Sept 2023 Emails

From: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.
gov] on behalf of Scott, Jeff

<jscott@washoecounty.gov>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2023 9:07 AM
To: BRUCE FOSTER [grtdad53@sbcglobal.net]
Subject: Re: Check-out Blocked
Thank you Mr Foster. See you then.
Jeff
Jeff Scott
Library Director | Washoe County Library System
jscott@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8340
301 S. Center Street, Reno, NV 89501
From: BRUCE FOSTER <grtdad53@sbcglobal.net>

Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2023 9:06:08 AM
To: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Mr. Scott:
I wish to meet on Tuesday at 11am. I will be having

Nichelle Hull and
Bruce Parks accompany me for the sake of transparency.
Thanks so much,
Bruce Foster
On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 04:37:47 PM PDT, Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>
wrote:
Mr. Foster,
I can meet with you at the following times. Let me know what days/times work for you:
Thursday 10-1
Friday 10-5
Monday 10-1
Tuesday 10-1
Sincerely,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2023 10:30 AM
Subject: Check-out Blocked
Mr. Scott:
When I went by the Sparks Library to check out a specific
book that
a librarian kindly found for me; I was informed that I was
blocked
from doing so. She then handed me your card.
I wish to meet so you can personally provide me with an
explanation.
Thanks so much,
Bruce Foster
Sparks
From: BRUCE FOSTER [grtdad53@sbcglobal.net] on behalf of BRUCE FOSTER
<grtdad53@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2023 9:06 AM
To: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]
Mr. Scott:
I wish to meet on Tuesday at 11am. I will be having

Nichelle Hull and
Bruce Parks accompany me for the sake of transparency.
Thanks so much,
Bruce Foster
wrote:
Mr. Foster,
Thursday 10-1
Friday 10-5
Monday 10-1
Tuesday 10-1
Sincerely,
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Mr. Scott:
book that
blocked
explanation.
Thanks so much,
Bruce Foster
Sparks
From: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Scott, Jeff
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 6:09 PM
To: James R McSpadden [jmcspadden@unr.edu]
CC: Trounson, Carla [CTrounson@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: texts for banned books week
Yay! Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 6:08:06 PM
Cc: Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>
Definitely, if you think that would be helpful! I’m always happy to share my passion for History
and support for the Library!
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Department of History/ Mail Stop 308
University of Nevada, Reno
On Sep 29, 2023, at 6:06 PM, Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you,
Can we submit these to the RGJ as an op Ed on your behalf?
Thank you enjoy your trip!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT CLICK on

links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Dear Jeff and Carla,
Feel free to edit these however works best! If you think I can send something in
the future as an op-ed or help out in any other way, I’d be happy to do. I’m off to
Germany for a three-month fellowship at the University of Bonn on Wednesday,
but I’d be happy to do things from afar until I’m back in Reno in mid-January.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 29, 2023, at 3:35 PM, Scott, Jeff

<jscott@washoecounty.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
These are fantastic! I am going to use one of the essays for banned
books week. I made an edit to the essay. I really liked one paragraph
from one of the essays and I placed that into the other essay. It is a
great summation of what happened then and how similar that is to
today.
I will pass this to our marketing team and we can get it set-up in the
newsletter.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
<image001.png> jscott@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8340
<image002.jpg> <image003.jpg> <image004.jpg> <image005.jpg>

Subject: texts for banned books week
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO

NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the
content is safe.]

I didn’t want to pelt all your colleagues with my message, since you’d
both know how to direct this! I put together two different newsletter-
y/op-ed-like texts on Nazis and book burning and book banning that I
thought might help for Banned Books Week. The Nazi Book Banning text
is more generic and references current events in the US, the Institute
for Sexual Science text focuses more on the story of Nazis seizing the
collections of this progressive research institute/medical clinic that was
a hub for the gay rights movements.
I thought I’d give you a choice of what works better, and I’d be happy to
tweak the other text for a Pride Month or the next time folks want to
ban books in the Washoe County libraries! Feel free to say too that
these texts don’t quite fit; I’m happy to tweak and change as needed!
If you’re looking for good historical Nazi book burning related visuals for
Banned Books Week, I love these two posters:
https://www.digitalcommonwealth.org/search/commonwealth:ft848t4
55
https://www.digitalcommonwealth.org/search/commonwealth:ft848v1
33
Since they were both produced by the federal Office of War
Information, they should be in the public domain.
Let me know if I can edit/change/re-write anything or if you need
anything else.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Awesome!! Thank you!

Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2023 8:06:30 PM
Cc: Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>;
Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert,
Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie,
Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Tiar,
Morgan A. <MATiar@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway,
Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Fanaselle,
Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy
<JHansen@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Re: German History and the Newsletter
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe

County -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.]
I’ll definitely have you something by October 1! I’ll be in

touch again soon!
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
That would be great. I think if it’s 500

words that would work. Just expand on
your email and it should get the point
across. People don’t realize how similar
it is and what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we
have it by October 1 that would be
great if you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: James R McSpadden

<jmcspadden@unr.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2023
6:53:17 PM
To: Scott, Jeff
Cc: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>;
Reinke, Kristin
<KReinke@washoecounty.gov>;
Weinert, Beate
<BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>;
McKenzie, Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Tiar,
Morgan A.
<MATiar@washoecounty.gov>;
Hemingway, Jamie
<JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>;
Fanaselle, Jessica
<JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>;
Hansen, Judy
Subject: German History and the
Newsletter
[NOTICE: This message originated

outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT
CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is
safe.]
Dear Jeff,
I’d be happy to help the library however
I can!
In terms of something for Banned Books
week, I see the week is super soon, but
I’d be happy to write something fairly
quickly, especially for the newsletter.
How long of a text were you thinking? I
could probably have something by early
next week. I’m happy to focus what I
write in a way that would be most
helpful and interesting to your
audience.
Based on what I saw at the library
board meeting, I think there was a
historical misunderstanding about what
banning books meant to the Germans in
the 1920s and 1930s. The idea was
almost “If we’re not burning books or
criminalizing printing them, we aren’t
banning them.” If it would be helpful, I
could write something pointing out that
the Nazis “banned” books by
performatively burning duplicates and
serials that they didn’t need anyway,
and then moved the “banned” books to
special libraries for experts. So, taking
books off the shelves and putting them
in special sections is literally how the
Nazis banned books. I don’t know if you
think that history lesson would help!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

3:33 PM, Scott, Jeff
<jscott@washoecounty
.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you, Dr.

McSpadden, for your
support.
I was very impressed
with your comments
last night highlighting
the similarities between
the group protesting
our books and
storytimes to what the
Nazis did. People may
think it is similar in the
general sense, but you
highlighted how the
techniques used are
exactly the same.
Would you be willing to
write something up for
Banned Books Week? It
is a tight timeline for
this year, as we will
start highlighting it next
week and it will run
through the first week
of October. We would
like to include a piece in
our newsletter and
wondered if you would
share it in the RGJ Op-
ED section.
Let me know if this is
something you can do.
If not, we can try for
next year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Trounson, Carla

<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
3:14 PM
To: James McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>; Scott, Jeff
.gov>; Reinke, Kristin
<KReinke@washoecoun
ty.gov>; Weinert, Beate
<BWeinert@washoeco
unty.gov>; McKenzie,
Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoec
ounty.gov>
Cc: Tiar, Morgan A.
<MATiar@washoecoun
ty.gov>; Hemingway,
Jamie
<JHemingway@washoe
county.gov>; Fanaselle,
Jessica
<JFanaselle@washoeco
unty.gov>; Hansen,
Judy
<JHansen@washoecou
nty.gov>
Subject: Fw: Board
Meeting
Hi Jamie,
As discussed,
I've included
folks who can
speak to you
about the Nazi-
banned book
article for our
newsletter.
You and I can
continue to
plan your Pride
Month program
for late June
(when you
return from
Austria). I'm
looking forward
to the program
and working
with you again!
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
Carla Trounson, M.A.
Library Assistant II | Washoe County Library System
<image006.png> ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100
2325 Robb Drive, Reno, NV 89523
<image007.png><image008.png><image009.png><ima
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
2:52 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting
[NOTICE: This message

originated outside of
Washoe County -- DO
NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments
unless you are sure
the content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a
Pride month program
(although it might have
to be towards the end
of June 2024—I’ll be in
Austria for a fellowship
until mid-June 2024)
related to queer history
in the 1920s and 1930s,
particularly Nazi
persecution of gay
folks. I can talk about
how German banned
drag, sexual education,
and things like that to
"protect the youth.”
I’ll have to think of a
catchy title, but there is
so much I could roll in.
For instance, I found
this one really cool
source in the archives
two summers ago.
There was a lecture
that a doctor from the
Institute for Sexual
Science went around
giving in the early
1930s about
contraception. We
don’t have the lecture
anymore, but we have
the questions the
audience wrote down
on old scraps of paper,
on bar bills, etc…to
send up to the doctor.
This one young women
wrote (I’ve attached the
picture of the original):
“I’m 27 years old, and
I’ve had a boyfriend for
three years. We like
each other a lot and
have had sex. My dad
wants to throw me out
of the house if I bring
any shame onto him.
What should I do?"
The doctor—perhaps
unhelpfully in his red
pencil—has written
“Contraception.”
It’s a funny episode that
is preserved in the
archives, but it sheds a
lot of light on how
precarious women’s
situations could be,
how personal honor
could be used as a
weapon, and genuinely
how clueless people
where about sexuality,
since they had little
sexual education at all.
The Nazis banned this
informative lecture,
since it could “corrupt
the people.” All of this
shows how the Nazis
used the language
corruption and
“community standards”
to censor and limit
information.
I’d also be happy to
write something for
banned books! If you
want, I could do
something on how the
Nazis banning books
was not really about
burning them (that was
done performatively for
show), but locking
books away so only
adult experts could use
them. I could do
something else too, but
that feels like the most
relevant history for
libraries confronting
people who advocate
censorship.
Let me know how I can
help!
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Department of History/
Mail Stop 308
University of Nevada,
Reno
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
On Sep
21,
2023,
at 2:02
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Jami
e,
The
answ
er is
yes
to
the
prog
ram;
they
love
the
idea.
Also,
the
libra
ry
direc
tor,
Jeff
Scott
, is
askin
g if
you
coul
d
write
som
ethin
g up
for
our
bann
ed
book
week
,
whic
h is
comi
ng
up.
We
coul
d put
it in
our
news
letter
. If
yes,
I'll
inclu
de
them
in
this
conv
ersat
ion
so
you
can
spea
k to
them
direc
tly.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.
<Outlook- ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100
0pn2tt34.png> 2325 Robb Drive, Reno, NV 89523
<Outlook-eg1ml1sk.png><Outlook-4s0yitzy.png>
ym4jd5pa.png><Outlook-hnqquxha.png>
From:
James R
McSpad
den
<jmcsp
adden
@unr.e
du>
Sent:
Thursd
ay,
Septem
ber 21,
2023
1:34
PM
To:
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
Subject
: Re:
Board
Meetin
g
[NOTICE
: This
messag
e
originat
ed
outside
of
Washoe
County
-- DO
NOT
CLICK
on links
or open
attach
ments
unless
you are
sure the
content
is safe.]
Hi
Carla,
I’m
always
happy
to help
howev
er I
can! As
a
historia
n, it
makes
my
blood
boil
when
folks
get
their
history
so
wrong.
Thanks
for all
you do,
Jamie
----------
----------
------
James
McSpa
dden
Assista
nt
Profess
or
Depart
ment of
History/
Mail
Stop
308
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
i
s
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
n
e
x
c
e
l
l
e
n
t
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
n
d
I
w
o
u
l
d
l
o
v
e
t
o
p
l
a
n
i
t
.
W
e
c
o
u
l
d
d
o
i
t
d
u
r
i
n
g
P
r
i
d
e
M
o
n
t
h
i
n
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
4
.
L
e
t
m
e
r
u
n
i
t
b
y
f
o
l
k
s
h
e
r
e
a
n
d
I
'
l
l
g
e
t
b
a
c
k
t
o
y
o
u
.
T
h
a
n
k
s
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
,
I
s
o
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
.
I
'
m
g
o
i
n
g
t
o
h
a
v
e
t
o
d
o
a
l
i
t
t
l
e
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
Library Assistant II | Washoe County Library S
qgon4esz.png> 2325 Robb Drive, Reno, NV 89523
<Outlook-tuvwbdhd.png><Outlook-j3ow
gocznzg3.png><Outlook-j5ucserg.png>
F
r
o
m
:
J
a
m
e
s
R
M
c
S
p
a
d
d
e
n
<
j
m
c
s
p
a
d
d
e
n
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
>
S
e
n
t
:
T
h
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
1
2
:
4
8
P
M
T
o
:
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
C
c
:
G
r
e
t
a
E
d
e
J
o
n
g
<
g
d
e
j
o
n
g
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
>
S
u
b
j
e
c
t
:
R
e
:
B
o
a
r
d
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
[
N
O
T
I
C
E
:
T
h
i
s
m
e
s
s
a
g
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
W
a
s
h
o
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
-
-
D
O
N
O
T
C
L
I
C
K
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
o
p
e
n
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
a
r
e
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
]
H
i
C
a
r
l
a
,
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
I
w
e
r
e
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
j
u
s
t
t
a
l
k
i
n
g
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
e
v
e
n
t
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
!
I
’
m
s
t
i
l
l
s
o
t
r
o
u
b
l
e
d
w
i
t
h
w
h
a
t
a
l
l
I
s
a
w
.
Y
o
u
d
i
d
a
m
a
r
v
e
l
o
u
s
j
o
b
—
a
s
d
i
d
a
l
l
t
h
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
t
a
f
f
—
b
u
t
I
’
m
s
o
w
o
r
r
i
e
d
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
t
h
a
t
s
h
o
w
e
d
u
p
.
.
.
O
n
e
t
h
i
n
g
I
w
a
s
j
u
s
t
t
a
l
k
i
n
g
t
o
G
r
e
t
a
a
b
o
u
t
i
s
t
h
a
t
I
w
a
s
s
t
r
u
c
k
t
h
a
t
m
a
n
y
o
f
s
p
e
a
k
e
r
s
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
a
n
t
e
d
t
o
p
u
l
l
b
o
o
k
s
o
f
f
t
h
e
s
h
e
l
v
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
k
e
t
h
e
m
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
o
n
l
y
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
s
,
w
h
i
l
e
i
n
s
i
s
t
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
y
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
l
i
k
e
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
i
n
1
9
3
0
s
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
.
A
s
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
a
n
,
i
t
s
t
r
i
k
e
s
m
e
t
h
a
t
p
u
l
l
i
n
g
b
o
o
k
s
o
f
f
s
h
e
l
v
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
k
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
a
s
e
l
e
c
t
g
r
o
u
p
o
f
p
e
o
p
l
e
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
e
x
a
c
t
l
y
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
d
i
d
.
T
h
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
N
a
z
i
s
s
e
i
z
e
d
a
l
l
t
h
e
b
o
o
k
s
o
n
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
o
u
t
o
f
G
e
r
m
a
n
l
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s
.
F
o
r
i
n
s
t
a
n
c
e
,
t
h
e
y
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
a
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
’
s
b
o
o
k
c
a
l
l
e
d
B
r
i
n
g
t
U
n
s
W
i
r
k
l
i
c
h
D
e
r
K
l
a
p
p
e
r
s
t
o
r
c
h
?
(
D
o
e
s
t
h
e
S
t
o
r
k
R
e
a
l
l
y
B
r
i
n
g
U
s
?
—
I
h
a
v
e
a
c
o
p
y
i
n
m
y
o
f
f
i
c
e
)
a
b
o
u
t
w
h
e
r
e
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
c
o
m
e
f
r
o
m
…
b
u
t
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
d
i
d
n
’
t
b
u
r
n
t
h
e
s
e
b
o
o
k
s
.
T
h
e
y
m
o
v
e
d
t
h
e
m
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
o
r
g
a
v
e
t
h
e
m
t
o
e
x
p
e
r
t
s
.
T
h
a
t
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
f
o
l
k
s
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
e
r
e
c
a
l
l
i
n
g
f
o
r
!
T
h
e
i
r
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
o
f
“
c
o
r
r
u
p
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
”
i
s
t
h
e
e
x
a
c
t
s
a
m
e
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
o
f
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
a
n
d
1
9
3
0
s
!
T
a
k
e
,
f
o
r
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
,
t
h
e
1
9
1
9
q
u
e
e
r
f
i
l
m
D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
O
t
h
e
r
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
w
a
s
b
a
n
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
r
a
d
i
c
a
l
i
z
i
n
g
p
e
r
i
o
d
o
f
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
h
e
a
d
e
d
t
o
w
a
r
d
t
h
e
T
h
i
r
d
R
e
i
c
h
.
T
h
e
N
e
w
Y
o
r
k
T
i
m
e
s
h
a
s
a
g
r
e
a
t
s
t
i
l
l
i
m
a
g
e
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
f
i
l
m
(
h
t
t
p
s
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
n
y
t
i
m
e
s
.
c
o
m
/
2
0
1
3
/
1
1
/
1
7
/
m
o
v
i
e
s
/
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
-
f
r
o
m
-
t
h
e
-
o
t
h
e
r
s
-
a
-
1
9
1
9
-
f
i
l
m
-
o
n
-
h
o
m
o
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
.
h
t
m
l
?
s
m
i
d
=
u
r
l
-
s
h
a
r
e
)
.
I
f
y
o
u
l
o
o
k
c
l
o
s
e
l
y
,
y
o
u
’
l
l
s
e
e
m
e
n
d
a
n
c
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
o
t
h
e
r
m
e
n
i
n
d
r
a
g
.
T
h
i
s
c
e
n
t
u
r
y
-
o
l
d
f
i
l
m
w
a
s
b
a
n
n
e
d
a
n
d
d
e
s
t
r
o
y
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
i
t
w
o
u
l
d
“
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
z
e
”
a
n
d
“
c
o
r
r
u
p
t
”
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
.
T
h
e
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
u
s
e
d
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
a
s
s
h
o
c
k
i
n
g
!
I
d
o
n
’
t
k
n
o
w
i
f
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
a
n
y
w
a
y
t
o
p
u
t
t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
o
n
N
a
z
i
s
,
S
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
,
a
n
d
D
r
a
g
o
r
s
o
m
e
t
h
i
n
g
f
o
r
n
e
x
t
P
r
i
d
e
,
b
u
t
I
l
e
c
t
u
r
e
o
n
t
h
i
s
i
n
m
y
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
,
a
n
d
I
’
d
b
e
h
a
p
p
y
t
o
d
o
m
o
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
o
n
t
h
i
n
g
s
l
i
k
e
t
h
e
p
e
r
s
e
c
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
g
a
y
m
e
n
,
l
e
s
b
i
a
n
s
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
s
e
x
u
a
l
m
i
n
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
i
n
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
a
n
d
1
9
3
0
s
.
I
d
o
n
’
t
t
h
o
s
e
f
o
l
k
s
w
o
u
l
d
a
t
t
e
n
d
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
t
a
l
k
,
b
u
t
—
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
l
y
s
p
e
a
k
i
n
g
—
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
b
a
n
n
e
d
d
r
a
g
a
n
d
t
o
o
k
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
-
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
b
o
o
k
s
o
u
t
o
f
l
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s
t
o
“
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
.
”
T
h
e
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
s
t
o
w
h
a
t
h
a
p
p
e
n
e
d
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
a
r
e
s
o
e
e
r
i
e
a
n
d
t
r
o
u
b
l
i
n
g
.
W
e
r
e
a
l
l
y
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
a
l
l
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
y
o
u
a
n
d
y
o
u
r
c
o
l
l
e
a
g
u
e
s
d
o
,
C
a
r
l
a
!
B
e
s
t
,
J
a
m
i
e
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
J
a
m
e
s
M
c
S
p
a
d
d
e
n
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
o
r
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
H
i
s
t
o
r
y
/
M
a
i
l
S
t
o
p
3
0
8
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
2
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
a
n
k
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
f
o
r
c
o
m
i
n
g
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
t
o
t
h
e
b
o
a
r
d
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
I
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
r
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
m
y
s
p
e
e
c
h
a
n
d
w
h
a
t
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
s
a
i
d
i
n
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
.
I
'
m
s
u
r
e
1
0
0
y
e
a
r
s
f
r
o
m
n
o
w
(
i
f
w
e
s
u
r
v
i
v
e
)
,
t
h
e
r
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
d
e
v
o
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
i
s
e
r
a
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
Library Assistant II | Washoe County
<Outlook- ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.
fuw0qelk.png> 2325 Robb Drive, Reno, NV 89523
<Outlook-mvrmqwzl.png><Outlo
trbpeerl.png><Outlook-14vlj5fm
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.
This email originated

outside of the
Reno. Do not click on
links or attachments
unless you recognize
the sender and know
the content is safe.
Report suspicious
emails to the Office of
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.
This email originated outside of the

University of Nevada, Reno. Do not click
on links or attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the
content is safe. Report suspicious
emails to the Office of Information
Technology (OIT) at abuse@unr.edu.
This email originated outside of the University of

Nevada, Reno. Do not click on links or attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe. Report suspicious emails to the Office of
Information Technology (OIT) at abuse@unr.edu.
This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno. Do

not click on links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe. Report suspicious emails to the Office of
<McSpadden Essay for Library Edited.docx>
This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno. Do not click on
links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Report suspicious emails to the Office of Information Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.
From: James R McSpadden [jmcspadden@unr.edu] on behalf of James R McSpadden
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you,
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
today.
newsletter.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott


content is safe.]

55
33
anything else.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

Jeff
Jeff Scott



touch again soon!
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

6:53:17 PM
To: Scott, Jeff
Cc: Trounson, Carla
Reinke, Kristin
Weinert, Beate
McKenzie, Stacy L.
Morgan A.
Hemingway, Jamie
Fanaselle, Jessica
Hansen, Judy
Newsletter

safe.]
Dear Jeff,
I can!
audience.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you, Dr.

McSpadden, for your
support.
with your comments
our books and
highlighted how the
techniques used are
exactly the same.
our newsletter and
ED section.
next year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
3:14 PM
To: James McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>; Scott, Jeff
<KReinke@washoecoun
<BWeinert@washoeco
Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoec
ounty.gov>
Cc: Tiar, Morgan A.
<MATiar@washoecoun
ty.gov>; Hemingway,
Jamie
<JHemingway@washoe
Jessica
unty.gov>; Hansen,
Judy
<JHansen@washoecou
nty.gov>
Subject: Fw: Board
Meeting
Hi Jamie,
As discussed,
I've included
folks who can
speak to you
about the Nazi-
banned book
article for our
newsletter.
You and I can
continue to
plan your Pride
Month program
for late June
(when you
return from
Austria). I'm
looking forward
to the program
and working
with you again!
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
2:52 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting

Washoe County -- DO
open attachments
unless you are sure
Hi Carla,
Pride month program
particularly Nazi
persecution of gay
how German banned
two summers ago.
There was a lecture
Science went around
giving in the early
1930s about
contraception. We
the questions the
audience wrote down
any shame onto him.
What should I do?"
is preserved in the
lot of light on how
how personal honor
could be used as a
how clueless people
shows how the Nazis
used the language
corruption and
to censor and limit
information.
write something for
want, I could do
Nazis banning books
show), but locking
books away so only
them. I could do
people who advocate
censorship.
help!
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Mail Stop 308
Reno
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
On Sep
21,
2023,
at 2:02
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Jami
e,
The
answ
er is
yes
to
the
prog
ram;
they
love
the
idea.
Also,
the
libra
ry
direc
tor,
Jeff
Scott
, is
askin
g if
you
coul
d
write
som
ethin
g up
for
our
bann
ed
book
week
,
whic
h is
comi
ng
up.
We
coul
d put
it in
our
news
letter
. If
yes,
I'll
inclu
de
them
in
this
conv
ersat
ion
so
you
can
spea
k to
them
direc
tly.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.
From:
James R
McSpad
den
<jmcsp
adden
@unr.e
du>
Sent:
Thursd
ay,
Septem
ber 21,
2023
1:34
PM
To:
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
Subject
: Re:
Board
Meetin
g
[NOTICE
: This
messag
e
originat
ed
outside
of
Washoe
County
-- DO
NOT
CLICK
on links
or open
attach
ments
unless
you are
sure the
content
is safe.]
Hi
Carla,
I’m
always
happy
to help
howev
er I
can! As
a
historia
n, it
makes
my
blood
boil
when
folks
get
their
history
so
wrong.
Thanks
for all
you do,
Jamie
----------
----------
------
James
McSpa
dden
Assista
nt
Profess
or
Depart
ment of
History/
Mail
Stop
308
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
i
s
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
n
e
x
c
e
l
l
e
n
t
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
n
d
I
w
o
u
l
d
l
o
v
e
t
o
p
l
a
n
i
t
.
W
e
c
o
u
l
d
d
o
i
t
d
u
r
i
n
g
P
r
i
d
e
M
o
n
t
h
i
n
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
4
.
L
e
t
m
e
r
u
n
i
t
b
y
f
o
l
k
s
h
e
r
e
a
n
d
I
'
l
l
g
e
t
b
a
c
k
t
o
y
o
u
.
T
h
a
n
k
s
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
,
I
s
o
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
.
I
'
m
g
o
i
n
g
t
o
h
a
v
e
t
o
d
o
a
l
i
t
t
l
e
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
F
r
o
m
:
J
a
m
e
s
R
M
c
S
p
a
d
d
e
n
<
j
m
c
s
p
a
d
d
e
n
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
>
S
e
n
t
:
T
h
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
1
2
:
4
8
P
M
T
o
:
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
C
c
:
G
r
e
t
a
E
d
e
J
o
n
g
<
g
d
e
j
o
n
g
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
>
S
u
b
j
e
c
t
:
R
e
:
B
o
a
r
d
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
[
N
O
T
I
C
E
:
T
h
i
s
m
e
s
s
a
g
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
W
a
s
h
o
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
-
-
D
O
N
O
T
C
L
I
C
K
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
o
p
e
n
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
a
r
e
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
]
H
i
C
a
r
l
a
,
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
I
w
e
r
e
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
j
u
s
t
t
a
l
k
i
n
g
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
e
v
e
n
t
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
!
I
’
m
s
t
i
l
l
s
o
t
r
o
u
b
l
e
d
w
i
t
h
w
h
a
t
a
l
l
I
s
a
w
.
Y
o
u
d
i
d
a
m
a
r
v
e
l
o
u
s
j
o
b
—
a
s
d
i
d
a
l
l
t
h
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
t
a
f
f
—
b
u
t
I
’
m
s
o
w
o
r
r
i
e
d
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
t
h
a
t
s
h
o
w
e
d
u
p
.
.
.
O
n
e
t
h
i
n
g
I
w
a
s
j
u
s
t
t
a
l
k
i
n
g
t
o
G
r
e
t
a
a
b
o
u
t
i
s
t
h
a
t
I
w
a
s
s
t
r
u
c
k
t
h
a
t
m
a
n
y
o
f
s
p
e
a
k
e
r
s
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
a
n
t
e
d
t
o
p
u
l
l
b
o
o
k
s
o
f
f
t
h
e
s
h
e
l
v
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
k
e
t
h
e
m
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
o
n
l
y
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
s
,
w
h
i
l
e
i
n
s
i
s
t
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
y
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
l
i
k
e
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
i
n
1
9
3
0
s
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
.
A
s
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
a
n
,
i
t
s
t
r
i
k
e
s
m
e
t
h
a
t
p
u
l
l
i
n
g
b
o
o
k
s
o
f
f
s
h
e
l
v
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
k
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
a
s
e
l
e
c
t
g
r
o
u
p
o
f
p
e
o
p
l
e
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
e
x
a
c
t
l
y
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
d
i
d
.
T
h
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
N
a
z
i
s
s
e
i
z
e
d
a
l
l
t
h
e
b
o
o
k
s
o
n
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
o
u
t
o
f
G
e
r
m
a
n
l
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s
.
F
o
r
i
n
s
t
a
n
c
e
,
t
h
e
y
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
a
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
’
s
b
o
o
k
c
a
l
l
e
d
B
r
i
n
g
t
U
n
s
W
i
r
k
l
i
c
h
D
e
r
K
l
a
p
p
e
r
s
t
o
r
c
h
?
(
D
o
e
s
t
h
e
S
t
o
r
k
R
e
a
l
l
y
B
r
i
n
g
U
s
?
—
I
h
a
v
e
a
c
o
p
y
i
n
m
y
o
f
f
i
c
e
)
a
b
o
u
t
w
h
e
r
e
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
c
o
m
e
f
r
o
m
…
b
u
t
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
d
i
d
n
’
t
b
u
r
n
t
h
e
s
e
b
o
o
k
s
.
T
h
e
y
m
o
v
e
d
t
h
e
m
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
o
r
g
a
v
e
t
h
e
m
t
o
e
x
p
e
r
t
s
.
T
h
a
t
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
f
o
l
k
s
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
e
r
e
c
a
l
l
i
n
g
f
o
r
!
T
h
e
i
r
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
o
f
“
c
o
r
r
u
p
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
”
i
s
t
h
e
e
x
a
c
t
s
a
m
e
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
o
f
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
a
n
d
1
9
3
0
s
!
T
a
k
e
,
f
o
r
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
,
t
h
e
1
9
1
9
q
u
e
e
r
f
i
l
m
D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
O
t
h
e
r
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
w
a
s
b
a
n
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
r
a
d
i
c
a
l
i
z
i
n
g
p
e
r
i
o
d
o
f
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
h
e
a
d
e
d
t
o
w
a
r
d
t
h
e
T
h
i
r
d
R
e
i
c
h
.
T
h
e
N
e
w
Y
o
r
k
T
i
m
e
s
h
a
s
a
g
r
e
a
t
s
t
i
l
l
i
m
a
g
e
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
f
i
l
m
(
h
t
t
p
s
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
n
y
t
i
m
e
s
.
c
o
m
/
2
0
1
3
/
1
1
/
1
7
/
m
o
v
i
e
s
/
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
-
f
r
o
m
-
t
h
e
-
o
t
h
e
r
s
-
a
-
1
9
1
9
-
f
i
l
m
-
o
n
-
h
o
m
o
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
.
h
t
m
l
?
s
m
i
d
=
u
r
l
-
s
h
a
r
e
)
.
I
f
y
o
u
l
o
o
k
c
l
o
s
e
l
y
,
y
o
u
’
l
l
s
e
e
m
e
n
d
a
n
c
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
o
t
h
e
r
m
e
n
i
n
d
r
a
g
.
T
h
i
s
c
e
n
t
u
r
y
-
o
l
d
f
i
l
m
w
a
s
b
a
n
n
e
d
a
n
d
d
e
s
t
r
o
y
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
i
t
w
o
u
l
d
“
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
z
e
”
a
n
d
“
c
o
r
r
u
p
t
”
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
.
T
h
e
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
u
s
e
d
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
a
s
s
h
o
c
k
i
n
g
!
I
d
o
n
’
t
k
n
o
w
i
f
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
a
n
y
w
a
y
t
o
p
u
t
t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
o
n
N
a
z
i
s
,
S
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
,
a
n
d
D
r
a
g
o
r
s
o
m
e
t
h
i
n
g
f
o
r
n
e
x
t
P
r
i
d
e
,
b
u
t
I
l
e
c
t
u
r
e
o
n
t
h
i
s
i
n
m
y
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
,
a
n
d
I
’
d
b
e
h
a
p
p
y
t
o
d
o
m
o
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
o
n
t
h
i
n
g
s
l
i
k
e
t
h
e
p
e
r
s
e
c
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
g
a
y
m
e
n
,
l
e
s
b
i
a
n
s
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
s
e
x
u
a
l
m
i
n
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
i
n
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
a
n
d
1
9
3
0
s
.
I
d
o
n
’
t
t
h
o
s
e
f
o
l
k
s
w
o
u
l
d
a
t
t
e
n
d
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
t
a
l
k
,
b
u
t
—
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
l
y
s
p
e
a
k
i
n
g
—
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
b
a
n
n
e
d
d
r
a
g
a
n
d
t
o
o
k
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
-
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
b
o
o
k
s
o
u
t
o
f
l
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s
t
o
“
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
.
”
T
h
e
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
s
t
o
w
h
a
t
h
a
p
p
e
n
e
d
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
a
r
e
s
o
e
e
r
i
e
a
n
d
t
r
o
u
b
l
i
n
g
.
W
e
r
e
a
l
l
y
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
a
l
l
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
y
o
u
a
n
d
y
o
u
r
c
o
l
l
e
a
g
u
e
s
d
o
,
C
a
r
l
a
!
B
e
s
t
,
J
a
m
i
e
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
J
a
m
e
s
M
c
S
p
a
d
d
e
n
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
o
r
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
H
i
s
t
o
r
y
/
M
a
i
l
S
t
o
p
3
0
8
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
2
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
a
n
k
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
f
o
r
c
o
m
i
n
g
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
t
o
t
h
e
b
o
a
r
d
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
I
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
r
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
m
y
s
p
e
e
c
h
a
n
d
w
h
a
t
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
s
a
i
d
i
n
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
.
I
'
m
s
u
r
e
1
0
0
y
e
a
r
s
f
r
o
m
n
o
w
(
i
f
w
e
s
u
r
v
i
v
e
)
,
t
h
e
r
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
d
e
v
o
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
i
s
e
r
a
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.

outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.




abuse@unr.edu.
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
today.
newsletter.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

content is safe.]

55
33
anything else.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

Jeff
Jeff Scott


touch again soon!
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
6:53:17 PM
To: Scott, Jeff
Cc: Trounson, Carla
Reinke, Kristin
Weinert, Beate
McKenzie, Stacy L.
Morgan A.
Hemingway, Jamie
Fanaselle, Jessica
Hansen, Judy
Newsletter

safe.]
Dear Jeff,
I can!
audience.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you, Dr.

McSpadden, for your
support.
with your comments
our books and
highlighted how the
techniques used are
exactly the same.
our newsletter and
ED section.
next year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
3:14 PM
To: James McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>; Scott, Jeff
<KReinke@washoecoun
<BWeinert@washoeco
Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoec
ounty.gov>
Cc: Tiar, Morgan A.
<MATiar@washoecoun
ty.gov>; Hemingway,
Jamie
<JHemingway@washoe
Jessica
unty.gov>; Hansen,
Judy
<JHansen@washoecou
nty.gov>
Subject: Fw: Board
Meeting
Hi Jamie,
As discussed,
I've included
folks who can
speak to you
about the Nazi-
banned book
article for our
newsletter.
You and I can
continue to
plan your Pride
Month program
for late June
(when you
return from
Austria). I'm
looking forward
to the program
and working
with you again!
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
2:52 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting

Washoe County -- DO
open attachments
unless you are sure
Hi Carla,
Pride month program
particularly Nazi
persecution of gay
how German banned
two summers ago.
There was a lecture
Science went around
giving in the early
1930s about
contraception. We
the questions the
audience wrote down
any shame onto him.
What should I do?"
is preserved in the
lot of light on how
how personal honor
could be used as a
how clueless people
shows how the Nazis
used the language
corruption and
to censor and limit
information.
write something for
want, I could do
Nazis banning books
show), but locking
books away so only
them. I could do
people who advocate
censorship.
help!
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Mail Stop 308
Reno
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
On Sep
21,
2023,
at 2:02
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Jami
e,
The
answ
er is
yes
to
the
prog
ram;
they
love
the
idea.
Also,
the
libra
ry
direc
tor,
Jeff
Scott
, is
askin
g if
you
coul
d
write
som
ethin
g up
for
our
bann
ed
book
week
,
whic
h is
comi
ng
up.
We
coul
d put
it in
our
news
letter
. If
yes,
I'll
inclu
de
them
in
this
conv
ersat
ion
so
you
can
spea
k to
them
direc
tly.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.
From:
James R
McSpad
den
<jmcsp
adden
@unr.e
du>
Sent:
Thursd
ay,
Septem
ber 21,
2023
1:34
PM
To:
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
Subject
: Re:
Board
Meetin
g
[NOTICE
: This
messag
e
originat
ed
outside
of
Washoe
County
-- DO
NOT
CLICK
on links
or open
attach
ments
unless
you are
sure the
content
is safe.]
Hi
Carla,
I’m
always
happy
to help
howev
er I
can! As
a
historia
n, it
makes
my
blood
boil
when
folks
get
their
history
so
wrong.
Thanks
for all
you do,
Jamie
----------
----------
------
James
McSpa
dden
Assista
nt
Profess
or
Depart
ment of
History/
Mail
Stop
308
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
i
s
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
n
e
x
c
e
l
l
e
n
t
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
n
d
I
w
o
u
l
d
l
o
v
e
t
o
p
l
a
n
i
t
.
W
e
c
o
u
l
d
d
o
i
t
d
u
r
i
n
g
P
r
i
d
e
M
o
n
t
h
i
n
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
4
.
L
e
t
m
e
r
u
n
i
t
b
y
f
o
l
k
s
h
e
r
e
a
n
d
I
'
l
l
g
e
t
b
a
c
k
t
o
y
o
u
.
T
h
a
n
k
s
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
,
I
s
o
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
.
I
'
m
g
o
i
n
g
t
o
h
a
v
e
t
o
d
o
a
l
i
t
t
l
e
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
F
r
o
m
:
J
a
m
e
s
R
M
c
S
p
a
d
d
e
n
<
j
m
c
s
p
a
d
d
e
n
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
>
S
e
n
t
:
T
h
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
1
2
:
4
8
P
M
T
o
:
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
C
c
:
G
r
e
t
a
E
d
e
J
o
n
g
<
g
d
e
j
o
n
g
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
>
S
u
b
j
e
c
t
:
R
e
:
B
o
a
r
d
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
[
N
O
T
I
C
E
:
T
h
i
s
m
e
s
s
a
g
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
W
a
s
h
o
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
-
-
D
O
N
O
T
C
L
I
C
K
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
o
p
e
n
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
a
r
e
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
]
H
i
C
a
r
l
a
,
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
I
w
e
r
e
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
j
u
s
t
t
a
l
k
i
n
g
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
e
v
e
n
t
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
!
I
’
m
s
t
i
l
l
s
o
t
r
o
u
b
l
e
d
w
i
t
h
w
h
a
t
a
l
l
I
s
a
w
.
Y
o
u
d
i
d
a
m
a
r
v
e
l
o
u
s
j
o
b
—
a
s
d
i
d
a
l
l
t
h
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
t
a
f
f
—
b
u
t
I
’
m
s
o
w
o
r
r
i
e
d
a
b
o
u
t
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
t
h
a
t
s
h
o
w
e
d
u
p
.
.
.
O
n
e
t
h
i
n
g
I
w
a
s
j
u
s
t
t
a
l
k
i
n
g
t
o
G
r
e
t
a
a
b
o
u
t
i
s
t
h
a
t
I
w
a
s
s
t
r
u
c
k
t
h
a
t
m
a
n
y
o
f
s
p
e
a
k
e
r
s
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
a
n
t
e
d
t
o
p
u
l
l
b
o
o
k
s
o
f
f
t
h
e
s
h
e
l
v
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
k
e
t
h
e
m
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
o
n
l
y
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
s
,
w
h
i
l
e
i
n
s
i
s
t
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
y
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
l
i
k
e
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
i
n
1
9
3
0
s
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
.
A
s
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
a
n
,
i
t
s
t
r
i
k
e
s
m
e
t
h
a
t
p
u
l
l
i
n
g
b
o
o
k
s
o
f
f
s
h
e
l
v
e
s
a
n
d
m
a
k
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
o
a
s
e
l
e
c
t
g
r
o
u
p
o
f
p
e
o
p
l
e
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
e
x
a
c
t
l
y
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
d
i
d
.
T
h
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
N
a
z
i
s
s
e
i
z
e
d
a
l
l
t
h
e
b
o
o
k
s
o
n
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
o
u
t
o
f
G
e
r
m
a
n
l
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s
.
F
o
r
i
n
s
t
a
n
c
e
,
t
h
e
y
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
a
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
’
s
b
o
o
k
c
a
l
l
e
d
B
r
i
n
g
t
U
n
s
W
i
r
k
l
i
c
h
D
e
r
K
l
a
p
p
e
r
s
t
o
r
c
h
?
(
D
o
e
s
t
h
e
S
t
o
r
k
R
e
a
l
l
y
B
r
i
n
g
U
s
?
—
I
h
a
v
e
a
c
o
p
y
i
n
m
y
o
f
f
i
c
e
)
a
b
o
u
t
w
h
e
r
e
c
h
i
l
d
r
e
n
c
o
m
e
f
r
o
m
…
b
u
t
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
d
i
d
n
’
t
b
u
r
n
t
h
e
s
e
b
o
o
k
s
.
T
h
e
y
m
o
v
e
d
t
h
e
m
t
o
a
d
u
l
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
o
r
g
a
v
e
t
h
e
m
t
o
e
x
p
e
r
t
s
.
T
h
a
t
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
f
o
l
k
s
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
e
r
e
c
a
l
l
i
n
g
f
o
r
!
T
h
e
i
r
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
o
f
“
c
o
r
r
u
p
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
”
i
s
t
h
e
e
x
a
c
t
s
a
m
e
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
o
f
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
a
n
d
1
9
3
0
s
!
T
a
k
e
,
f
o
r
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
,
t
h
e
1
9
1
9
q
u
e
e
r
f
i
l
m
D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
O
t
h
e
r
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
w
a
s
b
a
n
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
r
a
d
i
c
a
l
i
z
i
n
g
p
e
r
i
o
d
o
f
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
h
e
a
d
e
d
t
o
w
a
r
d
t
h
e
T
h
i
r
d
R
e
i
c
h
.
T
h
e
N
e
w
Y
o
r
k
T
i
m
e
s
h
a
s
a
g
r
e
a
t
s
t
i
l
l
i
m
a
g
e
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
f
i
l
m
(
h
t
t
p
s
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
n
y
t
i
m
e
s
.
c
o
m
/
2
0
1
3
/
1
1
/
1
7
/
m
o
v
i
e
s
/
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
-
f
r
o
m
-
t
h
e
-
o
t
h
e
r
s
-
a
-
1
9
1
9
-
f
i
l
m
-
o
n
-
h
o
m
o
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
.
h
t
m
l
?
s
m
i
d
=
u
r
l
-
s
h
a
r
e
)
.
I
f
y
o
u
l
o
o
k
c
l
o
s
e
l
y
,
y
o
u
’
l
l
s
e
e
m
e
n
d
a
n
c
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
o
t
h
e
r
m
e
n
i
n
d
r
a
g
.
T
h
i
s
c
e
n
t
u
r
y
-
o
l
d
f
i
l
m
w
a
s
b
a
n
n
e
d
a
n
d
d
e
s
t
r
o
y
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
i
t
w
o
u
l
d
“
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
z
e
”
a
n
d
“
c
o
r
r
u
p
t
”
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
.
T
h
e
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
u
s
e
d
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
w
a
s
s
h
o
c
k
i
n
g
!
I
d
o
n
’
t
k
n
o
w
i
f
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
a
n
y
w
a
y
t
o
p
u
t
t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
o
n
N
a
z
i
s
,
S
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
,
a
n
d
D
r
a
g
o
r
s
o
m
e
t
h
i
n
g
f
o
r
n
e
x
t
P
r
i
d
e
,
b
u
t
I
l
e
c
t
u
r
e
o
n
t
h
i
s
i
n
m
y
c
l
a
s
s
e
s
,
a
n
d
I
’
d
b
e
h
a
p
p
y
t
o
d
o
m
o
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
o
n
t
h
i
n
g
s
l
i
k
e
t
h
e
p
e
r
s
e
c
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
g
a
y
m
e
n
,
l
e
s
b
i
a
n
s
,
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
s
e
x
u
a
l
m
i
n
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
i
n
t
h
e
1
9
2
0
s
a
n
d
1
9
3
0
s
.
I
d
o
n
’
t
t
h
o
s
e
f
o
l
k
s
w
o
u
l
d
a
t
t
e
n
d
a
h
i
s
t
o
r
y
t
a
l
k
,
b
u
t
—
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
l
y
s
p
e
a
k
i
n
g
—
t
h
e
N
a
z
i
s
l
i
t
e
r
a
l
l
y
b
a
n
n
e
d
d
r
a
g
a
n
d
t
o
o
k
s
e
x
u
a
l
i
t
y
-
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
b
o
o
k
s
o
u
t
o
f
l
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s
t
o
“
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
t
h
e
y
o
u
t
h
.
”
T
h
e
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
s
t
o
w
h
a
t
h
a
p
p
e
n
e
d
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
a
r
e
s
o
e
e
r
i
e
a
n
d
t
r
o
u
b
l
i
n
g
.
W
e
r
e
a
l
l
y
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
a
l
l
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
y
o
u
a
n
d
y
o
u
r
c
o
l
l
e
a
g
u
e
s
d
o
,
C
a
r
l
a
!
B
e
s
t
,
J
a
m
i
e
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
J
a
m
e
s
M
c
S
p
a
d
d
e
n
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
o
r
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
H
i
s
t
o
r
y
/
M
a
i
l
S
t
o
p
3
0
8
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
2
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
a
n
k
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
f
o
r
c
o
m
i
n
g
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
t
o
t
h
e
b
o
a
r
d
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
I
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
r
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
m
y
s
p
e
e
c
h
a
n
d
w
h
a
t
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
s
a
i
d
i
n
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
.
I
'
m
s
u
r
e
1
0
0
y
e
a
r
s
f
r
o
m
n
o
w
(
i
f
w
e
s
u
r
v
i
v
e
)
,
t
h
e
r
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
d
e
v
o
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
i
s
e
r
a
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.

outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.



abuse@unr.edu.
Thank you,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Feel free to edit these however works best! If you think I can send something in the future as an
op-ed or help out in any other way, I’d be happy to do. I’m off to Germany for a three-month
fellowship at the University of Bonn on Wednesday, but I’d be happy to do things from afar until
I’m back in Reno in mid-January.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
These are fantastic! I am going to use one of the essays for banned books week. I made
an edit to the essay. I really liked one paragraph from one of the essays and I placed that
into the other essay. It is a great summation of what happened then and how similar
that is to today.
I will pass this to our marketing team and we can get it set-up in the newsletter.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT CLICK on links
or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]

I didn’t want to pelt all your colleagues with my message, since you’d both know how to
direct this! I put together two different newsletter-y/op-ed-like texts on Nazis and book
burning and book banning that I thought might help for Banned Books Week. The Nazi
Book Banning text is more generic and references current events in the US, the Institute
for Sexual Science text focuses more on the story of Nazis seizing the collections of this
progressive research institute/medical clinic that was a hub for the gay rights
movements.
I thought I’d give you a choice of what works better, and I’d be happy to tweak the other
text for a Pride Month or the next time folks want to ban books in the Washoe County
libraries! Feel free to say too that these texts don’t quite fit; I’m happy to tweak and
change as needed!
If you’re looking for good historical Nazi book burning related visuals for Banned Books
Week, I love these two posters:
Since they were both produced by the federal Office of War Information, they should be
in the public domain.
Let me know if I can edit/change/re-write anything or if you need anything else.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 8:07 PM, Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>

wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

Jeff
Jeff Scott

Cc: Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin
<KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert, Beate
<BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Tiar, Morgan A.
<MATiar@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie
<JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Fanaselle, Jessica
<JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy

content is safe.]
I’ll definitely have you something by October 1! I’ll be in touch again

soon!
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
That would be great. I think if it’s 500 words that would

work. Just expand on your email and it should get the
point across. People don’t realize how similar it is and
what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we have it by
October 1 that would be great if you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Subject: German History and the Newsletter

Dear Jeff,
I’d be happy to help the library however I can!
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the
week is super soon, but I’d be happy to write something
fairly quickly, especially for the newsletter. How long of
a text were you thinking? I could probably have
something by early next week. I’m happy to focus what I
write in a way that would be most helpful and
interesting to your audience.
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I
think there was a historical misunderstanding about
what banning books meant to the Germans in the 1920s
and 1930s. The idea was almost “If we’re not burning
books or criminalizing printing them, we aren’t banning
them.” If it would be helpful, I could write something
pointing out that the Nazis “banned” books by
performatively burning duplicates and serials that they
didn’t need anyway, and then moved the “banned”
books to special libraries for experts. So, taking books
off the shelves and putting them in special sections is
literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t know if
you think that history lesson would help!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you, Dr. McSpadden, for your

support.
I was very impressed with your
comments last night highlighting the
similarities between the group
protesting our books and storytimes to
what the Nazis did. People may think it
is similar in the general sense, but you
highlighted how the techniques used
are exactly the same.
Would you be willing to write
something up for Banned Books Week?
It is a tight timeline for this year, as we
will start highlighting it next week and it
will run through the first week of
October. We would like to include a
piece in our newsletter and wondered if
you would share it in the RGJ Op-ED
section.
Let me know if this is something you
can do. If not, we can try for next year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
<image001.png>

<CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>
3:14 PM
To: James McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu>; Scott, Jeff
<jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke,
Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>;
Weinert, Beate
McKenzie, Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Tiar, Morgan A.
Hemingway, Jamie
Fanaselle, Jessica
Hansen, Judy
Subject: Fw: Board Meeting
Hi Jamie,
As discussed, I've
included folks who can
speak to you about the
Nazi-banned book article
for our newsletter.
You and I can continue to
plan your Pride Month
program for late June
(when you return from
Austria). I'm looking
forward to the program
and working with you
again!
Best regards, Carla
My work week is Tuesday -
Saturday.
<image007.png><image008.png><image009.png><image010.p

2:52 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
Subject: Re: Board Meeting

safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month
program (although it might have to be
towards the end of June 2024—I’ll be in
Austria for a fellowship until mid-June
2024) related to queer history in the
1920s and 1930s, particularly Nazi
persecution of gay folks. I can talk
about how German banned drag, sexual
education, and things like that to
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but
there is so much I could roll in. For
instance, I found this one really cool
source in the archives two summers
ago. There was a lecture that a doctor
from the Institute for Sexual Science
went around giving in the early 1930s
about contraception. We don’t have the
lecture anymore, but we have the
questions the audience wrote down on
old scraps of paper, on bar bills, etc…to
send up to the doctor. This one young
women wrote (I’ve attached the picture
of the original):
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a
boyfriend for three years. We like each
other a lot and have had sex. My dad
wants to throw me out of the house if I
bring any shame onto him. What should
I do?"
The doctor—perhaps unhelpfully in his
red pencil—has written
It’s a funny episode that is preserved in
the archives, but it sheds a lot of light
on how precarious women’s situations
could be, how personal honor could be
used as a weapon, and genuinely how
clueless people where about sexuality,
since they had little sexual education at
all. The Nazis banned this informative
lecture, since it could “corrupt the
people.” All of this shows how the Nazis
used the language corruption and
“community standards” to censor and
limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for
banned books! If you want, I could do
something on how the Nazis banning
books was not really about burning
them (that was done performatively for
show), but locking books away so only
adult experts could use them. I could do
something else too, but that feels like
the most relevant history for libraries
confronting people who advocate
censorship.
Let me know how I can help!
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
On Sep 21, 2023, at
2:02 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
The answer is
yes to the
program; they
love the idea.
Also, the library
director, Jeff
Scott, is asking
if you could
write
something up
for our banned
book week,
which is
coming up. We
could put it in
our newsletter.
If yes, I'll
include them in
this
conversation so
you can speak
to them
directly.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
<Outlook-eg1ml1sk.png><Outlook-4s0yitzy.png><Outlo
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
1:34 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting
Washoe County -- DO
open attachments
unless you are sure the
content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’m always happy to
help however I can! As
a historian, it makes
my blood boil when
folks get their history
so wrong.
Thanks for all you do,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Mail Stop 308
Reno
On Sep
21,
2023,
at 1:22
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washo
ecount
y.gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Jami
e,
This
woul
d be
an
excel
lent
prog
ram
and I
woul
d
love
to
plan
it.
We
coul
d do
it
durin
g
Pride
Mont
h in
June
2024
. Let
me
run
it by
folks
here
and
I'll
get
back
to
you.
Than
ks
for
this
histo
ry, I
so
appr
eciat
e
you.
I'm
goin
g to
have
to do
a
little
rese
arch.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.
<Outlook-tuvwbdhd.png><Outlook-j3owevtz.pn
From:
James R
McSpad
den
<jmcsp
adden
@unr.e
du>
Sent:
Thursd
ay,
Septem
ber 21,
2023
12:48
PM
To:
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
Cc:
Greta E
de Jong
<gdejo
ng@un
r.edu>
Subject
: Re:
Board
Meetin
g
[NOTICE
: This
messag
e
originat
ed
outside
of
Washoe
County
-- DO
NOT
CLICK
on links
or open
attach
ments
unless
you are
sure the
content
is safe.]
Hi
Carla,
Greta
and I
were
literally
just
talking
about
the
event
last
night!
I’m still
so
trouble
d with
what all
I saw.
You did
a
marvel
ous
job—as
did all
the
library
staff—
but I’m
so
worried
about
the
public
that
showe
d up...
One
thing I
was
just
talking
to
Greta
about
is that I
was
struck
that
many
of
speake
rs last
night
wanted
to pull
books
off the
shelves
and
make
them
availabl
e only
to
adults,
while
insistin
g that
they
were
not like
the
Nazis
in
1930s
Germa
ny. As
a
historia
n, it
strikes
me that
pulling
books
off
shelves
and
making
them
availabl
e to a
select
group
of
people
is
literally
exactly
what
the
Nazis
did.
The
actual
Nazis
seized
all the
books
on
sexualit
y out of
Germa
n
librarie
s. For
instanc
e, they
remove
da
childre
n’s
book
called
Bringt
Uns
Wirklic
h Der
Klappe
rstorch
?
(Does
the
Stork
Really
Bring
Us?—I
have a
copy in
my
office)
about
where
childre
n come
from…
but the
Nazis
didn’t
burn
these
books.
They
moved
them to
adult
section
s or
gave
them to
experts
. That
is
literally
what
the
folks
last
night
were
calling
for!
Their
langua
ge of
“corrup
ting the
youth”
is the
exact
same
langua
ge of
Germa
ny from
the
1920s
and
1930s!
Take,
for
exampl
e, the
1919
queer
film
Differe
nt from
the
Others,
which
was
banned
in the
radicali
zing
period
of the
1920s
that
was
headed
toward
the
Third
Reich.
The
New
York
Times
has a
great
still
image
from
the film
(https://
www.n
ytimes.
com/20
13/11/1
7/movi
es/diffe
rent-
from-
the-
others-
a-
1919-
film-on-
homos
exuality
.html?s
mid=url
-
share).
If you
look
closely,
you’ll
see
men
dancin
g with
other
men in
drag.
This
century
-old
film
was
banned
and
destroy
ed by
the
Germa
ns
becaus
e it
would
“sexual
ize”
and
“corrup
t” the
youth.
The
parallel
s with
the
langua
ge that
was
used
last
night
was
shockin
g!
I don’t
know if
there is
any
way to
put
togethe
ra
history
progra
m on
Nazis,
Sexuali
ty, and
Drag or
someth
ing for
next
Pride,
but I
lecture
on this
in my
classes
, and
I’d be
happy
to do
more
present
ations
at the
library
on
things
like the
persec
ution of
gay
men,
lesbian
s, and
other
sexual
minoriti
es in
Germa
ny in
the
1920s
and
1930s.
I don’t
those
folks
would
attend
a
history
talk,
but—
historic
ally
speaki
ng—
the
Nazis
literally
banned
drag
and
took
sexualit
y-
related
books
out of
librarie
s to
“protect
the
youth.”
The
parallel
s to
what
happen
ed last
night
are so
eerie
and
troublin
g.
We
really
appreci
ate all
the
work
you
and
your
colleag
ues do,
Carla!
Best,
Jamie
----------
----------
------
James
McSpa
dden
Assista
nt
Profess
or
Depart
ment of
History/
Mail
Stop
308
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
2
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
a
n
k
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
f
o
r
c
o
m
i
n
g
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
t
o
t
h
e
b
o
a
r
d
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
I
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
r
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
m
y
s
p
e
e
c
h
a
n
d
w
h
a
t
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
s
a
i
d
i
n
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
.
I
'
m
s
u
r
e
1
0
0
y
e
a
r
s
f
r
o
m
n
o
w
(
i
f
w
e
s
u
r
v
i
v
e
)
,
t
h
e
r
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
d
e
v
o
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
i
s
e
r
a
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
<Outlook-mvrmqwzl.png><Outlook-brm
trbpeerl.png><Outlook-14vlj5fm.png>
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.

outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.

University of Nevada, Reno. Do not
click on links or attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know
the content is safe. Report suspicious

This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno. Do not

click on links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
the content is safe. Report suspicious emails to the Office of Information
This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno. Do not click on links
or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
abuse@unr.edu.

Feel free to edit these however works best! If you think I can send something in the future as an
op-ed or help out in any other way, I’d be happy to do. I’m off to Germany for a three-month
fellowship at the University of Bonn on Wednesday, but I’d be happy to do things from afar until
I’m back in Reno in mid-January.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
These are fantastic! I am going to use one of the essays for banned books week. I made
an edit to the essay. I really liked one paragraph from one of the essays and I placed that
into the other essay. It is a great summation of what happened then and how similar
that is to today.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott


I didn’t want to pelt all your colleagues with my message, since you’d both know how to
direct this! I put together two different newsletter-y/op-ed-like texts on Nazis and book
burning and book banning that I thought might help for Banned Books Week. The Nazi
Book Banning text is more generic and references current events in the US, the Institute
for Sexual Science text focuses more on the story of Nazis seizing the collections of this
progressive research institute/medical clinic that was a hub for the gay rights
movements.
I thought I’d give you a choice of what works better, and I’d be happy to tweak the other
text for a Pride Month or the next time folks want to ban books in the Washoe County
libraries! Feel free to say too that these texts don’t quite fit; I’m happy to tweak and
change as needed!
If you’re looking for good historical Nazi book burning related visuals for Banned Books
Week, I love these two posters:
Since they were both produced by the federal Office of War Information, they should be
in the public domain.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

Jeff
Jeff Scott


content is safe.]
I’ll definitely have you something by October 1! I’ll be in touch again

soon!
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
That would be great. I think if it’s 500 words that would

work. Just expand on your email and it should get the
point across. People don’t realize how similar it is and
what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we have it by
October 1 that would be great if you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Dear Jeff,
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the
week is super soon, but I’d be happy to write something
fairly quickly, especially for the newsletter. How long of
a text were you thinking? I could probably have
something by early next week. I’m happy to focus what I
write in a way that would be most helpful and
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I
think there was a historical misunderstanding about
what banning books meant to the Germans in the 1920s
and 1930s. The idea was almost “If we’re not burning
books or criminalizing printing them, we aren’t banning
them.” If it would be helpful, I could write something
pointing out that the Nazis “banned” books by
performatively burning duplicates and serials that they
didn’t need anyway, and then moved the “banned”
books to special libraries for experts. So, taking books
off the shelves and putting them in special sections is
literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t know if
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you, Dr. McSpadden, for your

support.
I was very impressed with your
comments last night highlighting the
similarities between the group
protesting our books and storytimes to
what the Nazis did. People may think it
is similar in the general sense, but you
highlighted how the techniques used
Would you be willing to write
something up for Banned Books Week?
It is a tight timeline for this year, as we
will start highlighting it next week and it
will run through the first week of
October. We would like to include a
piece in our newsletter and wondered if
you would share it in the RGJ Op-ED
section.
Let me know if this is something you
can do. If not, we can try for next year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

3:14 PM
To: James McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu>; Scott, Jeff
<jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke,
Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>;
Weinert, Beate
McKenzie, Stacy L.
Cc: Tiar, Morgan A.
Hemingway, Jamie
Fanaselle, Jessica
Hansen, Judy
Hi Jamie,
As discussed, I've
included folks who can
speak to you about the
Nazi-banned book article
for our newsletter.
You and I can continue to
plan your Pride Month
program for late June
(when you return from
Austria). I'm looking
forward to the program
and working with you
again!
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.
<image007.png><image008.png><image009.png><image010.p

2:52 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month
program (although it might have to be
towards the end of June 2024—I’ll be in
Austria for a fellowship until mid-June
2024) related to queer history in the
1920s and 1930s, particularly Nazi
persecution of gay folks. I can talk
about how German banned drag, sexual
education, and things like that to
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but
there is so much I could roll in. For
instance, I found this one really cool
source in the archives two summers
ago. There was a lecture that a doctor
from the Institute for Sexual Science
went around giving in the early 1930s
about contraception. We don’t have the
lecture anymore, but we have the
questions the audience wrote down on
old scraps of paper, on bar bills, etc…to
send up to the doctor. This one young
women wrote (I’ve attached the picture
of the original):
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a
boyfriend for three years. We like each
other a lot and have had sex. My dad
wants to throw me out of the house if I
bring any shame onto him. What should
I do?"
The doctor—perhaps unhelpfully in his
red pencil—has written
It’s a funny episode that is preserved in
the archives, but it sheds a lot of light
on how precarious women’s situations
could be, how personal honor could be
used as a weapon, and genuinely how
clueless people where about sexuality,
since they had little sexual education at
all. The Nazis banned this informative
lecture, since it could “corrupt the
people.” All of this shows how the Nazis
used the language corruption and
“community standards” to censor and
limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for
banned books! If you want, I could do
something on how the Nazis banning
books was not really about burning
them (that was done performatively for
show), but locking books away so only
adult experts could use them. I could do
something else too, but that feels like
the most relevant history for libraries
confronting people who advocate
censorship.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
On Sep 21, 2023, at
2:02 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
The answer is
yes to the
program; they
love the idea.
Also, the library
director, Jeff
Scott, is asking
if you could
write
something up
for our banned
book week,
which is
coming up. We
could put it in
our newsletter.
If yes, I'll
include them in
this
conversation so
you can speak
to them
directly.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
<Outlook-eg1ml1sk.png><Outlook-4s0yitzy.png><Outlo
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
1:34 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting
Washoe County -- DO
open attachments
content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’m always happy to
help however I can! As
a historian, it makes
my blood boil when
folks get their history
so wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Mail Stop 308
Reno
On Sep
21,
2023,
at 1:22
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washo
ecount
y.gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Jami
e,
This
woul
d be
an
excel
lent
prog
ram
and I
woul
d
love
to
plan
it.
We
coul
d do
it
durin
g
Pride
Mont
h in
June
2024
. Let
me
run
it by
folks
here
and
I'll
get
back
to
you.
Than
ks
for
this
histo
ry, I
so
appr
eciat
e
you.
I'm
goin
g to
have
to do
a
little
rese
arch.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.
<Outlook-tuvwbdhd.png><Outlook-j3owevtz.pn
From:
James R
McSpad
den
<jmcsp
adden
@unr.e
du>
Sent:
Thursd
ay,
Septem
ber 21,
2023
12:48
PM
To:
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washoe
county.
gov>
Cc:
Greta E
de Jong
<gdejo
ng@un
r.edu>
Subject
: Re:
Board
Meetin
g
[NOTICE
: This
messag
e
originat
ed
outside
of
Washoe
County
-- DO
NOT
CLICK
on links
or open
attach
ments
unless
you are
sure the
content
is safe.]
Hi
Carla,
Greta
and I
were
literally
just
talking
about
the
event
last
night!
I’m still
so
trouble
d with
what all
I saw.
You did
a
marvel
ous
job—as
did all
the
library
staff—
but I’m
so
worried
about
the
public
that
showe
d up...
One
thing I
was
just
talking
to
Greta
about
is that I
was
struck
that
many
of
speake
rs last
night
wanted
to pull
books
off the
shelves
and
make
them
availabl
e only
to
adults,
while
insistin
g that
they
were
not like
the
Nazis
in
1930s
Germa
ny. As
a
historia
n, it
strikes
me that
pulling
books
off
shelves
and
making
them
availabl
e to a
select
group
of
people
is
literally
exactly
what
the
Nazis
did.
The
actual
Nazis
seized
all the
books
on
sexualit
y out of
Germa
n
librarie
s. For
instanc
e, they
remove
da
childre
n’s
book
called
Bringt
Uns
Wirklic
h Der
Klappe
rstorch
?
(Does
the
Stork
Really
Bring
Us?—I
have a
copy in
my
office)
about
where
childre
n come
from…
but the
Nazis
didn’t
burn
these
books.
They
moved
them to
adult
section
s or
gave
them to
experts
. That
is
literally
what
the
folks
last
night
were
calling
for!
Their
langua
ge of
“corrup
ting the
youth”
is the
exact
same
langua
ge of
Germa
ny from
the
1920s
and
1930s!
Take,
for
exampl
e, the
1919
queer
film
Differe
nt from
the
Others,
which
was
banned
in the
radicali
zing
period
of the
1920s
that
was
headed
toward
the
Third
Reich.
The
New
York
Times
has a
great
still
image
from
the film
(https://
www.n
ytimes.
com/20
13/11/1
7/movi
es/diffe
rent-
from-
the-
others-
a-
1919-
film-on-
homos
exuality
.html?s
mid=url
-
share).
If you
look
closely,
you’ll
see
men
dancin
g with
other
men in
drag.
This
century
-old
film
was
banned
and
destroy
ed by
the
Germa
ns
becaus
e it
would
“sexual
ize”
and
“corrup
t” the
youth.
The
parallel
s with
the
langua
ge that
was
used
last
night
was
shockin
g!
I don’t
know if
there is
any
way to
put
togethe
ra
history
progra
m on
Nazis,
Sexuali
ty, and
Drag or
someth
ing for
next
Pride,
but I
lecture
on this
in my
classes
, and
I’d be
happy
to do
more
present
ations
at the
library
on
things
like the
persec
ution of
gay
men,
lesbian
s, and
other
sexual
minoriti
es in
Germa
ny in
the
1920s
and
1930s.
I don’t
those
folks
would
attend
a
history
talk,
but—
historic
ally
speaki
ng—
the
Nazis
literally
banned
drag
and
took
sexualit
y-
related
books
out of
librarie
s to
“protect
the
youth.”
The
parallel
s to
what
happen
ed last
night
are so
eerie
and
troublin
g.
We
really
appreci
ate all
the
work
you
and
your
colleag
ues do,
Carla!
Best,
Jamie
----------
----------
------
James
McSpa
dden
Assista
nt
Profess
or
Depart
ment of
History/
Mail
Stop
308
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno
O
n
S
e
p
2
1
,
2
0
2
3
,
a
t
1
2
:
2
2
P
M
,
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
,
C
a
r
l
a
<
C
T
r
o
u
n
s
o
n
@
w
a
s
h
o
e
c
o
u
n
t
y
.
g
o
v
>
w
r
o
t
e
:
[
E
X
T
E
R
N
A
L
E
M
A
I
L
]
H
i
G
r
e
t
a
a
n
d
J
a
m
i
e
,
T
h
a
n
k
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
f
o
r
c
o
m
i
n
g
l
a
s
t
n
i
g
h
t
t
o
t
h
e
b
o
a
r
d
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
I
a
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
e
y
o
u
r
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
m
y
s
p
e
e
c
h
a
n
d
w
h
a
t
y
o
u
b
o
t
h
s
a
i
d
i
n
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
.
I
'
m
s
u
r
e
1
0
0
y
e
a
r
s
f
r
o
m
n
o
w
(
i
f
w
e
s
u
r
v
i
v
e
)
,
t
h
e
r
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
d
e
v
o
t
e
d
t
o
t
h
i
s
e
r
a
.
B
e
s
t
r
e
g
a
r
d
s
,
C
a
r
l
a
M
y
w
o
r
k
w
e
e
k
i
s
T
u
e
s
d
a
y
-
S
a
t
u
r
d
a
y
.
<Outlook-mvrmqwzl.png><Outlook-brm
T
h
i
s
e
m
a
i
l
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
N
e
v
a
d
a
,
R
e
n
o
.
D
o
n
o
t
c
l
i
c
k
o
n
l
i
n
k
s
o
r
a
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
g
n
i
z
e
t
h
e
s
e
n
d
e
r
a
n
d
k
n
o
w
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
i
s
s
a
f
e
.
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
u
s
p
i
c
i
o
u
s
e
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
(
O
I
T
)
a
t
a
b
u
s
e
@
u
n
r
.
e
d
u
.
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.

outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.



abuse@unr.edu.

From: Libraries Transform [campaign@ala.org] on behalf of Libraries Transform
<campaign@ala.org>
Subject: Authors on Libraries, Banned Books Week, and More!
Having trouble viewing this e-mail? View as a web page.
New Data Shows Record Surge of Book Challenges in Public Libraries
On September 20, the American Library Association (ALA) released new preliminary data
that documents the continued rise in attempts to censor books and materials in public, school,
and academic libraries during the first eight months in 2023.
The data shows that, between January 1 and August 31, 2023, ALA’s Office for Intellectual
Freedom reported 695 attempts to censor library materials and services and documented
challenges to 1,915 unique titles. The number of unique titles challenged has increased by
20% from the same reporting period in 2022, the year in which the highest number of book
challenges occurred since ALA began compiling this data more than 20 years ago.
Save Big Money with Your Library Card!
A woman in Mesa, Arizona, has saved more than $23,000 by borrowing books from her local
library. Want to know how much YOU save at the library? I Love Libraries has a special
Library Value Calculator that can help you determine your savings.
“Libraries are places for everybody.” A Conversation with Jason Reynolds

Jason Reynolds is one of the most acclaimed writers of young adult literature in the world. The
recipient of a Newbery Honor, a Printz Honor, an NAACP Image Award, and multiple Coretta
Scott King honors, Reynolds is the bestselling author of Look Both Ways: A Tale Told in Ten
Blocks, All American Boys (with Brendan Kiely), Long Way Down, Stamped: Racism,
Antiracism, and You (with Ibram X. Kendi), Stuntboy, in the Meantime, Stuntboy, In-Between
Time, and Ain’t Burned All the Bright, as well as books in the Mile Morales Spider-Man
franchise for Marvel Entertainment. And he has great taste in music.
Reynolds spoke with I Love Libraries recently about writing for young readers, the fun and
challenges of working in the superhero world, book bans, library memories, music, his new
ALA Celebrity READ poster, and more.
Cornell University Library To Go Inside Algorithms

Algorithms dictate how many of us live our lives these days, setting parameters for automated
tasks as diverse as recommending movies on Netflix and books to buy on Amazon to helping
drivers navigate with GPS. But what are algorithms exactly and how do they work?
Cornell University Library in Ithaca, New York, is going to be making huge strides in helping
the public learn about algorithms thanks to a grant it received from the Institute of Museum
and Library Sciences. The grant will support an 18-month project aimed at creating open
educational resources on algorithmic literacy—building the public’s knowledge about what
algorithms are, how they function, and how they shape modern life.
I Love My Librarian Award: What Makes a Strong Nomination?

Only ONE DAY remains to submit your nomination for the 2024 I Love My Librarian Award!
If a librarian has made a difference in your life or gone above and beyond to serve their
community, nominating them for the I Love My Librarian Award is the perfect way to thank
them. Ten librarians from across the U.S. are honored with the award each year, which also
comes with a $5,000 cash prize.
While 10 librarians will be awarded, more than 1,000 nominations are received for the award
every year, so submitting a strong nomination is key to making your librarian stand out among
the crowd. Here are a few tips for making your nomination the best it can be and giving your
librarian their best shot at receiving the award.
Celebrate Banned Books Week Next Week!

Libraries, schools, bookstores, and groups around the world will be calling attention to
censorship and ways to fight it during Banned Books Week, October 1 – 7, 2023. The
American Library Association and Unite Against Book Bans will mark this year’s event with a
slate of programs, including a conversation with Banned Books Weeks Honorary Chair
LeVar Burton, a call to action on Let Freedom Read Day, videos from the Banned Books
From the Big Chair read out, and more.
The 2023 Banned Books Week theme, “Let Freedom Read,” is a call to action about the
urgent need to defend the right to read and to support the community of readers, library staff,
educators, authors, publishers, and booksellers.
Building Programs for the Long-Term: Think C-S-C

Like many libraries across the nation, the Free Library of Philadelphia is undergoing a
paradigm shift toward the community. They asked staff to be more skilled in assessing
community needs, developing strategic collaborations, and piloting and managing new kinds
of programs.
In the Free Library of Philadelphia’s Skills for Community-Centered Libraries work, the
library relies on the idea of C-S-C: capacity, sustainability and communication. These three
factors lead to long-term success for programs.
ALA Condemns Violence at U.S. Libraries

On September 12, libraries in Chicago and neighboring Aurora, Addison, and Evanston,
Illinois, received bomb threats. After investigations, no explosive devices were found at the
libraries, but some of the facilities were evacuated and remained closed for the day.
The threats are part of an increase in violence targeted at libraries and librarians across the
U.S. The American Library Association released a statement condemning the actions that
read, in part:
"Libraries are meant to be a safe haven for our communities, welcoming of people everywhere
who believe in the peaceful exchange of ideas. These ongoing and rising attacks on
America’s libraries pose an existential threat to the cornerstone of our democracy."
Read the whole statement.
New York Public Library Launches Campaign in Response to Rise in

Censorship
New York Public Library is partnering with the American Library Association and Unite Against
Book Bans to launch the “Books for All” campaign during Banned Books Week, held
October 1–7, to underscore the importance of reading and access to knowledge for all and the
vital role that public libraries play in our democracy. The partnership comes as the United
States experiences an alarming rise in book bans and challenges throughout the country.
Jenna Lee-Yun: How I Library

Throughout the month of September, we invited authors and library lovers to share a
cherished library moment or tell us what they value most about their library using the hashtag
#HowILibrary. Thank you to everyone who participated. There have been some wonderful
responses: Mo Willems, Lily Williams, Kelly Yang, and Meg Medina, to name a few.
Author Jenna Lee-Yun's story really touched our hearts.
Deadline Fast Approaching for New Opportunity from ALA's Public

Programs Office
The American Library Association (ALA) Public Programs Office empowers libraries to create
vibrant hubs of learning, conversation, and connection in communities of all types. The office
has an upcoming grant opportunity for libraries.
Coming up soon is an opportunity for your library to host Americans and the Holocaust: A
Traveling Exhibition for Libraries (deadline October 14), which examines the motives,
pressures and fears that shaped Americans’ responses to Nazism, war and genocide in
Europe during the 1930s and 1940s,
Presidential Libraries Issue Statement on Fragile State of U.S. Democracy

Thirteen presidential libraries released a statement on September 7 over concerns for U.S.
democracy amid deep national polarization.
The libraries, ranging from those celebrating the presidencies of Herbert Hoover to Barack
Obama, have called for a recommitment to our bedrock principles, including the rule of law
and respecting a diversity of beliefs. It’s the first time these libraries have joined to make such
a public declaration.
Brad Meltzer: How I Library

Brad Meltzer is the New York Times-bestselling author of The Lightning Rod, The Escape
Artist, and 11 other bestselling thrillers. He also writes non-fiction books like The Nazi
Conspiracy, about a secret plot to kill FDR, Stalin, and Winston Churchill at the height of
WWII, and the Ordinary People Change the World kids book series, which he does with Chris
Eliopoulos and inspired the Emmy-nominated PBS KIDS show, Xavier Riddle and the Secret
Museum. Meltzer's ongoing series of kids books on heroes throughout history includes books
on Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Mister Rogers, John Lewis, Albert Einstein, Rosa Parks, and many
more. He is also the host of Brad Meltzer’s Lost History and Brad Meltzer’s Decoded on the
History Channel.
Meltzer credits a librarian with introducing him to a world of wonder as a child and changing
his life forever. He shared his story on social media this Library Card Sign-up Month (using the
#HowILibrary hashtag) and has allowed us to share it here.
The Best New and Renovated Libraries of the Year

American Libraries has published the 2023 Library Design Showcase, an annual celebration
of new and renovated libraries that address patron needs in exciting and effective ways. This
year’s selections represent a return to prepandemic normalcy and demonstrate a firm step
into the future, with physical spaces designed to draw in communities, celebrate local history,
and acknowledge diverse natural environments. For these overhauls and expansions, form
and functionality reign.
Get Your "Free People Read Freely" Merch!

It's a message more important now than ever. Spread the word with apparel, totes, and more.
Find them in the ALA Graphics Gift Shop!
Questions? Email campaign@ala.org.

American Library Association
225 N Michigan Ave, Suite 1300
Chicago, IL 60601 | 1.800.545.2433
ala.org | librariestransform.org
Unsubscribe from Libraries Transform newsletter
Unsubscribe from all ALA emails
Please reference ALA's Privacy Policy
From: Stears, Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Stears, Debi D
<DDStears@washoecounty.gov>
To: MacMillan, Jana [JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov]; Library - Leadership Team [Library-
LeadershipTeam@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Library - Spanish Springs Staff [Library-SpanishSprings@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: RE: Phone call about "pornography in the libraries"
Thanks for letting us know about your call, Jana. Earlier this week I fielded a call from a concerned
patron who had been told that the library had two books for children that showed pictures and taught
children to perform a specific sexual act. She couldn’t believe that the library had such a book, but
wanted to find out for herself. This particular user was very supportive that we have a wide range of
materials available.
Debi
From: MacMillan, Jana <JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov>

Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 11:46 AM
To: Library - Leadership Team <Library-LeadershipTeam@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Library - Spanish Springs Staff <Library-SpanishSprings@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Phone call about "pornography in the libraries"
In the 10 o'clock hour this morning, one of my staff received a phone call from an older woman
identifying herself as a "retired special needs teacher of 18 years" and launching into a hard-to-
interrupt diatribe about what she called "pornography in the library."
Staff turned her over to me and she gave her name (I couldn't tell you what it was—it came out
garbled) and I asked if I could help her. She repeated what she had said to my staff and then
admitted that she "might be kind of confused as she had just woken up." She went on to say
that she had just "seen something on local TV" about "sex books for kids in the library" and
wanted me to know that she was "against that."
I told her I didn't know what "sex books" she was talking about and I explained that as a Public
Library we carried materials "for everyone in our community, not just one select group of
people." She reiterated that we shouldn't be handing out "sex books to children." I asked what
books she was talking about as I was unfamiliar with that description. She said the news was
talking about something called "Happy Queer" and had mentioned that people were stealing
books about the Holocaust and other library materials about race and sex and she cited a book
about "a grown man turning a child over and having sex with him."
Next, she launched into her beliefs about what books should be in schools. I interrupted her
and said as a Public Library we had nothing to do with what books were available in schools.
She asked if any "child who came into our library could check out a sex book." I redirected her
with "the library wants parents to parent their children and guide their selections." She said,
"Oh, that's good!"
She also brought up "Banned Books" and said we "should not have them in the library." I
countered with the fact that we "always celebrate our Freedom to Read during Banned Book
Week" and mentioned the 1st Amendment rights that we all had in this country as the basis for
highlighting censored materials.
Several times during this phone call I offered her Library Director Jeff Scott's phone number or
email address so she could discuss her concerns with him. She did not take, nor decline, the
information—but thanked me for talking to her and hung up.
Jana MacMillan, MLIS
Branch Manager, Spanish Springs | Washoe County Library System
jmacmillan@washoecounty.gov| Office: 775.424.1800
7100A Pyramid Way, Sparks, NV 89436

To: Stears, Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov]; Hemingway, Jamie
[JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov];
McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: Dr. McSpadden Essay for Banned Books Week
Yep! I wonder if we can get this into the RGJ as an op Ed piece. I can see if he would be ok with
that.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>

To: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>;
Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: RE: Dr. McSpadden Essay for Banned Books Week
Wow! This is such a powerful piece. It really shuts down those making the argument “we don’t want to
ban books, we just want to keep them away from children.”
From: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>
To: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews, John
<JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Stears, Debi D
Subject: Dr. McSpadden Essay for Banned Books Week
Can we get Dr. McSpadden’s essay into our newsletter for next week? Maybe we can make a social
media post for it? We will want to find ways to promote this as best we can.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
To: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Hemingway, Jamie
Subject: RE: Dr. McSpadden Essay for Banned Books Week
Wow! This is such a powerful piece. It really shuts down those making the argument “we don’t want to
ban books, we just want to keep them away from children.”

Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Hemingway, Jamie
<JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
To: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Stears, Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov];
Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
[SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: All Boys Aren’t Blue simultaneous download
Hi Debi,
Having Jen do that one would be great. She’s the main collection post creator/guru, so makes
sense to let her handle it.
Thanks!
Jamie
Get Outlook for iOS

To: Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie
<JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy
L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
That would be perfect!!! Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Subject: RE: All Boys Aren’t Blue simultaneous download
Hi Jeff,
We don’t have simultaneous use copies of All Boys Aren’t Blue. Lawn Boy is the title that we picked up
simultaneous use copies for, largely in response to the increased demand after the mention of the book
at multiple BCC meetings.
I think it’s a great idea to promote the most often challenged books that are available for simultaneous
use, though. Here’s what I was able to pick up those licenses for:
Gender Queer: A Memoir (Kobabe, Maia)
This Book is Gay (Dawson, Juno)
Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (Andrews, Jesse)
Crank (Hopkins, Ellen)
Lawn Boy (Evison, Jonathan)
Out of Darkness (Perez, Ashley Hope)
Court of Mist and Fury (Maas, Sarah J.)
Jamie, should I ask Jen to create a social media post for it or do you want to handle it?
Thanks!
Debi
Subject: All Boys Aren’t Blue simultaneous download
Just had a thought and maybe we covered this, do we have simultaneous access for the ebook for All
Boys aren’t Blue? If so we should make sure peope know when we highlight the book for banned books
week
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
To: Stears, Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov]; Hemingway, Jamie
That would be perfect!!! Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jeff,
Thanks!
Debi
week
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
Hi Jeff,

Thanks!
Debi

week
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
To: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov];
McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Stears, Debi D
[DDStears@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: Dr. McSpadden Essay for Banned Books Week
Will do! I'll get this forwarded to Tim for the newsletter.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
Public Information and Development Officer | Washoe County Library
System
jhemingway@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775-327-8360
301 South Center Street, Reno, NV 89501

Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
To: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; Andrews, John
[JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Stears,
Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov]
Attachments: McSpadden Essay for Library Edited.docx
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor of History
On May 10, 1933, Nazi university students organized book burnings across Germany. You might
think that the rabidly antisemitic Nazis only burned books by Jewish authors, but far more
literature was targeted. The flames also engulfed books about socialism and Marxism, texts that
supported democracy, works that insulted military honor, and any literature that was seen as
immoral, indecent, or was opposed by patriotic Germans.
In 1933, Americans were appalled. American journalists universally condemned the book
burnings, and the American Jewish Congress mobilized more than 100,000 people to protest in
New York City. In fact, the deaf activist Helen Keller, whose works were burned in Berlin, wrote
an open letter to the German students: “History has taught you nothing if you think you can kill
ideas. Tyrants have tried to do that often before, and the ideas have risen up in their might and
destroyed them. You can burn my books and the books of the best minds in Europe, but the ideas
in them have seeped through a million channels, and will continue to quicken other minds.”
Today when there are public discussions about removing books from American school
classrooms or public libraries, often a reference is made to Nazi Germany and these infamous
book burnings. Just recently this happened in a US Senate Judiciary Committee hearing and at a
Washoe County Library Board of Trustees meeting. If references to Nazis burning and banning
books are being thrown around, as a historian, I think we need to get our facts right.
Many Americans think the Nazis burned all the books they disliked and prevented anyone from
reading them. This is wrong. When Nazis seized libraries full of Marxist books, from Jewish
organizations, or from leftwing presses, the first thing that happened was that expert librarians
were called in to comb through the stolen books. Nazi librarians actually wanted massive
collections of Judaica, about German democracy, on Communism, and about sexuality and
gender, but they wanted them closed off from the general public. Only trusted adults should have
access to these supposedly dangerous books. As a 1935 Nazi order stated, the goal was “to keep
German cultural life pure from all harmful and undesirable literature [and this] will particularly
protect the youth from corrupting influences.”
If you look carefully at the photographs we have of the Nazi confiscation of the library of the
famous Institute for Sexual Science, people are actually reading books in order to set aside
anything that could be saved for other Nazi libraries. The items carted off to be burned were
mass-produced magazines, newsletters, and informational handouts. Even the Nazis throwing
these books into the flames are holding stacks of skinny periodicals and not massive tomes. The
ultimate proof that large numbers of the books the Nazis hated were not burned is that these
books still exist. Books with stamps proving they were originally in libraries the Nazis looted are
found in German collections to this very day.
In 1933, Nazi university students burned literature in a noxious public performance. However,
the Nazi government then implemented book bans that continued the project of those book
burners. Books were moved off the open shelves in German libraries and into closed Nazi
research institutes where they were only available to scholars and trusted adults.
What does this tell us? Nazi book banning was not so much about burning all the copies of books
but about taking them from some libraries and restricting access to books that were seen as
dangerous. Workers’ and Jewish libraries were closed, but the books were not destroyed. Instead,
Nazis stole them and put them in places like closed university research libraries. Texts on
sexuality were locked away in restricted sections in Nazi libraries, and books on democracy were
moved out of the reach of the general public. Even during World War II, when Berlin’s Jews
deported to the east to be murdered, what did the Nazis do with their books? Expert librarians
moved in and confiscated the books of their doomed Jewish neighbors. The Nazis murdered Jews
but often preserved the books they looted from the Jewish community.
Today, if someone assures you that all they want to do is move library books out of general
circulation and make them available only to adults to “protect the youth,” while swearing that
this is not like Nazi Germany, be wary. Historically speaking, this looks awfully similar to how
the Nazis really banned most books. Nazis moved them into special collections to keep them out
of the hands of ordinary people.
In the 1930s and 1940s, Americans were appalled by Nazi book burning and book banning.
Since “books are weapons in the war of ideas,” our forebears boasted that free Americans could
read anything they wanted. Let us remain true to that noble American tradition rather than try our
hands at Nazi-style book banning.
Subject: RE: texts for banned books week
Attachments: McSpadden Essay for Library Edited.docx
These are fantastic! I am going to use one of the essays for banned books week. I made an edit to the
essay. I really liked one paragraph from one of the essays and I placed that into the other essay. It is a
great summation of what happened then and how similar that is to today.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

I didn’t want to pelt all your colleagues with my message, since you’d both know how to direct this! I put
together two different newsletter-y/op-ed-like texts on Nazis and book burning and book banning that I
thought might help for Banned Books Week. The Nazi Book Banning text is more generic and references
current events in the US, the Institute for Sexual Science text focuses more on the story of Nazis seizing
the collections of this progressive research institute/medical clinic that was a hub for the gay rights
movements.
I thought I’d give you a choice of what works better, and I’d be happy to tweak the other text for a Pride
Month or the next time folks want to ban books in the Washoe County libraries! Feel free to say too that
If you’re looking for good historical Nazi book burning related visuals for Banned Books Week, I love
these two posters:
Since they were both produced by the federal Office of War Information, they should be in the public
domain.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Jeff
Jeff Scott

<KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>;
McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Tiar, Morgan A.
<MATiar@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>;
Fanaselle, Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy

I’ll definitely have you something by October 1! I’ll be in touch again soon!
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
That would be great. I think if it’s 500 words that would work. Just
expand on your email and it should get the point across. People don’t
realize how similar it is and what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we have it by October 1 that would

be great if you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County --

DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure
Dear Jeff,
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the week is super
soon, but I’d be happy to write something fairly quickly, especially for
the newsletter. How long of a text were you thinking? I could probably
have something by early next week. I’m happy to focus what I write in a
way that would be most helpful and interesting to your audience.
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I think there was a
historical misunderstanding about what banning books meant to the
Germans in the 1920s and 1930s. The idea was almost “If we’re not
burning books or criminalizing printing them, we aren’t banning them.”
If it would be helpful, I could write something pointing out that the
Nazis “banned” books by performatively burning duplicates and serials
that they didn’t need anyway, and then moved the “banned” books to
special libraries for experts. So, taking books off the shelves and putting
them in special sections is literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t
know if you think that history lesson would help!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Thank you, Dr. McSpadden, for your support.
I was very impressed with your comments last night

highlighting the similarities between the group
protesting our books and storytimes to what the Nazis
did. People may think it is similar in the general sense,
but you highlighted how the techniques used are
exactly the same.
Would you be willing to write something up for Banned

Books Week? It is a tight timeline for this year, as we
will start highlighting it next week and it will run
through the first week of October. We would like to
include a piece in our newsletter and wondered if you
would share it in the RGJ Op-ED section.
Let me know if this is something you can do. If not, we

can try for next year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2023 3:14 PM
To: James McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>; Scott,
Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin
Cc: Tiar, Morgan A. <MATiar@washoecounty.gov>;
Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>;
Fanaselle, Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>;
Hansen, Judy <JHansen@washoecounty.gov>
Hi Jamie,
As discussed, I've included folks who

can speak to you about the Nazi-
banned book article for our
newsletter.
You and I can continue to plan your

Pride Month program for late June
(when you return from Austria). I'm
looking forward to the program and
working with you again!
Best regards, Carla
My work week is Tuesday - Saturday.
<image007.png><image008.png><image009.png><image010.png>

To: Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>

Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month program (although it
might have to be towards the end of June 2024—I’ll be
in Austria for a fellowship until mid-June 2024) related
to queer history in the 1920s and 1930s, particularly
Nazi persecution of gay folks. I can talk about how
German banned drag, sexual education, and things like
that to "protect the youth.”
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but there is so much I

could roll in. For instance, I found this one really cool
source in the archives two summers ago. There was a
lecture that a doctor from the Institute for Sexual
Science went around giving in the early 1930s about
contraception. We don’t have the lecture anymore, but
we have the questions the audience wrote down on old
scraps of paper, on bar bills, etc…to send up to the
doctor. This one young women wrote (I’ve attached the
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a boyfriend for three

years. We like each other a lot and have had sex. My
dad wants to throw me out of the house if I bring any
shame onto him. What should I do?"
The doctor—perhaps unhelpfully in his red pencil—has

written “Contraception.”
It’s a funny episode that is preserved in the archives,

but it sheds a lot of light on how precarious women’s
situations could be, how personal honor could be used
as a weapon, and genuinely how clueless people where
about sexuality, since they had little sexual education at
all. The Nazis banned this informative lecture, since it
could “corrupt the people.” All of this shows how the
Nazis used the language corruption and “community
standards” to censor and limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for banned books!

If you want, I could do something on how the Nazis
banning books was not really about burning them (that
was done performatively for show), but locking books
away so only adult experts could use them. I could do
something else too, but that feels like the most relevant
history for libraries confronting people who advocate
censorship.

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
On Sep 21, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Trounson,

Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
The answer is yes to the

program; they love the
idea. Also, the library
director, Jeff Scott, is
asking if you could write
something up for our
banned book week, which
is coming up. We could
put it in our newsletter. If
yes, I'll include them in
this conversation so you
can speak to them
directly.
Best regards, Carla

Saturday.
<Outlook-eg1ml1sk.png><Outlook-4s0yitzy.png><Outlook-

1:34 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
[NOTICE: This message originated outside

of Washoe County -- DO NOT CLICK on
links or open attachments unless you are
sure the content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’m always happy to help however I

can! As a historian, it makes my blood
boil when folks get their history so
wrong.

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

1:22 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoe
county.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be
an excellent
program and I
would love to
plan it. We
could do it
during Pride
Month in June
2024. Let me
run it by folks
here and I'll get
back to you.
Thanks for this
history, I so
appreciate you.
I'm going to
have to do a
little research.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.

<Outlook-tuvwbdhd.png><Outlook-j3owevtz.png><Out
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
12:48 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Cc: Greta E de Jong
<gdejong@unr.edu>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting

Washoe County -- DO
open attachments
content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
Greta and I were

literally just talking
about the event last
night! I’m still so
troubled with what all I
saw. You did a
marvelous job—as did
all the library staff—but
I’m so worried about
the public that showed
up...
One thing I was just

talking to Greta about
is that I was struck that
many of speakers last
night wanted to pull
books off the shelves
and make them
available only to
adults, while insisting
that they were not like
the Nazis in 1930s
Germany. As a
historian, it strikes me
that pulling books off
shelves and making
them available to a
select group of people
is literally exactly what
the Nazis did. The
actual Nazis seized all
the books on sexuality
out of German
libraries. For instance,
they removed a
children’s book called
Bringt Uns Wirklich
Der Klapperstorch?
(Does the Stork Really
Bring Us?—I have a
copy in my office)
about where children
come from…but the
Nazis didn’t burn these
books. They moved
them to adult sections
or gave them to
experts. That is literally
what the folks last
night were calling for!
Their language of
“corrupting the youth”
is the exact same
language of Germany
from the 1920s and
1930s! Take, for
example, the 1919
queer film Different
from the Others, which
was banned in the
radicalizing period of
the 1920s that was
headed toward the
Third Reich. The New
York Times has a
great still image from
the film
(https://www.nytimes.c
om/2013/11/17/movies
/different-from-the-
others-a-1919-film-on-
homosexuality.html?s
mid=url-share). If you
look closely, you’ll see
men dancing with
other men in drag. This
century-old film was
banned and destroyed
by the Germans
because it would
“sexualize” and
“corrupt” the youth.
The parallels with the
language that was
used last night was
shocking!
I don’t know if there is

any way to put
together a history
program on Nazis,
Sexuality, and Drag or
something for next
Pride, but I lecture on
this in my classes, and
I’d be happy to do
more presentations at
the library on things
like the persecution of
gay men, lesbians, and
other sexual minorities
in Germany in the
1920s and 1930s. I
don’t those folks would
attend a history talk,
but—historically
speaking—the Nazis
literally banned drag
and took sexuality-
related books out of
libraries to “protect the
youth.” The parallels to
what happened last
night are so eerie and
troubling.
We really appreciate
all the work you and
your colleagues do,
Carla!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Mail Stop 308
Reno
On Sep
21,
2023,
at
12:22
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washo
ecount
y.gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Gret
a
and
Jami
e,
Than
k
you
both
for
comi
ng
last
night
to
the
boar
d
meet
ing. I
appr
eciat
e
your
supp
ort
for
my
spee
ch
and
what
you
both
said
in
refer
ence
to
the
publi
c
com
ment
s.
I'm
sure
100
years
from
now
(if
we
survi
ve),
there
will
be
entir
e
libra
ry
secti
ons
devo
ted
to
this
era.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.

<Outlook-mvrmqwzl.png><Outlook-brmbko55.p
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.

outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.


unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe. Report suspicious emails to the Office
of Information Technology (OIT) at abuse@unr.edu.

This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno. Do not click on links or
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report
suspicious emails to the Office of Information Technology (OIT) at abuse@unr.edu.
James McSpadden
From: Trounson, Carla [CTrounson@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Trounson, Carla
To: James R McSpadden [jmcspadden@unr.edu]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]
Thank you Jamie! Your articles are informative and I'm very grateful
for your scholarship! Those posters are wonderful, especially the
one with the Roosevelt quote.
I will forward these articles to our Northwest branch, I'd like our
branch folks to read them.
Director Scott is the best person to decide how to proceed with the
newsletter or op-ed.
Thank you so much for taking the time and writing this. Best
regards, Carla

ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100

I didn’t want to pelt all your colleagues with my message, since you’d both know how to direct
this! I put together two different newsletter-y/op-ed-like texts on Nazis and book burning and
book banning that I thought might help for Banned Books Week. The Nazi Book Banning text is
more generic and references current events in the US, the Institute for Sexual Science text
focuses more on the story of Nazis seizing the collections of this progressive research
institute/medical clinic that was a hub for the gay rights movements.
I thought I’d give you a choice of what works better, and I’d be happy to tweak the other text for
a Pride Month or the next time folks want to ban books in the Washoe County libraries! Feel free
to say too that these texts don’t quite fit; I’m happy to tweak and change as needed!
If you’re looking for good historical Nazi book burning related visuals for Banned Books Week,
I love these two posters:
Since they were both produced by the federal Office of War Information, they should be in the
public domain.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Jeff
Jeff Scott

-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
expand on your email and it should get the point across. People
don’t realize how similar it is and what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we have it by October 1 that

would be great if you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Dear Jeff,
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the week is

super soon, but I’d be happy to write something fairly quickly,
especially for the newsletter. How long of a text were you
thinking? I could probably have something by early next week. I’m
happy to focus what I write in a way that would be most helpful
and interesting to your audience.
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I think there was
a historical misunderstanding about what banning books meant to
the Germans in the 1920s and 1930s. The idea was almost “If
we’re not burning books or criminalizing printing them, we aren’t
banning them.” If it would be helpful, I could write something
pointing out that the Nazis “banned” books by performatively
burning duplicates and serials that they didn’t need anyway, and
then moved the “banned” books to special libraries for experts. So,
taking books off the shelves and putting them in special sections is
literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t know if you think
that history lesson would help!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

exactly the same.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jamie,
newsletter.
Best regards, Carla

Hi Carla,
censorship.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>

wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
can speak to them
directly.
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.

1:34 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
Hi Carla,
wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

1:22 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoe
county.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be
an excellent
program and I
would love to
plan it. We
could do it
during Pride
Month in June
2024. Let me
run it by folks
here and I'll get
back to you.
Thanks for this
history, I so
appreciate you.
I'm going to
have to do a
little research.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
12:48 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Cc: Greta E de Jong
<gdejong@unr.edu>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting
Washoe County -- DO
open attachments
content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
Greta and I were
saw. You did a
up...
and make them
available only to
the Nazis in 1930s
Germany. As a
shelves and making
them available to a
the Nazis did. The
out of German
they removed a
Bringt Uns Wirklich
Der Klapperstorch?
copy in my office)
come from…but the
books. They moved
or gave them to
what the folks last
Their language of
is the exact same
language of Germany
from the 1920s and
1930s! Take, for
example, the 1919
was banned in the
the 1920s that was
headed toward the
York Times has a
the film
men dancing with
by the Germans
because it would
“sexualize” and
language that was
used last night was
shocking!
any way to put
together a history
program on Nazis,
something for next
in Germany in the
1920s and 1930s. I
but—historically
and took sexuality-
what happened last
troubling.
your colleagues do,
Carla!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Mail Stop 308
Reno
On Sep
21,
2023,
at
12:22
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washo
ecount
y.gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Gret
a
and
Jami
e,
Than
k
you
both
for
comi
ng
last
night
to
the
boar
d
meet
ing. I
appr
eciat
e
your
supp
ort
for
my
spee
ch
and
what
you
both
said
in
refer
ence
to
the
publi
c
com
ment
s.
I'm
sure
100
years
from
now
(if
we
survi
ve),
there
will
be
entir
e
libra
ry
secti
ons
devo
ted
to
this
era.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.

outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.


This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno.

Do not click on links or attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious emails to
the Office of Information Technology (OIT) at abuse@unr.edu.
abuse@unr.edu.
Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
I can definitely do a social media post to promote it next week.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Just had a thought and maybe we covered this, do we have simultaneous access for the ebook for
All Boys aren’t Blue? If so we should make sure peope know when we highlight the book for
banned books week
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
Attachments: McSpadden_Nazi Book Banning.docx; McSpadden_Institute for Sexual
Science.docx
I didn’t want to pelt all your colleagues with my message, since you’d both know how to direct
this! I put together two different newsletter-y/op-ed-like texts on Nazis and book burning and
book banning that I thought might help for Banned Books Week. The Nazi Book Banning text is
more generic and references current events in the US, the Institute for Sexual Science text
focuses more on the story of Nazis seizing the collections of this progressive research
institute/medical clinic that was a hub for the gay rights movements.
I thought I’d give you a choice of what works better, and I’d be happy to tweak the other text for
a Pride Month or the next time folks want to ban books in the Washoe County libraries! Feel free
to say too that these texts don’t quite fit; I’m happy to tweak and change as needed!
If you’re looking for good historical Nazi book burning related visuals for Banned Books Week,
I love these two posters:
Since they were both produced by the federal Office of War Information, they should be in the
public domain.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Jeff
Jeff Scott


-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
expand on your email and it should get the point across. People
don’t realize how similar it is and what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we have it by October 1 that

would be great if you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Dear Jeff,
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the week is

super soon, but I’d be happy to write something fairly quickly,
especially for the newsletter. How long of a text were you
thinking? I could probably have something by early next week. I’m
happy to focus what I write in a way that would be most helpful
and interesting to your audience.
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I think there was
a historical misunderstanding about what banning books meant to
the Germans in the 1920s and 1930s. The idea was almost “If
we’re not burning books or criminalizing printing them, we aren’t
banning them.” If it would be helpful, I could write something
pointing out that the Nazis “banned” books by performatively
burning duplicates and serials that they didn’t need anyway, and
then moved the “banned” books to special libraries for experts. So,
taking books off the shelves and putting them in special sections is
literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t know if you think
that history lesson would help!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

exactly the same.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jamie,
newsletter.
Best regards, Carla

Hi Carla,
censorship.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>

wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
can speak to them
directly.
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.
<Outlook- Library Assistant II | Washoe County Library System
0pn2tt34.png> ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100

1:34 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
Hi Carla,
wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

1:22 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoe
county.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be
an excellent
program and I
would love to
plan it. We
could do it
during Pride
Month in June
2024. Let me
run it by folks
here and I'll get
back to you.
Thanks for this
history, I so
appreciate you.
I'm going to
have to do a
little research.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
From: James R
McSpadden
<jmcspadden@unr.edu
>
Sent: Thursday,
September 21, 2023
12:48 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
<CTrounson@washoec
ounty.gov>
Cc: Greta E de Jong
<gdejong@unr.edu>
Subject: Re: Board
Meeting
Washoe County -- DO
open attachments
content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
Greta and I were
saw. You did a
up...
and make them
available only to
the Nazis in 1930s
Germany. As a
shelves and making
them available to a
the Nazis did. The
out of German
they removed a
Bringt Uns Wirklich
Der Klapperstorch?
copy in my office)
come from…but the
books. They moved
or gave them to
what the folks last
Their language of
is the exact same
language of Germany
from the 1920s and
1930s! Take, for
example, the 1919
was banned in the
the 1920s that was
headed toward the
York Times has a
the film
men dancing with
by the Germans
because it would
“sexualize” and
language that was
used last night was
shocking!
any way to put
together a history
program on Nazis,
something for next
in Germany in the
1920s and 1930s. I
but—historically
and took sexuality-
what happened last
troubling.
your colleagues do,
Carla!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
Mail Stop 308
Reno
On Sep
21,
2023,
at
12:22
PM,
Trouns
on,
Carla
<CTrou
nson@
washo
ecount
y.gov>
wrote:
[EXTE
RNAL
EMAIL
]
Hi
Gret
a
and
Jami
e,
Than
k
you
both
for
comi
ng
last
night
to
the
boar
d
meet
ing. I
appr
eciat
e
your
supp
ort
for
my
spee
ch
and
what
you
both
said
in
refer
ence
to
the
publi
c
com
ment
s.
I'm
sure
100
years
from
now
(if
we
survi
ve),
there
will
be
entir
e
libra
ry
secti
ons
devo
ted
to
this
era.
Best
regar
ds,
Carla
My
work
week
is
Tuesd
ay -
Saturd
ay.
This
email
originat
ed
outside
of the
Univers
ity of
Nevad
a,
Reno.
Do not
click on
links or
attach
ments
unless
you
recogni
ze the
sender
and
know
the
content
is safe.
Report
suspici
ous
emails
to the
Office
of
Informa
tion
Techno
logy
(OIT)
at
abuse
@unr.e
du.

outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.


This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno.

Do not click on links or attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious emails to
the Office of Information Technology (OIT) at abuse@unr.edu.
abuse@unr.edu.
James McSpadden
James McSpadden
On May 6, 1933, university students in Berlin skipped their morning gym class to gather at the
Institute for Sexual Science. Accompanied by a brass band, these Germans pushed passersby out
of the way. When a trumpet blast sounded, the Nazi students broke into the building, ripping
things off the walls and overturning items as they rushed to the institute’s library. There, they
pulled books off the shelves and hauled them out to trucks waiting outside. A few hours later the
brownshirts arrived, and these Nazi stormtroopers continued looting and plundering into the
evening.
The Institute for Sexual Science had been founded in 1919 by the celebrity doctor Magnus
Hirschfeld. Hirschfeld was a leading researcher who studied sex, sexuality, and gender. His
institute brought together physicians, scientists, therapists, activists, and educators to offer many
different services to the public. These included health consultations for new couples, treatment
for sexually transmitted diseases, supportive therapy for the queer community, question-and-
answer sessions on sexual health for the general public, and some of the first gender-affirming
care and medical procedures offered to the trans community. The doctors at the institute even
partnered with the pharmaceutical industry to develop both contraceptives and drugs designed to
treat impotence. Magnus Hirschfeld took his message and research on worldwide lecture tours,
spending three months in the United States in 1932.
Berlin’s Institute for Sexual Science was also a hub for the early LGBTQ+ rights movement.
Hirschfeld and his colleagues campaigned to roll back laws criminalizing homosexual behavior.
The institute developed into a safe space, hosting affirming costume parties where guests could
appear in drag without fear of being judged. Hirschfeld even worked with the German film
industry on one of the first movies ever with a gay plot. Different from the Others (1919) told the
story of two men falling in love and trying to overcome both blackmail and homophobia.
Hirschfeld played himself as a sexologist in the movie, memorably saying to his struggling gay
patient: “Love for one of the same sex is no less pure or noble than for one of the opposite. This
orientation can be found in all levels of society, and among respected people. Those that say
otherwise come only from ignorance and bigotry.”
The Nazis hated the Institute for Sexual Science and—referencing Hirschfeld’s own Jewish
background—slandered the institute as “Jewish, Marxist, and indecent.” In 1928, when Magnus
Hirschfeld lectured on sexuality to a high school audience and said that, medically speaking,
homosexuality was normal and healthy, the Nazi press screamed that this was the ultimate
“corruption of the youth.” When the Nazis came to power and got their chance, the institute was
shuttered, plundered, and looted.
On May 10, 1933, Berlin’s students had planned the final event in their weeks of escalating Nazi
activism. In the previous weeks, they had distributed antisemitic flyers, had reported Jewish,
Marxist, and democratic professors to the police, and had rounded up “un-German,” Jewish,
pacifist, and “indecent” books from libraries across the city, including from the Institute for
Sexual Science. All this Nazi militancy would culminate in a public book burning outside the
university library. Swastika-clad students marched and sang songs, Nazi propagandists spoke,
and—despite pouring rain—the flames were lit. A pre-scripted ritual called on various student
speakers to stand in front of the fire declaring: “We oppose decadence and moral decay! We
stand for discipline and morality in families and the state! […] We oppose the distortion of our
history and the devaluing of our great heroes! We stand for reverence for our past!” Bellowing “I
consign these works to the fire” or “Devour, O Flames, these works” students cast books onto the
pyre. You can still watch the German newsreel from that infamous night.
The same evening students mockingly paraded around a bust of Magnus Hirschfeld, while
throwing books from his Institute for Sexual Science into the flames. Today, the story is often
told that the entire library of the institute was destroyed that fiery evening. We imagine anti-
intellectual Nazis burning all the books with which they disagreed, but that was not the case. In
fact, the idea that the Nazis burned all the Institute for Sexual Science’s books—or all the books
by Jewish authors, for example—is just plain wrong. What really happened can teach us
something important about how Nazis really treated the books they disliked.
Remember those Nazi students and stormtroopers who raided the Institute for Sexual Science
and carted off the books? Before those books ended up on the pyre, experts were summoned to
make sure that any useful or valuable material was saved. The photographs we still have of the
institute’s library being ransacked show Nazis reading books and librarians pulling out important
books to ensure they were not burned. Perhaps even the majority of the institute’s 17,000 book
collection was stolen rather than burned by the Nazis. To this very day, German librarians are
finding copies of books that are stamped property of the Institute for Sexual Science in other
library collections. In 1933, the Nazi students really ended up burning far more items that were
duplicates, common periodicals, handouts, or reproduced photos.
In the end, Nazis believed that knowledge contained in certain books was dangerous. After
German students performatively burned a relative handful, the Nazi state locked away the vast
majority of their looted books in restricted collections and libraries. The Institute for Sexual
Science’s library was not entirely destroyed, but the books were reclassified out of the reach of
any ordinary German who just wanted to read something like trusted doctor writing “Love for
one of the same sex is no less pure or noble than for one of the opposite.” For Nazis, these ideas
were too dangerous for regular people.
From: McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of McKenzie, Stacy L.
Subject: Re: Phone call about "pornography in the libraries"
Sounds like you handled this well. She did sound a bit confused about public vs school library.
Hope she learned from your excellent guidance!!
Get Outlook for iOS

Sent: Friday, September 29, 2023 11:45:39 AM
Cc: Library - Spanish Springs Staff <Library-SpanishSprings@washoecounty.gov>
"Oh, that's good!"
From: PW Preview for Librarians
[Preview_for_Librarians@publishersweekly-emails.com] on behalf of PW
Preview for Librarians <Preview_for_Librarians@publishersweekly-
emails.com>
Subject: Banned Books Week Is Here; Next Week's PW Starred Reviews
VIEW ONLINE | FORWARD TO A FRIEND
SEPTEMBER 29, 2023
The Week in Libraries: September 29, 2023

Among the week's headlines: Banned Books Week begins on Sunday; South
Carolina's state library withdraws from the ALA; EveryLibrary and 'Book
Riot' survey parents attitudes about book bans; and 'Library Journal'
questions whether KKR's ownership of OverDrive is an issue for the firm's acquisition of
publisher Simon & Schuster. more
Appeals Court Temporarily Stays

Injunction Blocking Texas Book Rating
Law
The temporary hold, which is not based on the merits of the case, puts Judge Alan D.
Albright's preliminary injunction on ice while the Fifth Circuit considers the state's bid to
stay the injunction. more
Book Business Applauds Government
Lawsuit Against Amazon
"What took so long?" That was the prevailing sentiment among many
industry members upon hearing the news that the FTC had filed an antitrust
lawsuit against the nation's largest e-tailer and dominant bookseller. more
Highlights of Next Week's Stars

Beautyland
Marie-Helene Bertino. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $28 (336p) ISBN 978-0-
374-10928-8
Read the Review »

City of Laughter
Temim Fruchter. Grove, $27 (384p) ISBN 978-0-8021-6128-4
Read the Review »
Daughter of Ashes
Ilaria Tuti, trans. from the Italian by Ekin Oklap. Soho Crime, $27.99
(432p) ISBN 978-1-64129-417-1
Read the Review »
The Lace Widow: An Eliza Hamilton Mystery

Mollie Ann Cox. Crooked Lane, $29.99 (320p) ISBN 978-1-63910-528-1
Read the Review »
Into Siberia: George Kennan’s Epic Journey Through the Brutal,

Frozen Heart of Russia
Gregory Wallance. St. Martin’s, $30 (304p) ISBN 978-1-250-28005-3
Read the Review »

Loaded: The Uncensored Oral History of the Velvet Underground
Dylan Jones. Grand Central, $30 (320p) ISBN 978-1-538756-56-0
Read the Review »
Our Moon: How Earth’s Celestial Companion Transformed the

Planet, Guided Evolution, and Made Us Who We Are
Rebecca Boyle. Random House, $28 (336p) ISBN 978-0-593-12972-2
Read the Review »
Becoming Ella Fitzgerald: The Jazz Singer Who Transformed

American Song
Judith Tick. Norton, $40 (656p) ISBN 978-0-3932-4105-1
Read the Review »

Zero at the Bone: Fifty Entries Against Despair
Christian Wiman. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $30 (320p) ISBN 978-0-374-
60345-8
Read the Review »
CHILDREN'S BOOKS
Hornbeam All In: Three Small Stories About One Large Moose (The
Hornbeam Books #1)
Cynthia Rylant, illus. by Arthur Howard. Beach Lane, $18.99 (48p) ISBN
978-1-66592-481-8
Read the Review »
Everybody Has a Body

Molli Jackson Ehlert, illus. by Lorian Tu. Macmillan/Feiwel and Friends,
$18.99 (32p) ISBN 978-1-2508-5444-5
Read the Review »
The Sky over Rebecca

Matthew Fox. Union Square Kids, $16.99 (256p) ISBN 978-1-45495-189-6
Read the Review »

New Books and More
New Kids' and YA Books: Week of October
2, 2023
Among the books hitting shelves next week are a picture book highlighting
the legacy of a Black poet, a middle grade book about easing grief through
cooking, a YA tale following the fallout for the family of a late Black
actress, and more. more
Generative AI vs. Copyright

Publishing attorney Lloyd J. Jassin examines what artificial intelligence will
mean for the publishing industry. more
On the Road with Matthew McConaughey

Matthew McConaughey's first picture book, 'Just Because,' illustrated by
Renée Kurilla, released earlier this month, and the actor embarked on a mini
media blitz in support of the book. We've gathered photo highlights from
his appearances, which included a week-long, sold-out bookstore tour. more
A Farewell to Tomie dePaola

Over the course of four evenings earlier this month, more than 500 friends
and family members of Tomie dePaola gathered for a celebration of the late
children's author-illustrator, marking what would have been his 89th
birthday. more
Passports to Diversity: Educators and
Students Travel the World Through
Translated Texts
In celebration of World Kid Lit Month, PW spoke with three educators who are infusing their
classrooms and libraries with books in translation to introduce their students to diverse
cultures and global perspectives. more
PW JobZone: Latest Jobs

• Ave Maria Press is seeking a new Publicist
• New Harbinger Publications is seeking a new Acquisitions Editor
• Grove Atlantic is seeking a new Financial Controller
Find out about these and other great jobs at Jobzone
Top 10 Bestsellers
1
The Democrat Party Hates America
Mark R Levin, Author
2
Elon Musk
Walter Isaacson, Author
3
Fourth Wing
Rebecca Yarros, Author
4
Holly
Stephen King, Author
5
Skinnytaste Simple: Easy, Healthy Recipes with 7 Ingredients or Fewer: A
Cookbook
Gina Homolka, Author, Heather K Jones, Author
6
Build the Life You Want: The Art and Science of Getting Happier
Arthur C Brooks, Author, Oprah Winfrey, Author
7
The Last Devil to Die: A Thursday Murder Club Mystery
Richard Osman, Author
8
Things We Left Behind
Lucy Score, Author
9
The Shadow Work Journal, Second Edition: A guide to Integrate and Transcend
your Shadows
Shaheen, Author
10
Astor: The Rise and Fall of an American Fortune
Anderson Cooper, Author
Download a printable PDF of this bestsellers list.
For more PW bestsellers lists, click here.
Send editorial questions about this e-newsletter to Andrew Albanese.

Send advertising questions about this e-newsletter to Cevin Bryerman.
Follow PW on Facebook and Twitter.
For additional assistance, contact us by email or at the address below.

Publishers Weekly,
49 West 23rd Street
Ninth Floor
New York, NY 10010 Phone 212-377-5500
Copyright 2023, PWxyz, LLC. PUBLISHERS WEEKLY and the PW Logo are registered trademarks of PWxyz, LLC.
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
You are receiving this email because jscott@washoecounty.us subscribed to one of Publishers Weekly's newsletters. If
you are not jscott@washoecounty.us, then please disregard this message. Update your newsletter preferences here.
PW takes spam very seriously. This email message meets all the requirements of the United States CAN-SPAM Act
and Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL). To remove yourself from the Preview for Librarians email list,
unsubscribe.
emails.com>
Subject: Banned Books Week Is Here; Next Week's PW Starred Reviews
SEPTEMBER 29, 2023

Among the week's headlines: Banned Books Week begins on Sunday; South
Carolina's state library withdraws from the ALA; EveryLibrary and 'Book
Riot' survey parents attitudes about book bans; and 'Library Journal'
questions whether KKR's ownership of OverDrive is an issue for the firm's acquisition of
publisher Simon & Schuster. more
Appeals Court Temporarily Stays

Injunction Blocking Texas Book Rating
Law
The temporary hold, which is not based on the merits of the case, puts Judge Alan D.
Albright's preliminary injunction on ice while the Fifth Circuit considers the state's bid to
stay the injunction. more
Book Business Applauds Government
Lawsuit Against Amazon
"What took so long?" That was the prevailing sentiment among many
industry members upon hearing the news that the FTC had filed an antitrust
lawsuit against the nation's largest e-tailer and dominant bookseller. more

Beautyland
Marie-Helene Bertino. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $28 (336p) ISBN 978-0-
374-10928-8
Read the Review »

City of Laughter
Temim Fruchter. Grove, $27 (384p) ISBN 978-0-8021-6128-4
Read the Review »
Daughter of Ashes
Ilaria Tuti, trans. from the Italian by Ekin Oklap. Soho Crime, $27.99
(432p) ISBN 978-1-64129-417-1
Read the Review »
The Lace Widow: An Eliza Hamilton Mystery

Mollie Ann Cox. Crooked Lane, $29.99 (320p) ISBN 978-1-63910-528-1
Read the Review »
Into Siberia: George Kennan’s Epic Journey Through the Brutal,

Frozen Heart of Russia
Gregory Wallance. St. Martin’s, $30 (304p) ISBN 978-1-250-28005-3
Read the Review »

Loaded: The Uncensored Oral History of the Velvet Underground
Dylan Jones. Grand Central, $30 (320p) ISBN 978-1-538756-56-0
Read the Review »
Our Moon: How Earth’s Celestial Companion Transformed the

Planet, Guided Evolution, and Made Us Who We Are
Rebecca Boyle. Random House, $28 (336p) ISBN 978-0-593-12972-2
Read the Review »
Becoming Ella Fitzgerald: The Jazz Singer Who Transformed

American Song
Judith Tick. Norton, $40 (656p) ISBN 978-0-3932-4105-1
Read the Review »

Zero at the Bone: Fifty Entries Against Despair
Christian Wiman. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $30 (320p) ISBN 978-0-374-
60345-8
Read the Review »
CHILDREN'S BOOKS
Hornbeam All In: Three Small Stories About One Large Moose (The
Hornbeam Books #1)
Cynthia Rylant, illus. by Arthur Howard. Beach Lane, $18.99 (48p) ISBN
978-1-66592-481-8
Read the Review »
Everybody Has a Body

Molli Jackson Ehlert, illus. by Lorian Tu. Macmillan/Feiwel and Friends,
$18.99 (32p) ISBN 978-1-2508-5444-5
Read the Review »
The Sky over Rebecca

Matthew Fox. Union Square Kids, $16.99 (256p) ISBN 978-1-45495-189-6
Read the Review »

New Books and More
New Kids' and YA Books: Week of October
2, 2023
Among the books hitting shelves next week are a picture book highlighting
the legacy of a Black poet, a middle grade book about easing grief through
cooking, a YA tale following the fallout for the family of a late Black
actress, and more. more
Generative AI vs. Copyright

Publishing attorney Lloyd J. Jassin examines what artificial intelligence will
mean for the publishing industry. more
On the Road with Matthew McConaughey

Matthew McConaughey's first picture book, 'Just Because,' illustrated by
Renée Kurilla, released earlier this month, and the actor embarked on a mini
media blitz in support of the book. We've gathered photo highlights from
his appearances, which included a week-long, sold-out bookstore tour. more
A Farewell to Tomie dePaola

Over the course of four evenings earlier this month, more than 500 friends
and family members of Tomie dePaola gathered for a celebration of the late
children's author-illustrator, marking what would have been his 89th
birthday. more
Passports to Diversity: Educators and
Students Travel the World Through
Translated Texts
In celebration of World Kid Lit Month, PW spoke with three educators who are infusing their
classrooms and libraries with books in translation to introduce their students to diverse
cultures and global perspectives. more

• Ave Maria Press is seeking a new Publicist
• New Harbinger Publications is seeking a new Acquisitions Editor
• Grove Atlantic is seeking a new Financial Controller
Top 10 Bestsellers
1
The Democrat Party Hates America
Mark R Levin, Author
2
Elon Musk
3
Fourth Wing
4
Holly
5
Skinnytaste Simple: Easy, Healthy Recipes with 7 Ingredients or Fewer: A
Cookbook
Gina Homolka, Author, Heather K Jones, Author
6
7
The Last Devil to Die: A Thursday Murder Club Mystery
Richard Osman, Author
8
Lucy Score, Author
9
The Shadow Work Journal, Second Edition: A guide to Integrate and Transcend
your Shadows
Shaheen, Author
10
Astor: The Rise and Fall of an American Fortune
Anderson Cooper, Author


Publishers Weekly,
49 West 23rd Street
Ninth Floor
New York, NY 10010 Phone 212-377-5500
unsubscribe.
From: MacMillan, Jana [JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of MacMillan, Jana
<JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov>
To: Library - Leadership Team [Library-LeadershipTeam@washoecounty.gov]
"Oh, that's good!"
From: Washoe County Library [noreply@libraryaware.com] on behalf of Washoe County
Library <noreply@libraryaware.com>
To: Library - All Staff [librarystaff@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Library News & Events
View Online
BANNED BOOKS WEEK
Washoe County Library System is celebrating the freedom to read during Banned
Books Week, October 1–7. Banned Books Week draws attention to efforts to
remove or restrict access to books in libraries, schools, and bookstores. This year’s
Banned Books Week theme is “Let Freedom Read.”
Visit a Banned Books Week display at any Washoe County Library. The "What are
your neighbors hiding from you?" display at the Spanish Springs Library features
several books that have been intentionally damaged or hidden by members of the
public in an effort to prevent access.
Learn More
COSTUME DONATIONS FOR COSTUME SHOP
Looking to donate Halloween costumes from ghoulish years past? Drop off your
clean and gently-used costumes during the Sierra View Library's open hours
through October 13.
These costumes will be given away at our costume shop event, starting October
14.
Learn more
TEENTOBER
This October, Washoe County Library System is excited to participate in the Young
Adult Library Services Association's annual TeenTober celebration, which highlights
the importance of library services for teens.
Search our calendar of events to see all the events we have planned.
Learn more
UPCOMING EVENTS
TeenTober Tuesdays After-School

Pizza and Puzzles Homework Help
Tuesday, October 3, 3:30–4:30 pm Thursday, October 5, 3:30–5:30 pm
Northwest Reno Library Sierra View Library
Celebrate TeenTober with treats and First through sixth grade students can
activities every Tuesday in October! receive free homework help from
library-trained volunteers.
Sign up now Learn more

Learn more
UPCOMING EVENTS
TeenTober Tuesdays After-School Homework

Pizza and Puzzles Help
Tuesday, October 3, 3:30–4:30 pm Thursday, October 5, 3:30–5:30 pm
Northwest Reno Library Sierra View Library
Celebrate TeenTober with treats and First through sixth grade students can
activities every Tuesday in October! receive free homework help from
library-trained volunteers.
STEAM STEAM Thursday

Eclipse Chalk Art Eclipses
Thursday, October 5, 3:30–5:30 pm Thursday, October 5, 4–5 pm
STEAM STEAM Thursday
Eclipse Chalk Art Eclipses

Thursday, October 5, 3:30–5:30 pm Thursday, October 5, 4–5 pm
North Valleys Library South Valleys Library
This week, we will learn about Join us to get ready for this month's
eclipses in honor of the eclipse that annular solar eclipse. We'll make a
will happen this month. We will model to understand how eclipses
make some eclipse corona chalk art, work and create our own pinhole
and everyone will get a pair of projectors to view the eclipse safely.
eclipse glasses.
Learn more
Sign up now
Visit our online calendar to see more upcoming events:
Story Craft STEAM

View all
Times Events Events
BOOK CLUBS
Four Seasons Book Club
Sparks Library
Educated
by Tara Westover
Tuesday Book Group

Spanish Springs Library
Wintering
by Katherine May
Mystery Sleuth Book Club

North Valleys Library
The Cloisters
by Katy Hays
Mystery Book Club

Woman with a Gun
by Philip Margolin
Inclined to Read Book Group

Incline Village Library
Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow
by Gabrielle Zevin
Four Seasons Book Club
Sparks Library
Educated
by Tara Westover
Tuesday Book Group

Wintering
by Katherine May
Mystery Sleuth Book Club

The Cloisters
by Katy Hays
Mystery Book Club

Woman with a Gun
by Philip Margolin
Inclined to Read Book Group

Incline Village Library
Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow
by Gabrielle Zevin
Visit the calendar to see all upcoming book clubs.
MOVIE SCREENINGS
Visit the calendar to see all movie screenings.
WHAT TO READ NEXT

Censored by Your Neighbors
See full list
NEWS & ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Explorer
The Fall 2023 issue of the Washoe County Library
Explorer is now available. The Explorer is our
comprehensive events guide. New issues are released
seasonally and cover three months of library programs
and events.
Download it today, or pick up a print copy at any

Washoe County Library.
FRIENDS OF WASHOE COUNTY LIBRARY

comprehensive events guide. New issues are released
seasonally and cover three months of library programs
and events.


Friends of Washoe County Library is a member-
supported 501(c)(3) Nevada non-profit organization
dedicated to advocating, fundraising, and providing
support for the Washoe County Library System.
The next Friends of Washoe County Library book

sale starts October 14.
To join, to donate, or for more information, please

visit www.washoelibraryfriends.org or call 775-324-
5522.
Locations & Hours Digital Library Calendar of Events

If you are having trouble unsubscribing from this email, please contact:
Washoe County Library at (775) 327-8300, 301 South Center Street, Reno, Nevada 89501
library@washoecounty.us
[JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: RE: KKoH
Niiiiice!

Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 9:36 AM
To: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
Subject: KKoH
Just a quick heads up, had a good conversation with Daniella Sonnino at KKOH about banned books
week. She’s going to air the piece starting Friday and it will air over the weekend. I think it will be four
different radio channels.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Academic Newswire- Library Journal [ljemail@libraryjournal.com] on behalf of Academic Newswire- Library
Journal <ljemail@libraryjournal.com>
Subject: Book Banning Debate Moves to U.S. Senate, Academic Movers Q&A with Eileen Rhodes, Education
Magazine Archive
View in browser
Forward to a Friend
September 28, 2023
Book Banning Debate Moves to U.S. Senate

By Steve Zalusky
The ongoing debate over the freedom to read moved to the
chambers of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, which held a
hearing September 12 entitled “Book Bans: How Censorship Limits
Liberty and Literature,” convened by Committee Chairman Dick
Durbin (D-IL).
Academic Movers Q&A: Eileen Rhodes, Consolidating
Resources Equitably
By Amy Rea
Eileen Rhodes was named one of LJ’s 2021 Movers & Shakers for
her work bringing Open Educational Resources to Capital
Community College in Connecticut, enabling students who
struggled with the cost of textbooks to continue pursuing their
degree. She’s currently the interim library director for Connecticut
State Community College, a role that’s shifted her priorities and
sent her in new directions.
SPONSORED BY OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

Supporting the Future of Peer Review [Podcast]
Every year, Peer Review Week honors the contributions of

scientists, academics, and researchers in all fields for the hours of
work they put into peer reviewing manuscripts to ensure quality
work is published. This year, the theme of Peer Review Week is
“The Future of Peer Review. ”But what actually is peer review?
Read More>>>
Education Magazine Archive | eReview

By Rob Tench
This first-rate resource is for anyone who wants to know more
about the history, development, and evolution of educational policy,
practice, and theory over the last century. Teachers, educational
administrators, and policymakers will also benefit.
Could KKR’s Ownership of OverDrive Raise Questions About

Simon & Schuster Purchase?
By Claire Kelley
KKR's potential acquisition of Simon & Schuster will undergo
scrutiny from the Department of Justice before proceeding and
could raise questions about how Simon & Schuster will do business
with OverDrive in the future.
SPONSORED BY F1000
Sharing Research Data Is Becoming More Important. Here’s
How Libraries Can Help
Research data are the underlying evidence that supports the claims
made in scholarly publications, and making these data publicly
available is a fundamental aspect of open access publishing. Yet,
owing to a number of obstacles—some real, some perceived—
many researchers are reluctant to share their data with the broader
research community.
Read More>>>
Movers & Shakers 2024 | Call for Nominations

The editors of Library Journal need your help in identifying
emerging talents in the library world—both great leaders and
behind-the-scenes contributors who are providing inspiration and
model programs for others. Our 22nd annual round of Movers &
Shakers will profile up-and-coming individuals from around the
world who are innovative, creative, and making a difference fighting
against censorship, and helping improve their workplace. From
librarians and non-degreed library workers to publishers, vendors,
coders, entrepreneurs, reviewers, and others who impact the library
field—Movers & Shakers 2024 will celebrate those people who are
moving all types of libraries ahead! Please let us know about
anybody you think we should be aware of. Submissions will close
on October 23, 2023.
“The fact is, it was sort of dictated: You will consolidate. But we were given
the freedom to choose what we wanted to consolidate. That was huge too,
because if they had micromanaged it and told us what we had to do versus
what we wanted to do, it wouldn’t have worked as well.”
—From: “Academic Movers Q&A: Eileen Rhodes, Consolidating Resources Equitably”
Claymation, Groucho Marx, and Monopoly | Real Reels
By Joshua Blevins Peck
The history of a beloved board game, a behind-the-scenes view of
LDS missionary work, and a claymation pioneer are among the
subjects of this month’s must-see documentaries.
SPONSORED BY GALE, PART OF CENGAGE GROUP

Digital Humanities Teaches Students Critical Analysis Skills
Students learn invaluable skills they can apply in a variety of

settings and applications. Across the nation, there has been
renewed debate over the value of humanities degree programs as
campus leaders look to overcome steep budget challenges.
Read More>>>
From LJ Reviews:
SOCIAL SCIENCES
PREMIUM
Koreatown Dreaming: Stories & Portraits of Korean Immigrant Life
By Emanuel Hahn
Recommended for anyone interested in the experiences of Korean Americans. For a more detailed
exploration of the topic, consider Koreatown, Los Angeles: Immigration, Race, and the “American Dream”
by Shelley Sang-Hee Lee.
PREMIUM
Egyptian Made: Women, Work, and the Promise of Liberation
By Leslie T. Chang
This book has the ability to tear holes into preexisting ideas readers may have about Egyptian women in
the workforce. It also invites them to learn how some women shape their own professional identities. As
intensely accessible and personable as Barbara Ehrenreich’s Nickeled and Dimed.
The Bars Are Ours: Histories and Cultures of Gay Bars in America, 1960 and After
By Lucas Hilderbrand
A powerful celebration and examination of LGBTQIA+ nightlife. This book will serve as a significant
record of evolving cultural touchstones and queer communities across the country.
REFERENCE
PREMIUM
The Who, What, and Where of America: Understanding the American Community Survey, 10th Ed
Ed. by Shana Hertz
This publication should be considered a useful and supplemental guide to the Census Bureau’s website,
since it expands on the information found within it.
PREMIUM
Joan of Arc: A Reference Guide to Her Life and Works
By Scott Manning
Manning asserts in his introduction that there is more documentation of Joan of Arc’s life, movements,
and military actions than commonly thought, and this volume supports his thesis. Comprehensive and
accessible to casual and serious readers alike.
NONFICTION
Falling Rocket: James Whistler, John Ruskin, and the Battle for Modern Art
By Paul Thomas Murphy
Absorbing and informative, this title is cultural history at its best.
PREMIUM
Writings on Yiddish and Yiddishkayt: The War Years, 1939–1945
By Isaac Bashevis Singer
A solid collection of Yiddish thought from an esteemed writer, at a pivotal time in Jewish history.
The Best American Essays 2023
Ed. by Vivian Gornick & Robert Atwan
An excellent compendium of the year’s best writing. Highly recommended for writing students, book
discussion groups, and fans of the essay format.
Nine Decades of Al Hirschfeld | Performing Arts

By Herbert E. Shapiro
These volumes of Hirschfeld’s illustrations and caricatures form a
remarkable visual history of Broadway theater in its heyday.
Zain Khalid’s Brother Alive Wins Bard Fiction Prize | Book

Pulse
By Sarah Wolberg
Zain Khalid wins the Bard Fiction Prize for his debut novel, Brother
Alive. Shortlists are announced for the Polari First Book Prize and
the Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize. Finalists are
announced for the Barnes & Noble Discover Prize.
Political Extremism & Radicalism Part III: Global Communist
and Socialist Movements | eReview
By James Rhoades
With its sophisticated search capabilities, support for primary-
source literacy, and singular collections of primary-source material,
this resource is a must-have for libraries supporting historical and
political research of far-left political movements.
FTC Sues Amazon | Book Pulse

By Kate Merlene
The FTC sues Amazon for illegally maintaining monopoly power.
Jorie Graham wins the Laurel Prize. Naomi Wood wins the 2023
BBC National Short Story Award. Finalists are named for the 2023
Atwood Gibson Writers’ Trust Fiction Prize.
From the Pages of infoDOCKET...

• In Affiliation with Arizona State University, “President Biden to Create Library
Honoring His Friend and Rival John McCain”
• Resources: FCC Chairwoman Rosenworcel Proposes to Restore Net Neutrality
Rules
• Journal Article: “Video Game Equipment Loss and Durability in a Circulating
Academic Collection”
• New Report: “Alternative Publishing Platforms. What Have We Learnt?”
• Andrea Jackson Gavin Appointed Inaugural Program Director of the HBCU Digital
Library Trust
Job Zone utilizes unique job matching technology to help you find
the perfect job (and employers find the perfect candidate), whether
you’re actively seeking or just keeping an eye out for your
possibilities. Log on today and check out our newest features,
including automated job and candidate matches, and email alerts.
JOB OF THE WEEK

The Austin Public Library is seeking a Library Division Manager.
Did you receive this newsletter from a friend? Sign up here to get Academic Newswire
LINKS: LibraryJournal.com | News | Reviews+ | LJ Events and Webcasts
CONTACTS: Editorial: lpeet@mediasourceinc.com; Advertising: rfutterman@mediasourceinc.com
Library Journal (an MSI Information Services company), 7858 Industrial Parkway, Plain City, OH 43064,
United States
Manage preferences
Subject: Re: Banned Books social media - first post showing hidden pronoun book
Great! Scheduling it to post asap.
Getting lots of good social media feedback on the first post about the SS display.
Jamie Hemingway
System

<JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
Yes!!
Jeff Scott
From: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>

Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 9:43:19 AM
To: Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie,
Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
Good morning,
I'm actually going to post this today. Jeff—you good with the post content before I proceed? (I
know this post will get people talking, so just want to make sure.)
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2023 3:43 PM
Thanks John.
I will post this later today if approved.
Here's the short version for X/Twitter (always a challenge having to edit down!):
We defend your right to decide what you read, so we take note when we find books hidden or
damaged in our libraries. #ThePronounBook by Chris Ayala-Kronos was recently found
hidden at the #NorthValleysLibrary. Find our #CensoredByYourNeighbors book list at
washoelibrary.org/catalog
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
From: Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>

To: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>;
McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
Love this! "Censored" is misspelled in the hashtag.

To: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Banned Books social media - first post showing hidden pronoun book
Hello!
I'm working on the first post highlighting the hidden books. I will post the pronoun book first.
Here's the post copy so far. Let me know if you'd like any changes, and/or if you approve.
------
We're highlighting the fight against censorship for the next two weeks in celebration of the
right to read during #BannedBooksWeek. At Washoe County Library #FreePeopleReadFreely.
We staunchly defend your right to decide what books are read in your household.
We have found that some members of the public want to decide that for you, so we take note
when we find specific books hidden or damaged in our libraries. "The Pronoun Book," by
Chris Ayala-Kronos, is a board book that was recently found hidden behind books in the
juvenile fiction section at the North Valleys Library.
We support your right to have access to books like this one. You can find this book and others
available for checkout in our catalog. Visit washoelibrary.org/catalog to find our
#BannedBooksWeek and #CencoredByYourNeighbors book lists.
#Whatareyourneighborshidingfromyou?
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
[JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]
Yes!!
Jeff Scott

Good morning,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Thanks John.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System


Hello!
------
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
To: Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov];
Good morning,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Thanks John.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System


Hello!
------
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
To: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
Subject: KKoH
Just a quick heads up, had a good conversation with Daniella Sonnino at KKOH about banned
books week. She’s going to air the piece starting Friday and it will air over the weekend. I think
it will be four different radio channels.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
To: Daniela Sonnino [Daniela.Sonnino@cumulus.com]
Subject: Re: [EXT]RE: banned books week
Oi thank you
Jeff Scott
From: Daniela Sonnino <Daniela.Sonnino@cumulus.com>

Let's shoot for a call at 910, I'm on live until then, thanks!!

To: Daniela Sonnino <Daniela.Sonnino@cumulus.com>
No not at this time. Will 9 still work?
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Are you around the office now?

Ok sounds good. You can call me at 775-327-8341
Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jeff, We still have time, if you have 2 min. Just a quick phoner about the amazing books on
the list. I'm free today (thur) for a phone call after 9:10. Yes, I'm the reporter at KOH.
Thanks!!
Daniela

Subject: [EXT]RE: banned books week
Good afternoon,
Sorry I missed this. Was there another time you would be available? Is this for KKOH?
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Subject: banned books week
Can I get a quick interview with you this morning about banned book week and the facebook
post about the display at Spanish Springs Library? It would be pretaped 5 min or less
Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you know the sender and you are sure the content is safe. Please report the message using the
Report Message feature in your email client if you believe the email is suspicious.
From: Daniela Sonnino [Daniela.Sonnino@cumulus.com] on behalf of Daniela Sonnino
<Daniela.Sonnino@cumulus.com>
Let's shoot for a call at 910, I'm on live until then, thanks!!

Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks!!
Daniela

Good afternoon,
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks!!
Daniela

Good afternoon,
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino

Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks!!
Daniela

Good afternoon,
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino
Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks!!
Daniela

Good afternoon,
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino
Thanks!!
Daniela

Good afternoon,
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino
To: BRUCE FOSTER [grtdad53@sbcglobal.net]
Subject: RE: Check-out Blocked
Mr. Foster,
Thursday 10-1
Friday 10-5
Monday 10-1
Tuesday 10-1
Sincerely,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Mr. Scott:

book that
blocked
explanation.
Thanks so much,
Bruce Foster
Sparks
To: Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov];
Thanks John.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System


Hello!
------
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
From: Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Andrews, John
<JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>
To: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; Scott, Jeff
[jscott@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]

Hello!
------
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
To: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
CC: Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]
Importance: High
Hello!
------
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
Subject: RE: banned books week
Good afternoon,
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino
From: Sauvageau, Audrey [asauvageau@nyeschools.org] on behalf of Sauvageau, Audrey
<asauvageau@nyeschools.org>
To: Sulin Jones [SulinJones@admin.nv.gov]
CC: abrueher@lyoncsd.org; acampbell [acampbell@carson.k12.nv.us];
acampbell@landernv.net; admin@lovelocktribe.com; aidybert.weeks@unlv.edu;
akurland@carson.org; Alena Principato [Alena.Principato@nsc.edu];
alicia.wellsbandcouncil@gmail.com; Amanda Oliver [graceaco@live.com];
amargosalibrary@gmail.com; Apel, Deborah [DApel@washoeschools.net];
asauvageau5476@gmail.com; ask@thelibrarydistrict.org; assistdir@pahrumplibrary.org;
Asteriadis, Stephanie - Nevada Prevention Resource Center [sasteriadis@casat.org]; Weinert,
Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov]; beattylibraryassistant@gmail.com;
beattylibrarydirector@gmail.com; Bleeker, Jeanne - Smoky Valley [jeanneb@svld.net];
bratsnj@nv.ccsd.net; Brett Silver [BSilver@admin.nv.gov]; bscarnati@tmcc.edu; Carol Glynn -
Storey County School District [caglynn@storey.k12.nv.us]; chair@lovelocktribe.com;
clcdirector@fpst.org; clquillen@churchillcountylibrary.org; Connie Corley
[ccorley@admin.nv.gov]; Dickman, Corinne [CDickman@washoecounty.gov]; coberhansli
[coberhansli@mineralcountynv.org]; creativelearning@carsoncitylibrary.org;
dalton.elyshoshone@gmail.com; Diehm, Kimberly - Boulder City [bcdirector@bclibrary.org];
director@pahrumplibrary.org; dporter@lyon-county.org; educationdirector@wrpt.org;
emily.king@csn.edu; Eric C Walsh [Eric.walsh@gbcnv.edu]; Faehling, Sharron
[piochelibrary@yahoo.com]; Forrest Lewis [lewisf@cityofnorthlasvegas.com]; ghatch@ypt-
nsn.gov; gpontrelli@rsic.org; grantal@nv.ccsd.net; grantwriter@fpst.org; hbarlese@plpt.nsn.us;
hdamonte@unr.edu; Holly Esposito - Washoe County School District
[hesposito@washoeschools.net]; Holly McPherson [mcphersonh@churchillcsd.com]; Hope
Williams [HWilliams@admin.nv.gov]; howard.mary@shopai.org; info@elyshoshonetribe.com;
Jessica Anderson [jessica.anderson@humboldtcountynv.gov]; jessica@bclibrary.org;
jgunn@hendersonlibraries.com; jholt@carson.org; Jill Hersha [hershaj@lvccld.org]; Joanne
Muellenbach [Joanne.Muellenbach@tun.touro.edu]; Johnny Dinh [Johnny.Dinh@nsc.edu];
jschardt@lyon-county.org; Judith Sargent [sargentj@lvccld.org]; June Simms - Touro University
Nevada [june.simms@tun.touro.edu]; jveloz@nyeschools.org; Kari Ward
[kward@admin.nv.gov]; Karleighn Goodale [kgoodale@ecsdnv.net]; Kassie Antonucci
[krkincai@elkocountynv.net]; Kathie Brinkerhoff [kbrinkerhoff@pershingcountynv.gov];
Kimberly.Kaplan@unlv.edu; Kindra Fox - Washoe County School District
[kcfox@washoeschools.net]; Kitti Canepi - University of Southern Nevada
[kcanepi@roseman.edu]; landon.paljusaj@unlv.edu; Lisa Gibson [gibsonl@lvccld.org]; Lori
Romero [Lromero@whitepinecountynv.gov]; Madziarek, Andrea - Smoky Valley
[andream@svld.net]; Marcie Smedley [mlsmedley@hendersonlibraries.com]; Mary Shultz -
UNR Medical Library [mshultz@medicine.nevada.edu]; Tiar, Morgan A.
[MATiar@washoecounty.gov]; Megan.DeArmond@tun.touro.edu; msantos@hcsdnv.com;
Nanci DeLa Cruz Aguayo [Nanci.Dela@nsc.edu]; Nathaniel King - Nevada State College
[nathaniel.king@nsc.edu]; Neil Siegel - TMCC [nsiegel@tmcc.edu]; Neisha Boddie-Smith
[NBoddie-Smith@admin.nv.gov]; nsmith@rsic.org; nwhite@esmeraldacountynv.org; Patricia
Iannuzzi - UNLV [patricia.iannuzzi@unlv.edu]; Cox, Patrick [pcox@nvcourts.nv.gov]; Pritchett,
Shanna [spritchett@nvcourts.nv.gov]; rnickel@citlink.net; Roberson, Caprice
[Caprice.Roberson@csn.edu]; Romelle Cronin - Douglas County School District
[rcronin@dcsd.k12.nv.us]; Ronald Belbin [ronald.belbin@wnc.edu]; Sarah Bates
[Sarah.Bates@washoecourts.us]; Sarah Patton [spatton@nevadaculture.org]; Scott, Jeff
[jscott@washoecounty.gov]; secretary.treasurer@washoetribe.us; Sharon Joy Browne
[sbrowne@admin.nv.gov]; Shelley Nee [snee@pershing.k12.nv.us]; skawich@plpt.nsn.us;
stephanie.espinoza@csn.edu; Sufa Anderson [andersons@lvccld.org];
Suzanne.Fayle@thelibrarydistrict.org; Tanya Brown-Wirth [brownt@lvccld.org]; Tiffany Garrett
[tgarrett@roseman.edu]; tonopahlibrary@hotmail.com; tribalsecretary@plpt.nsn.us; Walsh
Long, Ann [awalshlong@nvcourts.nv.gov]; Library - All Staff
[librarystaff@washoecounty.gov]; Watson Kelvin [watsonk@lvccld.org]; Wilcox, Stephanie
Heyroth [StephanieH.Wilcox@lcb.state.nv.us]; wprindle@lyon-county.org; Xan Goodman
[Xan.Goodman@unlv.edu]; yombaer@gmail.com; Zoleinna Schar [zschar@admin.nv.gov]
Subject: Re: WebJunction content and upcoming webinars
Thank you for the information!
Audrey Sauvageau
Library Aide
Tonopah Jr. Sr. High School
asauvageau@nyeschools.org
--------------------
"Every student a success." -- NCSD, vision
CONFIDENTIALITY - This e-mail transmission and any documents, files or previous e-mail
messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is for the sole use of the
intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. Any unauthorized or mistaken receipt of an e-mail should be returned to the
sender and deleted from the unauthorized recipient’s computer system
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 10:20 AM Sulin Jones <SulinJones@admin.nv.gov> wrote:
WebJunction trainings are available at no cost to Nevada library staff, boards, and volunteers.
Feel free to share!
~Sulin
WebJunction access is funded by a Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) Statewide
Continuing Education grant, provided by the Institute of Museum and Library Services and
administered by the Nevada State Library, Archives and Public Records.
WebJunction content and upcoming webinars – September 27, 2023
Highlighted Content
5 Things You Need to Know About Grant Writing for School Libraries: Consider
applying for a grant to support your school library. It's a great way to be able to expand
your programs, strengthen your resources, and even build new relationships and
partnerships. Check out these approachable resources and strategies that can simplify
this process and help you to feel supported and confident in your efforts.
Redefining the Library Experience: Global Insights for Future Planning: During the past
year, OCLC Global Council and OCLC Research explored the idea of the changing
library experience by focusing on topics such as community engagement,
collaboration, and innovative programs that meet library users’ evolving needs and
expectations. The resulting report provides an overview of how these findings relate to
what resources and services libraries offer, how libraries engage with their
communities and partners, and the evolving needs of library workers. Read this article
to learn more and access the full Redefining the library experience report.
Advancing IDEAs: Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Accessibility, 19 September 2023: This is

the latest Hanging Together blog post, part of a regular series on issues of Inclusion, Diversity,
Equity, and Accessibility, compiled by a team of OCLC contributors.
WebJunction Webinars
These upcoming webinars are open for registration. If you can’t attend a live session, all
WebJunction webinars are recorded and available for free in the Course Catalog.
Climate Justice
Tuesday, October 3, 2023 ◆ 2:00 pm Eastern / 11:00 am Pacific ◆ 90 minutes
Registration: https://www.webjunction.org/events/webjunction/climate-justice.html
Climate justice recognizes the disproportional impacts of climate change on the people
and places least responsible for the problem: systematically oppressed communities
and communities of color. Libraries that approach climate action through the lens of
climate justice can accelerate necessary work in communities to ensure all are heard in
disaster preparedness and emergency management work. Learn how to think like a
21st century economist and how libraries can help lead the way to a just transition of
our communities to strengthen community resilience and livability not just in the
aftermath of climate change-driven disasters, but well before they ever happen.
Revitalizing Morale: Cultivating a Supportive Library Culture
Wednesday, October 11, 2023 ◆ 3:00 pm Eastern / 12:00 pm Pacific ◆ 90 minutes
Registration: https://www.webjunction.org/events/webjunction/revitalizing-morale.html
Building on research and insights presented in the webinar, Low Morale in Libraries: Impacts
and Countermeasures, this panel discussion delves deeper into essential facets that foster a
healthy and supportive library culture, exploring institutional and individual solutions to
countering low morale. Examining how organizational culture, library hierarchies, and
management styles affect the workplace experiences of library staff, we’ll explore various
strategies for library staff working to navigate power dynamics and advocate for positive
personal or organizational change. Recognizing the trauma, stress, and burnout experienced
by library staff, we’ll consider how to:
• Assertively communicate needs while embracing change, set boundaries to

address toxic positivity, and foster a compassionate environment
• Explore visionary leadership approaches for inclusive libraries and promote
collaboration for library staff at all levels
• Gain insights on trauma-informed practices and collective care to help recover
from burnout and foster empathy and resilience
Join this panel of researchers, library practitioners, and changemakers as they share
experiences, research, and practical strategies to help foster a healthier, empowered library
environment.
Building Community Relationships for Better Library Services
Registration: https://www.webjunction.org/events/webjunction/building-community-
relationships.html
Many libraries are increasingly focused on planning library services collaboratively with their
communities. Connected Learning, Participatory Design, and Community Led-Libraries are
becoming standard practice, but to successfully embark on that work, the first (and ongoing!)
thing library staff need to do is build robust and meaningful connections within their
communities. In this session, we will explore strategies for finding community partners and
building relationships with them with the goal of truly working in collaboration with people they
serve. We will discuss strategies for small rural libraries up through large urban systems. You
will hear from library staff who have successfully started doing this work in their own
communities with partners who serve all ages. You will also learn about the importance of this
work and why it needs to be supported by administrators and supervisors.
From: Sulin Jones [SulinJones@admin.nv.gov] on behalf of Sulin Jones
<SulinJones@admin.nv.gov>
To: abrueher@lyoncsd.org; acampbell [acampbell@carson.k12.nv.us]; acampbell@landernv.net;
admin@lovelocktribe.com; aidybert.weeks@unlv.edu; akurland@carson.org; Alena Principato
[Alena.Principato@nsc.edu]; alicia.wellsbandcouncil@gmail.com; Amanda Oliver
[graceaco@live.com]; amargosalibrary@gmail.com; Apel, Deborah [DApel@WashoeSchools.net];
asauvageau@nyeschools.org; asauvageau5476@gmail.com; ask@thelibrarydistrict.org;
assistdir@pahrumplibrary.org; Asteriadis, Stephanie - Nevada Prevention Resource Center
[sasteriadis@casat.org]; Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov];
beattylibraryassistant@gmail.com; beattylibrarydirector@gmail.com; Bleeker, Jeanne - Smoky
Valley [jeanneb@svld.net]; bratsnj@nv.ccsd.net; Brett Silver [BSilver@admin.nv.gov];
bscarnati@tmcc.edu; Carol Glynn - Storey County School District
[caglynn@storey.k12.nv.us]; chair@lovelocktribe.com; clcdirector@fpst.org;
clquillen@churchillcountylibrary.org; Connie Corley [ccorley@admin.nv.gov]; Dickman, Corinne
[CDickman@washoecounty.gov]; coberhansli [coberhansli@mineralcountynv.org];
creativelearning@carsoncitylibrary.org; dalton.elyshoshone@gmail.com; Diehm, Kimberly -
Boulder City [bcdirector@bclibrary.org]; director@pahrumplibrary.org; dporter@lyon-
county.org; educationdirector@wrpt.org; emily.king@csn.edu; Eric C Walsh
[Eric.walsh@gbcnv.edu]; Faehling, Sharron [piochelibrary@yahoo.com]; Forrest Lewis
[lewisf@cityofnorthlasvegas.com]; ghatch@ypt-nsn.gov; gpontrelli@rsic.org;
grantal@nv.ccsd.net; grantwriter@fpst.org; hbarlese@plpt.nsn.us; hdamonte@unr.edu; Holly
Esposito - Washoe County School District [hesposito@washoeschools.net]; Holly McPherson
[mcphersonh@churchillcsd.com]; Hope Williams [HWilliams@admin.nv.gov];
howard.mary@shopai.org; info@elyshoshonetribe.com; Jessica Anderson
[jessica.anderson@humboldtcountynv.gov]; jessica@bclibrary.org;
jgunn@hendersonlibraries.com; jholt@carson.org; Jill Hersha [hershaj@lvccld.org]; Joanne
Muellenbach [Joanne.Muellenbach@tun.touro.edu]; Johnny Dinh [Johnny.Dinh@nsc.edu];
jschardt@lyon-county.org; Judith Sargent [sargentj@lvccld.org]; June Simms - Touro
University Nevada [june.simms@tun.touro.edu]; jveloz@nyeschools.org; Kari Ward
[kward@admin.nv.gov]; Karleighn Goodale [kgoodale@ecsdnv.net]; Kassie Antonucci
[krkincai@elkocountynv.net]; Kathie Brinkerhoff [kbrinkerhoff@pershingcountynv.gov];
Kimberly.Kaplan@unlv.edu; Kindra Fox - Washoe County School District
[kcfox@washoeschools.net]; Kitti Canepi - University of Southern Nevada
[kcanepi@roseman.edu]; landon.paljusaj@unlv.edu; Lisa Gibson [gibsonl@lvccld.org]; Lori
Romero [Lromero@whitepinecountynv.gov]; Madziarek, Andrea - Smoky Valley
[andream@svld.net]; Marcie Smedley [mlsmedley@hendersonlibraries.com]; Mary Shultz -
UNR Medical Library [mshultz@medicine.nevada.edu]; Tiar, Morgan A.
[MATiar@washoecounty.gov]; Megan.DeArmond@tun.touro.edu; msantos@hcsdnv.com; Nanci
DeLa Cruz Aguayo [Nanci.Dela@nsc.edu]; Nathaniel King - Nevada State College
[nathaniel.king@nsc.edu]; Neil Siegel - TMCC [nsiegel@tmcc.edu]; Neisha Boddie-Smith
[NBoddie-Smith@admin.nv.gov]; nsmith@rsic.org; nwhite@esmeraldacountynv.org; Patricia
Iannuzzi - UNLV [patricia.iannuzzi@unlv.edu]; Cox, Patrick [pcox@nvcourts.nv.gov]; Pritchett,
Shanna [spritchett@nvcourts.nv.gov]; rnickel@citlink.net; Roberson, Caprice
[Caprice.Roberson@CSN.EDU]; Romelle Cronin - Douglas County School District
[rcronin@dcsd.k12.nv.us]; Ronald Belbin [ronald.belbin@wnc.edu]; Sarah Bates
[Sarah.Bates@washoecourts.us]; Sarah Patton [spatton@nevadaculture.org]; Scott, Jeff
[jscott@washoecounty.gov]; secretary.treasurer@washoetribe.us; Sharon Joy Browne
[sbrowne@admin.nv.gov]; Shelley Nee [snee@pershing.k12.nv.us]; skawich@plpt.nsn.us;
stephanie.espinoza@csn.edu; Sufa Anderson [andersons@lvccld.org]; Sulin Jones
[SulinJones@admin.nv.gov]; Suzanne.Fayle@thelibrarydistrict.org; Tanya Brown-Wirth
[brownt@lvccld.org]; Tiffany Garrett [tgarrett@roseman.edu]; tonopahlibrary@hotmail.com;
tribalsecretary@plpt.nsn.us; Walsh Long, Ann [awalshlong@nvcourts.nv.gov]; Library - All Staff
[librarystaff@washoecounty.gov]; Watson Kelvin [watsonk@lvccld.org]; Wilcox, Stephanie
Heyroth [StephanieH.Wilcox@lcb.state.nv.us]; wprindle@lyon-county.org; Xan Goodman
[Xan.Goodman@unlv.edu]; yombaer@gmail.com; Zoleinna Schar [zschar@admin.nv.gov]
Subject: WebJunction content and upcoming webinars
Attachments: WebJunction-content-and-webinars-9-27-23.docx
WebJunction trainings are available at no cost to Nevada library staff, boards, and volunteers. Feel free
to share!
~Sulin
WebJunction access is funded by a Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) Statewide Continuing
Education grant, provided by the Institute of Museum and Library Services and administered by the
Nevada State Library, Archives and Public Records.
WebJunction content and upcoming webinars – September 27, 2023
Highlighted Content
5 Things You Need to Know About Grant Writing for School Libraries: Consider applying
for a grant to support your school library. It's a great way to be able to expand your programs,
strengthen your resources, and even build new relationships and partnerships. Check out these
approachable resources and strategies that can simplify this process and help you to feel
supported and confident in your efforts.
Redefining the Library Experience: Global Insights for Future Planning: During the past
year, OCLC Global Council and OCLC Research explored the idea of the changing
library experience by focusing on topics such as community engagement, collaboration,
and innovative programs that meet library users’ evolving needs and expectations. The
resulting report provides an overview of how these findings relate to what resources and
services libraries offer, how libraries engage with their communities and partners, and
the evolving needs of library workers. Read this article to learn more and access the full
Redefining the library experience report.
Advancing IDEAs: Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Accessibility, 19 September 2023: This is

the latest Hanging Together blog post, part of a regular series on issues of Inclusion, Diversity,
Equity, and Accessibility, compiled by a team of OCLC contributors.
WebJunction Webinars
These upcoming webinars are open for registration. If you can’t attend a live session, all
WebJunction webinars are recorded and available for free in the Course Catalog.
Climate Justice
Registration: https://www.webjunction.org/events/webjunction/climate-justice.html
Climate justice recognizes the disproportional impacts of climate change on the people and
places least responsible for the problem: systematically oppressed communities and
communities of color. Libraries that approach climate action through the lens of climate justice
can accelerate necessary work in communities to ensure all are heard in disaster preparedness
and emergency management work. Learn how to think like a 21st century economist and how
libraries can help lead the way to a just transition of our communities to strengthen community
resilience and livability not just in the aftermath of climate change-driven disasters, but well
before they ever happen.
Revitalizing Morale: Cultivating a Supportive Library Culture

Wednesday, October 11, 2023 ◆ 3:00 pm Eastern / 12:00 pm Pacific ◆ 90 minutes
Registration: https://www.webjunction.org/events/webjunction/revitalizing-morale.html
Building on research and insights presented in the webinar, Low Morale in Libraries: Impacts
and Countermeasures, this panel discussion delves deeper into essential facets that foster a
healthy and supportive library culture, exploring institutional and individual solutions to
countering low morale. Examining how organizational culture, library hierarchies, and
management styles affect the workplace experiences of library staff, we’ll explore various
strategies for library staff working to navigate power dynamics and advocate for positive
personal or organizational change. Recognizing the trauma, stress, and burnout experienced by
library staff, we’ll consider how to:
• Assertively communicate needs while embracing change, set boundaries to address

toxic positivity, and foster a compassionate environment
• Explore visionary leadership approaches for inclusive libraries and promote collaboration
for library staff at all levels
• Gain insights on trauma-informed practices and collective care to help recover from
burnout and foster empathy and resilience
Join this panel of researchers, library practitioners, and changemakers as they share
experiences, research, and practical strategies to help foster a healthier, empowered library
environment.
Building Community Relationships for Better Library Services
Registration: https://www.webjunction.org/events/webjunction/building-community-
relationships.html
Many libraries are increasingly focused on planning library services collaboratively with their
communities. Connected Learning, Participatory Design, and Community Led-Libraries are
becoming standard practice, but to successfully embark on that work, the first (and ongoing!)
thing library staff need to do is build robust and meaningful connections within their
communities. In this session, we will explore strategies for finding community partners and
building relationships with them with the goal of truly working in collaboration with people they
serve. We will discuss strategies for small rural libraries up through large urban systems. You
will hear from library staff who have successfully started doing this work in their own
communities with partners who serve all ages. You will also learn about the importance of this
work and why it needs to be supported by administrators and supervisors.
Thanks,
Daniela Sonnino
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 4:30 PM
Subject: Fw: Banned Books Week 2023: Let Freedom Read
Importance: High
Hello,
The press release for Banned Books Week is now live! (Forwarded below). The first social media
post highlighting our displays has gone up, also featuring the Spanish Springs display. (FB and X
posts linked below)
Now on display at the Spanish Springs... - Washoe County Library | Facebook
https://x.com/WashoeLibrary/status/1706803385435816092?s=20
We'll continue the blitz of highlighting individual titles and displays this week. Keep an eye out
for a lot of social media activity! I've also heard from Terri Russell (KOLO) that she's planning to
do a story about the displays.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
From: Washoe County Library System <jhemingway@washoecounty.gov>

To: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Banned Books Week 2023: Let Freedom Read
Banned Books Week 2023: Let

Freedom Read
Visit a Banned Books Week display at Washoe County Library locations October
1-7
Read More
Share
Tweet
Forward
© 2023 Washoe County Library System
This email was sent to jhemingway@washoecounty.us

why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences
Washoe County · 1001 E 9th Street · Reno, NV 89512 · USA
Subject: Fwd: Blocked Patron
Just a heads up on this interaction. Mr Foster has not contacted me.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 2:40:58 PM
To: Jefry, Jennifer L. <JJefry@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>;
Dickman, Corinne <CDickman@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Blocked Patron
Good afternoon,
Mr. Foster’s account is blocked for defacing a library book. He is to contact me regarding his
account. He has not yet done that. His card block is for one year unless he contacts me regarding
his actions.
Thank you for upholding the block. Mr Foster has defaced library books and attempted to hide
library materials. This primarily happened at the Spanish Springs Library.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Jefry, Jennifer L. <JJefry@washoecounty.gov>

To: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>;
Subject: Blocked Patron
Helllo,
Wanted to give you a heads up…..Patron BRUCE ROBERT FOSTER, ID# 21235011295604, came in
Tuesday at 2:20 to check out a book. It was a YA book “Traffick” by Ellen Hopkins, so I went to retrieve it
from the Teen area. When he tried to check out, it was blocked and I handed him Jeff’s business card
and apologized for the inconvenience. He asked about what else was written in his account to which I
answered this was all the info we had. During this interaction Debbie came next to me for support with
the situation when Bruce started saying it was discriminatory. I responded with “It’s hard to tell since no
one has spoken to Jeff yet.” He still wanted the book so I told him I’d put it on hold for him.
CC: Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; Prentiss, Timothy
[TPrentiss@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: RE: Banned Books press release
I very much appreciate the edits you made. Thanks!

Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 11:51 AM
To: Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie,
Cc: Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; Prentiss, Timothy <TPrentiss@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Banned Books press release
Hello,
Got a second draft ready. Please take a look and let me know if you have any additions. I'll get
this pushed out this afternoon, and do some social media to go with it.
Question - which photo would you all prefer that I use for the press release? SS or SO?
Debi - John and I made a couple of edits to your quote. Take a look and let us know if that's ok.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway

System

Hi Jamie,
This looks great! I noticed the spot for a quote for me.
How about:
"One of the real strengths of our collection of materials is that we have a wide range of materials that
reflect the interests of our wonderfully diverse community. Banned Books Week gives us an opportunity
to reflect on how important it is that we continue to protect the right to read for all members of our
community."
Thanks!
Debi

Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 4:34 PM
Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Banned Books press release
Hello,
The draft of the banned books week press release is attached. I've left room for a couple of
quotes—Debi, Jeff, Stacy—feel free to send me a quote if you'd like.
I will get this sent out tomorrow. We'll get the social media posts about the displays and
censored books started tomorrow as well. In anticipation of that I reposted the post about
LeVar Burton being this year's honorary chair today.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway

System

To: Jefry, Jennifer L. [JJefry@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
[SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Dickman, Corinne [CDickman@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: Blocked Patron
Good afternoon,
Mr. Foster’s account is blocked for defacing a library book. He is to contact me regarding his
account. He has not yet done that. His card block is for one year unless he contacts me regarding
his actions.
Thank you for upholding the block. Mr Foster has defaced library books and attempted to hide
library materials. This primarily happened at the Spanish Springs Library.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Jefry, Jennifer L. <JJefry@washoecounty.gov>

Subject: Blocked Patron
Helllo,
Wanted to give you a heads up…..Patron BRUCE ROBERT FOSTER, ID# 21235011295604, came in
Tuesday at 2:20 to check out a book. It was a YA book “Traffick” by Ellen Hopkins, so I went to retrieve it
from the Teen area. When he tried to check out, it was blocked and I handed him Jeff’s business card
and apologized for the inconvenience. He asked about what else was written in his account to which I
answered this was all the info we had. During this interaction Debbie came next to me for support with
the situation when Bruce started saying it was discriminatory. I responded with “It’s hard to tell since no
one has spoken to Jeff yet.” He still wanted the book so I told him I’d put it on hold for him.
From: LJXpress- Library Journal [ljemail@libraryjournal.com] on behalf of LJXpress- Library Journal
<ljemail@libraryjournal.com>
Subject: Book Banning Debate in U.S. Senate, LJ Talks with ALA President Emily Drabinski, Q&A with Academic
Mover Eileen Rhodes
View in browser
Forward to a Friend
September 26, 2023
Book Banning Debate Moves to U.S. Senate

By Steve Zalusky
The ongoing debate over the freedom to read moved to the
chambers of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, which held a
hearing September 12 entitled “Book Bans: How Censorship Limits
Liberty and Literature.” The hearing was convened by Committee
Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL), in response to data from the
American Library Association (ALA) revealing that between January
1 and August 31, ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom recorded
695 attempts to censor library materials and services, and
documented challenges to 1,915 unique titles.
LJ Talks to ALA President Emily Drabinski
By Lisa Peet
New American Library Association (ALA) President Emily Drabinski
has her eye on ALA’s projects and goals, as well as the
association’s ongoing work standing up for its organizational
values. LJ caught up with her in between stops on her tour of U.S.
libraries to hear more about what she has planned.
SPONSORED BY CLARIVATE
Impact of Academic Libraries on Student Success: Survey
Report 2023
A two-pronged survey from the perspective of both academic
librarians and faculty reveals how campus libraries contribute to
student success, what the barriers are, and what could be done to
further the impact of the library. Access to detailed data tables is
available at the end of the report.
Download the full report>>>
Academic Movers Q&A: Eileen Rhodes, Consolidating

Resources Equitably
By Amy Rea
Eileen Rhodes was named one of Library Journal’s 2021 Movers &
Shakers for her work bringing Open Educational Resources to
Capital Community College in Connecticut, enabling students who
struggled with the cost of textbooks to continue pursuing their
degree. We recently reached out to Rhodes and learned she’s
currently the interim library director for Connecticut State
Community College, a role that’s shifted her priorities and sent her
in new directions.
ALA’s Preliminary 2023 Book Challenge Data Shows 20
Percent Increase in Attempts on Unique Titles
By Lisa Peet
The American Library Association (ALA) has released its
preliminary data on the attempted censorship and restriction of
access to books and other materials in public, academic, and K–12
libraries during the first eight months of 2023. Between January 1
and August 31, ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom documented
695 challenges to library materials to 1,915 unique titles.
SPONSORED BY F1000
Sharing Research Data Is Becoming More Important. Here’s
How Libraries Can Help
Research data are the underlying evidence that supports the claims
made in scholarly publications, and making these data publicly
available is a fundamental aspect of open access publishing. Yet,
owing to a number of obstacles—some real, some perceived—many
researchers are reluctant to share their data with the broader
research community.
Read more>>>
Call for Nominations | LJ Movers & Shakers 2024

The editors of Library Journal need your help in identifying
emerging talents in the library world—both great leaders and
behind-the-scenes contributors who are providing inspiration and
model programs for others. Our 22nd annual round of Movers &
Shakers will profile up-and-coming individuals from around the
world who are innovative, creative, making a difference fighting
against censorship, and helping improve their workplace. From
librarians and non-degreed library workers to publishers, vendors,
coders, entrepreneurs, reviewers, and others who impact the library
field—Movers & Shakers 2024 will celebrate those people who are
moving all types of libraries ahead!
Deadline to submit: October 23, 2023
“We want our schools and libraries to be open and welcoming settings for
education, not cultural battlefields.”
—From: Book Banning Debate Moves to U.S. Senate
"We Need a Chorus of Voices, United in Our Determination to

Protect Intellectual Freedom" | Opinion
By Da'Taeveyon Daniels
Banned Books Week 2023 Youth Honorary Chair Da'Taeveyon
Daniels writes about his journey to self-acceptance and advocacy,
and the importance of the fight against censorship.
SPONSORED CONTENT
Calling an Audible: The Play Is Changing as Innovation
Flourishes in Audiobooks
"Audio is the fastest-growing format in the industry,” says
HarperAudio Associate Publisher Brad Hill. This rapid growth has
encouraged publishers to experiment with audiobook production.
For instance, publishers are releasing more audiobook originals,
adding more music and sound effects, and creating multicast
productions that resemble radio plays.
Read More>>>
Display Shelf | Bookish Books

By Melissa DeWild
Book lovers will delight in a display full of titles that feature books,
bookstores, libraries, and writers across both fiction and nonfiction.
Mystery Previews | Prepub Alert, April 2024 Titles
By Melissa DeWild and Neal Wyatt
Mysteries to look forward to, including a list of new series titles.
Current Events: Climate Change | Prepub Alert, April 2024

Titles
By Melissa DeWild and Neal Wyatt
Navigating the many facets of a heating planet.
Booker Prize Shortlist Is Announced | Book Pulse

By Sarah Wolberg
Shortlists for the Booker Prize and the Financial Times/Schroders
Business Book of the Year are announced. Dream States: Smart
Cities, Technology, and the Pursuit of Urban Utopias by John
Lorinc has won the inaugural Pattis Family Foundation Global
Cities Book Award. A new PEN America report finds a 33% jump in
school book bans. Plus, Page to Screen and interviews with Aparna
Nancherla, Jo Nesbø, Michael Wolff, and more.
S. & S. Launches Program To Help Fight Book Bans | Book
Pulse
By Sarah Wolberg
A new Simon & Schuster program highlights the merits of books
that have been subject to censorship and will provide resources for
fighting book bans. The Academy of American Poets announces
the winners of its annual poetry prizes. LeVar Burton will serve as
the honorary chair of this year’s Banned Books Week. Amazon will
require publishers on Kindle to disclose when any of their content is
generated by artificial intelligence.
The Running Grave by Robert Galbraith Tops Holds Lists |

Book Pulse
By Kate Merlene
The Running Grave by Robert Galbraith leads holds this week. Also
getting buzz are titles by Ken Follett, Mary Kay Andrews, James
Patterson and Mike Lupica, and V.E. Schwab. Four LibraryReads
and three Indie Next picks publish this week. People’s book of the
week is Wellness by Nathan Hill. Memoirs in the news include
Kerry Washington’s Thicker than Water and Cassidy Hutchinson’s
Enough. Plus, Hollywood studios and WGA reach a tentative deal
to end the 146-day strike.
From the Pages of infoDOCKET...

• AI Book Bans: Testing LLMs Against the Freedom to Read; ChatGPT Can Now See, Hear,
and Speak; & More News Headlines
• Journal Article: “Librarians’ Attitudes, Needs, and Barriers to Participating in
International Conferences: A Survey of ALA Members”
• Colorado: “Former Weld County Librarian Wins Settlement After District Fired Her For
Promoting LGBTQ, Anti-Racism Programs”
REVIEWS
WEB-FIRST REVIEWS OF BOOKS AND MEDIA

The Novelizers: An Affectionate History of Media Adaptations &
Originals, Their Astonishing Authors—and the Art of the Craft, by
David Spencer, is a starred performing arts selection. "Packed with
photos, this is the perfect reference tool for the publishing genre
that launched many lifetime readers." What You Want: Poems, by
Maureen N. McLane, is a starred poetry title. "The poetics of
spontaneity is not unusual, but McLane brings to it a honed
sensibility and voice entirely her own." And in law and crime, In
Light of All Darkness: Inside the Polly Klaas Kidnapping and the
Search for America’s Child is a starred title. "One of the best true
crime books out there. It shows the anguish and toll on the
investigators and witnesses to a heinous crime. True-crime and
public-affairs readers will devour this well-researched book. It’s as
good as the outstanding Unmasked by Paul Holes with Robin Gaby
Fisher."
See All Reviews›››
Job Zone utilizes unique job matching technology to help you find
the perfect job (and employers find the perfect candidate), whether
you’re actively seeking or just keeping an eye out for your
possibilities. Log on today and check out our newest features,
including automated job and candidate matches, and email alerts.
JOB OF THE WEEK

The Austin Public Library is seeking a Library Division Manager.
Did you receive this newsletter from a friend? Sign up here to get Academic Newswire
LINKS: LibraryJournal.com | News | Reviews+ | LJ Events and Webcasts
CONTACTS: Editorial: nwyatt@mediasourceinc.com; Advertising: rfutterman@mediasourceinc.com
Library Journal (an MSI Information Services company), 7858 Industrial Parkway, Plain City, OH
43064, United States
Manage preferences
Sounds good. I'll use the SS pic.
I will schedule this to get sent out after lunch, around 2 pm. Just changed the social media
headers to a "save the date" for Banned Books Week.
Very exciting to be getting the word out about this.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

To: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Stears, Debi D
<DDStears@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
Spanish Springs is more telling as to what’s going on locally. I think that’s a better choice. South
Valleys is more visually interesting, but the hidden aspect drives home the banned books
concept.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 11:50:44 AM
Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Hi Jamie,
How about:
"One of the real strengths of our collection of materials is that we have a wide range of
materials that reflect the interests of our wonderfully diverse community. Banned Books Week
gives us an opportunity to reflect on how important it is that we continue to protect the right to
read for all members of our community."
Thanks!
Debi

Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
To: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; Stears, Debi D
[DDStears@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]
Spanish Springs is more telling as to what’s going on locally. I think that’s a better choice. South
Valleys is more visually interesting, but the hidden aspect drives home the banned books
concept.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 11:50:44 AM
Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Hi Jamie,
How about:
Thanks!
Debi

Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
To: Stears, Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov];
Attachments: BBW 2023 press release SECOND DRAFT.docx; SPANISH SPRINGS
LIBRARY BANNED BOOKS DISPLAY.jpg; SOUTH VALLEYS BANNED BOOKS WEEK
DISPLAY.jpg
Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Hi Jamie,
How about:
Thanks!
Debi

Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
Washoe County Library System will join in the national celebration of the freedom to read during
Banned Books Week from October 1-7, 2023. This year’s Banned Books Week theme is “Let Freedom
Read.”
Banned Books Week draws attention to national and local efforts to remove or restrict access to books
in libraries, schools, and bookstores. Launched in 1982, this annual event highlights the freedom to seek
and to express ideas and emphasizes the importance of the fight against censorship. Washoe County
Library plans to mark the celebration by featuring frequently challenged titles on display and available to
check out throughout the library system.
Between January 1 and August 31, 2023, the American Library Association's Office for Intellectual
Freedom documented challenges to 1,915 unique titles nationwide. This reflects a 20 percent increase
in the number of book challenges recorded during the same reporting period in 2022.
Since 2014, Washoe County Library has received two formal book challenge requests. More recently,
Collection Development Manager Debi Stears has observed an uptick in less formal methods of
challenging books occurring at multiple Washoe County Library locations. Stears states, "One of the real
strengths of our collection is that we have a wide range of materials that reflects the interests of our
wonderfully diverse population. Banned Books Week gives us an opportunity to emphasize how
important it is that we continue to protect the right to read for all members of our community."
Currently on display at the Spanish Springs Library, "What are your neighbors hiding from you?" features
several books that have been intentionally damaged or hidden by members of the public in an effort to
prevent patron access. Censored titles include books about the LGBTQIA+ community, African
Americans, Native Americans, immigrants, politics, sexuality, and the Holocaust.
Patrons are invited to visit a Banned Books Week display at any Washoe County Library location, explore
online displays at catalog.washoecountylibrary.us, and learn more about local and nationwide efforts to
combat censorship at bannedbooksweek.org. Visit washoecountylibary.us for library locations and hours
and for online access to downloadable copies of frequently challenged titles.
Hi Jamie,
How about:
Thanks!
Debi

Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
[jscott@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Stears,
Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Prentiss, Timothy [TPrentiss@washoecounty.gov]
Jamie, everything looks good to me. My editor skills are pretty off this week, so take that for
whatever it's worth!

Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
From: ALA Connect [DoNotReply@ConnectedCommunity.org] on behalf of ALA
Connect <DoNotReply@ConnectedCommunity.org>
Subject: ALA Chapter Leaders Digest for Monday September 25, 2023
ALA Chapter Leaders

Post New Message
Sep 24, 2023
Discussions
started 4 hours ago, Jon Martin (0 replies)
For Awareness: Penguin Random House's Banned Wagon Tour

1. Message Jon Martin
Chapter Relations Committee + Chapter EDs, Presidents or Councilors (On

Affiliation) Agenda
2. Meeting Agenda Chapter Relations Committee +... Jon Martin
top next
1. For Awareness: Penguin Random House's Banned Wagon Tour
Email a reply to Send a private

the discussion message via email
Sep 25, 2023 3:04 PM
Jon Martin
sites.prh.com/banned-books-menu/tour-stops
------------------------------
Jon Martin
Program Manager - Chapter Relations Office (CRO)
He/Him/His
jmartin@ala.org
------------------------------
top previous
2. Chapter Relations Committee + Chapter EDs, Presidents or Councilors (On
Affiliation) Agenda

Sep 25, 2023 1:45 PM

Jon Martin
Meeting Agenda
Chapter Relations Committee + Chapter EDs, Presidents or Councilors (On

Affiliation)
Sep 26, 2023 01:30 PM Central Time (US and Canada)
https://ala-
events.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJIsduytrzwoH91G0y5QEqjf1NF2EkPScBa3
Agenda:
1. Welcome (BH)
2. Affiliation and Tracking (25 minutes)
• Review the current tracking system for chapters regarding affiliation
attacks (JM)
• Review and update the list of affiliated challenges (JM)
• Discuss any strategy and talking points (JM)
• Share organizations attacking, their talking points and state responses
(JM)
• Respond or not to respond (SH)
3. Fall 2023/2024 Legislative Session (25 minutes)
• Introduce legislative priorities survey for the upcoming Fall 2023/2024
session | State Legislative Discussion Group (Like State Intellectual
Freedom Network, OIF) (JM)
• Discuss OneClickPolitics and BillTrack50 (JM)
• Chapter Advocacy Academy Workshop (MD)
• Share any updates regarding fall bill introductions for 2024 or fall
sessions (MD)
4. LLX and Annual Conference Programming (10 minutes) (BH)
• LLX: Association Leader Exchange Scheduled
• Share ideas or priorities for chapter-focused sessions or events at the
Annual Conference
5. Around the Room - Additional Support Requests (15 minutes) (BH)
• Discuss any additional support requests or needs from chapters from
ALA
• Review outstanding requests and their status
• Determine actions required to address the requests
• Consider potential resources and assistance that can be provided to
chapters
Next Meeting:
• Wednesday, Nov. 15th at 3pm eastern / 2pm central / 1pm mountain / noon
pacific
------------------------------
Jon Martin
He/Him/His
jmartin@ala.org
------------------------------
You are subscribed to "ALA Chapter Leaders" as jscott@washoecounty.us. To

change your subscriptions, go to My Subscriptions. To unsubscribe from this
community discussion, go to Unsubscribe.
[SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Stears, Debi D [DDStears@washoecounty.gov]
Attachments: BBW 2023 press release.docx
Importance: High
Hello,
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
Washoe County Library System will join in the national celebration of the freedom to
read during Banned Books Week from October 1-7, 2023. This year’s Banned Books
Week theme is “Let Freedom Read.”
Banned Books Week draws attention to national and local efforts to remove or restrict
access to books in libraries, schools, and bookstores. Launched in 1982, this annual
event highlights the freedom to seek and to express ideas and emphasizes the
importance of the fight against censorship. Washoe County Library plans to mark the
celebration by featuring frequently challenged titles on display and available for
check-out throughout the library system.
Between January 1 and August 31, 2023, the American Library Association's Office for
Intellectual Freedom documented challenges to 1,915 unique titles nationwide. This
reflects a 20 percent increase in the number of book challenges recorded during the
same reporting period in 2022.
Since 2014, Washoe County Library has received two book challenge requests. More
recently, Collection Development Manager Debi Stears has observed an uptick in less
formal methods of challenging books ocurring at multiple Washoe County Library
locations. Stears states, "INSERT QUOTE HERE."
The Spanish Springs Library currently has a display up entitled "what are your
neighbors hiding from you?" The display features several books that have been
intentionally damaged or hidden by members of the public in an effort to prevent
patron access. Censored titles include books about the LGBTQIA+ community, African
Americans, Native Americans, immigrants, politics, sexuality, and the Holocaust.
Washoe County Library supports the right to read and works to curate a diverse
collection that reflects a variety of viewpoints and experiences. "INSERT QUOTE HERE."
More information about local and nationwide efforts to combat censorship are
available at any Washoe County Library location and at bannedbooksweek.org. Visit
washoecountylibary.us for library locations and hours and for online access to
downloadable copies of frequently challenged titles.
To: Van Hoozer, Terri [TVanhoozer@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Ullman, Julie [JLUllman@washoecounty.gov]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: RE: Drag Queen Picture Book Hidden in YPL
Hi Terri,
Thanks for alerting me. I’ve added it my spreadsheet of hidden titles.
Debi
From: Van Hoozer, Terri <TVanhoozer@washoecounty.gov>

To: Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Ullman, Julie <JLUllman@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Drag Queen Picture Book Hidden in YPL
Hi Deb,
When it's not busy in YPL, I have gotten into the habit of pulling our puzzle cabinet away from
the wall. I usually find several puzzle pieces and a few crayons, but this morning I found this
book propped up against the wall behind the cabinet:
Terri Van Hoozer
tvanhoozer@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.851.5190
15650-A Wedge Pkwy, Reno NV 89511

Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: Fall Explorer is here!
Good morning,
We are running low on our fall Explorers, so I have placed an order for additional copies. We
should see them arrive within the next two weeks. We're down to 2 boxes, so please hang tight
while we await more.
Don't forget to promote the digital copy and take the QR code sign with you to your outreach
events: 2023-Fall Explorer digital access sign.pdf
Thanks for your patience,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 4:14 PM
To: Library - All Staff <librarystaff@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Fall Explorer is here!
Good afternoon,
The fall issue of the Explorer has arrived! The couriers have already delivered them to most
library locations today. TR and VE will get theirs Tuesday, SC will get them on Wednesday, and
IV will receive theirs on Thursday. Thank you Emily and Jerome!
To order more Explorers, please submit a clerical request.
HUGE massive thanks to my Explorer production team: Jessica/NW, Carly/NV, Russell/IV,

Teree/SO, Rachel/SP, and soon to be joining us, Samantha and Laurie/SV. These folks work so
hard to design and edit each issue. Please thank them when you get a chance. It's a huge
project, and somehow the team pulls it off four times a year!
You can access the fully linked digital version here:
https://washoecountylibrary.us/events/explorer.php
And the QR code sign is here:

2023-Fall Explorer digital access sign.pdf
What's notable about the fall issue?
• GE is our cover star, just in time for Burning Man... and in celebration of the arrival of
high speed broadband.
• Literary Events are on pp. 4-5, including a write up about Banned Books Week by Debi
Stears.
• Holiday Celebrations are on p. 6
• Upcoming Events are on p. 7
• P. 8 is a page devoted to Celebrating Seniors
• P. 9 showcases our galleries
• Community Outreach is on p. 10
• Story Times and Paws are on p. 11
• Online Resources, maker services, and tech classes are on pp. 12-13
• TeenTober is on p. 14
• Our bilingual Spanish page is on p. 15
• Find the daily events listings on pp. 16-23
Last but not least, thank you to the Explorer Contributors and branch doc creators who help us
get our events into each issue, and take the time to assist with essential edits.
NOTE-please continue to display the summer issue until September 1. After that, they can be
recycled. Please email me with the approximate number of summer Explorers that you have
left over.
Thanks so much for helping us promote the Explorer.
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
From: LibraryWorks [kathleen@libraryworks.com] on behalf of LibraryWorks
<kathleen@libraryworks.com>
Subject: This Thursday! The Power of Play: Fostering Creativity and Innovation in Libraries
A LibraryWorks presentation ...
The Power of Play: Fostering

Creativity and Innovation in Libraries
September 28, 2023; 2:00 – 3:00PM Eastern
The concept of play is widely embraced across various age groups in many
European countries, often finding its place in public libraries and higher
education institutions. Alternately, in the United States, the practice of play
tends to be mainly encouraged and accepted among children. However, the
realms of libraries, librarianship, and higher education are now more than ever
in need of incorporating play to drive innovation within our field and enhance
inclusivity among our patrons.
Play can help foster creativity, innovation and allow people to break routines
and change the way they think about their usual workflows. When one is
challenged or encouraged to play, there is increased collaboration,
communication, comprehension, critical thinking, creative innovation, and
confidence. But also, when playing we learn more about ourselves and each
other and we discover how easy and productive learning can be. When we
work and play in groups, we are more adaptable, creative, innovative, and
fearless. Lastly, playing doesn’t need to cost a lot of money and even those
who might be “play insecure” can find activities that might work for them. All
we need for play is an intention to be present, passionate, and adaptable, and
not be afraid to act silly or look like a fool.
This presentation will discuss the pedagogy of play but also provide practical
case studies showing how theory can influence practice in libraries,
classrooms, workplaces, makerspaces, outreach & engagement,
communication, creativity, health & wellness, storytelling, visual literacy, and
so much more.
Presenter: Megan Lotts is the Art Librarian at
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey,
where she embraces creativity and play when
teaching, building collections, engaging with
colleagues, and facilitating programming and
events across the New Brunswick campuses. She
has presented her research nationally and
internationally and has published articles in Art
Documentation, portal: the Libraries and the
Academy, and more.
REGISTER
Registration fee: $49/person. September 2023
Group Rates: Groups of four or more are 45% off.

Everyone gets their own login link and a copy of the
recording the day after the live event. Please use the
registration link to purchase and upload your list of
attendees. If you have any difficulty uploading your list,
28
you can send it directly to jenny@libraryworks.com. Earn 0.1 CEU
when you attend this
Can't attend live? All paid registrants will receive a webinar!
copy of the recording the day after the live event.
REGISTER
About LibraryWorks
LibraryWorks' mission is to help you to make informed decisions about library technology, automation and
software, collection development and management, facilities and furnishings, staffing, purchasing, and
other areas that drive effective strategic planning and day-to-day operations. Our family of resources can
enable you to identify best practices, monitor trends, evaluate new products and services, hone new skills,
and even enjoy some library humor. Visit us at http://www.LibraryWorks.com
Copyright © 2023 LibraryWorks, Inc., All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.
Our mailing address is:

LibraryWorks, Inc.
7823 Stratford Rd
Bethesda, MD 20814-1339
Add us to your address book
Want to change how you receive these emails?

You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.
From: LibraryWorks [kathleen@libraryworks.com] on behalf of LibraryWorks
<kathleen@libraryworks.com>
Subject: This Thursday! The Power of Play: Fostering Creativity and Innovation in Libraries
A LibraryWorks presentation ...
The Power of Play: Fostering

Creativity and Innovation in Libraries
September 28, 2023; 2:00 – 3:00PM Eastern
The concept of play is widely embraced across various age groups in many
European countries, often finding its place in public libraries and higher
education institutions. Alternately, in the United States, the practice of play
tends to be mainly encouraged and accepted among children. However, the
realms of libraries, librarianship, and higher education are now more than ever
in need of incorporating play to drive innovation within our field and enhance
inclusivity among our patrons.
Play can help foster creativity, innovation and allow people to break routines
and change the way they think about their usual workflows. When one is
challenged or encouraged to play, there is increased collaboration,
communication, comprehension, critical thinking, creative innovation, and
confidence. But also, when playing we learn more about ourselves and each
other and we discover how easy and productive learning can be. When we
work and play in groups, we are more adaptable, creative, innovative, and
fearless. Lastly, playing doesn’t need to cost a lot of money and even those
who might be “play insecure” can find activities that might work for them. All
we need for play is an intention to be present, passionate, and adaptable, and
not be afraid to act silly or look like a fool.
This presentation will discuss the pedagogy of play but also provide practical
case studies showing how theory can influence practice in libraries,
classrooms, workplaces, makerspaces, outreach & engagement,
communication, creativity, health & wellness, storytelling, visual literacy, and
so much more.
Presenter: Megan Lotts is the Art Librarian at
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey,
where she embraces creativity and play when
teaching, building collections, engaging with
colleagues, and facilitating programming and
events across the New Brunswick campuses. She
has presented her research nationally and
internationally and has published articles in Art
Documentation, portal: the Libraries and the
Academy, and more.
REGISTER
Registration fee: $49/person. September 2023
Group Rates: Groups of four or more are 45% off.

Everyone gets their own login link and a copy of the
recording the day after the live event. Please use the
registration link to purchase and upload your list of
attendees. If you have any difficulty uploading your list,
28
you can send it directly to jenny@libraryworks.com. Earn 0.1 CEU
when you attend this
Can't attend live? All paid registrants will receive a webinar!
copy of the recording the day after the live event.
REGISTER
About LibraryWorks
LibraryWorks' mission is to help you to make informed decisions about library technology, automation and
software, collection development and management, facilities and furnishings, staffing, purchasing, and
other areas that drive effective strategic planning and day-to-day operations. Our family of resources can
enable you to identify best practices, monitor trends, evaluate new products and services, hone new skills,
and even enjoy some library humor. Visit us at http://www.LibraryWorks.com
Copyright © 2023 LibraryWorks, Inc., All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.

LibraryWorks, Inc.
7823 Stratford Rd
Bethesda, MD 20814-1339

From: Cummings, Tami, Ramage, Apryl [noreply@yammer.com] on behalf of Cummings,
Tami, Ramage, Apryl <noreply@yammer.com>
Subject: Updates from All Company at Washoe County
Washoe County
Posted in All Company
Cummings, Tami
CT
Sep 20, 2023 10:27AM
From Parks Ranger Nick Steuer:
Back in 2019, photographer Tim Torell was able to capture images

(attached) on his camera trap at Bowers Mansion Park of a rubber boa
snake wrapped around the neck of a…
GM
Garcia, Melisa Sep 22, 2023 12:31PM
So cool!
Go to conversation
Ramage, Apryl
RA
Aug 30, 2023 07:05AM
QUESTION OF THE WEEK....
Fiction or Non Fiction? Can relate to books or movies.

Show more
WS
Welman, Seth Sep 22, 2023 11:18AM
Fiction. Currently reading the Tales of the City Series and watching
the DVD's. There's even a follow up Netflix Show that rounds out the
end.
Go to conversation
Explore more conversations

Go to Viva Engage
Unsubscribe | Privacy Statement
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
From: WCSD NEWS [WashoeCountyTaxIncrease@charter.net] on behalf of WCSD NEWS
<WashoeCountyTaxIncrease@charter.net>
To: WCSD NEWS [WashoeCountyTaxIncrease@charter.net]
Subject: HORRID LOCAL THEFT REPORT = Aggressive Plundering And Looting Abounds
In Reno
Belligerent, Militant, Marauding Washoe County Student Hoard Descend To

Vigorously Pillage Local Merchants
It’s A Real Hell-Hole
See Horrendous Details Below
WCSD TRUSTEES TO CONTACT WITH YOUR CONCERNS
Jeff Church = Jeffrey.Church@washoeschools.net

Adam Mayberry = adam.mayberry@washoeschools.net
Diane Nicolet = DNicolet@washoeschools.net
Joseph Rodriguez = Joseph.Rodriguez@washoeschools.net
Elizabeth Smith = Elizabeth.Smith@washoeschools.net
Colleen Westlake = Colleen.Westlake@washoeschools.net
Alex Woodley = Alex.Woodley@washoeschools.net
What's going on in YOUR school?

(775) 685.8200 - Confidential Hotline
Subscribe to Education Crusade (educationcrusade.org)
Paul D. White
September 15, 2023
UPDATE
High School Student Looting Continues and
Spreads
"Damonte HS students steal so much from our Safeway - EVERY day - that we've all
lost our regular monthly bonuses, and it's causing food prices to go up. I can't
stand to see what these kids are doing to our great store."
"Why won't the schools just close their campuses and stop this?" (A Damonte Safeway
Manager speaking to Education Crusade on 9/14/23.)
___________________________
Who is censoring or intimidating Channel 2

News from airing the story?
• 2 WEEKS AGO, Channel 2 interviewed store and school personnel and Education
Crusade about the Galena HS Student Mob Looting story, a critically important local
news event.
https://nevadasignal.com/wcsd-like-a-horde-of-locusts/
• 2 WEEKS LATER, Channel 2 still refuses to air the story.
TV Station Manager:
"What IS it? I don't know anything about it." ??
News Director:
Doesn't return phone calls.
Newsroom Producer:
"I don't know WHEN we're going to run it."
Newsroom Reporter:
"I don't know IF we're going to run it."
____________________________
And from North Valley Raley's Store:
"The North Valley HS students are in here stealing EVERY day."
• "The students steal so much alcohol that the high school called and said they
blame ME for their students coming back from lunch DRUNK every day."
• "Parents call me and say it's MY fault for "LETTING (?!)" their kids steal the
alcohol." (A Manager at the Raley's on North Hills Blvd.)
• "We have about 75 students crowd into our store every day at lunch. They steal
everything: food, alcohol and pharmaceuticals. We have 4-6 staff trying to stop
them, and the students just ignore us. We've called the school, the Sheriff's
Department, AND the WCSD school police. They ALL tell us it's OUR problem."
(Manager - Quik-Stop on North Hills Blvd.)
_________________________________
Education Crusade joined NextDoor two days

ago to inform the community about this huge
problem.
Immediately, hundreds of community members started responding. Education
Crusade began informing them of how bad the situation is, and
how they can help solve the problem.
But ... 24 hours later, NextDoor kicked Education Crusade and
Paul White off the page and deleted their posts.
WCSD has at least TEN other high schools that ALL have similar theft problems at
lunch - or WORSE - that are destroying local businesses adjacent to these schools.
The ENTIRE School Board Refuses to Do

ANYTHING to stop this.
• They could make this an agenda item and take action, but they refuse.
• Education Crusade told Jeff Church that if he would make this an agenda item,
Education Crusade would bring a dozen or more store managers to the School Board
meeting to testify in person about the issue. Mr. Church expressed NO interest in
doing this.
______________________________________________________________________
Students in WCSD schools are PROVABLY:
• Not LEARNING
• Not SAFE
• Not in a MORAL ENVIRONMENT
What possible reason does ANY parent have for entrusting THEIR children to this dysfunctional, dangerous, and
decadent system?
Many of Education Crusade's briefs are also published in NevadaSignal.com

In Reno



Paul D. White
September 15, 2023
UPDATE
Spreads
___________________________

news event.
TV Station Manager:
News Director:
Newsroom Producer:
Newsroom Reporter:
____________________________

_________________________________

problem.

doing this.
______________________________________________________________________
• Not LEARNING
• Not SAFE
decadent system?

In Reno



Paul D. White
September 15, 2023
UPDATE
Spreads
___________________________

news event.
TV Station Manager:
News Director:
Newsroom Producer:
Newsroom Reporter:
____________________________

_________________________________

problem.

doing this.
______________________________________________________________________
• Not LEARNING
• Not SAFE
decadent system?

To: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
Subject: Re: Media request: Number of "banned" books in WCLS
Yes talk about the SS display and Debi’s report. Good idea!!
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

I can also mention the number of titles that have been hidden/damaged.
Jamie Hemingway
System

Subject: Fw: Media request: Number of "banned" books in WCLS
FYI - media request for Moonshine Ink on number of challenged titles. I can share the article
below where Debi mentions the two challenged books. https://thisisreno.com/2023/08/library-
books-explained-to-county-commission-after-complaints-by-small-group-of-far-right-activists/
What are your thoughts?
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
From: Drysdale, Bethany <BDrysdale@washoecounty.gov>

To: Alex Hoeft <alex@moonshineink.com>
Cc: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; mdowns@washoeschools.net
<mdowns@washoeschools.net>
Subject: RE: Media request: Number of "banned" books in WCLS
Hi Alex – I’m looping in Megan Downs with the School District and Jamie Hemingway with the Library
System. This is their area of expertise.
Thanks,
Bethany
Bethany Drysdale
Media and Communications Manager | Office of the County Manager
bdrysdale@washoecounty.gov| Office: 775.328.2070 | Cell: 775.313.8582
1001 E 9th Street, Building A, Reno, NV 89512
From: Alex Hoeft <alex@moonshineink.com>

To: Drysdale, Bethany <BDrysdale@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Media request: Number of "banned" books in WCLS
Hi Bethany,
For Moonshine Ink's October edition, I'm doing a write-up on a local project by students who've created
a Banned Book Bus. As an aside, while the piece itself is pretty fluffy, I'd like to include numbers of
requests for books to be pulled off Washoe County library shelves (particularly with the Incline library,
though I assume it's a system-wide request).
Can you advise on a number of books that have been "banned" or removed from Washoe County library
shelves?
Alex Hoeft | Moonshine Ink

News Reporter
Phone (530) 587-3607 x10
Cell (702) 595-7259
alex@moonshineink.com
moonshineink.com
The Independent Newspaper for Truckee/North Lake Tahoe
#KeepTahoeSmart
If you find value in quality local news, and if you believe that our democracy needs fortifying, please
become a member of Moonshine Ink.
I’m also happy to be a contact if he has any further questions.

Jamie Hemingway

System

Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway

System

Thanks,
Bethany
Bethany Drysdale

Hi Bethany,
shelves?
News Reporter
Phone (530) 587-3607 x10
Cell (702) 595-7259
moonshineink.com
#KeepTahoeSmart
emails.com>
Subject: ALA Finds Book Bans Still Surging; Next Week's PW Starred
Reviews
SEPTEMBER 22, 2023

Among the week's headlines: a judge in Washington rejects a bid by book
banners to force a vote on closing the local library; a Colorado librarian
who was wrongly fired after refusing to censor LGBTQ programming is
awarded $250,000; Alabama's state librarian defends the ALA; and LeVar
Burton will serve as honorary chair for Banned Books Week. more
New ALA Data Shows Book Challenges

Still Surging
Ahead of Banned Books Week, the ALA reported 695 attempts to censor
library materials between January 1 and August 31, 2023, and 1,915 unique
titles challenged—a 20% increase over last year. more
New PEN America Report Finds 33% Jump
in School Book Bans
"Amid a growing climate of censorship, school book bans continue to
spread through coordinated campaigns by a vocal minority of groups and individual actors
and, increasingly, as a result of pressure from state legislation," the report finds. more
Find an Unshakeable Source of Strength

Within
Wise therapist Jo-ann Rosen offers a holistic system for gaining and
maintaining the stability of mind needed for personal and social
transformation, even in the midst of trauma—with simple, body-based
exercises grounded in neuroscience and the path of mindfulness inspired by
Thich Nhat Hanh. (Sponsored) more

Her Side of the Story
Alba de Céspedes, trans. from the Italian by Jill Foulston. Astra House, $29
(512p) ISBN 978-1-66260-143-9
Read the Review »
Happy
Celina Baljeet Basra. Astra House, $26 (272p) ISBN 978-1-66260-230-6
Read the Review »
The Favorites
Rosemary Hennigan. Graydon House, $28.99 (336p) ISBN 978-1-5258-
0509-7
Read the Review »
Blood Betrayal: A Detective Inaya Rahman Novel

Ausma Zehanat Khan. Minotaur, $28 (304p) ISBN 978-1-250-82240-6
Read the Review »

Past Lying: A Karen Pirie Novel
Val McDermid. Atlantic Monthly, $27 (464p) ISBN 978-0-8021-6149-9
Read the Review »
The Last Ships from Hamburg: Business, Rivalry and the Race to
Save Russia’s Jews on the Eve of World War I
Steven Ujifusa. Harper, $32 (320p) ISBN 978-0-062-97187-6
Read the Review »
Among the Braves: Hope, Struggle and Exile in the Battle for Hong
Kong and the Future of Democracy
Shibani Mahtani and Timothy McLaughlin. Hachette, $39 (336p) ISBN 978-
0-306-83036-5
Read the Review »

The Path to Paradise: A Francis Ford Coppola Story
Sam Wasson. Harper, $32.99 (384p) ISBN 978-0-06-303784-7
Read the Review »
What the Taliban Told Me

Ian Fritz. Simon & Schuster, $29.99 (304p) ISBN 978-1-6680-1069-3
Read the Review »
CHILDREN'S BOOKS
The Concrete Garden

Bob Graham. Candlewick, $18.99 (32p) ISBN 978-1-5362-3380-3
Read the Review »
Ellen Takes Flight: The Life of Astronaut Ellen Ochoa

Doreen Rappaport, illus. by Oliver Dominguez. Little, Brown, $19.99 (48p)
ISBN 978-0-7595-5494-8
Read the Review »

Loud and Proud: The Life of Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm
Lesa Cline-Ransome, illus. by Kaylani Juanita. S&S/Wiseman, $18.99 (48p)
ISBN 978-1-5344-6352-3
Read the Review »
Small Shoes, Great Strides: How Three Brave Girls Opened Doors to
School Equality
Vaunda Micheaux Nelson, illus. by Alex Bostic. Carolrhoda, $19.99 (40p)
ISBN 978-1-7284-1923-7
Read the Review »
Gwen & Art Are Not in Love

Lex Croucher. Wednesday, $20 (416p) ISBN 978-1-250847-21-8
Read the Review »
New Books and More

New Kids' and YA Books: Week of
September 25, 2023
Among the books hitting shelves next week are a picture book collaboration
between a National Youth Poet Laureate and a Caldecott Honoree, a middle
grade tale about the next bruja in a family line of witches, a YA debut about
a worldwide heist competition, and more. more
In a Blistering Opinion, Judge Officially
Blocks Texas Book Rating Law
Last week, federal judge Alan D. Albright delivered a 59-page written
opinion holding that the controversial Texas law "misses the mark" by imposing a web of
"unconstitutionally vague" requirements. The decision represents a major victory for freedom
to read advocates. more
Why It Matters That Marvel Comics Are

Becoming Penguin Classics
This month, Penguin released the three latest titles in its Penguin Classics
Marvel Collection. We spoke with the series editor, Ben Saunders, and two
authors who wrote forewords to the books, Jerry Craft and Rainbow
Rowell, about the importance of enshrining comics in the literary canon.
more
New S&S Program, Books Belong, Takes

Aim at Book Bans
Simon & Schuster will launch a "multi-platform education and resources
program" during Banned Books Week, in an effort to expand the publisher's
response to censorship. more
New Literature in Translation

We spoke with the publishers bringing David Diop, Annie Ernaux, Yoko
Tawada, and others to U.S. readers about how to get—and keep—their
authors' works in translation in front of the reading public. more
Isabel Allende's Picture Book Debut
Jill Santopolo, publisher of Philomel Books, has signed a three-book deal
with award-winning author Isabel Allende for her children's debut. The first
book, 'Perla, the Mighty Dog!,' illustrated by Sandy Rodriguez, will be
published on June 4, 2024, and simultaneously released in a Spanish-
language edition. more

• KN Literary Arts is seeking a new Sales Account Manager
• William B Eerdmans Publishing is seeking a new Director of Marketing
• Aptara Inc. is seeking a new Editorial Manager
Top 10 Bestsellers
1
Elon Musk
2
3
Holly
4
Fourth Wing
5
Counting the Cost
Jill Duggar, Author, Derick Dillard, With, Craig Borlase, With
6
Lucy Score, Author
7
Just Because
Matthew McConaughey, Author, Renée Kurilla, Illustrator
8
Code Red: A Mitch Rapp Novel by Kyle Mills
Vince Flynn, Author, Kyle Mills, Author
9
The Art of Home: A Designer Guide to Creating an Elevated Yet Approachable
Home
Shea McGee, Author
10
Atomic Habits: An Easy & Proven Way to Build Good Habits & Break Bad Ones
James Clear, Author


Publishers Weekly,
49 West 23rd Street
Ninth Floor
New York, NY 10010 Phone 212-377-5500

unsubscribe.
Jamie Hemingway
System

Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Thanks,
Bethany
Bethany Drysdale

Hi Bethany,
shelves?

News Reporter
Phone (530) 587-3607 x10
Cell (702) 595-7259
moonshineink.com
#KeepTahoeSmart
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Thanks,
Bethany
Bethany Drysdale

Hi Bethany,
shelves?

News Reporter
Phone (530) 587-3607 x10
Cell (702) 595-7259
moonshineink.com
#KeepTahoeSmart
From: Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Weinert, Beate
<BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>
To: Hansen, Judy [JHansen@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
Subject: Re: Staff Day Inquiry Fwd: Washoe County Library Staff Day
Judy, Jeff really likes your suggestion. Would you mind checking their availability
for for Thursday, 12/14. We would need a large space for about 150 staff and then
3 break out rooms.
With Much Gratitude,

Beate
Beate Weinert
Youth Services and Library Events Manager | Washoe County Library System
bweinert@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8361
From: Hansen, Judy <JHansen@washoecounty.gov>

To: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie,
Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>;
Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; Burton, Leah J. <LJBurton@washoecounty.gov>;
Owens, Brenda <BOwens@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Staff Day Inquiry Fwd: Washoe County Library Staff Day
Hi Jeff,
Just a thought for an alternative location for staff day. Our last YSLE annual planning meeting
was at the Wilbur D. May Museum. We used the Double Diamond Room and were happy with
the accommodations and there was no fee charged.
I didn't realize they also rent out the Garden Court area which could accommodate all of our
staff and the Double Diamond Room could be used for break out sessions. There is also a
"storage room" with extra tables etc. across from the Double Diamond Room that could
possibly be used but I'm not sure if that is available to reserve.
If I remember correctly we used hot spots since there was no Wi-Fi for us to login to and was
told that would probably be faster than the Wi-Fi.
https://www.washoecounty.gov/parks/maycenterhome/rentals/museumrentals.php
Museum Event Space
www.washoecounty.gov
Thank you,
Judy
Judy Hansen
Youth Services & Events Librarian | Washoe County Library System
jhansen@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8318

To: Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews,
John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; Burton, Leah J. <LJBurton@washoecounty.gov>; Owens, Brenda
<BOwens@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy
Subject: Staff Day Inquiry Fwd: Washoe County Library Staff Day
I asked for a proposal from the Renaissance. It’s around $5000 without catering and around
$7000 with catering. A bit steep but it’s going to continue to get tough to find venues to house all
of us.
Take a look at the email thread and let me know your thoughts.
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Rebecca Moralez <rmoralez@Renaissancereno.com>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 8:38:12 AM
Subject: RE: Washoe County Library Staff Day
Good morning Jeff,
If you met the $5,250.00 food and beverage minimum the room rental would be $1,000.00 for Topaz 2
and $650.00 for Sage and $700.00 for River Rock.
Thank you,
REBECCA MORALEZ
CATERING SALES MANAGER
Renaissance Reno Downtown Hotel & Spa
One South Lake Street, Reno NV 89501
T 775.321.5860
Renaissance Hotels
renhotels.com | facebook.com/renhotels | twitter.com/renhotels

To: Rebecca Moralez <rmoralez@Renaissancereno.com>
Subject: Re: Washoe County Library Staff Day
Thank you for this information.
Without the minimum food it is $4000 then $650 and $700. With the food minimum it is $5200, then
$3000, and $650 and $700?
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Subject: RE: Washoe County Library Staff Day
Hello Jeff,
Of course! If you were to meet the food and beverage minimum of $5,250.00 (exclusive of tax and
service charge) we would be happy to reduce the room rental to $1,000.00 for the Topaz 2 room.
Thank you,
REBECCA MORALEZ
T 775.321.5860
Renaissance Hotels

To: Rebecca Moralez <rmoralez@Renaissancereno.com>
Subject: Re: Washoe County Library Staff Day
Can we add a food option to look at those pricing options?
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Subject: Washoe County Library Staff Day
Hello Jeff,
Thank you for your inquiry and for thinking of the Renaissance Reno Downtown Hotel & Spa for your
upcoming meeting. We do have space available on December 14th for the 150 attendees you are
expecting. Our Topaz 2 room can accommodate up to 220 guests on rounds of 10, I have included a few
pictures for your reference. The room rental for Topaz 2 is normally $4,000.00, however should you
need any food or beverage we would be happy to reduce our room rental with a food and beverage
minimum requirement. For the two other spaces you need with 40 guests each, we do have our Sage
and River Rock room available, I have also included a few pictures for reference. The room rental for the
Sage room would be $650.00 and River Rock would be $700.00. I have also included our Catering menu
for your review additionally.
If you have any questions or if you need any additional information, please feel free to call or email me.
Thank you and happy Friday!

All my best,
REBECCA MORALEZ
T 775.321.5860
Renaissance Hotels
From: Hemingway, Jamie, Cummings, Tami, +1 other [noreply@yammer.com] on behalf of
Hemingway, Jamie, Cummings, Tami, +1 other <noreply@yammer.com>
Subject: Discover what's happening across your organization.
Washoe County
Hemingway, Jamie
Washoe County Library is now recruiting our Sparks Hometowne

Christmas Parade team! This will be our eighth year marching in the
parade, and we are opening up Christmas Parade participation to all
County staff!
This year's theme is Dashing Through the Decades, so it's all about
nostalgia for the…
Go to conversation
Cummings, Tami
From Parks Ranger Nick Steuer:
Back in 2019, photographer Tim Torell was able to capture images

(attached) on his camera trap at Bowers Mansion Park of a rubber boa
snake wrapped around the neck of a striped skunk. This anti-predatory
behavior of the rubber boa snake was documented in the March
2021…
Go to conversation
Kirkland, Christine A.
Wellness Screenings for 2023 are being offered Monday, October

2nd-Thursday, November 30th. Brought to Washoe County by
Specialty Health. Basic Wellness Panel at no cost for all covered
employees, retirees and dependents enrolled in the Washoe County
Health Plan. Bring your insurance card to your…
Go to conversation
Explore communities today

Go to Viva Engage
Unsubscribe | Privacy Statement
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
From: EveryLibrary [info@everylibrary.org] on behalf of EveryLibrary
<info@everylibrary.org>
Subject: Taxpayers Foot the Bill for Book Bans
Jeff --
How much are taxpayers paying to fund the book banning crusade?
EveryLibrary's Associate Director recently penned an Op-Ed in the New

Hampshire Union Leader entitled: The overwhelming cost of book banning in
which he explored the weaponization of school and public library policies by a
small number of people.
These attacks are costing taxpayers millions of dollars and having lasting
impacts on your ability to choose books for you and your family.
You might be surprised just how much these activists are costing you, the
taxpayer.
Help us spread the word!
Click to Tweet or share on Facebook
Never mind that the educational value lost is incalculable.
We can actually demonstrate how much money- tax payer money; your money-
is being spent on taking books away from students. Let’s take a look at a few real
world examples of the dollars that go into banning books. Then you can decide if
this is what you want your tax payer money going towards. Or if you think it
would be better spent elsewhere.
Banning a book comes down essentially to two things. Parts and labor. The
“parts” in this case are the books themselves. After all, it's hard to ban a book if
you do not have it in the first place (although some activists have spent
significant taxpayer resources on attempts to ban books that libraries don't even
own). And since most school districts require a review by committee before a
book is removed from libraries, every member of that review committee has to
have a copy of the book.
Which brings us to “labor” or the human cost behind these reviews. And this is
really where the costs take off. Think about it: Your taxpayer dollars pay the
salary of the employees who are spending some of their time, or much of their
time, reading books that have been challenged by just a handful of activists in
your district. And every hour they spend reading a book to review, is an hour of
other work they are not doing for you.
All because of just a few, vocal, radicals.
Let’s start in Texas.
Sign the petition against banned books today!
Back in 2021, Texas State Representative Matt Krause requested that the Texas
Education Agency fully review more than 800 books he felt should not be on
school library shelves. As you might expect, his book list was mostly targeted at
books written for or about minority and marginalized communities, but that is
actually immaterial to the larger point here. The point is: how much would it
cost?
One school district, just one, Lewisville Independent School District, provided
an estimate to the Texas Education Agency that it would take one hundred
and fifty-eight hours and more than $3,000 to ban books. (Click to Tweet)
For context: Texas has more than twelve hundred school districts! That
means if ALL of them needed about $3,000 to comply with this request, it would
end up costing the state $3.6 MILLION dollars to ban books.
It will cost more than $3.6 Million dollars to ban books in Texas.
(Click to tweet)
That of course assumes that every single county and charter required the same
personnel and resources. Lewisville ISD has about 315,000 people in its county.
Of course, the largest school district in Texas is the Houston Independent, which
has about 1.5 million people, or around five times as many, in its district. We can
reasonably assume it would cost them considerably more.
Which means that $3.6 million dollars in the state of Texas is a low
estimate.
That, of course, is based only on one single list provided by one single state
representative. When a county falls victim to particularly radical action and
actors, or becomes frozen by indecision and debate, the costs quickly skyrocket
even more. Take the example of Spring Branch Independent School District in
the same state.
A recent attempt to ban the book The Black Friend, on Being a Better White
Person ended up costing the district 226 hours of time, divided between sixteen
people and cost more than $30,000! (Click to Tweet)
$30,000 just to ban ONE book!
Please consider a $25 donation today!

We'll put 100% of your donations to work fighting against book bans
and library closures.
Imagine how expensive state rep Krause’s list of 800 books would get in Spring
Branch! Does this seem like money well spent? Is this where you want $30,000
of YOUR tax dollars going?
Florida is another state that is taking on absolutely absurd costs to ban books.
And they recently passed HB 1069 which is an example of how vaguely worded
and ill defined laws end up costing taxpayers money as local officials toil to
figure out how to abide by them.
Part of HB1069 requires that every library digitally account for every single book
on their shelves and where they are filed, and upload those lists to a publicly
available database. Ostensibly, this is so parents are able to see if there are books
on the list that they object to so that they can challenge them for removal. But
cataloguing the entire library’s collection is one thing: this also applies to
classroom libraries. Which means that schools have to go classroom by
classroom and find every single book and digitally catalogue those as well!
Schools and libraries are already woefully understaffed, and the burdensome
request of this bill has to be outsourced in most cases. That means school
districts have to hire third parties to help them file everything. What’s the cost?
Between $34,000 to $135,000 per library or school to ban books in

Florida. Per year. (Click to Tweet)
Every single year, it is going to cost every single library or school- and therefor,
you, the taxpayer- an average of $85,000 to catalogue the books on shelves and
in classrooms… really just so that extreme political actors can object to some of
them and get them banned.
Even if this was only an average cost per district, it would end up costing the
state of Florida $5.8 million dollars ANNUALLY to ban books. (Click to
Tweet)
But that average number of $85,000 is per school or library

according to estimates.
Sign the petition against banned books today!
Of course, Florida is not alone in passing vaguely worded bills that end up
costing tax payers millions of dollars as locals try to wrestle with how to apply
those laws. North Dakota recently handed down HB1205 and SB2360 which add
more layers of censorship to libraries and ban books. And guess what: even a
tiny state like North Dakota finds itself overwhelmed by the absolute costs of
how to apply these laws.
The North Dakota State Library, one single library, estimated that the costs of
re-evaluating its collection to comply with the what they believe is the intention
of these loosely worded house bills, would be $3.3 million dollars. That’s $3.3
million dollars for one library in one state, just in labor costs, to comply with
laws that want to take books away, not add them! (Click to Tweet)
Is this getting exhausting yet? Do these millions of dollars seem like they are
going to a worthwhile cause? Is this what you want your taxpayer money spent
on?
One last example: let’s really get into the nitty gritty on this.
Back in March of 2022, Kelly Jensen of Book Riot published an article detailing
the average costs of an individual book challenge. This is what it costs to
challenge one single book on average.
She used Francis Howell School District in Missouri as the example, however the
numbers provided are backed up in presentations given by school districts
around the country. Katy ISD released similar numbers when asked about how
much an individual challenge costs. And while labor costs are slightly different
from one district to another across the country, these average dollar values
provide an illustrative point.
For a single committee hearing in Francis Howell SD to consider a book, every

member of the committee needs a copy of the book. Trade paperbacks, believe it
or not, cost on average of $15.00 now, and the book use din Jensen’s article was
more expensive even: it cost the district $20.00 per copy for all seven committee
members.
That’s $140 just to get the books to be considered to be added to the

library in one school district in Missouri. (Click to tweet)
Then there is the real cost: the time it takes for members of the committee to
read and consider that book (Monday’s Not Coming in this example). Jensen
lowballs their salaries at $15.00/hour for the sake of the example: but the reality
is many of the salaried members of this review board are making quite a bit
more. And she only estimates that it takes 2 hours for the board members to
read the book. Also very generous, since an average novel takes closer to eight
hours of reading time to complete.
However, using Jensen’s charitable estimations, at $15.00 an hour for two hours
for 7 committee members plus the cost of the book, we come to $365.00. Except
the process is not over: they now need to discuss the book and make a decision
based on their reading.
If the talks go long, you can probably expect to add an additional $210 in labor
to the challenge, which brings it to $575.00 to challenge the book all in.
And again, Jensen wanted to create an illustrative floor: the real costs only go
UP from here.
Now, $575 to challenge a book might seem a bit more reasonable after we have
been talking in the millions. But remember: this is for ONE book in a state
where hundreds are being challenged every year. AND, most districts have a
budget on per student spending. In Francis Howell SD, where Jensen set her
example, that number is $6,375 per student. So the cost of book challenge is, on
the low end, $575. That eats up almost 10% of the school's total per student
expenditures. (Click to tweet)
Thats 10% of a school district per student expenditures going into

banning one book. (Click to tweet)
One book.
Your donations are put to work fighting against book bans and
library closures.
These numbers are not inconsequential. They are transformative. Schools are
already underfunded, and libraries even more so. They cannot afford to spend
hundreds, thousands, millions of dollars on pouring over books to decide
whether they should be banned because of the objections of only one, or a very
few parents.
Right now, the extreme minority is costing you, the taxpayer, and your students
millions of dollars to bow to their wishes and strip books away from shelves.
(Click to tweet)
It is not as simple as a parent saying “I want this book taken away from
everyone” and it gets done. It costs time. It costs money. (Click to tweet)
Lots of money.
And considering book bans are supported by an absolute minority of the

population, it seems more than a little irrational that the smallest population
should be costing everyone millions to adhere to their extreme ideologies.
This is absurd. It is irrational. It needs to stop. Help us stop it by signing and
sharing the petition or making a donation today!
EveryLibrary
https://www.everylibrary.org/
Paid for by EveryLibrary
EveryLibrary · PO Box 406, 45 E. Burlington St., Riverside, IL 60546, United States

This email was sent to jscott@washoecounty.us. To stop receiving emails, click here.
You can also keep up with EveryLibrary on Twitter.
Created with NationBuilder, software for leaders.

CC: Trounson, Carla [CTrounson@washoecounty.gov]; Reinke, Kristin
[KReinke@washoecounty.gov]; Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie,
Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Tiar, Morgan A. [MATiar@washoecounty.gov];
Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; Fanaselle, Jessica
[JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov]; Hansen, Judy [JHansen@washoecounty.gov]
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Cc: Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>;
Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>;
Tiar, Morgan A. <MATiar@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>;
Fanaselle, Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy <JHansen@washoecounty.gov>
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
That would be great. I think if it’s 500 words that would work. Just expand on
your email and it should get the point across. People don’t realize how similar it is
and what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we have it by October 1 that would be great if

you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Dear Jeff,
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the week is super soon, but
I’d be happy to write something fairly quickly, especially for the newsletter. How
long of a text were you thinking? I could probably have something by early next
week. I’m happy to focus what I write in a way that would be most helpful and
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I think there was a historical
misunderstanding about what banning books meant to the Germans in the 1920s
and 1930s. The idea was almost “If we’re not burning books or criminalizing
printing them, we aren’t banning them.” If it would be helpful, I could write
something pointing out that the Nazis “banned” books by performatively burning
duplicates and serials that they didn’t need anyway, and then moved the “banned”
books to special libraries for experts. So, taking books off the shelves and putting
them in special sections is literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t know if
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

I was very impressed with your comments last night highlighting the
similarities between the group protesting our books and storytimes to
what the Nazis did. People may think it is similar in the general sense,
but you highlighted how the techniques used are exactly the same.
Would you be willing to write something up for Banned Books Week? It
is a tight timeline for this year, as we will start highlighting it next week
and it will run through the first week of October. We would like to
include a piece in our newsletter and wondered if you would share it in
the RGJ Op-ED section.
Let me know if this is something you can do. If not, we can try for next
year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>

To: James McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>; Scott, Jeff
<jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin
Cc: Tiar, Morgan A. <MATiar@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie
Hi Jamie,
As discussed, I've included folks who can speak
to you about the Nazi-banned book article for
our newsletter.
You and I can continue to plan your Pride
Month program for late June (when you return
from Austria). I'm looking forward to the
program and working with you again!
Best regards, Carla


content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month program (although it might have to be
towards the end of June 2024—I’ll be in Austria for a fellowship until
mid-June 2024) related to queer history in the 1920s and 1930s,
particularly Nazi persecution of gay folks. I can talk about how German
banned drag, sexual education, and things like that to "protect the
youth.”
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but there is so much I could roll in. For
instance, I found this one really cool source in the archives two
summers ago. There was a lecture that a doctor from the Institute for
Sexual Science went around giving in the early 1930s about
contraception. We don’t have the lecture anymore, but we have the
questions the audience wrote down on old scraps of paper, on bar bills,
etc…to send up to the doctor. This one young women wrote (I’ve
attached the picture of the original):
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a boyfriend for three years. We like each
other a lot and have had sex. My dad wants to throw me out of the
house if I bring any shame onto him. What should I do?"
The doctor—perhaps unhelpfully in his red pencil—has written
It’s a funny episode that is preserved in the archives, but it sheds a lot of
light on how precarious women’s situations could be, how personal
honor could be used as a weapon, and genuinely how clueless people
where about sexuality, since they had little sexual education at all. The
Nazis banned this informative lecture, since it could “corrupt the
people.” All of this shows how the Nazis used the language corruption
and “community standards” to censor and limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for banned books! If you want, I
could do something on how the Nazis banning books was not really
about burning them (that was done performatively for show), but
locking books away so only adult experts could use them. I could do
something else too, but that feels like the most relevant history for
libraries confronting people who advocate censorship.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
On Sep 21, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Trounson, Carla

<CTrounson@washoecounty.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
The answer is yes to the program;
they love the idea. Also, the library
director, Jeff Scott, is asking if you
could write something up for our
banned book week, which is coming
up. We could put it in our
newsletter. If yes, I'll include them in
this conversation so you can speak
to them directly.
Best regards, Carla

Hi Carla,
I’m always happy to help however I can! As a
historian, it makes my blood boil when folks get their
history so wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 1:22 PM,

Trounson, Carla
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be an
excellent program and I
would love to plan it. We
could do it during Pride
Month in June 2024. Let
me run it by folks here
and I'll get back to you.
Thanks for this history, I
so appreciate you. I'm
going to have to do a
little research.
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.
<Outlook-tuvwbdhd.png><Outlook-j3owevtz.png><Outlook-

12:48 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
Cc: Greta E de Jong <gdejong@unr.edu>
Hi Carla,
Greta and I were literally just talking
about the event last night! I’m still so
troubled with what all I saw. You did a
marvelous job—as did all the library
staff—but I’m so worried about the
public that showed up...
One thing I was just talking to Greta
about is that I was struck that many of
speakers last night wanted to pull
books off the shelves and make them
available only to adults, while insisting
that they were not like the Nazis in
1930s Germany. As a historian, it
strikes me that pulling books off
shelves and making them available to
a select group of people is literally
exactly what the Nazis did. The actual
Nazis seized all the books on sexuality
out of German libraries. For instance,
they removed a children’s book called
Bringt Uns Wirklich Der
Klapperstorch? (Does the Stork Really
Bring Us?—I have a copy in my office)
about where children come from…but
the Nazis didn’t burn these books.
They moved them to adult sections or
gave them to experts. That is literally
what the folks last night were calling
for!
Their language of “corrupting the
youth” is the exact same language of
Germany from the 1920s and 1930s!
Take, for example, the 1919 queer film
Different from the Others, which was
banned in the radicalizing period of
the 1920s that was headed toward the
Third Reich. The New York Times has
a great still image from the film
(https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/
movies/different-from-the-others-a-
1919-film-on-
homosexuality.html?smid=url-share).
If you look closely, you’ll see men
dancing with other men in drag. This
century-old film was banned and
destroyed by the Germans because it
would “sexualize” and “corrupt” the
youth. The parallels with the language
that was used last night was shocking!
I don’t know if there is any way to put
together a history program on Nazis,
Sexuality, and Drag or something for
next Pride, but I lecture on this in my
classes, and I’d be happy to do more
presentations at the library on things
like the persecution of gay men,
lesbians, and other sexual minorities
in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. I
don’t those folks would attend a
history talk, but—historically
speaking—the Nazis literally banned
drag and took sexuality-related books
out of libraries to “protect the youth.”
The parallels to what happened last
night are so eerie and troubling.
We really appreciate all the work you
and your colleagues do, Carla!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

12:22 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoe
county.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and
Jamie,
Thank you both
for coming last
night to the
board meeting.
I appreciate
your support
for my speech
and what you
both said in
reference to
the public
comments. I'm
sure 100 years
from now (if we
survive), there
will be entire
library sections
devoted to this
era.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
<Outlook-mvrmqwzl.png><Outlook-brmbko55.png><Ou
outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.


abuse@unr.edu.
Jeff
Jeff Scott

-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott


Dear Jeff,
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jamie,
our newsletter.
Best regards, Carla


content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
youth.”
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
to them directly.
Best regards, Carla

Hi Carla,
history so wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 1:22 PM,

Trounson, Carla
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be an
little research.
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.

12:48 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
Hi Carla,
for!
1919-film-on-
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

12:22 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoe
county.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and
Jamie,
Thank you both
for coming last
night to the
board meeting.
I appreciate
your support
for my speech
and what you
both said in
reference to
the public
comments. I'm
sure 100 years
from now (if we
survive), there
will be entire
library sections
devoted to this
era.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.


abuse@unr.edu.
-Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

you can swing it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Dear Jeff,
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jamie,
our newsletter.
Best regards, Carla


content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
youth.”
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
to them directly.
Best regards, Carla
0pn2tt34.png> ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100

Hi Carla,
history so wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 1:22 PM,

Trounson, Carla
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be an
little research.
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.

12:48 PM
To: Trounson, Carla
Hi Carla,
for!
1919-film-on-
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at

12:22 PM, Trounson,
Carla
<CTrounson@washoe
county.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and
Jamie,
Thank you both
for coming last
night to the
board meeting.
I appreciate
your support
for my speech
and what you
both said in
reference to
the public
comments. I'm
sure 100 years
from now (if we
survive), there
will be entire
library sections
devoted to this
era.
Best regards,
Carla
My work week is
Tuesday - Saturday.
fuw0qelk.png> ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100
outside of the
the sender and know
Report suspicious
Information
Technology (OIT) at
abuse@unr.edu.



abuse@unr.edu.
That would be great. I think if it’s 500 words that would work. Just expand on your email and it
should get the point across. People don’t realize how similar it is and what book banning means.
And it doesn’t have to be a week. If we have it by October 1 that would be great if you can swing
it.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Dear Jeff,
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the week is super soon, but I’d be happy to
write something fairly quickly, especially for the newsletter. How long of a text were you
thinking? I could probably have something by early next week. I’m happy to focus what I write
in a way that would be most helpful and interesting to your audience.
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I think there was a historical misunderstanding
about what banning books meant to the Germans in the 1920s and 1930s. The idea was almost
“If we’re not burning books or criminalizing printing them, we aren’t banning them.” If it would
be helpful, I could write something pointing out that the Nazis “banned” books by
performatively burning duplicates and serials that they didn’t need anyway, and then moved the
“banned” books to special libraries for experts. So, taking books off the shelves and putting them
in special sections is literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t know if you think that history
lesson would help!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

I was very impressed with your comments last night highlighting the similarities
between the group protesting our books and storytimes to what the Nazis did. People
may think it is similar in the general sense, but you highlighted how the techniques used
Would you be willing to write something up for Banned Books Week? It is a tight
timeline for this year, as we will start highlighting it next week and it will run through
the first week of October. We would like to include a piece in our newsletter and
wondered if you would share it in the RGJ Op-ED section.
Let me know if this is something you can do. If not, we can try for next year.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

<jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert,
Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy <JHansen@washoecounty.gov>
Hi Jamie,
As discussed, I've included folks who can speak to you
about the Nazi-banned book article for our newsletter.
You and I can continue to plan your Pride Month program
for late June (when you return from Austria). I'm looking
forward to the program and working with you again!
Best regards, Carla

Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month program (although it might have to be towards the
end of June 2024—I’ll be in Austria for a fellowship until mid-June 2024) related to
queer history in the 1920s and 1930s, particularly Nazi persecution of gay folks. I can
talk about how German banned drag, sexual education, and things like that to "protect
the youth.”
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but there is so much I could roll in. For instance, I
found this one really cool source in the archives two summers ago. There was a lecture
that a doctor from the Institute for Sexual Science went around giving in the early 1930s
about contraception. We don’t have the lecture anymore, but we have the questions
the audience wrote down on old scraps of paper, on bar bills, etc…to send up to the
doctor. This one young women wrote (I’ve attached the picture of the original):
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a boyfriend for three years. We like each other a lot and
have had sex. My dad wants to throw me out of the house if I bring any shame onto
him. What should I do?"
The doctor—perhaps unhelpfully in his red pencil—has written “Contraception.”
It’s a funny episode that is preserved in the archives, but it sheds a lot of light on how
precarious women’s situations could be, how personal honor could be used as a
weapon, and genuinely how clueless people where about sexuality, since they had little
sexual education at all. The Nazis banned this informative lecture, since it could “corrupt
the people.” All of this shows how the Nazis used the language corruption and
“community standards” to censor and limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for banned books! If you want, I could do
something on how the Nazis banning books was not really about burning them (that was
done performatively for show), but locking books away so only adult experts could use
them. I could do something else too, but that feels like the most relevant history for
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
The answer is yes to the program; they love the
idea. Also, the library director, Jeff Scott, is
asking if you could write something up for our
banned book week, which is coming up. We
could put it in our newsletter. If yes, I'll include
them in this conversation so you can speak to
them directly.
Best regards, Carla

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT
CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is
safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’m always happy to help however I can! As a historian, it makes my
blood boil when folks get their history so wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be an excellent program
and I would love to plan it. We could
do it during Pride Month in June
2024. Let me run it by folks here
and I'll get back to you. Thanks for
this history, I so appreciate you. I'm
going to have to do a little research.
Best regards, Carla
qgon4esz.png> ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100

Hi Carla,
Greta and I were literally just talking about the event
last night! I’m still so troubled with what all I saw. You
did a marvelous job—as did all the library staff—but
I’m so worried about the public that showed up...
One thing I was just talking to Greta about is that I
was struck that many of speakers last night wanted to
pull books off the shelves and make them available
only to adults, while insisting that they were not like
the Nazis in 1930s Germany. As a historian, it strikes
me that pulling books off shelves and making them
available to a select group of people is literally exactly
what the Nazis did. The actual Nazis seized all the
books on sexuality out of German libraries. For
instance, they removed a children’s book called Bringt
Uns Wirklich Der Klapperstorch? (Does the Stork
Really Bring Us?—I have a copy in my office) about
where children come from…but the Nazis didn’t burn
these books. They moved them to adult sections or
gave them to experts. That is literally what the folks
last night were calling for!
Their language of “corrupting the youth” is the exact
same language of Germany from the 1920s and
1930s! Take, for example, the 1919 queer film
Different from the Others, which was banned in the
radicalizing period of the 1920s that was headed
toward the Third Reich. The New York Times has a
great still image from the film
(https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/movies/differen
t-from-the-others-a-1919-film-on-
homosexuality.html?smid=url-share). If you look
closely, you’ll see men dancing with other men in
drag. This century-old film was banned and destroyed
by the Germans because it would “sexualize” and
“corrupt” the youth. The parallels with the language
I don’t know if there is any way to put together a
history program on Nazis, Sexuality, and Drag or
something for next Pride, but I lecture on this in my
classes, and I’d be happy to do more presentations at
the library on things like the persecution of gay men,
lesbians, and other sexual minorities in Germany in
the 1920s and 1930s. I don’t those folks would attend
a history talk, but—historically speaking—the Nazis
literally banned drag and took sexuality-related books
out of libraries to “protect the youth.” The parallels to
what happened last night are so eerie and troubling.
We really appreciate all the work you and your
colleagues do, Carla!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 12:22 PM,

Trounson, Carla
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,
Thank you both for
coming last night to the
board meeting. I
appreciate your support
for my speech and what
you both said in reference
to the public comments.
I'm sure 100 years from
now (if we survive), there
will be entire library
sections devoted to this
era.
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.
<Outlook-
fuw0qelk.png> ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100
<Outlook-mvrmqwzl.png><Outlook-brmbko55.png><Outlook-


abuse@unr.edu.
Dear Jeff,
In terms of something for Banned Books week, I see the week is super soon, but I’d be happy to
write something fairly quickly, especially for the newsletter. How long of a text were you
thinking? I could probably have something by early next week. I’m happy to focus what I write
in a way that would be most helpful and interesting to your audience.
Based on what I saw at the library board meeting, I think there was a historical misunderstanding
about what banning books meant to the Germans in the 1920s and 1930s. The idea was almost
“If we’re not burning books or criminalizing printing them, we aren’t banning them.” If it would
be helpful, I could write something pointing out that the Nazis “banned” books by
performatively burning duplicates and serials that they didn’t need anyway, and then moved the
“banned” books to special libraries for experts. So, taking books off the shelves and putting them
in special sections is literally how the Nazis banned books. I don’t know if you think that history
lesson would help!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

I was very impressed with your comments last night highlighting the similarities
between the group protesting our books and storytimes to what the Nazis did. People
may think it is similar in the general sense, but you highlighted how the techniques used
Would you be willing to write something up for Banned Books Week? It is a tight
timeline for this year, as we will start highlighting it next week and it will run through
the first week of October. We would like to include a piece in our newsletter and
wondered if you would share it in the RGJ Op-ED section.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

<jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert,
Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy <JHansen@washoecounty.gov>
Hi Jamie,
As discussed, I've included folks who can speak to you
about the Nazi-banned book article for our newsletter.
You and I can continue to plan your Pride Month program
for late June (when you return from Austria). I'm looking
forward to the program and working with you again!
Best regards, Carla
Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month program (although it might have to be towards the
end of June 2024—I’ll be in Austria for a fellowship until mid-June 2024) related to
queer history in the 1920s and 1930s, particularly Nazi persecution of gay folks. I can
talk about how German banned drag, sexual education, and things like that to "protect
the youth.”
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but there is so much I could roll in. For instance, I
found this one really cool source in the archives two summers ago. There was a lecture
that a doctor from the Institute for Sexual Science went around giving in the early 1930s
about contraception. We don’t have the lecture anymore, but we have the questions
the audience wrote down on old scraps of paper, on bar bills, etc…to send up to the
doctor. This one young women wrote (I’ve attached the picture of the original):
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a boyfriend for three years. We like each other a lot and
have had sex. My dad wants to throw me out of the house if I bring any shame onto
him. What should I do?"
It’s a funny episode that is preserved in the archives, but it sheds a lot of light on how
precarious women’s situations could be, how personal honor could be used as a
weapon, and genuinely how clueless people where about sexuality, since they had little
sexual education at all. The Nazis banned this informative lecture, since it could “corrupt
the people.” All of this shows how the Nazis used the language corruption and
“community standards” to censor and limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for banned books! If you want, I could do
something on how the Nazis banning books was not really about burning them (that was
done performatively for show), but locking books away so only adult experts could use
them. I could do something else too, but that feels like the most relevant history for
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
<image011.jpg>
<image012.jpg>
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
The answer is yes to the program; they love the
idea. Also, the library director, Jeff Scott, is
asking if you could write something up for our
banned book week, which is coming up. We
could put it in our newsletter. If yes, I'll include
them in this conversation so you can speak to
them directly.
Best regards, Carla

safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’m always happy to help however I can! As a historian, it makes my
blood boil when folks get their history so wrong.
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be an excellent program
and I would love to plan it. We could
do it during Pride Month in June
2024. Let me run it by folks here
and I'll get back to you. Thanks for
this history, I so appreciate you. I'm
going to have to do a little research.
Best regards, Carla

Hi Carla,
Greta and I were literally just talking about the event
last night! I’m still so troubled with what all I saw. You
did a marvelous job—as did all the library staff—but
I’m so worried about the public that showed up...
One thing I was just talking to Greta about is that I
was struck that many of speakers last night wanted to
pull books off the shelves and make them available
only to adults, while insisting that they were not like
the Nazis in 1930s Germany. As a historian, it strikes
me that pulling books off shelves and making them
available to a select group of people is literally exactly
what the Nazis did. The actual Nazis seized all the
books on sexuality out of German libraries. For
instance, they removed a children’s book called Bringt
Uns Wirklich Der Klapperstorch? (Does the Stork
Really Bring Us?—I have a copy in my office) about
where children come from…but the Nazis didn’t burn
these books. They moved them to adult sections or
gave them to experts. That is literally what the folks
last night were calling for!
Their language of “corrupting the youth” is the exact
same language of Germany from the 1920s and
1930s! Take, for example, the 1919 queer film
Different from the Others, which was banned in the
radicalizing period of the 1920s that was headed
toward the Third Reich. The New York Times has a
great still image from the film
(https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/movies/differen
t-from-the-others-a-1919-film-on-
homosexuality.html?smid=url-share). If you look
closely, you’ll see men dancing with other men in
drag. This century-old film was banned and destroyed
by the Germans because it would “sexualize” and
“corrupt” the youth. The parallels with the language
I don’t know if there is any way to put together a
history program on Nazis, Sexuality, and Drag or
something for next Pride, but I lecture on this in my
classes, and I’d be happy to do more presentations at
the library on things like the persecution of gay men,
lesbians, and other sexual minorities in Germany in
the 1920s and 1930s. I don’t those folks would attend
a history talk, but—historically speaking—the Nazis
literally banned drag and took sexuality-related books
out of libraries to “protect the youth.” The parallels to
what happened last night are so eerie and troubling.
We really appreciate all the work you and your
colleagues do, Carla!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 12:22 PM,

Trounson, Carla
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,
Thank you both for
coming last night to the
board meeting. I
appreciate your support
for my speech and what
you both said in reference
to the public comments.
I'm sure 100 years from
now (if we survive), there
will be entire library
sections devoted to this
era.
Best regards, Carla
Saturday.


abuse@unr.edu.
To: Trounson, Carla [CTrounson@washoecounty.gov]; James McSpadden
[jmcspadden@unr.edu]; Reinke, Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov]; Weinert, Beate
[BWeinert@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Tiar, Morgan A. [MATiar@washoecounty.gov]; Hemingway, Jamie
[JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]; Fanaselle, Jessica [JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov];
Hansen, Judy [JHansen@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: RE: Board Meeting
I was very impressed with your comments last night highlighting the similarities between the group
protesting our books and storytimes to what the Nazis did. People may think it is similar in the general
sense, but you highlighted how the techniques used are exactly the same.
Would you be willing to write something up for Banned Books Week? It is a tight timeline for this year,
as we will start highlighting it next week and it will run through the first week of October. We would like
to include a piece in our newsletter and wondered if you would share it in the RGJ Op-ED section.
Thank you!!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

To: James McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin
<KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Fanaselle, Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy
Hi Jamie,
As discussed, I've included folks who can speak to you about the
Nazi-banned book article for our newsletter.
You and I can continue to plan your Pride Month program for late
June (when you return from Austria). I'm looking forward to the
Best regards, Carla

Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month program (although it might have to be towards the end of June 2024—
I’ll be in Austria for a fellowship until mid-June 2024) related to queer history in the 1920s and 1930s,
particularly Nazi persecution of gay folks. I can talk about how German banned drag, sexual education,
and things like that to "protect the youth.”
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but there is so much I could roll in. For instance, I found this one really
cool source in the archives two summers ago. There was a lecture that a doctor from the Institute for
Sexual Science went around giving in the early 1930s about contraception. We don’t have the lecture
anymore, but we have the questions the audience wrote down on old scraps of paper, on bar bills,
etc…to send up to the doctor. This one young women wrote (I’ve attached the picture of the original):
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a boyfriend for three years. We like each other a lot and have had sex.
My dad wants to throw me out of the house if I bring any shame onto him. What should I do?"
It’s a funny episode that is preserved in the archives, but it sheds a lot of light on how precarious
women’s situations could be, how personal honor could be used as a weapon, and genuinely how
clueless people where about sexuality, since they had little sexual education at all. The Nazis banned this
informative lecture, since it could “corrupt the people.” All of this shows how the Nazis used the
language corruption and “community standards” to censor and limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for banned books! If you want, I could do something on how the
Nazis banning books was not really about burning them (that was done performatively for show), but
locking books away so only adult experts could use them. I could do something else too, but that feels
like the most relevant history for libraries confronting people who advocate censorship.

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
The answer is yes to the program; they love the idea.

Also, the library director, Jeff Scott, is asking if you could
write something up for our banned book week, which is
coming up. We could put it in our newsletter. If yes, I'll
include them in this conversation so you can speak to
them directly.
Best regards, Carla



[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Hi Carla,
I’m always happy to help however I can! As a historian, it makes my blood boil when
folks get their history so wrong.

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,
This would be an excellent program and I

would love to plan it. We could do it during
Pride Month in June 2024. Let me run it by
folks here and I'll get back to you. Thanks for
this history, I so appreciate you. I'm going to
have to do a little research.
Best regards, Carla



safe.]
Hi Carla,
Greta and I were literally just talking about the event last night! I’m
still so troubled with what all I saw. You did a marvelous job—as did
all the library staff—but I’m so worried about the public that showed
up...
One thing I was just talking to Greta about is that I was struck that
many of speakers last night wanted to pull books off the shelves and
make them available only to adults, while insisting that they were not
like the Nazis in 1930s Germany. As a historian, it strikes me that
pulling books off shelves and making them available to a select group
of people is literally exactly what the Nazis did. The actual Nazis
seized all the books on sexuality out of German libraries. For
instance, they removed a children’s book called Bringt Uns Wirklich
Der Klapperstorch? (Does the Stork Really Bring Us?—I have a copy
in my office) about where children come from…but the Nazis didn’t
burn these books. They moved them to adult sections or gave them
to experts. That is literally what the folks last night were calling for!
Their language of “corrupting the youth” is the exact same language

of Germany from the 1920s and 1930s! Take, for example, the 1919
queer film Different from the Others, which was banned in the
radicalizing period of the 1920s that was headed toward the Third
Reich. The New York Times has a great still image from the film
(https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/movies/different-from-the-
others-a-1919-film-on-homosexuality.html?smid=url-share). If you
look closely, you’ll see men dancing with other men in drag. This
century-old film was banned and destroyed by the Germans because
it would “sexualize” and “corrupt” the youth. The parallels with the
language that was used last night was shocking!
I don’t know if there is any way to put together a history program on

Nazis, Sexuality, and Drag or something for next Pride, but I lecture
on this in my classes, and I’d be happy to do more presentations at
the library on things like the persecution of gay men, lesbians, and
other sexual minorities in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. I don’t
those folks would attend a history talk, but—historically speaking—
the Nazis literally banned drag and took sexuality-related books out of
libraries to “protect the youth.” The parallels to what happened last
We really appreciate all the work you and your colleagues do, Carla!
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,
Thank you both for coming last

night to the board meeting. I
appreciate your support for my
speech and what you both said in
reference to the public comments.
I'm sure 100 years from now (if we
survive), there will be entire library
sections devoted to this era.
Best regards, Carla



abuse@unr.edu.
To: Stacey Clark [saclark123@yahoo.com]
Subject: RE: Join Us Next Thursday, 9/21
I will be there. Sorry I did not confirm earlier.
Looking forward to it.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Stacey Clark <saclark123@yahoo.com>

Subject: Fwd: Join Us Next Thursday, 9/21
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: North Washoe Dems <nwd@washoedems.org>

Date: September 17, 2023 at 8:29:20 AM PDT
To: saclark123@yahoo.com
Subject: Join Us Next Thursday, 9/21
Reply-To: North Washoe Dems <nwd@washoedems.org>
Registration Statistics updated 9/14/2023

View this email in your browser
September 2023
North Washoe Dems Event Alert

Thursday, September 21, 2023
Doors open at 5:30, Event starts at 6:00
Jeff Scott, Washoe County Library Director

Jeff Scott began his career over 20 years ago at the Arizona Historical
Foundation, an archive of Senator Barry Goldwater, at Arizona State
University. During his career, he has served as the library director for Casa
Grande, Arizona, Tulare County, and Berkeley, California. In addition, Jeff
has served on the California Library Association Board and as President of
the Nevada Library Association. Appointed as the Library Director for the
Washoe County Library System (WCLS) in 2015, he has renovated
numerous library facilities, expanded outreach, created operational and
strategic plans, and, together with the talented staff of WCLS, strives to
make the library a welcoming and enriching place to visit and work.
Event Location: Mr. Crab’s Boiling Seafood Restaurant

137 Los Altos Pkwy
Sparks, NV 89436
In the Sparks Galleria Shopping Center near Michaels and Ulta
Doors open at 5:30 for socializing before the meeting starts. Mr. Crab will
have food and drinks for sale, but there is no charge for our meetings.
All are welcomed. RSVP and questions: contact us at

nwd@washoedems.org.
Make a Difference as a Precinct Organizer

The Washoe County Democratic Party Precinct Organizing Committee is
actively recruiting precinct organizers. Registered Democrats who are
enthusiastic about leading fellow Democrats and passionate about
Democratic ideals are qualified to be precinct organizers. They meet and talk
to neighbors, distribute candidate literature, help get out the vote and register
voters.
Contact Diana Mackey at Mackeydlm@icloud.com, or text or call 775-287-

5880 to find out how to get involved.
Find Your Precinct
Let’s Make Progress Together. Get Involved!

Join the North Washoe Dems Leadership Team
Are you interested in being involved in the advancement of Democratic
ideals in our area? The North Washoe Dems are seeking individuals who
would like to join our leadership team. Make a difference in the success of
northern Nevada Democratic candidates and issues! We also welcome
speaker/program ideas. For more information, contact us at
nwd@washoedems.org.
We have been working on becoming an official affiliate of the Washoe Dems,
enabling us to enhance participation in the political process, reach more
deeply into a variety of constituencies, issues and geographic areas and
elect more Democrats to public office.
North Washoe Dems Leadership Team

Susan Hill and Cookie West - Co-chairs
Andrew Ayala - Newsletter Editor
Greg Stanley - At-large Representative
Washoe County Active Voters

Active
Party Difference
Voters
Democratic 96.637 +57

Republican 101,358 +74
Nonpartisan 90,208 +195
Other 24,167 +51
Total 312,370 +377
Copyright (C) 2023 North Washoe Dems. All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because you shared your email address with
the North Washoe Dems.

North Washoe Dems
1465 Terminal Way, Suite 1
Reno, NV 89502

You can update your preferences or unsubscribe
To: Trounson, Carla [CTrounson@washoecounty.gov]; James McSpadden
[jmcspadden@unr.edu]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Reinke, Kristin
[KReinke@washoecounty.gov]; Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov]
This is so exciting! Please let me know if I can help! Can’t wait to see the op-Ed and learn more.
Get Outlook for iOS

To: James McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin
<KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Fanaselle, Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy
Hi Jamie,
Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month program (although it might have to be towards the end of June
2024—I’ll be in Austria for a fellowship until mid-June 2024) related to queer history in the
1920s and 1930s, particularly Nazi persecution of gay folks. I can talk about how German
banned drag, sexual education, and things like that to "protect the youth.”
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but there is so much I could roll in. For instance, I found this
one really cool source in the archives two summers ago. There was a lecture that a doctor from
the Institute for Sexual Science went around giving in the early 1930s about contraception. We
don’t have the lecture anymore, but we have the questions the audience wrote down on old
scraps of paper, on bar bills, etc…to send up to the doctor. This one young women wrote (I’ve
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a boyfriend for three years. We like each other a lot and have had
sex. My dad wants to throw me out of the house if I bring any shame onto him. What should I
do?"
clueless people where about sexuality, since they had little sexual education at all. The Nazis
banned this informative lecture, since it could “corrupt the people.” All of this shows how the
Nazis used the language corruption and “community standards” to censor and limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for banned books! If you want, I could do something on
how the Nazis banning books was not really about burning them (that was done performatively
for show), but locking books away so only adult experts could use them. I could do something
else too, but that feels like the most relevant history for libraries confronting people who
advocate censorship.

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,

them directly.
Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,

Best regards, Carla


safe.]
Hi Carla,
up...


Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla



abuse@unr.edu.
To: James McSpadden [jmcspadden@unr.edu]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Reinke,
Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov]; Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov];
Hi Jamie,
Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
I’d be happy to do a Pride month program (although it might have to be towards the end of June
2024—I’ll be in Austria for a fellowship until mid-June 2024) related to queer history in the
1920s and 1930s, particularly Nazi persecution of gay folks. I can talk about how German
banned drag, sexual education, and things like that to "protect the youth.”
I’ll have to think of a catchy title, but there is so much I could roll in. For instance, I found this
one really cool source in the archives two summers ago. There was a lecture that a doctor from
the Institute for Sexual Science went around giving in the early 1930s about contraception. We
don’t have the lecture anymore, but we have the questions the audience wrote down on old
scraps of paper, on bar bills, etc…to send up to the doctor. This one young women wrote (I’ve
“I’m 27 years old, and I’ve had a boyfriend for three years. We like each other a lot and have had
sex. My dad wants to throw me out of the house if I bring any shame onto him. What should I
do?"
clueless people where about sexuality, since they had little sexual education at all. The Nazis
banned this informative lecture, since it could “corrupt the people.” All of this shows how the
Nazis used the language corruption and “community standards” to censor and limit information.
I’d also be happy to write something for banned books! If you want, I could do something on
how the Nazis banning books was not really about burning them (that was done performatively
for show), but locking books away so only adult experts could use them. I could do something
else too, but that feels like the most relevant history for libraries confronting people who
advocate censorship.

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
On Sep 21, 2023, at 2:02 PM, Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>
wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,

them directly.
Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,

Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Jamie,

Best regards, Carla


safe.]
Hi Carla,
up...


Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla



abuse@unr.edu.
To: Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov];
Reinke, Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
CC: Fanaselle, Jessica [JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov]; Tiar, Morgan A.
[MATiar@washoecounty.gov]; Hansen, Judy [JHansen@washoecounty.gov]
Great! He has written back, so I'll include all of you in this next
email.
Best Regards, Carla

From: Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>

To: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie,
Cc: Fanaselle, Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>; Tiar, Morgan A. <MATiar@washoecounty.gov>;
Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>; Hansen, Judy <JHansen@washoecounty.gov>
Yes, absolutely on Jamie's offer!! Mr. Myers (sp?) literally cornered Judy and me
after LBOT suggesting WCLS offer history programs --specifically American/Civil
War. Nuance. I think Mr. Myers missed the point when we emphasized that
learning from history is necessary for society to evolve and grow.
Ask and we deliver...
Carla, please let Jamie know 'YES, absolutely YES!' and let us know what we can
do to make it happen.

Beate
Beate Weinert

To: Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>
Trounson, Carla <CTrounson@washoecounty.gov>
Why not both? Debi wrote something up in the Explorer. I think if Carla and Dr McSpadden
each wrote something connecting what’s happening to what the Nazis did it would be very
powerful. I’m just blown away with his comparisons. It’s exactly the same!
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>

Weinert, Beate <BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>
Hi Jeff,
Carla and I are just talking about this, do you mean an op-ed for one of the local newspapers?
Or something to add to the library newsletter? She's happy to ask but just wants to make sure
what she's asking. 🙂
Kristin Reinke, MLIS

Branch Manager | Washoe County Library System
kreinke@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.787.4117
2325 Robb Drive, Reno NV 89523
My work week is Sunday - Thursday.

Could he write an Op-Ed for Banned Books week? We are going to start pushing this out next
week.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

I also LOVE this! This is a perfect program for this. Maybe he can do this for Pride and for
Banned Books Week next year?
Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

I LOVE the idea! I'm forwarding this to Jeff, Stacy and Beate in case they see a potential issue,
otherwise I think Morgan should put it in the event hopper for YSLE for possibly April or June
2024.
Kristin


To: Reinke, Kristin <KReinke@washoecounty.gov>; Tiar, Morgan A. <MATiar@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Fanaselle, Jessica <JFanaselle@washoecounty.gov>
FYI...


To: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>
Hi Jamie,
This would be an excellent program and I would love to plan it. We

could do it during Pride Month in June 2024. Let me run it by folks
here and I'll get back to you. Thanks for this history, I so appreciate
you. I'm going to have to do a little research.
Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
Greta and I were literally just talking about the event last night! I’m still so troubled with what
all I saw. You did a marvelous job—as did all the library staff—but I’m so worried about the
One thing I was just talking to Greta about is that I was struck that many of speakers last night
wanted to pull books off the shelves and make them available only to adults, while insisting that
they were not like the Nazis in 1930s Germany. As a historian, it strikes me that pulling books
off shelves and making them available to a select group of people is literally exactly what the
Nazis did. The actual Nazis seized all the books on sexuality out of German libraries. For
instance, they removed a children’s book called Bringt Uns Wirklich Der Klapperstorch? (Does
the Stork Really Bring Us?—I have a copy in my office) about where children come from…but
the Nazis didn’t burn these books. They moved them to adult sections or gave them to experts.
That is literally what the folks last night were calling for!
Their language of “corrupting the youth” is the exact same language of Germany from the 1920s
and 1930s! Take, for example, the 1919 queer film Different from the Others, which was banned
in the radicalizing period of the 1920s that was headed toward the Third Reich. The New York
Times has a great still image from the film
(https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/movies/different-from-the-others-a-1919-film-on-
homosexuality.html?smid=url-share). If you look closely, you’ll see men dancing with other men
in drag. This century-old film was banned and destroyed by the Germans because it would
“sexualize” and “corrupt” the youth. The parallels with the language that was used last night was
shocking!
I don’t know if there is any way to put together a history program on Nazis, Sexuality, and Drag
or something for next Pride, but I lecture on this in my classes, and I’d be happy to do more
presentations at the library on things like the persecution of gay men, lesbians, and other sexual
minorities in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. I don’t those folks would attend a history talk,
but—historically speaking—the Nazis literally banned drag and took sexuality-related books out
of libraries to “protect the youth.” The parallels to what happened last night are so eerie and
troubling.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,
Thank you both for coming last night to the board

meeting. I appreciate your support for my speech and
what you both said in reference to the public comments.
I'm sure 100 years from now (if we survive), there will be
entire library sections devoted to this era.
Best regards, Carla

abuse@unr.edu.
From: Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Weinert, Beate
<BWeinert@washoecounty.gov>
To: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Reinke, Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov];
[MATiar@washoecounty.gov]; Trounson, Carla [CTrounson@washoecounty.gov]; Hansen,
Judy [JHansen@washoecounty.gov]
Yes, absolutely on Jamie's offer!! Mr. Myers (sp?) literally cornered Judy and me
after LBOT suggesting WCLS offer history programs --specifically American/Civil
War. Nuance. I think Mr. Myers missed the point when we emphasized that
learning from history is necessary for society to evolve and grow.
Ask and we deliver...
Carla, please let Jamie know 'YES, absolutely YES!' and let us know what we can
do to make it happen.

Beate
Beate Weinert

Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jeff,


week.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

2024.
Kristin


FYI...


Hi Jamie,

Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
shocking!
troubling.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla

abuse@unr.edu.
To: Reinke, Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
[SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov]
[MATiar@washoecounty.gov]; Trounson, Carla [CTrounson@washoecounty.gov]
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hi Jeff,


week.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

2024.
Kristin


FYI...


Hi Jamie,

Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
shocking!
troubling.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla

abuse@unr.edu.
From: Reinke, Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Reinke, Kristin
<KReinke@washoecounty.gov>
Hi Jeff,


week.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

2024.
Kristin


FYI...

Hi Jamie,

Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
shocking!
troubling.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla

abuse@unr.edu.
week.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

2024.
Kristin


FYI...


Hi Jamie,

Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
shocking!
troubling.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla
<Outlook- Carla Trounson, M.A.

fuw0qelk.png> Library Assistant II | Washoe County Library System
abuse@unr.edu.
Thanks!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

2024.
Kristin


FYI...


Hi Jamie,

Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
shocking!
troubling.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla

abuse@unr.edu.
From: Reinke, Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Reinke, Kristin
<KReinke@washoecounty.gov>
2024.
Kristin


FYI...


Hi Jamie,
Best regards, Carla


Hi Carla,
shocking!
troubling.
Best,
Jamie
--------------------------
James McSpadden
Assistant Professor

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Hi Greta and Jamie,

Best regards, Carla

abuse@unr.edu.
From: Bruce Parks [bruce122@ymail.com] on behalf of Bruce Parks <bruce122@ymail.com>
Subject: Re: Minutes
Thank you!
Bruce Parks

wrote:
Thank you for your patience.
Here are the attached minutes.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Bruce Parks <bruce122@ymail.com>

Subject: Minutes
Hello Mr. Scott,
I am requesting a paper copy of the minutes for both June 2023 and July 2023 that will be up for LBoT
vote this evening, be made available to me before the meeting tonight as per OML Manual (attached)
page 49 numerals 6 and 7. Also, I am reminding you that I have also previously requested to be on the
standing request list (electronic is perfectly acceptable) as per OML Manual Item 6, NRS241.020(3)(c).
Thank you and I look forward to the meeting.

Best regards,
Bruce Parks
To: Prentiss, Timothy [TPrentiss@washoecounty.gov]; Andrews, John
[JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Minutes
Attachments: 20230719-minutes draft .docx; June 2023 LBOT Minutes Draft .docx
Tim/John,
Can we post these minutes on the library board page?
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2023 | 4:00 PM
VIRTUAL MEETING
The Board met in regular session in a virtual format via Zoom webinar.
1) CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Perez assumed the gavel in the absence of Chair Amy Ghilieri. Vice Chair Perez called
the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
2) ROLL CALL AND DETERMINATION OF QUORUM
Present: Absent:
Frank Perez Vice Chair Amy Ghilieri Chair
Lea Grace Trustee
Al Rogers Trustee
Vacant Trustee
County Staff:
Jeff Scott Library Director
David Solaro Assistant County Manager
Brandon Price Deputy District Attorney
3) PUBLIC COMMENT
Deputy District Attorney Brandon Price reminded the audience of the rules regarding public comment and
decorum by reading them aloud, noting these rules were included on the cover pages of every Library
Board of Trustees agenda under the paragraphs “Public Comment” and “Response to Public Comment”.
Drew Rebar was invited to make public comment via Zoom multiple times, but the microphone icon on
his end showed he was muted; he appeared to be having difficulty resolving this issue. During the meeting,
staff reached out to him via email to offer him a chance to submit a written statement or comment in case
he was not able to make a live comment. He was later able to get through successfully during Agenda
Item 4, Approval of Meeting Minutes, and it was recommended he be allowed to make comment on any
matter (whether general or specific to Agenda Item 4) due to the previous technical difficulties. (See his
comment under Agenda Item 4.)
The following members of the public spoke regarding their opposition to Drag Queen Story Time (DQST)
events: Nichelle Hull; Bruce Parks; Valerie Fiannaca; Sandie Tibbett; Reva Crump; Drew Reibar; Janet
Butcher; Joanie Hammond; Craig Newton; Bill (last name not given); Danny Hart; and an unknown female
who did not provide her name (listen to make sure I have her in the right column – for or against DQST).
Reasons cited by the above commenters for their opposition of DQST events included:
• Concerns that DQST events were adult in nature and inappropriate for children or public libraries
• A desire to see individuals other than drag performers leading story time events
• Religious or moral beliefs opposing LGBTQ+ themes; desire for a return to traditional values
• Fear that DQST events exposed youth to sexualized themes or content, or were intended to introduce
children to this content in a manner intended to ‘groom’ them for abuse
• Belief that only parents/families should teach their kids about sexuality/gender
• Concerns that such events would cause gender confusion or loss of innocence in young children
• Opposition to the use of public facilities to host events of a controversial nature
• Doubts regarding the value or educational benefit of DQST programming
In addition to comments regarding his opposition to DQST events, Bruce Parks stated he wanted to see at
least one conservative member appointed to the Library Board.
The following members of the public spoke in support of the Library System and DQST events: Alicia Linsey
Deitrich; Nathan Noble; and Jennifer Howard.
Reasons cited by the above commenters for their support of DQST events and the Washoe County Library
System included:
• Appreciation for the general creativity, inclusiveness, and range of library programming available
• Compliments regarding the libraries’ devoted and welcoming staff
• Gratitude for the Library System’s efforts to celebrate diversity, inclusiveness, and acceptance
• Increased awareness of social issues faced by the LGBTQ+ community, including children & families
• Belief that the freedom to read was an essential right and library materials and events, within reason,
should not be censored unless blatantly obscene
• Belief that libraries were public spaces meant for everyone, including minorities
• Appreciation that events were conducted in a safe environment with positive role models and the
support and encouragement of families
4) APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES
There was discussion and comments from Bruce Parks, Reva Crump, and Vice Chair Frank Perez regarding
corrections which needed to be made to the June 21, 2023 meeting minutes before they could be
approved, including:
- Removing former Trustee Ann Medaille and Trustee Al Rogers, whose term did not begin until
July 1, 2023, from the list of attendees,
- Correcting the name of the Deputy District Attorney in attendance at the meeting in question,
and
- Correcting the arrival time for Vice Chair Perez, upon which a quorum was established.
On motion by Vice Chair Perez, seconded by Trustee Moser, which motion duly carried, the Board decided
to table the approval of the June 2023 Library Board of Trustees Meeting minutes in order for the above-
listed corrections to be made. All in favor; none opposed.
5) OLD BUSINESS
None
6) NEW BUSINESS
a. Presentation: Washoe County Library Strategic Plan Update by Library Director Jeff Scott
Director Jeff Scott discussed updates to the Washoe County Library Strategic Plan, including:
- The recent installation of book machines,

- A news story about the Sun Valley self-service kiosk,
- Information regarding the vandalism of the book kiosk in Cold Springs and repairs planned,
- A ribbon cutting for the kiosk in Cold Springs once it was repaired,
- A ribbon cutting to be held July 25 in Gerlach and information regarding the last mile fiber project
- The summer Kids Café program which allowed children to receive free meals during summer
break
- Zoom Rooms being expanded and installed at the Sierra View and Sparks libraries,
- Baby’s First Library Card program,
- Attendance at recent Drag Queen Story Time events,
- Americans in the Holocaust exhibit at the Northwest Reno Library,
- Items accomplished by the Strategic Plan in 2022 and 2023,
- The next goals the Library System would be focusing on, including the upcoming tax renewal
initiative (more information would be discussed at the August meeting), and
- Updates regarding the ADA restroom and family restroom construction at the Downtown Reno
Library.
Trustee Moser inquired about the legal kiosk; Director Scott explained these were in the North Valleys
and Incline Village branches and could provide video assistance to patrons looking for legal information
since those branches were the furthest from the Law Library and legal resources available in Reno.
Trustee Moser thought it would be nice to have more information at the next meeting; Director Scott said
he would provide a more detailed report for the Board soon.
Rogers – kudos to Scott, making progress on strategic plan goals. Q – zoom rooms and state lib grant, is
there a typical match for state/fed ? JS – not standard, sometimes they ask for a match amount for
marketing or advertising. Traditional LSTA cycle is $75k once per year competitive cycle, and also $10K
mini grants. Had extra money this year, Jamie put that together quickly, zoom rooms larger 4 person
rooms we were able to win those.
Rogers – any programming determining what will be put on by lib, what is being done or what do you do
when we have events that could have conflict? Assuming sheriffs dept on site or in the wings if
necessary to assist?
JS – ben west security coordinates w Allied and sheriff, sparks pd, and reno pd as well as NREC? Looking
for security threats at the event. Last year proud boys tried to disrupt, came back w weapon when
unsuccessful, we learned a lot and had deputies drive by several times sparks PD also interacting w
public and try to keep things calm. Can be scary for kids and families, but we take every effort to ensure
safe and productive.
Rogers – next strategic plan cycle, is there an outside resource to brainstorm to start process? What
happens next? JS – two processes to create SP, interviews w staff, comm and stakeholders; also
expanded to interviews & surveys, over 1200 responses, feedback from Board as well. Board will take
survey and have opportunity to discuss what want to see at next plan. At tail end fewer action items
because we focus on much up front, give extra time to deal w other issues. Bookmobile saga kind of
hung up. Next year will start working on new plan for future. Tax initiative work mainly first.
Rogers – tax initiative, that’s the biggest thing on our plate for long term. Opportunities w that tax.
Moser – what were issues w getting the bookmobile by Mid Aug? JS we were awarded the grant, tried to
get paperwork in, Board has to approve the grant before we can start spending money, but State didn’t
send us the paperwork in time, tried to ask Cap Ford to keep the vehicle on hand. Things happen at end
of the fiscal year waiting on state library to give us the info. Supply chain issues. Ford Transit van, bought
shelving works specifically only with this van – waiting for approval to make that happen at the Aug bcc.
b. Discussion and Approval of Library Board of Trustee Bylaws for Fiscal Year 2023-2024
Reva Crump gave public comment regarding Bylaws

– hope you have the red and blue copy, may affect how you vote. Article 2 org memb secd B.5, word
MAY being changed to SHALL. If keep MAY it’s appropriate, if trustee is asked to do such but can’t
require of them. Article 4 meetings section a – when using suggested verbiage change in red, chair sole
discretion as to meeting time without input of other trustees. If unsavory person gets chair position,
don’t have to consider the other trustees if you change it to this option. All should have a vote to the
time held. Art 4 sect I, permanently removing pc at end of meeting, board committing to hear at
beginning and on every action item, their choice, but will be committed for the future. Art 4 sect L,
suggest putting period after the word Annually in the 4th line, accomplish same thing without excess
verbiage in bylaws, ….reviewed annually, Board may decide in that year …. Gives freedom to flex when
its convenient for the board. 5:27pm
NV Patriots Bruce Parks gave public comment regarding Bylaws
– section 4 paragraph J, each body established rules to conduct meetings, using ambiguous language,
disingenuous, but may get into conflict in future if not clearly delineated what rules will follow –
Roberts, masons, you must adopt a firm set of rules. Lang not consistent w establishing rules to conduct
meetings. Understand less formal in the past, but recommend you consider changing language back to
original. Also point out bylaws were not available in the original packet that was put out on Friday. Again
back to the OML violation/ethics violations. To be brought up at a different time. Rec adopt firm set of
rules.
Library Board Comments:

Al – read bylaws, noted not holding anything within bylaws to a specific month, keep to annual review, I
think that’s a good approach to have flexibility to review annually but not by any specific month (like
June).
Frank – remove June?
Al – at least one per calendar year. To keep it a working document that can continue to evolve.
Frank – suggested amendment to bylaws, give Board ability to review bylaws within the year. I don’t
oppose that.
Moser – should we remove? Or amend again in a few weeks?
Frank – Ghilieri is Board member presently and based on BCC maybe 2 months, she is still Chair just not
present today. Don’t have issue leaving her name on this bc she is still a board member today. Are you
still ok with 5pm? Hoping to change.
Moser – in favor. Rogers – no issue w that.
Frank – move meeting time to 5pm, bylaws allow us to move to virtual meeting, clearly stated and also
in NRS. Look at subsection 4, meeting times can be set at discretion of chair. I suggest Chair G make that
determination whether 4 or 5pm, though I prefer, it should be up to the Chair. Any issue w way
subsection 4 is written (asking Trustees). As it stands, it’s the chairs call. I’m ok w that.
Rogers – no issue w that.
Brandon – comment the supporting materials posted w agenda – under 241.020, ss 11, supporting
materials must be posted lib website at time materials provided to trustees, under that statute no
requirement materials be posted 3 days in advance, as long as made available to public at same time as
available to trustees, it complies.
Frank – making notes, include Board member Rogers amendment – remove June to just say annually. If
no other suggestions, edits, motion – including Rogers suggested amendment?
Al – motion to approve w amendment as presented to strike the month of June in section to reflect
bylaws would be reviewed on an annual basis with no stipulation of month.
Frank – sec 4 subsection …

Brandon clarifies – mtn to approve proposed minutes with exception in ss 4 L to state ANNUALLY.
Motion by Trustee Rogers, seconded by Trustee Moser to approve with amendment as presented to strike
the month of June in the bylaws to reflect that the bylaws would be reviewed on an annual basis, with no
stipulation as to a specific month.
6) REPORTS
a. Library Director Update by Jeff Scott [Non-Action Item]
Library Director Jeff Scott provided a verbal update to the Board, and briefly discussing topics including a
recent mercury spill discovered at the Spanish Springs Library branch and resulting HAZMAT cleanup
efforts; Board correspondence and articles which had been included in the packet for review; and
information on how book challenges worked.
Trustee Al Rogers asked whether there would be any Library-related presentations at the Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) meetings in August.
Director Scott stated Library Collection Development Manager Debi Stears would provide a report to the
BCC regarding the Library System’s collection development and material selection processes.
b. South Valleys Library Presentation by Branch Manager Julie Ullman [Non-Action Item]
Branch Manger Julie Ullman reviewed a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which was included in the
Board packet.
Following the conclusion of her presentation, Vice Chair Frank Perez noted his family had signed up for
his son’s library card at the South Valleys Library branch. He thanked Ms. Ullman for her update.
Trustee Moser stated she loved seeing how many community members really enjoyed and appreciated
the services provided by the libraries, particular services for seniors, veterans, and women. She suggested
considering possibly incorporating services for Americorp or Peace Corp servants in the future.
c. Internet Librarian Presentation by John Andrews [Non-Action Item]
Library Director Jeff Scott explained Internet Librarian John Andrews was currently out sick and was not
available to do his presentation; he requested the item be tabled for a future meeting. Vice Chair Perez
agreed this could be postponed for a meeting at some point in the future.
7) STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
None
8) BOARD COMMENTS
Vice Chair Perez discussed the BCC’s decision not to reappoint Amy Ghilieri …_______________________
The BCC did not vote to reappoint Ghilieri, however, she will serve as Chair until a replacement is found.
I estimate she may serve as Chair for maybe two months or longer depending on how vacancies go.
Member Medaille did submit resignation; did not state a reason and wished the Board the best of luck
moving forward in endeavors and efforts. Want board to start thinking about any interest by Board
members to become the Chair. I will say I can’t describe my thankfulness and admiration for Chair
Ghilieri; she was a member before I joined, long before negative comments began about specific
programming. She was a strong member, always asking great questions, she is a PhD,
doctorate/professor of History, and friend of mine, I am going to miss her. Opens two vacancies.
Whoever the new members are, we will welcome them; as always said, important to realize we are
Trustees in a voluntary role and serving– ok diff in opinion, but when becomes a problem is when
anything violent or conflict involving violence occurring. That is a problem. OK to have different
perspectives about certain items, but I will say that I am keeping track of the conflict and taking into
account when we’re looking at different types of programming or things of that nature. Just my
thoughts on it. Thank Ghilieri again and next time she is present – I did tell the DA, reason we weren’t
able to be in person at SO lib was conflict with meeting room. So public knows, that was the reason for
virtual meeting.
Trustee Rogers – thank Perez for running great virtual meeting today, look forward, lot to learn. Getting
out, interacting with Director and staff, and learning as much as I can. Think some good background that
will help in that endeavor, look forward to getting involved with teams and initiatives important to the
Board and the community to shape libs for the future.
Trustee Lea Moser stated everyone had a right to voice their opinions and she applauded their civic
engagement, ____________________________________...
Moser –believe we should protect certain freedoms, that includes certain programming we believe
should be incorporated in the lib sys as part of that freedom. Ghilieri did an amazing job, the meetings I
attended at some points did become violent and scary and she managed them with ease. Welcome
Trustee Rogers and hope to see you next month in person.
Frank – to Rogers, little info on who you are? Bio?
Trustee Al Rogers thanked Vice Chair Perez for running the meeting and he stated he looked forward to
interacting with Library Director Jeff Scott and branch staff, and learning as much as possible about the
Library System, in order to help the Board and the community to shape and support the libraries for the
future. Trustee Rogers also provided a brief summary of his experience and education:
Rogers – gave a little info on self last month, but in community over 40 yrs, attended univ here, stayed
on to start career at teaching at Bishop Manogue and coach, worked at C of R, parks and rec, co mgrs.
Office, background in some budget and operations, look to Dir Scott and trustees for policy and other
experience. Make libraries continued community asset. Thank and look forward to a good few mos
getting off the ground.
9) ADJOURNMENT
Vice Chair Perez adjourned the meeting at 6:16 PM.

LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING
MINUTES JUNE 21, 2023
4:00 P.M.
The Board met in regular session in a hybrid format via Zoom webinar and in person.
Chair Ghilieri called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm.
1) ROLL CALL
Board Members Present: Amy Ghilieri

Frank Perez (arrived at 4:02)
Lea Moser
Board Members Absent: Anne Medaille
County Staff Present: Library Director Jeff Scott

Assistant District Attorney Trent Ross
Assistant County Manager David Solaro
2) Public Comment
The following members of the public commented in opposition to the drag queen story time
(DQST) event: Christ Noht, Jim Lyon, Janet Butcher, Nichelle Hull, Fred and Victoria Myer, Robi
Avelar, Liza Cabria, Rebecca Andrews, Susan Califa, Nancy Carlson, Joseph Schulz, Bruce Parks,
Sandy and Gary Burnell, Linda Robins, Jason Coursey, Agnes Boutte, Cheryl Anderson, Yolanda
Knaak, Sophie Bush, Mikhail Ivanov, Sara Hadden, Ed Forrest, John and Marlene Ciaffi, and Dale
Elias.
Valeri Fiannaca pledged allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.
Reva Crump welcomed new Board Trustee Al Rogers. She stated she had emailed the Library
Trustees but did not receive a response; although she received a reply from Library Director Jeff
Scott, Ms. Crump noted she was not happy with his reply. She suggested the main Library web
page be updated.
3) Approval of Meeting Minutes
a) Approval of Minutes from the Library Board Meeting of May 21, 2023
Bruce Parks expressed opposition to the brevity of the Board minutes.
On motion by Trustee Lea Moser, seconded by Vice Chair Frank Perez, which motion
duly carried, the Board approved the minutes of the May 21, 2023 Library Board of
Trustees meeting. All in favor; none opposed.
4) Old Business
None
5) New Business
a) Election of Chair for Library Board of Trustees for Fiscal Year 2023-2024
Chair Amy Ghilieri nominated Vice Chair Frank Perez as Library Board of Trustees Chair
for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.
Vice Chair Perez stated he would not want the position and nominated Amy Ghilieri for
reappointment, stating he felt she had done an excellent job the past year and would
prefer to see her continue in the role.
Public Comment:
Bruce Parks commented in opposition of Amy Ghilieri being reappointed as Chair.
Ann Henson opined the Board should wait until 6:00 PM before voting on the next
Chair and Vice Chair.
Nichelle Hull asked Assistant District Attorney Trent Ross about agenda changes and
elections for Chair and Vice Chair.
Board Action:
On motion by Vice Chair Frank Perez, seconded by Trustee Moser, which motion duly
carried, the Board reappointed Amy Ghilieri as Library Board of Trustees Chair for Fiscal
Year 2023-2024.
b) Election of Vice-Chair for Library Board of Trustees for Fiscal Year 2023-2024
Trustee Lea Moser thanked the Board members and Chair Amy Ghilieri for their service
and maintaining order during the meetings.
Bruce Parks commented in opposition of the appointment of any current Library Board
members to the Vice Chair role.
Trustee Moser nominated Trustee Frank Perez for Vice Chair.
On motion by Trustee Moser, seconded by Chair Amy Ghilieri, which motion duly
carried, the Board approved Frank Perez as Library Board of Trustees Vice Chair for
Fiscal Year 2023-2024.
Vice Chair Frank Perez stated it would be an honor for him to serve as Vice Chair for
the Board. He added he was proud of staff and the Library System and enjoyed being
a part of the Library Board of Trustees.
Trustee Moser thanked everyone for being amicable and looked forward to seeing how
the Board progressed in the next year.
c) Appointment of One Library Board Trustee as Friends of Washoe County Library Liaison
for Fiscal Year 2023-2024
Public Comment:
Bruce Parks, Victoria Myer, and Nichelle Hull commented in opposition of the Friends
of Washoe County Library.
Janet Butcher stated she wanted to see the Board appoint a liaison who would be fair
and whom the public could trust.
Board Action:
Trustee Lea Moser asked whether any of the Trustees were interested in accepting the
appointment as Liaison to the Friends of the Washoe County Library.
Vice Chair Frank Perez opined that appointing a Trustee who did not currently hold a
role (such as Chair or Vice Chair) could be beneficial, and he thought Trustee Moser
would be a good fit as liaison.
Trustee Moser indicated she would be interested in the position.

Vice Chair Perez commented he thought highly of Trustee Moser and felt she was very
engaged with the public.
On motion by Vice Chair Perez, seconded by Chair Amy Ghilieri, which motion duly
carried, the Board approved the appointment of Trustee Lea Moser to the role of
Liaison to the Friends of the Washoe County Library for Fiscal Year 2023-2024. All in
favor; none opposed.
d) Approval of Library Board of Trustees Meeting Schedule/Service Team Presentation

Cycle for 2023-2024
Library Director Jeff Scott reviewed proposed dates for the 2023-2024 Library Board of
Trustees Meetings/Service Team Presentation Cycle.
Trustee Perez asked whether 4:00 PM worked for all the Trustees or if a different time
might be better, but it was decided the meeting schedule and times would remain as
proposed.
duly carried, the Board approved the Library Board of Trustees Meeting
Schedule/Service Team Presentation Cycle for 2023-2024. All in favor; none opposed.
e) Approval of Library Holiday and Closure schedule for Fiscal Years 2023-2025
Public Comment:
Bruce Parks expressed concerns regarding the holiday closure schedule, and wanted
to know what the Library would be doing to promote the holidays.
Frank Meyer wanted to know why he could not have access to Library branches when
staff were present there and expressed a desire to see a clearer schedule.
Board Action:
On motion by Vice Chair Frank Perez, seconded by Trustee Lea Moser, which motion
duly carried, the Board approved the Library Holiday and Closure Schedule for Fiscal
Years 2023-2025. All in favor; none opposed.
f) Approval of Library Board of Trustee Bylaws for Fiscal Year 2023-2024
Public Comment:
Bruce Parks opined the Bylaws did not reflect what was posted, pointed out that some
dates did not appear to be accurate, and stated he wanted to see the Board follow the
Bylaws by specification.
Reva Crump commented regarding changing the meeting times, and stated she would
like to see the item on the Library Board’s next meeting agenda. She stated it would be
good for all Board members to agree on a time.
Board Action:
Trustee Lea Moser asked Assistant District Attorney Trent Ross whether the Board could
propose a change to the suggested meeting times; Assistant District Attorney Ross
indicated this was possible.
Trustee Moser indicated she would consider proposing modifying the meeting time
from 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM, to include web-based meetings.
Vice Chair Perez suggested he would also consider supporting a change to move the
meeting time to 5:00 PM.
Chair Amy Ghilieri expressed openness to the suggested changes but indicated further
discussion would need to wait for a future meeting.
g) Presentation and Discussion: Washoe County Library Strategic Plan Update by Library
Director Jeff Scott
Director Scott reviewed updates regarding the Library System’s Strategic Plan, book
vending machines recently installed in Cold Springs and the Sun Valley teen center, a
book promotion on KOLO TV, the Sparks Library renovation including installation of new
carpet, the commencement of the Summer Reading Program and kickoff promotions at
different branches. He discussed recent staff day training events, the hiring of two new
Library Assistant IIIs and the promotion of Jamie Hemingway to the role of Development
Officer, and the hiring of new Assistant Library Director, Stacy McKenzie. Director Scott
mentioned the Rainbow Fest and Drag Queen Story Time events had been well-
attended and successful.
h) Presentation of Proposed Collection Development Policy by Library Collection

Development Manager, Debi Stears; Discussion of Proposed Collection Development
Policy (also known as Book Selection); and Approval of Collection Development Policy
The above Agenda Item was postponed for a future meeting.

i) Presentation of Proposed Interlibrary Loan Policy by Library Collection Development
Manager Debi Stears; Discussion of Interlibrary Loan Policy; and Approval of Interlibrary
Loan Policy
j) Presentation and Discussion: Washoe County Library Budget for Fiscal Year 2023-2024
by Library Director Jeff Scott
Director Scott reviewed an overview and breakdown of the Library’s funding, explaining
that funds typically came from four areas: the Washoe County General Fund, the
Expansion Fund, the Friends of the Washoe County library, and Gift Funds. Most funding
was utilized for staff and benefits, services, and supplies. Director Scott also discussed
the Expansion Tax, which was due to sunset or end in 2024. He noted Expansion Tax
funds had been used to renovate some of the library branches.
6) Reports
a) Library Director Update, including hiring, Library Board of Trustees Appointment, and
future Library projects by Director Jeff Scott
Director Scott mentioned there had been a great turnout for Drag Queen Story Time,
with the Reno Gazette-Journal and other news media outlets covering the event; he
noted he would be sharing some of the coverage during the next Library Board meeting
in July. Director Scott noted new Assistant Library Director Stacy McKenzie had been
hired and would be introduced at the July meeting. He also welcomed newly appointed
Trustee Al Rogers.
b) Incline Village Library Presentation by Branch Manager John Crockett
Incline Village Branch Manager John Crockett conducted a PowerPoint presentation, a

copy of which was included in the Board packet. He explained the branch focus was to
support the Library System’s strategic goals, serve the community, and maintain and
improve the unique Incline Village facility. The branch wa now open to the public on
Saturdays, and staff were working on a plan to maintain services during inclement
weather. The Incline Village branch was also participating in the Summer Reading
Challenge with a kickoff block party. Mr. Crockett said the lending book kiosk had been
a huge success, with tons of books being checked out; a new Zoom room was available
at the branch, and members from the Incline and Crystal Bay communities had utilized
the room for job fairs and interviews. He welcomed rehired Library Aide Phyllis Rogers
and new Library Assistant II, Louise Whewell. He congratulated long time staff member
Robin Barnett for 15 years of service, and Natalie Villegas for 5 years of service. He also
thanked the 4 volunteers who regularly served at the branch, with a combined 38 years
of experience.
c) Outreach Team Presentation by North Valleys Branch Manager Jonnica Bowen
North Valleys Branch Manager Jonnica reviewed a PowerPoint presentation, a copy

of which was provided in the Board packet, regarding recent Outreach Team activities,
such as Farm Day at the Rancho San Rafael Park staff helped to promote library
services and issuance of library cards. The Outreach Team also assisted with the
Incline Village job fair, and setup of the Sun Valley and Cold Springs book kiosks.
7) Staff Announcements
North Valleys Branch Manager Jonnica Bowen took a moment to thank her colleagues
publicly for their support in several recent events.
8) Board Comment
New Trustee Al Rogers introduced himself briefly, and thanked Library Director Scott and
the Board for the opportunity to serve as a Board member. (Note Al Rogers was present,
but term did not officially start until July)
Chair Amy Ghilieri welcomed Trustee Rogers and stated it would be nice to finally have a
full Board and able to meet quorums.
Vice Chair Frank Perez also welcomed Trustee Rogers to the Board and the members of
staff and the public in attendance. He discussed the need for public commenters to treat
each other with respect regardless of their differences in opinion. He wanted to know
whether security staff was present; Director Scott responded that there were not security
staff present, but the Incline Sheriff was aware of the meeting.
Vice Chair Perez indicated he would like to see a more detailed plan regarding the
Expansion Tax from Director Scott, particularly regarding the campaign efforts being
planned, as it was a very important ballot initiative.
9) Adjournment
Chair Ghilieri adjourned the meeting at 6:41 pm.

To: RC [unolabrat@gmail.com]
Subject: RE: Minutes for June 23, July 23 LBoT
Thank you for your patience, here are the attached minutes.
Jeff Scott
From: RC <unolabrat@gmail.com>
Subject: Minutes for June 23, July 23 LBoT
Hello Mr. Scott,
I am reqesting a paper copy of the minutes for both June 2023 and July 2023 that will be up for
LBoT vote this eveneing, be made available to me before the meeting tonight as per OML
Manual (attached) page 49 numerals 6 and 7. Also, I am reminding you that I have also
previously requested to be on the standing request list (electronic is perfectly acceptable) as per
OML Manual Item 6, NRS241.020(3)(c).
Thank you and I look forward to the meeting,

Best,
Reva Crump, M.S.
VIRTUAL MEETING
1) CALL TO ORDER
Present: Absent:
Lea Grace Trustee
Al Rogers Trustee
Vacant Trustee
County Staff:
3) PUBLIC COMMENT
System included:
and
5) OLD BUSINESS
None
6) NEW BUSINESS

break
Library.

rules.

June).
oppose that.

6) REPORTS
Board packet.
None
8) BOARD COMMENTS
virtual meeting.
engagement, ____________________________________...
9) ADJOURNMENT

4:00 P.M.
1) ROLL CALL

Lea Moser

2) Public Comment
Elias.
page be updated.
4) Old Business
None
5) New Business
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Year 2023-2024.
Public Comment:
Board Action:


Cycle for 2023-2024
proposed.
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Director Jeff Scott


Loan Policy
6) Reports
Trustee Al Rogers.

of experience.

8) Board Comment
9) Adjournment

To: Bruce Parks [bruce122@ymail.com]
Subject: RE: Minutes
Here are the attached minutes.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Subject: Minutes
Hello Mr. Scott,
Best regards,
Bruce Parks
VIRTUAL MEETING
1) CALL TO ORDER
Present: Absent:
Lea Grace Trustee
Al Rogers Trustee
Vacant Trustee
County Staff:
3) PUBLIC COMMENT
System included:
and
5) OLD BUSINESS
None
6) NEW BUSINESS

break
Library.

rules.

June).
oppose that.

6) REPORTS
Board packet.
None
8) BOARD COMMENTS
virtual meeting.
engagement, ____________________________________...
9) ADJOURNMENT

4:00 P.M.
1) ROLL CALL

Lea Moser

2) Public Comment
Elias.
page be updated.
4) Old Business
None
5) New Business
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Year 2023-2024.
Public Comment:
Board Action:


Cycle for 2023-2024
proposed.
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Director Jeff Scott


Loan Policy
6) Reports
Trustee Al Rogers.

of experience.

8) Board Comment
9) Adjournment

Subject: Minutes
Attachments: June 2023 LBOT Minutes Draft .docx; 20230719-minutes draft .docx
Jeff Scott
4:00 P.M.
1) ROLL CALL

Lea Moser

2) Public Comment
Elias.
page be updated.
4) Old Business
None
5) New Business
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Year 2023-2024.
Public Comment:
Board Action:


Cycle for 2023-2024
proposed.
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Director Jeff Scott


Loan Policy
6) Reports
Trustee Al Rogers.

of experience.

8) Board Comment
9) Adjournment

VIRTUAL MEETING
1) CALL TO ORDER
Present: Absent:
Lea Grace Trustee
Al Rogers Trustee
Vacant Trustee
County Staff:
3) PUBLIC COMMENT
System included:
and
5) OLD BUSINESS
None
6) NEW BUSINESS

break
Library.

rules.

June).
oppose that.

6) REPORTS
Board packet.
None
8) BOARD COMMENTS
virtual meeting.
engagement, ____________________________________...
9) ADJOURNMENT

To: moserglea@gmail.com
Subject: June/July LBOT Minutes
Attachments: June 2023 LBOT Minutes Draft .docx; 20230719-minutes draft .docx
Lea,
Attached are the minutes for today’s meeting.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
4:00 P.M.
1) ROLL CALL

Lea Moser

2) Public Comment
Elias.
page be updated.
4) Old Business
None
5) New Business
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Year 2023-2024.
Public Comment:
Board Action:


Cycle for 2023-2024
proposed.
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Director Jeff Scott


Loan Policy
6) Reports
Trustee Al Rogers.

of experience.

8) Board Comment
9) Adjournment

VIRTUAL MEETING
1) CALL TO ORDER
Present: Absent:
Lea Grace Trustee
Al Rogers Trustee
Vacant Trustee
County Staff:
3) PUBLIC COMMENT
System included:
and
5) OLD BUSINESS
None
6) NEW BUSINESS

break
Library.

rules.

June).
oppose that.

6) REPORTS
Board packet.
None
8) BOARD COMMENTS
virtual meeting.
engagement, ____________________________________...
9) ADJOURNMENT

To: Reinke, Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov]; Perez, Frank (Vice Chiar)
[FPerez@washoecounty.gov]; Burton, L.J. [LJBurton@washoecounty.gov]; Albert Rogers
[bascoboy1962@gmail.com]
CC: Kaplan, Herbert [HKaplan@da.washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
Subject: Draft Minutes for June LBOT Meeting
Attachments: June 2023 LBOT Minutes Draft .docx
Good afternoon,
I have attached the June CORRECTED Minutes. Kristin, please print these out for the public as well.
Sincerely,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
4:00 P.M.
1) ROLL CALL

Lea Moser

2) Public Comment
Elias.
page be updated.
4) Old Business
None
5) New Business
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Year 2023-2024.
Public Comment:
Board Action:


Cycle for 2023-2024
proposed.
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Public Comment:
Board Action:
Director Jeff Scott


Loan Policy
6) Reports
Trustee Al Rogers.

of experience.

8) Board Comment
9) Adjournment

To: Perez, Frank (Vice Chiar) [FPerez@washoecounty.gov]; Burton, L.J.
[LJBurton@washoecounty.gov]; Albert Rogers [bascoboy1962@gmail.com]
CC: Kaplan, Herbert [HKaplan@da.washoecounty.gov]; Burton, L.J.
[LJBurton@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Reinke,
Kristin [KReinke@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Draft Minutes for July LBOT Meeting
Attachments: 20230719-minutes draft .docx
Good afternoon,
Attached are the draft minutes for the July LBOT meeting. I will be sending the June corrected minutes
to you shortly.
Kristin, can you print these out and have them available for the public this afternoon?
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
VIRTUAL MEETING
1) CALL TO ORDER
Present: Absent:
Lea Grace Trustee
Al Rogers Trustee
Vacant Trustee
County Staff:
3) PUBLIC COMMENT
System included:
and
5) OLD BUSINESS
None
6) NEW BUSINESS

break
Library.

rules.

June).
oppose that.

6) REPORTS
Board packet.
None
8) BOARD COMMENTS
virtual meeting.
engagement, ____________________________________...
9) ADJOURNMENT

To: Burton, L.J. [LJBurton@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: FW: Minutes
Attachments: OML Manual 2019-03-26_OML_12TH_AGOMANUAL.pdf
Jeff Scott

Subject: Minutes
Hello Mr. Scott,
Best regards,
Bruce Parks
NEVADA
OPEN MEETING LAW
MANUAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL
AARON FORD
100 NORTH CARSON STREET

CARSON CITY, NEVADA 89701-4717
Telephone (775) 684-1100; Fax (775) 684-1108
Las Vegas: Telephone (702) 486-3420; Fax (702) 486-3768
Reno: Telephone (775) 688-1818; Fax (775) 688-1822
This manual is published online at ag.nv.gov
Twelfth Edition
January 2016 -
Updated
3/26/2019
FOREWORD
The Nevada Legislature enacted significant amendments to the Open Meeting Law
(OML) in 2013 and 2015. This newly revised 2016 Open Meeting Law Manual incorporates
those new amendments. Comments and suggestions are welcome regarding this revision or
future revisions.
The full Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 241—Meetings of State and Local
Agencies—can be found at: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-241.html.
We encourage the reader to visit the Attorney General’s web page at http://ag.nv.gov.
There, you will find links to Open Meeting Law Opinions beginning in 1993, this Manual, the
OML compliance checklist, and the OML complaint form.
Open Meeting Law Opinions are annotated in NRS Chapter 241 by the Legislative
Counsel Bureau. Other opinions are labeled “AG File No.” and also are published on our
webpage, which is searchable by the reader. Together, these opinions provide the reader with a
multitude of factual scenarios and are a useful guide to this office’s interpretation and application
of the OML.
-i-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Reference is made throughout the manual to Open Meeting Law Opinions (OMLO),
which are opinions rendered by the Office of the Attorney General as a guideline for enforcing
the Open Meeting Law and not as a written opinion requested pursuant to NRS 228.150. OMLO
Opinions can be found at: ag.nv.gov/open government. Additional references may be found
at Attorney General Opinions (Op. Nev. Att'y Gen.), which are opinions rendered pursuant to
NRS 228.150.
PART 1 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST……………………………………………………8
PART 2 WHAT IS A “PUBLIC BODY” THAT MUST CONDUCT ITS

MEETINGS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?........15
§ 2.01 General: discussion of statutory definition of public body………………………...15
§ 2.02 Blue ribbon commissions; Governor-appointed committees; executive agency

boards, committees …………………………………………………………………16
§ 2.03 Agency staff………………………………………………………………………...17
§ 2.04 Committees; subcommittees; advisory bodies.......................................................... 18
§ 2.05 Commissions or committees appointed by the Legislature ...................................... 20
§ 2.06 Members-elect of public bodies .............................................................................. 20
§ 2.07 Appointment of designee to public body .................................................................. 20
§ 2.08 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed to be public bodies............ 21
§ 2.09 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed not to be public bodies...... 21
§ 2.10 Private, nonprofit organizations…………………………………………………….22
§ 2.11 Quasi-judicial proceedings…………………………………………………………23
PART 3 WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE EXEMPT FROM THE

OPEN MEETING LAW?.......................................................................................24
§ 3.01 General……………………………………………………………………..……….24
§ 3.02 Statutory exemptions……………………………………………………………….25
-ii-
§ 3.03 Certain confidential investigative proceedings of the Gaming Control
Board and Commission………………………………………………………...…...28
§ 3.04 Quasi-judicial proceedings no longer exempt from OML........................................ 28
§ 3.05 Attorney-client conference exception ...................................................................... 28
§ 3.06 Student governments …………………………………………………………..…...29
§ 3.07 Pre-meeting discussion to remove or delay discussion of items from agenda ......... 29
PART 4 WHAT GATHERINGS MUST BE CONDUCTED IN COMPLIANCE

WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?................................................................. 30
§ 4.01 General; statutory definitions .............................................................................. 30
§ 4.02 Informal gatherings and discussions that constitute deliberation ............................. 31
§ 4.03 Social gatherings……………………………………………………………...…….33
§ 4.04 Seminars, conferences, conventions ......................................................................... 34
§ 4.05 Telephone conferences/video conferences ............................................................... 34
§ 4.06 Electronic polling……………………...................................................................... 35
§ 4.07 Mail polls……………………………… .................................................................. 36
§ 4.08 Serial communications, or “walking quorums” ........................................................ 36
§ 4.09 “Private briefings” among staff of public body and non-quorum of members......... 39
§ 4.10 Meetings held out-of-state or out-of-local jurisdiction............................................. 39
§ 4.11 Exception for conferring with counsel...................................................................... 39
§ 4.12 Meetings held with another public body................................................................... 40
§ 4.13 Appointment of public officer……………………………………………………...40
PART 5 WHAT ARE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE

OPEN MEETING LAW? (see Sample Forms 1 and 3) ………………………..42
§ 5.01 General……………………………………………………………………………...42
§ 5.02 Contents of notice ………………………………………………………………….42
-iii-
§ 5.03 Posting the notice………………………………………………………………….. 44
§ 5.04 Mailing the written notice; mailing list..................................................................... 45
§ 5.05 Calculating “three working days”............................................................................. 46
§ 5.06 Providing copies of agenda and supporting material upon request .......................... 46
§ 5.07 Fees for providing notice of copies of supporting material ...................................... 50
§ 5.08 Emergencies………………………………………………………………………...51
§ 5.09 Providing individual notice to persons whose character, alleged misconduct,

professional competence, physical or mental health are to be considered;
waivers of notice; exemption from OML for meetings held to consider
individual applications for employment (NRS 241.033)…………………………..53
§ 5.10 Meeting to consider administrative action against a person or acquisition

of real property by eminent domain (NRS 241.034………………………………. 55
PART 6 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARING AND

FOLLOWING THE AGENDA? (See Sample Form 1)………………………..58
§ 6.01 General……………………………………………………………………………..58
§ 6.02 Agenda must be clear and complete (See Sample Form 1) ……………………….59
§ 6.03 Stick to the agenda………………………………………………………………....64
§ 6.04 Matters brought up during public comment; meeting continued to another date….65
§ 6.05 Meeting that must be continued to a future date ………………………………….65
PART 7 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDUCTING AN

OPEN MEETING?................................................................................................ 67
§ 7.01 General……………………………………………………………………………..67
§ 7.02 Facilities……………………………………………………………………………67
§ 7.03 Accommodations for physically handicapped persons……………………………68
§ 7.04 Public comment: multiple periods of public comment……………………………68
§ 7.05 Reasonable time, place and manner restrictions apply to public meetings………..68
-iv-
§ 7.06 Excluding people who are disruptive ....................................................................... 71
§ 7.07 Excluding witnesses from testimony of other witnesses.......................................... 71
§ 7.08 Vote by secret ballot is forbidden; voting requirements for elected public
bodies; voting requirements for appointed public bodies (NRS 241.0355) ……… 71
§ 7.09 Audio and/or video recordings of public meetings by members of the public….....73
§ 7.10 Telephone conferences…………...……………………………………………...…73
PART 8 WHEN ARE CLOSED MEETINGS AUTHORIZED AND HOW

ARE THEY TO BE HANDLED?........................................................................ 74
§ 8.01 General………………………………………………………………………..……74
§ 8.02 When closed sessions may be held………………………………………………...74
§ 8.03 When closed sessions may not be held…………………………………………….75
§ 8.04 Closed meeting; definition of “character” and “competence”; employment

interviews and performance evaluations; notice requirements……………...……..76
§ 8.05 The appointment to “public office” closed meeting prohibition…………………...78
§ 8.06 How to handle closed sessions to consider character, allegations of misconduct,

professional competence, or physical and mental health of a person……………...79
PART 9 WHAT RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AND MADE AVAILABLE

TO THE PUBLIC? ……………………………………………………………...81
§ 9.01 General…………………………………………………………………………......81
§ 9.02 Requirement for and content of written minutes………………………………….81
§ 9.03 Retention and disclosure of minutes………………………………………………82
§ 9.04 Making and retaining audiotapes or video recordings of meetings……………….82
§ 9.05 Fees for inspecting or copying minutes and tapes………………………………...83
-v-
PART 10 WHAT HAPPENS IF A VIOLATION OCCURS?..........................................84
§ 10.01 General…………………………………………………………………………. ..84
§ 10.02 Correcting a violation……………………………………………………..............84
§ 10.03 Actions taken in violation are void.........................................................................86
§ 10.04 Reconsidering actions that are void………………………………. .…………….87
§ 10.05 Any person denied a right under the law may bring a civil suit…….……………88
§ 10.06 The Office of the Attorney General may bring a civil suit……………………….88
§ 10.07 Time limits for filing lawsuit; policy for enforcement of complaints……………89
§ 10.08 Jurisdiction and venue for suits ……………………………………………….....90
§ 10.09 Standards for injunctions and enforcing injunctions……………………………..90
§ 10.10 Criminal sanctions…..……………………………………………………………91
§ 10.11 Public officers may be removed from office……………………………………..91
§ 10.12 Filing a complaint; procedure; Attorney General subpoena power;

public records……………………………………………………………………..91
§ 10.13 Public notice of Attorney General Opinion finding violation by public body…...92
§ 10.14 Monetary penalty for willful violation: one-year limitations period……………..93
PART 11 HOW IS THE OPEN MEETING LAW INTERPRETED

AND APPLIED?.................................................................................................. 95
§ 11.01 General……………………………………………………………………………95
§ 11.02 Legislative declaration and intent………………………………………………...95
§ 11.03 Standards of interpretation………………………………………………………. 95
§ 11.04 Use of standard of reasonableness……………………………………………… 95
§ 11.05 Attorney General Opinions……………………………………………………… 95
-vi-
PART 12 WHAT ELSE DO I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE
OPEN MEETING LAW?...................................................................................97
§ 12.01 General…………………………………………………………………………...97
§ 12.02 Relationship of Open Meeting Law to Administrative Procedure Act,

NRS Chapter 233B…………………………………………………………........98
§ 12.03 Relationship of Open Meeting Law to First Amendment

to the Constitution of the United States………………………………………....98
§ 12.04 Relationship of Open Meeting Law and defamation……................................... 98
SAMPLE FORM 1: NOTICE AND AGENDA OF PUBLIC MEETING

(WITH COMMENTS)………………………………………….100
SAMPLE FORM 2: MINUTES……………………………………………………….104
SAMPLE FORM 3: NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER CHARACTER,

MISCONDUCT, COMPETENCE OR HEALTH OF A
PERSON, NRS 241.033 ..………………………………………108
PROOF OF SERVICE……………………………………………………………………..110
INDEX………………………………………………………………………….……………111
-vii-
Part 1 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
This is a checklist to reference when applying the Open Meeting Law. References
in brackets are to the NRS and to sections of this manual.
_______ Does the Open Meeting Law apply?
_______ Is the entity a public body? [NRS 241.015(4), §§ 3.01-3.10]
_______ Is there an exemption or exception from the Open Meeting Law? [§§ 4.01-4.07]
_______ Is a meeting going to occur? [NRS 241.015(3), §§ 5.01-5.13]
_______ Will a quorum of the members of the public body be present? [§ 5.01]
_______ Will a quorum deliberate toward a decision or take action on any matter over
which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power?
[§ 5.01]
Agenda (see Sample Form 1)
_______ Has a clear and complete agenda of all topics to be considered been prepared?
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1) §§ 6.02, 7.02]
_______ Does the agenda list all topics scheduled to be considered during the meeting?
[§§ 6.02, 7.02]
_______ Have all the topics been described clearly in the agenda in order to give the public
adequate notice? [§§ 6.02, 7.02]
_______ Does the agenda include designated periods for public comment?
Does the agenda state that action may not be taken on the matters discussed
during this period until specifically included on an agenda as an action item?
[§§ 6.02, 7.04, 8.04]
_______ Does the notice inform the public that (1) items may be taken out of the order
listed on the agenda, and (2) agenda items may be combined for consideration,
and (3) items may be delayed or removed at any time? [§ 6.02]
_______ Does the agenda (1) describe the items on which action may be taken and
(2) clearly denote that these items are for possible action? [§§ 6.02, 7.01, 7.02]
-8-
_______ Has each closed session been denoted, including the name of the person being
considered in the closed session, and if action is to be taken in an open session
after the closed session, was it indicated on the agenda? [§§ 7.02, 9.06, NRS
241.020(2)(d)(4)]
Notice, posting, and mailing (see Sample Form 1)
_______ Has written notice of the meeting been prepared? [NRS 241.020(2), § 6.01]
_____ Does the notice include:
_____ The time, place, and location of the meeting? [§ 6.02]
_____ An agenda of topics for discussion or possible action; for further

information,,see Sample Form 1, this manual, or Index under
“Agenda.”
_____ A list of places where the notice was posted? [§ 6.03]
_____ A statement regarding assistance and accommodations for

physically handicapped people? [§ 6.02]
_______ Was the written notice [NRS 241.020(3)(a), § 6.03]:
_____ Posted at the principal office of the public body (or if there is no principal
office, at the building in which the meeting is to be held)? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted at not less than three other separate, prominent places within the
jurisdiction of the public body? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted on the official website of the State, https://notice.nv.gov? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted on the public body’s website if the public body maintains a
website? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted no later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting?
(Do not count day of meeting) [§§ 6.03, 6.05]
_____ In compliance with minimum public notice, is there written documentation

for the public body’s record of meeting? [NRS 241.020(4)]
_______ Was the written notice mailed at no charge to those who requested a copy?
[§§ 6.04, 6.07]
_______ Was it mailed in the same manner in which the notice is required to be mailed to a
member of the body? [§ 6.04]
-9-
_______ Was it delivered to the postal service used by the body no later than 9 a.m. of the
third working day before the meeting? [§ 6.04]
_______ Have persons who requested notices of the meeting been informed with the first
notice sent to them that their request lapses after six months?
[NRS 241.020(3)(c), § 6.04]
_______ If a person’s character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical

or mental health is going to be considered at the meeting, has that person been
given written notice of the time and place of the meeting?
[NRS 241.033(1), § 6.09]
_______ Does the notice contain a list of the general topics concerning the person, inform
the person that he/she may attend the closed session, bring a representative,
present evidence, provide testimony, and present witnesses? [NRS §241.033(4)]
_______ Does the notice inform the person that the public body may take administrative
action against the person? If so, then the requirements of NRS 241.034
have been met. [NRS §241.033(2)(b)]
_______ Was the notice personally delivered to the person at least five working days
before the meeting or sent by certified mail to the last known address of that
person at least 21working days before the meeting? (Nevada Athletic
Commission is exempt from these timing requirements.) [NRS 241.033(1)-(2)]
_______ Did the public body receive proof of service of the notice before holding the
meeting? (Nevada Athletic Commission not exempt from this requirement.)
[NRS 241.033(1) (a) and (b)]
Agenda support material made available to public
_______ Has at least one copy of an agenda, a proposed ordinance or regulation that will
be discussed at the meeting, and any other supporting material (except
confidential material as detailed in the statute) been provided at no charge to each
person who so requests copies? [NRS 241.020(6) and (7) §§ 6.06, 6.07]
_______ Has the governing body of a city or county whose population is greater than
45,000 posted its supporting materials to its website no later than the time the
material is provided to members of the governing body? Material provided to the
governing body during its meeting must be uploaded to its website within 24
hours after conclusion of the meeting. [NRS 241.020(8)]
_______ Does each agenda list the contact information for the person(s) from whom a
requester may obtain a copy of meeting supporting materials or the place where
a copy may be obtained?
-10-
Emergency Meeting
_______ Is this an emergency meeting? [NRS 241.020(2) and (10), § 6.08]
_______ Were the circumstances giving rise to the meeting unforeseen?
_______ Is immediate action required?
_______ Has the entity documented the emergency?
_______ Has an agenda been prepared limiting the meeting to the emergency item?
_______ Has an attempt been made to give public notice?
_______ While the notice and agenda requirements may be relaxed in an emergency, are
other provisions of the Open Meeting Law complied with (e.g., meeting open and
public, minutes kept, etc.)?
Closed Session (see Sample Form 3)
_______ Is a closed session specifically authorized by statute? [NRS 241.020(1);

NRS 241.030(1), §§ 9.01-9.07]
_______ Have all the requirements of that statute been met?
If a closed session is being conducted to consider character, misconduct,

competence, or physical or mental health of a person or to consider an appeal by a
person of the results of an examination, see NRS 241.033:
_____ Is the subject person an elected member of a public body? If so, a closed
session is not authorized. [NRS 241.031, § 9.04]
_____ Is the closed session to consider the character, alleged misconduct, or

professional competence of an appointed public officer or a chief
executive or administrative officer in a comparable position of a public
body (i.e., president of a university, state college or community college
within NSHE system, county school superintendent, or city or county
manager)? If so, a closed meeting is prohibited. [NRS 241.031(1)(b)]
_____ Is the closed session to discuss the appointment of any person to public
office or as a member of a public body? If so, a closed session is not
authorized. [NRS 241.030(4)(d), § 9.03]
_____ Has the subject been notified as provided above? Has proof of service
been returned to the public body? NRS 241.033(1), [§ 6.09]
-11-
_____ If a recording was made of the open session, was a recording also made of
the closed session? [NRS 241.035(4), § 9.06]
_____ Was the subject person given a copy of the recording of the closed session
if requested? [NRS 241.035(6), NRS 241.033(6), § 9.06]
_____ Have minutes been kept of the closed session? [NRS 241.035(2) § 10.02]
_____ Have minutes and recordings of the closed session been retained
and disposed of in accordance with NRS 241.035(2)? [§ 10.03]
_____ Was a motion made to go into closed session which specifies the nature of
the business to be considered and the statutory authority pursuant to which
the public body is authorized to close the meeting?
[NRS 241.030(3), § 9.06]
_____ Was the discussion limited to specific matters specified in the motion?
[§ 9.06]
_____ Did the public body go back into open session to take action on the subject
discussed? (This must be done unless otherwise provided in a specific
statute) [§ 9.06]
_____ Has the subject requested the meeting be open? If so, the public body
must open the meeting unless another person appearing before the public
body requests that the meeting remains closed.
[NRS 241.030(2)(a) and (b)]
Meeting open to public; accommodations
_______ Have all persons been permitted to attend? [NRS 241.020, § 8.01]
_______ Was exclusion of witnesses at hearings during the testimony of other witnesses
handled properly? [NRS 241.030(4)(b), 241.033(5), § 8.07]
_______ Was exclusion of persons who willfully disrupted a meeting to the extent that its
orderly conduct is made impractical handled properly?
[NRS 241.030(4)(a), § 8.06]
_______ Have members of the public been given an opportunity to speak during the public
comment period? [NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3), § 8.04]
_______ Are facilities adequate and open? [§ 8.02]
_______ Have reasonable efforts been made to assist and accommodate physically
handicapped persons desiring to attend? [NRS 241.020(1), § 8.03]
-12-
_______ If the meeting is by telephone or video conference, can the public hear each
_______ Have members of the general public been allowed to record public meetings on
audiotape or other means of sound reproduction as long as it in no way interferes
with the conduct of the meeting? [NRS 241.035(3), § 8.08]
Stick to agenda; emergency agenda items
_______ Have actual discussions and actions at the meeting been limited to only those
items on the agenda? [§ 7.03]
_______ If an item has been added to the agenda as an emergency item:

[NRS 241.020(2) and (10), § 6.08]
_____ Was it due to an unforeseen circumstance?
_____ Was immediate action required?
_____ Has the emergency been documented in the minutes?
_____ Did the body refrain from taking action on discussion items or public
comment items? [NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3), § 7.04]
Recordings
_______ The public body shall record its public meeting [NRS 241.035(4), § 10.04]:
_____ Have recordings been made of the closed session as well as open sessions?
[NRS 241.035(4), § 9.06]
_____ Recordings of public meetings must be made available to the public within
30 workings days after adjournment of the meeting. [NRS 241.035(2)]
_____ Recordings must be retained for at least one year after the adjournment
of the meeting. [NRS 241.035(4)(a)]
_____ Recordings of public meetings must be treated as public records in

accordance with public records statutes. [NRS 241.035(4)(b)]
_____ Have recordings of closed sessions been made available to the subjects
of those sessions, if requested? [NRS 241.033(6)]
-13-
Minutes (see Sample Form 2)
_______ Have minutes or an audio recording been made available for both open and closed
sessions? [NRS 241.035(2), (4) and (6), § 10.02]
_______ Do they include at a minimum the material required by NRS 241.035(1)?

[§ 10.02]
_______ Are minutes of open sessions kept as public records under the public record
statutes and NRS 241.035(2)?
_______ Have minutes of open sessions been made available for inspection by the public
within 30 working days after the adjournment of the meeting, retained for at least
five years, and otherwise treated as provided in NRS 241.035(2)?
_______ Have minutes of closed sessions been made available to the subjects of those
sessions if requested? [NRS 241.033(6)]
Non-compliance
_______ Have any areas of noncompliance been corrected?

[§§ 11.01, 11.02, 11.03, 11.04]
_______ If litigation is brought to void an action or seek injunctive or declaratory relief,

was it brought within the time periods in NRS 241.037(3)? [§ 11.07]
-14-
Part 2 WHAT IS A “PUBLIC BODY” THAT MUST CONDUCT ITS MEETINGS
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 2.01 General: discussion of statutory definition of public body.
The definition of “public body” was clarified and its scope expanded by the 2011
Legislature. A public body’s manner of creation rather than its function is the new touchstone of
the definition.
NRS 241.015(4)(b) ensures that the actions and deliberations of certain multimember
groups appointed by the Governor or a public officer and/or a public entity under his direction
and control are subject to the OML, as long as at least two members of the appointed body are
not employees of the Executive Department of State Government. The Legislature deemed this
expansion of the scope of the OML appropriate given the growing role such groups play in the
formulation of public policy.
NRS 241.015(4)(a) requires a public body to be connected to state or local government in

order to be subject to the OML. Set out below is the definition of “public body.”
NRS 241.015(4) defines a public body as:
4. Except as otherwise provided NRS 241.016, “public body”

means:
(a) Any administrative, advisory, executive or legislative body
of the state or a local government which expends or disburses or is
supported in whole or in part by tax revenue or which advises or
makes recommendations to any entity which expends or disburses
or is supported in whole or in part by tax revenue, including, but
not limited to, any board, commission, committee, subcommittee
or other subsidiary thereof and includes an educational foundation
as defined in subsection 3 of NRS 388.750 and a university
foundation as defined in subsection 3 of NRS 396.405, if the
administrative, advisory, executive, or legislative body is created
by:
(1) The Constitution of this State;
(2) Any statute of this State;
(3) A city charter and any city ordinance which has been
filed or recorded as required by the applicable law;
(4) The Nevada Administrative Code;
(5) A resolution or other formal designation by such a body
created by a statute of this State or an ordinance of a local
government;
(6) An executive order issued by the Governor; or
(7) A resolution or an action by the governing body
political subdivision of this State;
-15-
(b) Any board, commission or committee consisting of at
least two persons appointed by:
(1) The Governor or a public officer who is under the
direction of the Governor, if the board, commission or committee
has at least two members who are not employees of the Executive
Department of the State Government;
(2) An entity in the Executive Department of the State
government consisting of members appointed by the Governor, if
the board, commission or committee otherwise meets the definition
of a public body pursuant to this subsection; or
(3) A public officer who is under the direction of an agency
or other entity in the Executive Department of the State
Government consisting of members appointed by the Governor, if
the board, commission or committee has at least two members who
are not employed by the public officer or entity; and
(c) A limited-purpose association that is created for a rural
agricultural residential common-interest community as defined in
subsection 6 of NRS 116.1201.
5. “Quorum” means a simple majority of the membership of a public body or
another proportion established bylaw.
The definition of “public body” is not a drastic change; rather it codifies prior Attorney
General Opinions, so that the definition of public body is dependent explicitly on its manner of
creation rather than its function. It always has been true that a public body must be collegial, that
is, it must consist of more than two persons. NRS 241.015(4) requires at least two persons to
comprise a public body. The Open Meeting Law concerns itself with meetings, gatherings,
decisions, and actions obtained through the collective consensus of a quorum of the public body
membership. See also Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 64 P.3d 1070 (2003)
(collective process of decision making must be accomplished in public). The Court emphasized
that public bodies may only act collectively. Similarly, in Del Papa v. Board of Regents¸114
Nev. 388, 400, 956 P.2d 770, 778–779 (1988) the Court said: “the constraints of the Open
Meeting Law apply only where a quorum of a public body, in its official capacity as a body,
deliberates toward a decision or makes a decision.”
In a letter opinion, the Office of the Attorney General opined that when determining if a
body is supported by tax revenues, the term “tax revenues” should be construed in its broadest
possible sense to include not only those items traditionally thought of as taxes but also the
license fees paid to various professional licensing boards pursuant to state law. See Attorney
General letter opinion addressed to Mr. Arne R. Purhonen, Nevada State Board of Architecture,
dated September 1, 1977.
§ 2.02 Blue ribbon commissions; Governor appointed committees; executive agency

boards, committees
Following the principle that a “public body” must be a multi-member entity, the Office
of the Attorney General opined that the Open Meeting Law does not apply to the Governor when
-16-
he/she is acting in his official executive capacity because the Governor is not a multi-member
body. See Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 241 (August 24, 1961).
As explained in § 3.01 above, any commission, committee, or board appointed by the

Governor with at least two members who are not employees of the State Executive Department
are now defined as a public body and subject to the Open Meeting Law. But all other bodies,
regardless of composition, which are appointed by executive heads of local governments or
agencies including, but not limited to, mayors and city and county managers, continue to be
exempt from the Open Meeting Law.
An executive officer of a board or commission who carries out the directives, orders, and
policies of a board or commission in day-to-day administration of an agency of government is
not considered the alter ego of the board or commission so as to require him to comply with the
Open Meeting Law. Bennett v. Warden, 333 So. 2d 97 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976) (meetings
between college president and his advisors or staff personnel are not covered).
Along this line, the Office of the Attorney General held that staff meetings to advise a
city manager who, in turn, arrives at his own decision and recommendation on an insurance
claim were not within the ambit of the Open Meeting Law. See Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 79-5
(February 23, 1979).
OMLO 2010-02 (April 7, 2010) (“committee, subcommittee or subsidiary thereof,” is not

defined in statute, but the OML Manual interprets the statute to mean that to the extent a group is
appointed by a public body and is given the task of making decisions for or recommendations to
the public body, the group would be governed by the OML). For further treatment of this issue,
see § 3.04 NEVADA OPEN MEETING LAW MANUAL (11th ed. 2011); OMLO 2002-017 (April 18,
2002) and OMLO 2002-27 (June 11, 2002). See also OMLO 2007-03 (July 17, 2007) (Walker
Basin Project Stakeholder’s Group found not to be public body: it was created by UNR Vice-
Chancellor’s steering committee, it was not advisory to any other body, and it was not created by
statute). See also OMLO 2007-04 (September 10, 2007) (OML does not apply to Douglas Selby,
Las Vegas City Manager, when acting in his official capacity, he appointed a citizens advisory
body).
The Open Meeting Law applies only to public bodies; the Fernley City Council is a
public body, but the citizens’ recruitment committee formed by the Mayor was not a public
body. Council played no role in the initial interviews and screening of applications for
appointment to City Manager position. Council did not deny a request for access to the initial
candidate’s resumes. Once initial screening was accomplished by the Mayor and his citizen’s
recruitment committee, and names were forwarded to the Council, then the OML applied. The
Council complied with the OML; the finalists’ applications and resumes were made public
before the meeting. AG File No. 09-026 (June 14, 2009)
§ 2.03 Agency staff
The Open Meeting Law usually does not apply to the typical internal agency staff
meetings where staff members make individual reports and recommendations to a superior,
-17-
where the technical requirements of a quorum do not apply, and where decisions are not reached
by a vote or consensus. See OMLO 2004-02 (January 20, 2004) for a further discussion and
analysis on this topic.
However, when a public body delegates de facto authority to a staff committee to act on
its behalf in the formulation, preparation, and promulgation of plans or policies, the staff
committee stands in the shoes of the public body and the Open Meeting Law may apply to the
staff meetings. See News-Press Publishing Co., Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So.2d 546 (Fla. Dist. Ct.
App. 1982) (When the governing authority of a hospital district delegated responsibility of
preparation of a proposed budget to an internal budget committee, the open meeting law applied
to the committee, even though it consisted of staff personnel.).
Following the above principles, the Office of the Attorney General opined that the Open
Meeting Law did not apply to internal staff meetings of an executive agency or interagency staff
meetings except where a public body delegates policy formulation or planning functions to a
staff committee and these policies or plans are the subject of foreseeable action by the public
body. See Letter Opinion to Mr. William A. Molini dated February 11, 1985.
§ 2.04 Committees; subcommittees; advisory bodies
NRS 241.015(4) specifically includes committees, subcommittees, or subsidiaries thereof

within the definition of a “public body.” A committee or subcommittee is covered by the law
whenever a quorum of the committee or subcommittee gathers to deliberate or make a decision
including taking action to make a recommendation to the parent body. NRS 241.015; Lewiston
Daily Sun, Inc. v. City of Auburn, 544 A.2d 335 (Me. 1988); Arkansas Gazette Co. v. Pickens,
522 S.W.2d 350 (Ar. 1975).
Legislative committees are exempt from the OML. In 1994, the Nevada Constitution was
amended to exempt legislative committees from the OML. Nevada Constitution article 4, § 15.
The Open Meeting Law does not define “committee, subcommittee or subsidiary
thereof,” so counsel for the public body should be consulted for a determination of whether
the Open Meeting Law extends to a particular group of persons. Review
of §§ 3.01–3.02 above, is recommended. Following the principles of the cases cited above and in
§ 3.03, to the extent that a group is appointed by a public body and is given the task of making
decisions for or recommendations to the public body, the group would be governed by the Open
Meeting Law. See OMLO 2002-017 (April 18, 2002) and OMLO 2002-27 (June 11, 2002). But
see AG File No. 07-030 (September 10, 2007) (OML does not apply to the appointment of a
citizen advisory panel to advise Las Vegas City Manager when acting in his official capacity (see
infra at § 3.03).
If a subcommittee recommendation to a parent body is more than mere fact-finding

because the subcommittee has to choose or accept options, or decide to accept certain facts while
rejecting others, or if it has to make any type of choice in order to create a recommendation, then
it has participated in the decision-making process and is subject to the OML. Negotiations with
unions, private contractors, and others conducted by a subcommittee of a public body, which
-18-
result in a recommendation to the parent body, are subject to the OML, unless specifically
exempted by statute.
Failure to notice on its agenda the break-up of an advisory body into study groups, and
failure to provide the study groups with recorders or designate someone to keep minutes of the
meeting was a violation of NRS 241.015(4)(a). The facilitator’s strategy for dividing the
committee into study groups coupled with that group’s assignment should have been noticed on
the agenda and real minutes should have been kept along with a tape recording. AG File No. 07-
027 (August 15, 2007).
NRS 241.015(4) specifically includes within the definition of public body an “advisory
body of the state or a local government which expends or disburses or is supported in whole or in
part by tax revenue or which advises or makes recommendations to any entity which expends or
disburses or is supported in whole or in part by tax revenue. . . .”
For additional guidance, see the following: § 3.07, infra; OMLO 98-03 (July 7, 1998),
where the Office of the Attorney General opined that a subcommittee informally appointed by
the president of a school board was a public body as defined in NRS 241.015(4) where, even
though the subcommittee was not formally appointed, its members shared equal voting power,
formed a consensus to speak to the school board with one voice, and the school board knew of its
existence and treated it as a board subcommittee; and OMLO 98-04 (July 7, 1998) where the
Office of the Attorney General opined that two school board members, while self-appointed and
initially acting as individuals, became a public body as defined in NRS 241.015(4) when the
school board began recognizing them as a subcommittee and encouraging them to meet with
staff to formulate a school safety proposal to be presented to the board, after which they met as a
collegial body with staff to form a proposal which was formally presented to the board in the
name of the “School Safety Subcommittee.” The Office of the Attorney General opined that
formality in appointment is not the sole dispositive factor in determining what constitutes a
public body under the Open Meeting Law, and informality in appointment should not be an
escape from it; to hold otherwise would encourage circumvention of the Open Meeting Law
through the use of unofficial committees.
An elected Public Body, subject to NRS 241.0355, which statute forbids action by the
body unless a majority of all the members of the elected body vote affirmatively for the action,
asserted that NRS 241.0355 does not apply to its committees because its bylaws do not require
any committee to be composed of elected officials only. Bylaws do not rise to the level of statute
and bylaws do not have the force and effect of law. Standing and Special committees of this
public body were elected public bodies for purposes of the OML. AG File No. 09-017 (May 29,
2009); see also OMLO 2001-57 and AGO 2001-25 for further discussion of the two-tiered
voting requirement found in NRS 241.0355.
The Legislature intended that “committee, subcommittee, or any subsidiary there-

of” be applied to any gathering that makes a decision or recommendation to a parent body. The
label given to the sub-group is immaterial and will not prevent the application of the OML to
groups with other labels besides “committee” or “sub-committee.” Even in the absence of a
formal appointment process (see NRS 241.015(4)(a)(7)), the Open Meeting Law applies to a
-19-
staff committee with de facto authority from the parent public body to act on its behalf. The staff
committee stands in the shoes of the public body. Legislative intent and explicit language mean
the OML applies whenever a quorum of committee, subcommittee, or any subsidiary
thereof, meets to deliberate or take action. AG File No. 08-014 (July 2, 2008).
§ 2.05 Commissions or committees appointed by the Legislature
NRS 241.016(2)(a) exempts the Legislature from the requirements of the OML. Since the
Legislature is not a public body, none of its various committees or subcommittees had been
considered to be subject to the OML.
However, the Nevada Constitution was amended in 1994 after a vote by the people to
ensure that meetings of all legislative committees must be open to the public, except meetings
held to consider the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or
mental health of a person. NEV. CONST. ART. 4, §15.
§ 2.06 Members-elect of public bodies
Although the literal language of the Open Meeting Law appears to limit its application to
actual members of a public body, the Office of the Attorney General believes the better view is
set forth in Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973), where the court held
that members-elect of boards and commissions are within the scope of an open meeting law.
Otherwise, members-elect could gather with impunity behind closed doors and make decisions
on matters soon to come before them, in clear violation of the purpose, intent, and spirit of our
Open Meeting Law. Application of the provisions of the statute to members-elect of public
bodies is consistent with the liberal interpretation mandated for the Open Meeting Law. See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999) and AG File Nos. 01-003, 01-008 (April 12, 2001).
§ 2.07 Appointment of designee to public body
Under the Open Meeting Law, a member of a public body is prohibited from designating
a person to attend a meeting of the public body in the place of the member unless the designation
is expressly authorized by the legal authority pursuant to which the public body was created. See
NRS 241.025.
Designation may occur only if the public body’s creating authority specifically allows for
designation. If there is no express authority authorizing a designee, then one cannot be
appointed. However, if the legal authority creating the public body expressly authorizes a
designee, then the process of designation of a person may occur either in a written document or
on the record at a meeting of the public body.
Once a person is designated to attend a meeting in place of the member, that person is:
(1) deemed to be a member of the body for the purpose of determining a quorum at the meeting;
and (2) may exercise the same powers as the regular member of the body at that meeting.
-20-
There is nothing in NRS 241.025 which forbids designation of a person for multiple
meetings as long as the process is followed and the term of the designation explicitly is set forth
so there can be no confusion about the designee’s term.
§ 2.08 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed to be public bodies
If a group or body was a public body under interpretation of the definition of “public
body” prior to the 2011 legislative session, it only had to be connected to state or local
government and it must expend or disburse tax. The 2011 Legislature clarified the scope of the
definition of public body so that our prior interpretation of the definition still is true if the body
was created by statute, constitution, ordinance, the NAC, resolution or other formal designation
by a parent public body, Governor’s executive order, and resolution or action by the governing
body of a political subdivision of this State.
Nevada Interscholastic Activities Non-profit corporation authorized by

Association NRS 386.420
Nevada Board of Architecture Created by NRS 623.050: see

Attorney General Letter Opinion
dated September 1, 1977
Community Development OMLO 2001-17 (April 12, 2001)

Corporation and the Eureka
County Economic Development
Council
Storey County Cemetery Board See OMLO 2002-27 (June 11, 2002)
§ 2.09 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed not to be public bodies
The following entities specifically have been deemed not to be public bodies under
interpretation of “public body” prior to the 2011 legislative session. These bodies carefully
should review the definition of “public body” to ensure continuing compliance:
Committee to prepare arguments See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 2000-18
advocating and opposing approval (June 2, 2000).
of ballot for a city.
A private, not-for-profit electric See AG File No. 00-055

utility company. (March 12, 2001).
Non-profit community senior See OMLO 99-035 (April 3, 2000).

citizen’s center.
Economic Development See OMLO 99-05 (January 12, 1999).

Authority of Western Nevada
-21-
Faculty Senate at the Community See OMLO 2003-19 (April 21, 2003).
College of Southern Nevada
Clark County Civil Bench/Bar See AG File No. 10-011 (April 12, 2010).
Committee: Eighth Judicial District
Court.
Nevada Department of Corrections See OMLO 2003-21 (May 21, 2003) and
Psychological Review Panel OMLO 2004-15 (May 5, 2004).
Nevada Discovery Museum See OMLO 2008-01 (January 30, 2008).
Head Start of Northeastern Nevada See OMLO 2004-20 (May 18, 2004).
Nevada State Board of Parole See 2011: NRS 241.030(4) (not a public
Commissioners body when acting to grant, deny, con-
tinue, or revoke parole of a prisoner).
Elko County Juvenile Probation See OMLO 2004-25 (June 29, 2004).
Committee
Nevada Humane Society (a non- See AG File No. 10-051

profit corporation not created by (January 4, 2011).
ordinance or statute).
Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs See AG File No. 09-038

Association: Domestic non-profit (September 23, 2009).
corporation. Its creation has no
statutory connection to state or local
government.
§ 2.10 Private, nonprofit organizations
Where a government body or agency itself establishes a civic organization, even though it
is composed of private citizens, it may well constitute a “public body” under the law. See OMLO
2001-17, citing Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So.2d 473 (Fla. 1974). In Nevada, this would be
true if the civic organization is intended to perform any administrative, advisory, executive, or
legislative function of state or local government and it expends or disburses or is supported in
whole or in part by tax revenue, or if it is intended to advise or make recommendations to any
other Nevada governmental entity which expends or disburses or is supported in whole or in part
by tax revenue. See, e.g., Seghers v. Community Advancement, Inc., 357 So. 2d 626 (La. Ct. App.
1978); Raton Public Service Co. v. Hobbes, 417 P.2d 32 (N.M. 1966).
The mere receipt of a grant of public money does not by itself transform a private,
nonprofit civic organization into a “public body” for purposes of the Open Meeting Law, nor
-22-
does the membership of a few government officials on the organization's board of directors, per
se, make the organization a “public body.” See OMLO 2004-03 (February 10, 2004) and OMLO
2004-20 (May 18, 2004). A private, non-profit corporation is a public body if it is formed by a
public body; acts in an administrative, advisory, and executive capacity in performing local
governmental functions; and is supported in part by tax revenue from the public body. See
OMLO 2001-17 (April 12, 2001); but see AG File No. 10-051 (January 4, 2011) (non-profit
corporation did not act in administrative, advisory, or executive capacity nor was it supported in
part by tax revenue).
§ 2.11 Quasi-judicial proceedings
The 2011 Legislature subjected all public body meetings of a quasi-judicial nature to the
OML. See NRS 241.016(1). Only meetings of the Parole Board of Commissioners are exempt,
but only when acting to grant, deny, continue, or revoke parole of a prisoner, or when modifying
the terms of the parole of a prisoner. See NRS 241.016(2)(c).
“Quasi-judicial proceedings are those proceedings having a judicial character that

are performed by administrative agencies.” Stockmeier v Nevada Dep’t of Corr. Psychological
Review Panel, 122 Nev. 385, 390, 135 P.3d 200, 224-25 (2006), abrogated by, Buzz Stew, LLC v.
City of North Las Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 228 n.6, 181 P.3d 670, 672 n.6 (2008). The Court in
Stockmeier stated that an administrative body acts in a quasi-judicial manner when it refers to a
proceeding as a trial, takes evidence, weighs evidence, and makes findings of fact and
conclusions of law from which a party may appeal an adverse decision to a higher authority. Id.
at 391-92, 135 P.3d 224-25. The Stockmeier Court stated that “‘the taking of evidence only upon
oath or affirmation, the calling and examining of witnesses on any relevant matter, impeachment
of any witness, and the opportunity to rebut evidence presented against the employee’ was
‘consistent with quasi-judicial administrative proceedings.’’’ Id. at 390, 135 P.3d at 223 (citing
Knox v. Dick, 99 Nev. 514, 518, 665 P.2d 267, 270 (1983)).
-23-
Part 3 WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE EXEMPT FROM THE
OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 3.01 General
The opening clause in NRS 241.020(1) provides that the Open Meeting Law applies
“except as otherwise provided by specific statute.” The word “specific” is an important one. The
Nevada Supreme Court is reluctant to imply exceptions to the rule of open meetings. See McKay
v. Board of County Comm’rs, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987). See also Op. Nev. Att'y Gen.
No. 150 (November 8, 1973).
Some public body proceedings or hearings are exempt from the Open Meeting Law by
specific statute, or it may have a limited statutory exception from the OML. A non-exclusive list
of exempt entities is set out below in § 4.02.
Exemption means that certain public business may be conducted without regard to any
requirement of the Open Meeting Law because the Legislature has weighed the benefits of
secrecy with the OML’s policy of openness, while other statutes merely allow certain activities
to be closed to the public. These statutes create exceptions to the OML, but a public body still
must record and keep minutes of closed meetings under statutes allowing for exceptions. The
distinction is important because openness still is the norm; openness strictly will be enforced, so
a public body must ensure that its statute either creates an exemption or an exception, because
the OML still applies to exceptions. Any action taken in violation of the Open Meeting Law is
void. But even though some statutes permit or require “deliberations” of certain matters to be
closed to the public, that statutory authority does not imply necessarily that action taken after
deliberations is exempt from the Open Meeting Law.
The distinction sometimes is obfuscated by statutory language that is not as specific as

contemplated by NRS 241.020(1). In those cases, interpretation of the statutes should be
employed using the standards discussed in Part 12 of this manual.
Because the OML still applies to all public body activities outside its statutory exception,
a government body advising the public body may not be estopped from performing its
governmental function even where the public body wrongly had interpreted the exception for
several years. The Nevada Supreme Court in Chanos v Nevada Tax Comm’n., 124 Nev. 232,
238, 181 P.3d 675, 679 (2008), after review of legislative intent, decided that the Nevada Tax
Commission’s statutory exception had not been applied correctly to taxpayer refund applications,
despite earlier advice from the Attorney General’s office that its hearing procedure was in
violation of the OML. The Attorney General brought suit against the Tax Commission. The
Supreme Court held that the statutory exception (NRS 360.247) allowed the Tax Commission to
close only the portion of its hearing at which it received confidential evidence, questioned
parties, and heard argument concerning confidential information. The Court found an OML
violation even after a lengthy period of misinterpretation resulting in closed meetings upon only
a request by an affected taxpayer. The Court also held that estoppel does not apply to estop the
Attorney General from enforcing an interpretation of the OML, which may have been
-24-
contradictory with past practices at the Nevada Tax Commission for two reasons: firstly, the Tax
Commission and Edison (defendants) failed to prove that they were ignorant of the true state of
the facts, and, secondly, a government body may not be estopped from performing its
governmental function.
Below is a discussion of some governmental body proceedings, meetings, and other

activities that are statutorily exempt from the Open Meeting Law, and some that are not.
§ 3.02 Statutory exemptions
The following public body proceedings, meetings, and hearings either are exempt from
the Open Meeting Law or the public body has an exception under the statutes cited. Because the
statutes may change after the printing of this manual, be sure to check the statutes and make sure
all the conditions or requirements of the statutes are followed.
Should a body choose to conduct any of these proceedings as part of an open meeting, the
Office of the Attorney General recommends the proceedings be included on the agenda as an
exempt proceeding, citing the provision that provides the exemption; but the exemption from the
open meeting requirements still applies to the proceeding whether or not the exemption was
placed on the agenda.
Judicial Proceedings See NRS 241.016(2)(b) and Goldberg v. Eighth

Judicial District Court, 93 Nev. 614, 572 P.2d 521
(1977). The Open Meeting Law does not apply to
proceedings before the Commission on Judicial
Selection and, except as otherwise provided in
NRS 1.4687, the Commission on Judicial
Discipline.
Legislature NRS 241.016(2)(a) excludes the Legislature

from the definition of public body. See Article 4 §
15 of the Nevada Constitution. See discussion in §
3.05.
State Ethics Commission Meetings or hearings to receive information

or evidence concerning the propriety of the
conduct of any public officer or employee
under NRS Chapter 281 are exempt under
NRS 281A.440(15).
Local Ethics NRS 281A.350 provides a specific statutory

exception to the Open Meeting Law that allows a
local ethics committee to render a confidential
opinion to an elected city councilperson. See Op.
Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 94-10 (May 24, 1994).
-25-
A local ethics board may not meet in closed
session to discuss the past conduct of a public
official due to lack of a statutory exception to the
open meeting requirements. See Op. Nev. Att'y
Gen. No. 94-21 (July 29, 1994).
Hearings by public school See NRS 392.467(3), Davis v. Churchill

boards to consider expulsion of County Sch. Bd., 616 F. Supp. 1310 (D. Nev.
pupils; hearings by charter 1985), remanded, 823 F.2d 554 (9th Cir.
school boards to consider 1987), and OMLO 99-04 (January 11, 1998);
expulsion of pupils see NRS 386.585(2).
Certain labor negotiations The following proceedings conducted under

proceedings NRS Chapter 288 are exempt: (1) any
negotiation or informal discussion between a
local government employer and an employee
organization or individual employees whether
conducted by the governing body or through a
representative or representatives; (2) any
meeting of a mediator with either party or both
parties to a negotiation; (3) any meeting or
investigation conducted by a fact finder; (4)
any meeting of the governing body of a local
government employer with its management
representative or representatives, and (5)
deliberations of the board toward a decision on
a complaint, appeal, or petition for declaratory
relief. See NRS 288.220, but see AG File No.
10-020 (June 22, 2010). Even exempt
meetings should be limited by statutory
authority. The legislative intent underlying an
exemption is to allow these meetings as long
as the meetings confine discussion to
negotiations between a local government
employer and an employee organization and/or
the defined exceptions in NRS 288.220.
Exempt meetings cannot be used to
circumvent the legislative intent expressed in
NRS 241. Exempt meetings under NRS
288.220 cannot be used as a shield to
improperly discuss persons or any other issue
not within the scope of the exemption.
Nevada Commission NRS 239C.140(2) states:

on Homeland Security The Commission may hold a closed
meeting to:
-26-
(a) Receive security briefings;
(b) Discuss procedures for responding to
acts of terrorism and related emergencies;
or
(c) Discuss deficiencies in security with
respect to public services, public facilities
and infrastructure,
if the Commission determines, upon a
majority vote of its members, that the
public disclosure of such matters would be
likely to compromise, jeopardize or
otherwise threaten the safety of the public.
Committee on A meeting or hearing held by the

Catastrophic Leave Committee to carry out the provisions of
this section (an appeal of the appointing
authority) and the Committee’s
deliberations on the information or evidence
received are not subject to any provision of
chapter 241 of NRS.
See NRS 284.3629(7).
Committees formed to Committees created pursuant to NRS

present arguments on 295.121
ballot questions. to present the arguments on a ballot
question
are exempt from the Open Meeting Law.
See
NRS 295.121(12) and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen.
2000-18 (June 2, 2000).
Board of Medical Any deliberations conducted or vote taken

Examiners by the Board or any investigative committee
of the Board regarding its ordering of a
physician, physician assistant or practitioner
of respiratory care to undergo a physical
or mental examination or any other
examination designated to assist the Board
or committee in determining the fitness of a
of respiratory care are not subject to the
requirements of NRS 241.020.
See NRS 630.336(1).
NRS 360.247 states:

Nevada Tax 1. Except as otherwise provided in this
-27-
Commission section, any appeal to the Nevada Tax
Commission which is taken by a taxpayer
concerning his/her liability for tax must be
heard during a session of the Commission
which is open to the public. Upon request
by the taxpayer, a hearing on such an appeal
must be closed to the public to receive
proprietary or confidential information.
Occupational NRS 622.320 states:

Licensing Boards 1. The provisions of NRS 241.020 do not
apply to proceedings relating to an
investigation conducted to determine
whether to proceed with disciplinary action
against a licensee, unless the licensee
requests that the proceedings be conducted
pursuant to those provisions.
2. If the regulatory body decides to proceed
with disciplinary action against the licensee,
all proceedings that are conducted after
that decision and are related to that
disciplinary action are subject to the
provisions of NRS 241.020.
§ 3.03 Certain confidential investigative proceedings of the Gaming Control Board and
Commission
NRS 463.110(2) holds that all meetings of the Gaming Control Board are open to the
public except for investigative hearings that may be conducted in private at the discretion of the
board or hearing examiner. NRS 463.110(4) holds that investigative hearings of the board or
hearing officer may be conducted without notice.
Also, the Office of the Attorney General opined in Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 150
(November 8, 1973) that certain investigative proceedings involving the Gaming Commission
receiving information that is confidential by law may be exempt from the Open Meeting Law up
to the point where the proceeding moves into deliberations or taking action. See Op. Nev. Att'y
Gen. No. 150 (November 8, 1973). Cf. Marston v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Co., Inc., 341 So.
2d 783 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976).
§ 3.04 Quasi-judicial proceedings no longer exempt from OML
The 2011 Legislature made all meetings of a public body that are quasi-judicial in nature
subject to the OML. NRS 241.016(1). The Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners is exempt,
but only when acting to grant, deny, continue, or revoke parole for a prisoner or to establish or
modify the terms of the parole of a prisoner. NRS 241.016(2)(c).
-28-
§ 3.05 Attorney-client conference exception
NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2) excepts from the definition of “Meeting,” for purposes of the Open
Meeting Law, a meeting of a quorum of a public body “[t]o receive information from the
attorney employed or retained by the public body regarding potential or existing litigation
involving a matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory
power and to deliberate toward a decision on the matter, or both.”
A meeting held for the purpose of having an attorney-client discussion of potential and
existing litigation pursuant to NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2) is not a meeting for purposes of the Open
Meeting Law and does not have to be open to the public. In fact, no agenda is required to be
posted and no notice is required to be provided to any member of the public. See OMLO 2002-21
(May 20, 2002). However, the Office of the Attorney General advises that if the public body
interrupts its meeting to confer with its legal counsel pursuant to NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2), the
public body should place this interruption of the open meeting on the agenda to avoid any
confusion. See § 5.11 of this manual for more information regarding meetings to confer with
counsel.
It is important to note that a public body may deliberate “collectively to examine, weigh
and reflect upon the reasons for or against the action,” which connotes collective discussion in an
attorney-client conference. See NRS 241.015(2); Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87,
97, 64 P.3d 1070, 1077 (2003), OMLO 2001-09 (March 28, 2001) and OMLO 2002-13 (March
22, 2003). However, NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2) does not permit a public body to take action in an
attorney-client conference.
§ 3.06 Student governments
NRS 241.017 requires the Board of Regents of the University of Nevada to establish
requirements equivalent to the Open Meeting Law for student governments in the Nevada
System of Higher Education and to provide for their enforcement. See OMLO 2004-09 (March
19, 2004) where the Office of the Attorney General opined that pursuant to
NRS 241.038, it did not have jurisdiction to investigate or enforce an alleged violation by the
UNLV Rebel Yell Advisory Board.
§ 3.07 Pre-meeting discussion to remove or delay discussion of items from agenda
The Nevada Supreme Court decided that pre-meeting discussions by a public body to
remove an item from its agenda did not violate the OML because a public body may remove or
refuse to consider an agenda item at any time, therefore, pre-meeting discussions regarding
whether to remove an agenda item do not implicate the OML. Schmidt v. Washoe County, 123
Nev. 128, 135, 159 P.3d 1099, 1104 (2007), abrogated by, Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of North Las
Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 228 n.6, 181 P.3d 670, 672 n.6 (2008).
See NRS 241.020(2)(c)(6)(III)(public body may remove an item from its agenda at any
time.)
-29-
Part 4 WHAT GATHERINGS MUST BE CONDUCTED IN COMPLIANCE
WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 4.01 General; statutory definitions
NRS 241.015(3(a)(1) and (2) define “meeting” as:
(1) The gathering of members of a public body at which a

quorum is present, whether in person or by means of electronic
communication, to deliberate toward a decision or to take action
on any matter over which the public body has supervision,
control, jurisdiction or advisory power.
(2) Any series of gatherings of members of a public body at
which:
(I) Less than a quorum, whether in person or by means of
electronic communication, is present at any individual gathering;
(II) The members of the public body attending one or more of
the gatherings collectively constitute a quorum; and
(III) The series of gatherings was held with the specific intent to
avoid the provisions of this chapter.
As discussed in §4.05, NRS 241.015(3)(b) excludes from the definition of meeting:
A gathering or series of gatherings of members of a public body, as

described in paragraph (a), at which a quorum is actually or
collectively present, whether in person or by means of electronic
communication:
(1) Which occurs at a social function if the members do not
deliberate toward a decision or take action on any matter over
which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction or
advisory power.
(2) To receive information from the attorney employed or
retained by the public body regarding potential or existing
litigation involving a matter over which the public body has
supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power and to
deliberate toward a decision on the matter, or both.
Some of the key words in that definition are:
“Gathering” In Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 85-19 (December 17, 1985), the Office
of the Attorney General defined “gathering” to mean to bring
together, collect, or accumulate and to place in readiness.
Accordingly, a “gathering” of members of a public body within the
conception of an open meeting would include any method of
collecting or accumulating the deliberations, or decisions of a
-30-
quorum of these members.
“Quorum” A “quorum” of a public body is defined in NRS 241.015(5) as “a

simple majority of the membership of a public body or another
proportion established by law.”
“Present” NRS 241.010(2) states “[I]f any member of a public body is present
by means of teleconference or videoconference at any meeting of
the public body, the public body shall ensure that all the members
of the public body and the members of the public who are present at
the meeting can hear or observe and participate in the meeting.” A
member of a public body may be present through video conference
or teleconference, but not through social media, such as a chat
room, or email. The public must be able to view and/or hear the
public body and be able to participate in the public meeting.
“Deliberate” Under NRS 241.015(2), “deliberate” means “collectively to

examine, weigh and reflect upon the reasons for or against the
action. The term includes, without limitation, the collective
discussion or exchange of facts preliminary to the ultimate
decision.” See Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 97,
64 P.3d 1070, 1077 (2003) and Sacramento Newspaper Guild v.
Sacramento County Bd. of Supervisors, 69 Cal.Rptr. 480 (Cal.
Ct. App. 1968) discussed in § 5.02 below. See OMLO 2010-06
(September 10, 2010) (collective deliberation is required to
constitute a meeting of Board of school trustees).
“Action” Under NRS 241.015(1), “action” means: “(a) a decision made by a

majority of the members present, whether in person or by means of
electronic communication, during a meeting of a public body; (b) a
commitment or promise made by a majority of the members
present, whether in person or by means of electronic
communication, during a meeting of a public body; (c) if a public
body may have a member who is not an elected official, an
affirmative vote taken by a majority of the members present,
whether in person or by means of electronic communication, during
a meeting of the public body; or (d) if all the members of a public
body must be elected officials, an affirmative vote taken by a
majority of all the members of the public body.
Application of the definitions to common circumstances follows.
§ 4.02 Informal gatherings and discussions that constitute deliberation
The Nevada Supreme Court cited Sacramento Newspaper Guild v. Sacramento County
Board of Supervisors (see § 5.01 above, for citation) for clarification of the meaning of
-31-
“deliberation.” All five members of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors went to a
luncheon gathering with the county counsel, a county executive, the county director of welfare,
and some AFL-CIO labor leaders to discuss a strike of the Social Workers Union against the
county. Newspaper reporters were not allowed to sit in on the luncheon, and litigation resulted.
The board of supervisors contended that the luncheon was informal and merely involved
discussions that were neither deliberations nor actions in violation of California’s open meeting
law.
The California Court of Appeals disagreed and upheld an injunction against the board,
ruling that California’s open meeting law extended to informal sessions or conferences designed
for discussion of public business. Among other things, the Court observed:
“Recognition of deliberation and action as dual components of the

collective decision-making process brings awareness that the
meeting concept cannot be split off and confined to one component
only, rather it comprehends both and either.”
“To deliberate is to examine, weigh and reflect upon the

reasons for or against the choice. . . . Deliberation thus
connotes not only collective discussion, but the collective
acquisition or the exchange of facts preliminary to the ultimate
decision.”
“An informal conference or caucus permits crystallization of secret

decisions to a point just short of ceremonial acceptance. There is
rarely any purpose to a nonpublic, pre-meeting conference
except to conduct some part of the decisional process behind
closed doors. Only by embracing the collective inquiry in
discussion stages, as well as the ultimate step of official action, can
an open meeting regulation frustrate these evasive devices. As
operative criteria, formality and informality are alien to the law’s
design, disposing it to the very evasions it was designed to prevent.
Construed in light of the Brown Act’s objectives, the term
“meeting” extends to informal sessions or conferences of board
members designed for the discussion of public business. The
Elks Club luncheon . . . was such a meeting.”
69 Cal.Rptr. at 485.
There are important objectives to be achieved from requiring the deliberations and
actions of public agencies to be open and public. As stated in the article, Access to Government
Information in California:
“The goal in requiring that deliberations take place at meetings

that are open and public is that committee members make a
conscientious effort to hear viewpoints on each issue so that the
-32-
community can understand on what their premises are based, add
to those premises when necessary, and intelligently evaluate and
participate in the process of government.”
54 Cal. L. Rev. 1650 (1966).
The Office of the Attorney General agrees with the foregoing and believes that if a
majority of the members of a public body should gather, even informally, to discuss any matter
over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power, it must
comply with the Open Meeting Law. Cf. Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 241 (August 24, 1961) and
Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 380 (January 1, 1967), certain aspects of which were written before the
statutory definition of “meeting” was established.
For an example of the foregoing discussion of informal meeting:
A quorum of the City Council discussed public business with a volunteer

firefighter. Two members constituted a quorum of the City Council and these two
were employed by the same employer. However, after an interview with the
witness firefighter, no evidence was uncovered which indicated that a
commitment or promise about a matter within the City Council’s supervision,
control, jurisdiction, or advisory power had been made. Warning was issued to the
Council. AG File No. 08-003 (April 7, 2008).
Under some city charters, the mayor is not a member of the city council, and the mayor’s
powers usually are limited to a veto or casting a tie-breaking vote. In such cases, the presence of
the mayor is not counted in determining the presence of a quorum of the council. See Op. Nev.
Att’y Gen. No. 2001-13 (June 1, 2001).
§ 4.03 Social gatherings
Nothing in the Open Meeting Law purports to regulate or restrict the attendance of
members of public bodies at purely social functions. A social function only would be reached
under the law if it is scheduled or designed, at least in part, for the purpose of having a majority
of the members of the public body deliberate toward a decision or take action on any matter over
which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. As described by
the California Court of Appeals in Sacramento Newspaper Guild, 69 Cal.Rptr. at 487 n.8, supra
at § 5.02:
There is a spectrum of gatherings of public agencies that can be called a meeting, ranging
from formal convocations to transact business to chance encounters where business is discussed.
However, neither of these two extremes is an acceptable definition of the statutory word
“meeting.” Requiring all discussions between members to be open and public would preclude
normal living and working by officials. On the other hand, permitting secrecy, unless there is a
formal convocation of a body, invites evasion. Although one might hypothesize quasi-social
occasions whose characterization as a meeting would be debatable, the difference between a
-33-
social occasion and one arranged for pursuit of the public’s business usually will be quite
apparent.
The definition of meeting now explicitly excludes a gathering or series of gatherings

of members of a public body at which a quorum is actually or collectively present which occurs
at a social function, if the members do not deliberate toward a decision or take action on any
matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. See
NRS 241.015(3)(b)(1).
§ 4.04 Seminars, conferences, conventions
When a majority of the members of a public body attend a state or national seminar,
conference, or convention to hear speakers on general subjects of interest to public officials or to
participate in workshops with their counterparts from around the state or nation, it usually may
be assumed they are there for the purpose of general education and social interaction and not to
conduct meetings to deliberate toward a decision or to take action on any matter over which their
public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power, even if presentations at the
seminar touch on subjects within the ambit of the public body’s jurisdiction or advisory power.
Thus, such seminars, conferences and conventions do not fall under the definition of “meeting”
found in NRS 241.015(3). However, should the gathering have the purpose of or in fact exhibit
the characteristics of a “meeting” as defined in NRS 241.015(3), then the provisions of the Open
Meeting Law apply. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. 2001-05 (March 14, 2001).
§ 4.05 Telephone conferences/video conferences
Nothing in the Open Meeting Law prohibits a quorum of the members of a public body
from deliberating toward a decision or taking action on public business via a telephone
conference call or video conference in which they simultaneously are linked to one another
telephonically. However, since this is a “meeting,” the notice requirements of the Open Meeting
Law must be complied with, and the public must have an opportunity to listen to the discussions
and votes by all the members through a speaker phone or video conference equipment. This may
be accomplished by including in the meeting notice the location and address of a place where
members of the public may appear and listen to the meeting discussion over a telephone speaker
device or other electronic media. See Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 956 P.2d 770
(1998) for a discussion regarding the applicability of the Open Meeting Law to a public body’s
use of telephones, fax machines, and other electronic devices to deliberate and/or take action.
Although a telephone conference may be a lawful method of conducting the public’s

business, it never should be used as a subterfuge to avoid compliance with the Open Meeting
Law and its stated intent that the actions of public bodies are to be taken openly and their
deliberations conducted openly. NRS 241.016(4).
///
///
-34-
§ 4.06 Electronic polling
NRS 241.016(4) specifically provides that electronic communications must not be used to
circumvent the spirit or letter of the Open Meeting Law in order to discuss or act upon a matter
over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory powers.
This statute applies to telephone polls (unless done as a part of an open meeting as
discussed above) and to polls by facsimile or e-mail.
In Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 956 P.2d 770 (1998), the Chairman of
the Board of Regents of the University of Nevada sent by facsimile a draft advisory to all but one
regent rebutting public statements made by that regent to the press. The draft advisory was
accompanied by a memo requesting feedback on the advisory and sought advice from the other
regents on whether to release the advisory to the press. The memo stated that no press release
would occur without Board approval. Of the ten regents who received the fax, five responded in
favor of releasing the advisory, one wanted it released under the chairman’s name only, one was
opposed, two had no opinion, and one did not respond. The regents who responded did so by
telephone calls either to the chairman or the interim director of public information for the
University. In finding that the Board violated the Open Meeting Law by deciding whether to
release the draft advisory privately by “facsimile” and telephone rather than by public meeting,
the Nevada Supreme Court stated:
[A] quorum of a public body using serial electronic

communication to deliberate toward a decision or to make a
decision on any matter over which the public body has supervision,
control, jurisdiction or advisory power violates the Open Meeting
Law. That is not to say that in the absence of a quorum, members
of a public body cannot privately discuss public issues or even
lobby for votes. However, if a quorum is present, or is gathered by
serial electronic communications, the body must deliberate and
actually vote on the matter in a public meeting.
Id. at 400, 956 P.2d at 778.
Where two county commissioners (three were a quorum) discussed the termination of
the County Manager between themselves, the OML was not offended because no other
commissioner acknowledged discussion about termination with them. The failure to create
a constructive quorum barred application of the OML. AG File No. 07-011 (June 11, 2007);
NRS 241.015(3) sets the serial communication bar at “collective deliberations or actions”
(exchange of facts that reflect upon reasons for or against the choice) involving a quorum of
members of a public body. Dewey, 119 Nev. at 87, 64 P.3d at 1070. See also AG File No. 07-015
(September 10, 2007) (allegation that Board of School Trustees created constructive quorum
through emails and private meetings).
///
-35-
§ 4.07 Mail polls
In view of the legislative declaration of intent that all actions of public bodies are to be
taken openly, the making of a decision by a mail poll that is not subject to public attendance
appears inconsistent with both the spirit and intent of the law. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 85-19
(December 17, 1985).
§ 4.08 Serial communications, or “walking quorums”
The Open Meeting Law forbids “walking quorums” or constructive quorums. Serial
communication invites abuse if it is used to accumulate a secret consensus or vote of the
members of a public body. Any method of meeting where a quorum of a public body discusses
public business, whether gathered physically or electronically, is a violation of the OML.
Nevada is a “quorum state,” which means that the gathering of less than a quorum of
the members of a public body is not within the definition of a meeting under NRS 241.015(3).
Where less than a quorum of a public body participates in a private briefing with counsel or staff
prior to a public meeting, it may do so without violating the Open Meeting Law. Dewey, 119
Nev. at 99, 64 P.3d at 1078.
While the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that meetings between a quorum of a public body
and its attorney are not exempt from the Open Meeting Law, it observed in McKay v. Board of
County Commissioners, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987) that:
Nothing whatever precludes an attorney for a public body

from conveying sensitive information to the members of
a public body by confidential memorandum; nor does anything
prevent the attorney from discussing sensitive information
in private with members of the body, singly
or in groups less than a quorum. Any detriment suffered
by the public body in this regard must be assumed to have been
weighed by the Legislature in adopting this legislation. The
Legislature has made a legitimate policy choice-one in which this
court cannot and will not interfere.
McKay, 103 Nev. at 495–96, 746 P.2d at 127.
In another case, the Nevada Supreme Court observed that the OML did not forbid all
discussion among public body members even when discussing public business:

-36-
lobby for votes. (Emphasis added.)
Del Papa, 114 Nev. at 400, 956 P.2d at 778.
Serial communication invites abuse of the Open Meeting Law if it is used to accumulate
a secret consensus or vote of the members of a public body. In McKay v. Board of County
Commissioners, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987), the Court stated that sensitive information
may be discussed in serial meetings where no quorum is present in any gathering. But there can
be no deliberation, action, commitment, or promise made regarding a public matter in such a
serial meeting.
In Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 64 P.3d 1070 (2003), the
Court reaffirmed its position in McKay and provided a substantial discussion regarding “serial
communications” and non-quorum private briefings by staff. Please note that
NRS 241.015(3)(a)(2), which defines “serial communications” as a “meeting” for purposes of
the Open Meeting Law, was enacted after the Dewey case was decided. However, the Office of
the Attorney General believes the Court’s analysis in Dewey provides substantial insight into the
facts the Supreme Court will analyze to determine if “serial communications” occurred.
In Dewey, the Redevelopment Agency for the City of Reno (Agency) owned the Mapes
Hotel, an historic landmark listed on the National Trust for Historic Preservation. In 1999, the
Agency adopted a resolution in which it would accept bids to rehabilitate the Mapes Hotel. The
Agency’s staff put together a request for proposals (RFP), which was sent to more than 580
developers. In response to the RFP, the Agency received six proposals to rehabilitate the Mapes
Hotel.
On August 31, 1999, the Agency’s staff conducted two private back-to-back briefings
with a non-quorum of the Agency attending each briefing; three members attended one briefing
and two members attended the other briefing. For the purposes of an Agency meeting, a quorum
was four or more members.
The purpose of these meetings was to inform the Agency members of potential issues
with the RFP responses. The testimony at trial was clear that the Agency members neither
provided their opinions, voted on the issue, nor were they polled by staff as to their opinions or
votes at the briefings. The purpose of the briefings was to provide Agency members with
information regarding a complex public policy issue.
Dewey, as well as other plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit against the Agency alleging a violation
of the Open Meeting Law. The trial court held that there was a violation of the Open Meeting
Law because the meetings constituted a constructive quorum for purposes of the Open Meeting
Law. However, the Court only issued an injunction and refused to void the Agency’s actions. In
response, Dewey appealed the court’s final order in hopes of voiding the Agency’s actions, and
the Agency cross-appealed alleging that the Court erred in finding an Open Meeting Law
violation.
-37-
On appeal, the Nevada Supreme Court stated, “[W]e have . . . acknowledged that the
Open Meeting Law is not intended to prohibit every private discussion of a public issue. Instead,
the Open Meeting Law only prohibits collective deliberations or actions where a quorum is
present.” (Emphasis added.) Dewey, 119 Nev. at 94–95, 64 P.3d at 1075. The Court stated, in
part, that deliberations meant the collective discussion by a quorum. (See §5.01, infra for the full
definition of deliberations.) Since a quorum of the Agency did not attend the back-to-back
briefings, a collective discussion equaling deliberations could not have occurred. In order for a
constructive quorum to exist, the Agency members or staff would have to participate in serial
communications. The trial court shifted the burden to the Agency to prove that the Agency did
not participate in serial communications. The Supreme Court held that shifting the burden was
inappropriate because a quorum of the public body did not attend the briefings. Thus, the burden
was on Dewey to provide substantial evidence that the Agency conducted serial
communications.
The Court then reviewed the record to determine whether substantial evidence existed to
prove serial communications occurred. The Court stated that the record did not provide
substantial evidence that the Agency member’s thoughts, questions, or opinions from one
briefing were shared with the members of the other briefing. There also was no evidence of
polling by the Agency’s staff to determine the opinions or votes of the Agency’s members.
Further, there was no evidence in the record that the briefings resulted in the Agency taking
action or deliberating on the issue. Finally, the record indicated that the Agency’s staff intended
to comply with the Open Meeting Law in conducting the briefings in the non-quorum back-to-
back fashion. As a result, the Court held that substantial evidence did not exist to prove the
briefings resulted in serial communications creating a constructive quorum, and that the
Agency’s back-to-back briefings were not “meetings” for purposes of the Open Meeting Law.
Further citations illustrating the discussion above:
• The Office of the Attorney General accepts affidavits or written statements from
members of a public body as evidence whether “serial communications” occurred.
See OMLO 2004-16 (May 65, 2004).
• See OMLO 2004-26 (July 21, 2004) for an example of “serial communications”
in violation of the Open Meeting Law, and see OMLO 2003-11 (March 6, 2003)
for an analysis finding no “serial communication” consistent with Dewey.
• See OMLO 2008-010: A public body quorum met to discuss District business
immediately following adjournment of a noticed meeting. The meeting had been
arranged without notification to the public that a quorum would remain after
adjournment of the regularly scheduled meeting. The fact that the meeting only
concerned discussion of matters not appearing on a public body’s agenda did not
exempt the discussion from the application of the OML. OML is applicable
whenever a quorum of a public body deliberates or takes action on any matter
over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory
power. AG File No. 08-010 (July 23, 2008); AG File No. 08-035 (November 17,
2008) (two members of public body were mistaken in their belief that a quorum
-38-
can only be achieved by a physical gathering of a quorum at the same time and
place.)
§ 4.09 “Private Briefings” among staff of public body and non-quorum of members
In Dewey, 119 Nev. at 94, 64 P.3d at 1075, the Nevada Supreme Court stated that private
briefings among staff of a public body and a non-quorum of members of a public body are not
meetings for purposes of the Open Meeting Law, and such a meeting is not prohibited by law.
See §5.08 supra for a further discussion of Dewey.
§ 4.10 Meetings held out-of-state or out of local jurisdiction
The Open Meeting Law applies even if the meeting occurs outside of Nevada. For
example, minutes must be kept, and a clear and complete agenda must be noticed properly.
Nothing in the Open Meeting Law limits its application only to meetings in Nevada, and
any such interpretation would only invite evasion of the law by meeting across state lines. A
county-based public body may lawfully meet outside the county. See AG File No. 00-040
(January 5, 2001).
See also § 4.05, Attorney-Client conferences.
While the Open Meeting Law does not prohibit out-of-jurisdiction meetings, other
statutes might. See, for example, the limitations on county commission meetings in
NRS 244.085.
§ 4.11 Exception for conferring with counsel
“Meeting” has been redefined to exclude a gathering or series of gatherings of members

of a public body at which a quorum is present (1) to receive information from the attorney for the
public body regarding potential or existing litigation involving a matter over which the public
body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power and (2) to deliberate toward a
decision on the matter.
The law specifically allows the members of a public body to deliberate, but not
act, information obtained from its counsel in an attorney-client conference. See § 4.05 supra.
However, any action must be taken in an open meeting. The agenda should note that the public
body may interrupt the open meeting and exclude the public for the purpose
of having an attorney-client discussion of potential and existing litigation, pursuant to
NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2).
Alternatively, the public body may gather to confer with legal counsel at times other than
the time noticed for a normal meeting. In such instances, there is no notice or agenda required.
However, the usual notice and agenda will be required in order to later convene an open meeting
in order to take any action based on the attorney-client conference. A decision on whether to
-39-
settle a case or to make or accept an offer of judgment must be made in an open meeting. See
OMLO 2002-21 (May 20, 2002).
However, a conference between counsel and a quorum of a public body that does not
involve potential or existing litigation on a matter over which the public body has supervision,
control, jurisdiction or advisory power, is not exempt from the OML. (See § 4.02 for examples
of other statutory exemptions from the OML.) The Open Meeting Law bans closed meetings in
all cases not specifically excepted by statute. McKay, 103 Nev. at 495–96, 746 P.2d at 127–28;
NRS 241.020(1). “Any detriment suffered by the public body in this regard [limitations on the
ability to meet privately with legal counsel] must be assumed to have been weighed by the
Legislature in adopting this legislation. The Legislature has made a legitimate policy choice –
one in which this court cannot and will not interfere.” Id., 103 Nev. at 496, 746 P.2d at 127.
§ 4.12 Meetings held with another public body
Whenever a quorum of a public body gathers and collectively discusses, deliberates, or

takes action on matters over which the body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory
power, a meeting of that body takes place within the meaning of NRS 241.015(3) even if the
public body is meeting with another public body at the same time and place. A meeting of two or
more public bodies must be conducted in accordance with the Open Meeting Law and each
public body must give notice of its meeting even if the meeting is also publicly noticed as a
meeting of another public body. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 2001-05 (March 14, 2001). Notice
of a meeting of each public body may utilize one agenda, combined to indicate to the public that
two or more public bodies are meeting and may take action separately.
However, even if a quorum of a parent public body attends a meeting of its own standing
subcommittee, where the quorum of the parent body merely listens, does not participate, does not
ask questions, does not deliberate, and does not take action or collectively discuss any matter
within the parent’s jurisdiction or control, no meeting within the meaning of NRS 241.015(3) has
occurred and no violation of the OML has occurred. OMLO 2010-06 (September 10, 2010).
§ 4.13 Appointment of public officer
NRS 241.031 prohibits a closed meeting for the purpose of appointing a public officer or
a person to a position for which the person serves at the pleasure of a public body as a chief
executive or administrative officer or in a comparable position. Public officer is defined in
NRS 281.005 to mean a person elected or appointed to a position which: “(a) is established by
the Constitution or a statute of this State, or by a charter or ordinance of a political subdivision of
this State; and (b) involves the continuous exercise, as part of the regular and permanent
administration of the government, of a public power, trust or duty.” University and Community
College System v. DR Partners, 117 Nev. 195, 201, 18 P.3d 1042, 1046 (2001) (NRS 281.005 is
in harmony with judicial definition of “public officer”). For further treatment of this issue, see §
9.05, infra: Appointment to public office; closed meeting prohibition. See NRS 281A.160, Ethics
in Government, for a similar definition of public officer which also clarifies the scope of the
phrase, “public power, trust or duty.”
-40-
The OML prohibits holding a closed meeting for the discussion of the appointment of
any person to public office, or appointment as a member of a public body. If a public body
participates in any part of the selection process for the position of public officer or for a person
who serves at the pleasure of the public officer, or for the appointment of a person to a
public body, then all discussion of the appointment process must occur in a public meeting.
NRS 241.030(4)(d). In City Council of City of Reno v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886,
891, 784 P.2d 974, 977 (1989) the Court stated that the phrase “discussion of appointment” in
NRS 241.030(4)(d) [formerly NRS 241.030(3)(e)] means “all consideration, discussion,
deliberation, and selection” of a public officer or one who serves at the pleasure of a public body.
The Nevada Supreme Court explicitly stated that the OML applies only to an appointment
process conducted by a public body. The Fernley City Council is a public body, but the citizen
recruitment committee formed by the Mayor was not a public body. The Open Meeting Law did
not apply to it and consequently, complainant’s demand for access to all the original candidates’
applications and resumes is not supported by the OML. AG File No. 09-026 (June 14, 2009).
Where the remaining members of a public body selected the new member to fill a
vacancy following the resignation of one member, no OML violation occurred where there was
no discussion among the members of the public body before it voted on appointment of the new
member. NRS 241.015 does not require verbal discussion, assessment, or verbal deliberation
among the members of a public body before it takes action. NRS 241.015 states that a meeting
occurs where a public body deliberates or takes action. The Legislature intended that
deliberations be conducted openly, but it did go so far as to void action in the absence of verbal
discussion or deliberation by members prior to action. AG File No. 09-029 (November 4, 2009).
-41-
Part 5 WHAT ARE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS UNDER
THE OPEN MEETING LAW? (See Sample Forms 1 and 3)
§ 5.01 General
The right of citizens to attend open public meetings is diminished greatly if they are not
provided with an opportunity to know when the meeting will take place and what subject or
subjects will be considered. One of the primary objectives of the Open Meeting Law is to allow
members of the public to make their views known to their representatives on issues of general
importance to the community. This type of communication would be impossible if the public
were denied the opportunity to appear at the meeting through lack of knowledge that a meeting
would be held.
Except in an emergency, written notice of all meetings of all public bodies must be
posted in at least four places within the jurisdiction of the public body and mailed at least three
working days before the meeting is to occur, as specified below.
Details about how the notice is to be prepared, posted, and mailed are discussed below. A
sample form of a notice is included as Sample Form 1. This sample is intended only as a sample,
and public bodies may use whatever form or format they wish.
In Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 150, 67 P.3d 902, 903 (2003), the
Supreme Court of Nevada stated that Nevada’s Open Meeting Law “clearly includes stringent
agenda requirements.” See § 7.02.
Additionally, NRS 241.033 requires personal notice be given to individuals whose character,
alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health are to be considered
at a meeting. See § 6.09.
NRS 241.034 requires personal notice must also be given to individuals against whom the
public agency is going to take certain administrative actions or from whom real property will be
taken by eminent domain. See § 6.10.
§ 5.02 Contents of notice (see Sample Form 1)
NRS 241.020 sets forth specific notice requirements that are mandatory and must appear
on every agenda.
I. Certain disclosures on how the meeting will be conducted
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(6) and (7) require the following disclosures on the agenda:
Notice that:
(1) Items may be taken out of order;
-42-
(2) Items may be combined for consideration by the public body; and
(3) Items may be pulled or removed from the agenda at any time.
Notice must be made to the public of reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and
manner of public comment. Restriction must be reasonable and cannot restrict comment based
on viewpoint.
II. Minimum requirements for public comment
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3) requires that public bodies adopt one of two alternative public
comment agenda plans.
First, a public body may comply by agendizing one public comment period before
any action items are heard by the public body and then provide for another period of public
comment before adjournment.
The second alternative also involves multiple periods of public comment but only
after discussion of each agenda action item and before the public body takes action on the item.
Finally, regardless of which alternative is selected, the public body must allow the
public time to comment on any matter not specifically included on the agenda as an action item
some time before adjournment.
A public body may combine these two public comment alternatives, or take portions
of one to add to the requirements of the other. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3) represents the minimum
Legislative requirements regarding public comment.
III. Items the meeting notice must include
The time, place, and location of the meeting. NRS 241.020(2)(a). See OMLO 2004-
27 (July 13, 2004) where the Office of the Attorney General opined that starting a meeting late
after staff took extraordinary measures to ensure that the public received notice that the meeting
would start late was not a violation of the Open Meeting Law.
A list of locations where the notice has been posted. NRS 241.020(2)(b). See, e.g.,
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999).
The name and contact information for the person designated by the public body from
whom a member of the public may request the supporting material for the meeting and a list of
the locations where the supporting material is available to the public. NRS 241.020(2)(c).
An agenda consisting of:
a) A clear and complete statement of the topics scheduled to be considered during

the meeting. NRS.241.020(2)(d)(1) See § 7.02.
-43-
b) A list describing the items on which action may be taken and clearly denoting that
action may be taken on those items, by placing next to the agenda item, the phrase
“for possible action”. It is not sufficient to place “action” next to the item or to
place an asterisk next to the item to signify an action item. The phrase “for
possible action” must be used. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(2), see e.g., OMLO 2003-13
(March 21, 2003).
c) Multiple periods of public comment: one before any action item and one before
adjournment, and discussion of those comments, if any. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3)
alternatively allows the public body to hear comment prior to taking action on
each and every agenda action item. No action may be taken upon a matter raised
under this item of the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included
on an agenda as an item upon which action will be taken. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3).
See, e.g. OMLO 2003-13 (March 21, 2003).
d) If any portion of the meeting will be closed to consider the character, alleged
misconduct or professional competence of a person, the name of the person whose
character, alleged misconduct or professional competence will be considered.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(4).
e) If, during any portion of the meeting, the public body will consider whether to
take administrative action regarding a person, the name of that person.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(5).
IV. Accommodation for members of the public with physical disabilities
In addition, an agenda must inform the public that the public body and employees
responsible for the meeting shall make reasonable efforts to assist and accommodate persons
with physical disabilities desiring to attend a meeting. See NRS 241.020(1). The notice should
include the name and telephone number of a person who may be contacted so arrangements can
be made in advance to avoid last minute problems. See § 7.02 of this manual for guidance in
preparing the agenda.
§ 5.03 Posting the notice
NRS 241.020(3)(a) and (b) requires that a copy of the notice must be posted in at least
four places not later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting.
The notice must be posted at the principal office of the public body, or if there is no such
office, then at the building in which the meeting is to be held.
The notice must be posted on the official website of the State [https://notice.nv.gov]
pursuant to NRS 232.2175.
The notice must be posted at a minimum of three other separate, prominent places within
the jurisdiction of the public body. Thus, a state agency must post in at least three prominent
-44-
places within the state, and a local government must post in at least three prominent places
within the jurisdiction of the local government (e.g., county, city, town, etc.).
The notice must be posted in “prominent” places. The statute does not define
“prominent,” and whether a notice is properly posted must be judged on the individual
circumstances existing at the time of the posting. As a general proposition, the Office of the
Attorney General offers the following suggestions:
• Try to post the notices in places where they can be read or obtained by members of the
public and media who seek them out.
• Unless required by the statute, avoid posting the notices in buildings that will be closed
during the notice period.
• If the meeting concerns a regulated industry or profession, post additional notices at trade
or professional associations for the industry.
• Community bulletin boards at city halls and county administration buildings may be
used.
If the public body maintains an Internet website, posting on that website is also required.
NRS 241.020(5). A public body is not required to create a website if it already does not have
one. Inability to post notice of a meeting on its website as a result of a technical problem is not a
violation of the law. Website notice is not a substitute for the minimum notice required by
NRS 241.020(3). See OMLO 2004-16 (May 6, 2004) in which this office opined that a public
body, which usually posted its agenda on the website of another government agency or public
body, did not violate the Open Meeting Law when it failed to post its agenda on that website
because it did not “maintain” the website.
Each public body must make and keep a record of compliance with the statutory requirement for
posting the notice and agenda before 9 a.m. of the third working day before a public meeting.
The record is to be made by the person who posted a copy of the public notice and it must
include: (1) date and time of posting, (2) address of location of posting, and (3) name, title, and
signature of person who posted the public notice. NRS 241.020(4).
§ 5.04 Mailing the written notice; mailing list
In addition to posting the notice, a public body must mail a copy of the notice to any
person who has requested notice of meetings. NRS 241.020(3)(c). A public body should
implement internal record keeping procedures to keep track of those who have requested notice.
The mailing requirement of the law does not require actual receipt of the notice by the
person to whom the notice must be mailed; it only requires that the notice be postmarked before
9 a.m. on the third working day before the meeting. See AG File No. 00-015 (April 7, 2000).
-45-
The written notices must be mailed to the requestors “in the same manner in which
notice is required to be mailed to a member of the body” and must be “delivered to the postal
service used by the body not later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting.”
NRS 241.020(3)(c)(1). A public body does not satisfy the requirements of the Open Meeting
Law by sending an e-mail to an individual who has requested personal notice of public meetings,
unless the individual waived his or her statutory right to personal notice by regular mail and
instead elected to receive notice by e-mail. See NRS 241.020(3)(c)(2) and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen.
No. 2001-01 (February 9, 2001).
NRS 241.020(3)(c) states that a request for mailed notice of meetings automatically
lapses six months after it is made to the public body and that the public body must inform the
requestor of this fact by enclosure or notation upon the first notice sent. (Emphasis added.)
Members of the public do not have to make separate written request for notice of each meeting,
but a request for both written and electronic notice lapses after six months unless the requestor
renews the request.
§ 5.05 Calculating “three working days”
“Working day” means every day of the week except Saturday, Sunday, and any day
declared to be a legal holiday, pursuant to NRS 236.015. NRS 241.015(6). The actual day of a
meeting is not to be considered as one of the three working days referenced in the statute. See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999).
For example, a Thursday meeting should be noticed by 9 a.m. on Monday of the same
week, while a Tuesday meeting must be noticed no later than 9 a.m. Thursday of the preceding
week; if the Monday before a Tuesday meeting were a legal holiday, notice would be posted no
later than 9 a.m. on Wednesday of the prior week.
§ 5.06 Providing copies of agenda and supporting material upon request
NRS 241.020(6) states:
6. Upon any request, a public body shall provide, at no charge, at

least one copy of:
(a) An agenda for a public meeting;
(b) A proposed ordinance or regulation which will be discussed
at the public meeting; and
(c) Subject to the provisions of subsection 7 or 8, as applicable,
any other supporting material provided to the members of the
body, except materials:
(1) Submitted to the public body pursuant to a nondisclosure or
confidentiality agreement which relates to proprietary information;
(2) Pertaining to the closed portion of such a meeting of the
public body; or
-46-
(3) Declared confidential by law, unless otherwise agreed to by
each person whose interest is being protected under the order of
confidentiality.
As used in this subsection, “proprietary information” has the meaning ascribed to it in

NRS 332.025.
7. A copy of supporting material required to be provided upon

request pursuant to paragraph (c) of subsection 6 must be:
(a) If the supporting material is provided to the members of the
public body before the meeting, made available to the requester at
the time the material is provided to the members of the public
body; or
(b) If the supporting material is provided to the members of the
public body at the meeting, made available at the meeting to the
members of the public body.
If the requester has agreed to receive the information and material set forth in
subsection 6 by electronic mail, the public body shall, if feasible, provide the information and
material by electronic mail.
8. The governing body of a county of city whose population is

45,000 or more shall post the supporting material described in
paragraph (c) of subsection 6 to its website not later than the time
the material is provided to the members of the governing body or,
if the supporting material is provided to the members of the
governing body at a meeting, not later than 24 hours after the
conclusion of the meeting. Such posting is supplemental to
the right of the public to request the supporting material pursuant
to subsection 6. The inability of the governing body, as a result of
technical problems with its website, to post supporting material
pursuant to this subsection shall not be deemed to be a violation of
the provisions of this chapter.
9. A public body may provide the public notice, information or

supporting material required by this section by electronic mail.
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, if a public body
makes such notice, information or supporting material available by
electronic mail, the public body shall inquire of a person who
requests the notice, information or supporting material if the
-47-
person will accept receipt by electronic mail. If a public body is
required to post the public notice, information or supporting
material on its website pursuant to this section, the public body
shall inquire of a person who requests the notice, information or
supporting material if the person will accept by electronic mail
a link to the posting on the website when the documents are made
available. The inability of a public body, as a result of technical
problems with its electronic mail system, to provide a public
notice, information or supporting material or a link to a website
required by this section to a person who has agreed to receive such
notice, information, supporting material or link by electronic mail
shall not be deemed to be a violation of the provisions of this
chapter.
Note that while these provisions authorize a public body to provide the notice, agenda,
and/or supporting material by electronic mail, if the requester agrees to accept receipt by
electronic mail, these provisions do not mandate that a public body provide these documents by
electronic mail. Electronic delivery is supplemental to the right of the public to obtain hard
copies of materials under NRS 241.020(6) and (7).
Other examples of how the requirement to make supporting materials available to

the public has been applied:
(1) In AG File No. 08-040 (May 8, 2009) an e-mail communication from a

Superintendent to his staff and to the public body, the Board of School Trustees, was not
included in supporting materials for the meeting nor was it released to a reporter prior to the
meeting, even though it was relevant to a pending agenda item. The e-mail communication was
determined to be privileged and shielded by “executive privilege” as it was both predecisional
and deliberative under a common law doctrine recognized by the Nevada Supreme Court in DR
Partners v. Board of County Commissioners, 116 Nev. 616, 621, 6 P.3d 465, 468 (2000).
(2) The Office of the Attorney General has opined that drafts of proposed orders of the
Public Utilities Commission are agenda supporting material under NRS 241.020(6), formerly
NRS 241.020(4), and copies must be furnished upon request at the time that they are made
available to commission members. See OMLO 98-02 (March 16, 1998). Drafts of minutes of
previous meeting to be approved at upcoming meeting are agenda supporting material under
NRS 241.020(5) and must be provided upon request. See OMLO 98-06 (October 19, 1998); AG
File No. 10-047 (November 8, 2010).
(3) Member of a public body independently distributed a proposed budget document to

other members shortly before meeting. It should have been included in supporting material, but
once distributed to the public body, members discovered it was not included in the agenda
packet; it was treated as a fugitive document; the board did not consider it during the meeting.
AG File No. 10-027 (July 20, 2010).
-48-
(4) Where the Chair of the public body independently obtains a document and discusses
it during a public meeting, although it was not provided to any other member of the public
body, or the public, the independent action of the Chair does not entangle the Commission with
NRS 241.020. Unless the document had been provided to the Commission as support material,
pursuant to NRS 241.020(6) and (7), complainant’s request for its disclosure must be under
NRS 239. AG File No. 10-028 (July 8, 2010).
(5) Inability to provide supporting material to the public because the public body’s clerk,
staff, or other custodian of materials does not have a copy, because the clerk, staff, or other
custodian was not provided a copy, is a violation of NRS 241.020(6) and (7). It does not matter
that the source of supporting material is a private person, the city manager, or any other person.
If all members of the public body receive supporting material for a future agenda item, that
material must be available to the public upon request. AG File No. 09-021 (August 21, 2009).
(6) Requests to provide agenda supporting material under NRS 241.020(7) are treated
separately from standing requests to mail notices of meetings under NRS 241.020(3)(c). See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999). Agenda supporting material need not be mailed but must be
made available over the counter when the material is ready and has been distributed to members
of the public body and at the meeting. See OMLO 98-01 (January 21, 1998) and OMLO 2003-06
(7) The OML does not require supporting materials, such as a settlement agreement, to
be appended to or attached to the publication of the public body’s meeting Notice and Agenda.
Members of the public must request copies of supporting materials before or during the meeting;
the public body has no duty to provide copies of supporting materials except when requested.
AG File No. 10-008 (May 3, 2010).
(8) When a public body is interviewing candidates for a vacant position in an open
session, a request for a copy of candidate resumes may not be refused by the public body because
the resume of the chosen applicant would become part of the personnel file if hired, or on the
grounds that refusal was necessary to accommodate an applicant’s concern that he/she might
suffer an adverse employment reaction from his/her current employer if the applicant’s interest
in the position became known to his/her current employer. See AG File No. 00-035 (August 31,
2000). See also Opinion in AG File No. 08-005 (March 7, 2008) (beginning with a presumption
in favor of open government and public access, disclosure of applicants’ names, application for
employment, and proposed contracts of employment should be deemed public unless there is
sufficient justification, such as an identifiable privacy or law enforcement interest, or other
exigent circumstances, for keeping the record confidential).
(9) Agenda supporting materials are not required to be provided until after the
appointment of a person if a separate statute or regulation declares the materials to be
confidential during the selection and appointment process. See AG File No. 00-036 (September
25, 2000).
(10) In situations where a request for agenda supporting materials is made at the
meeting, a public body does not have to stop or delay its meeting to provide the materials if the
-49-
supporting material requested had been available at the time the agenda was posted. In this
circumstance, a public body can satisfy the Open Meeting Law requirement of providing
supporting materials “upon any request” by having one “public” copy of the supporting materials
available for review at the meeting. NRS 241.020(6).
(11) As to materials that were not available on the agenda posting date, a member of the
public is justified in asking for such materials at the meeting, and the public body must interrupt
its meeting to provide the requested copies. See NRS 241.020(7)(b) and AG File No. 00-025
(October 3, 2000).
(12) Unapproved draft minutes that are on the agenda for approval are agenda support
material which must be provided upon request.
(13) A public body was advised that proposed revised bylaws were supporting materials
for the meeting and a public copy should have been made available at the meeting and upon any
request. AG File No. 09-010 (June 10, 2009).
(14) The Open Meeting Law does not require a public body to honor a blanket request
for supporting materials for multiple meetings. See OMLO 2003-12 (March 11, 2003). The
Legislature intended to treat requests for support material differently than requests for notice and
agenda under NRS 241.020(6).
(15) When all subsections of NRS 241.020 are read together, it is clear that the
legislative purpose behind the phrase “[U]pon any request” refers only to the period of time
before or during a public meeting. Subsection 7 provides direct evidence of legislative purpose.
Parts (a) and (b) explicitly state when the public body’s duty to provide a “no-charge” copy is
applicable. Part (a) states that the public may request a copy before the meeting and part (b)
states the circumstances under which the public body must provide it during the meeting. There
is no subsection authorizing a “no-charge” copy after adjournment of a public meeting. It also is
clear that in order to harmonize the OML and the public records act, the Legislature intended that
supporting materials become a public record following adjournment of the public meeting.
Supporting materials pass to the legal custodian (in this case the County Clerk) when it becomes
subject to public record law—NRS Chapter 239. AG File No. 2011-01 (April 4, 2011); AG File
No. 09-046 (February 11, 2010).
§ 5.07 Fees for providing notice of copies of supporting material
Under NRS 241.020(6), a requested public notice, agenda, a proposed ordinance or

regulation must be provided at no cost to the requester prior to the meeting for which the notice,
agenda, and supporting material were prepared. See §6.06 above. Other requested supporting
materials which are not confidential, or subject to a non-disclosure agreement, or which do not
pertain to a closed portion of a meeting must be made available to the public at the time the
materials are provided to the members of the public body.
No charge may be made for sending copies of a notice and agenda required by
NRS 241.020(3)(c). See OMLO 99-07 (February 4, 1999). Generally, governmental bodies may
-50-
exercise only those powers that are conferred upon them by the Legislature. There is no grant of
power to public bodies in the Open Meeting Law which authorizes them to legislate or charge a
fee to a person who has requested individual notice of the meetings. Further, charging a fee
under such circumstances could have the effect of chilling the right of all Nevada citizens to
receive notice of public meetings. We note that mailing a copy of the meeting notice to anyone
who requests such notices is deemed by the law to be a part of the “minimum public notice”
requirements, which all public bodies must meet. The only restriction contemplated by the law is
a six-month limitation on the request, unless it is renewed by the requestor.
Minutes and audio recordings of public meetings become public records once prepared
following public meetings. All public bodies must make available, free of charge, a copy of the
minutes or an audio recording to a member of the public upon request. Minutes or an audio
recording of a meeting must be made available for inspection by the public within 30 working
days after the adjournment of the meeting. NRS 241.035(2).
§ 5.08 Emergencies
When emergencies occur, a public body may not be able to wait three days to call a
meeting and post a notice and agenda in order to act, or the public body already may have sent
out a notice and agenda and cannot amend the agenda and give three days’ notice of the
emergency item before the meeting.
NRS 241.020(2) provides that except in an emergency, written notice of all meetings
must be given at least three working days before the meeting. NRS 241.020(10) defines an
emergency as: “an unforeseen circumstance which requires immediate action and includes, but is
not limited to: (a) Disasters caused by fire, flood, earthquake or other natural causes; or (b) Any
impairment of the health and safety of the public.”
An emergency meeting may be called or an item may be taken up on an emergency basis

only:
• Where the need to discuss or act upon an item truly is unforeseen at the time the meeting
agenda is posted and mailed, or before the meeting is called; and
• Where an item is truly of such a nature that immediate action is required at the meeting.
In an emergency:
• A meeting may be scheduled with less than three days’ notice if the meeting is limited
only to the matter which qualifies as an emergency. The minutes of the meeting should
reflect the nature of the emergency and why notice could not be timely given.
• If a meeting already has been scheduled, notice already has been posted and mailed, and
less than three working days remain before the meeting, the emergency item may be
added to the agenda at the meeting. The minutes should reflect the nature of the
emergency and why notice could not be timely given.
-51-
• If a meeting has been scheduled, and it is possible to amend the notice and agenda and to
post and mail the amended notice (or a notice of an emergency item to be added to the
agenda) more than three working days before the meeting, the notice and agenda should
be so amended.
In all cases, whenever a matter is taken up as an emergency, the Office of the Attorney
General recommends that the public body provide as much supplementary notice to the public
and the news media as is reasonably possible under the circumstances. Further, all other
requirements of the Open Meeting Law must be observed.
The Office of the Attorney General cautions, however, that a true emergency must exist
and the rule must not be invoked as a subterfuge by a public body to avoid giving notice of that
agenda item to the public. Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-A (February 23, 1981) gives an example
of when an emergency did not exist. This opinion discusses a situation where, in a regularly-
scheduled meeting of a public body, dissention quickly arose between the members so much so
that the meeting became acutely tense and emotional. In an attempt to relieve the pressure, the
board went into an unscheduled executive session to “discuss the professional competence and
character of a person” (including some its members). Noting that the dissention on the board had
been known for months, the Office of the Attorney General determined that a sufficient
emergency did not exist to go into the unscheduled executive session because there was ample
time to provide written public notice of the need for an executive session during a regularly
scheduled meeting to discuss the matters.
See OMLO 99-10 (August 24, 1999), where the Office of the Attorney General opined
that administrative error did not establish grounds to hold an emergency meeting without giving
proper notice. A statutory deadline for action by a county commission to submit a ballot question
is not an unforeseen circumstance. See AG File No. 00-029 (August 9, 2000). The need to seize
records of a development authority is foreseeable and, therefore, not an emergency. See AG File
No. 01-039 (August 20, 2001). See OMLO 2004-22 (June 15, 2004) where the unforeseen
resignation of the General Manager of the sewer treatment plant created an emergency because,
in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare, the public body needed to keep the plant
operating, and thus, an emergency meeting to employ a new manager was appropriate.
Where the financial health of the School District was at stake and where there was
threatened loss of revenue and apparent loss of revenue, the District’s characterization of the
emergency as an “unforeseen” event was appropriate. The Board’s decision to hire a licensed
administrator after a public meeting during which the Superintendent had been unexpectedly
fired was an unforeseen event. AG File No. 07-028 (September 18, 2007).
///
///
///
-52-
waivers of notice (See Sample Form 3); exemption from OML for meetings
held to consider individual applications for employment (NRS 241.034)
NRS 241.033 prohibits a public body from holding a meeting to consider the character,
alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of any person unless
it provided written notice to the person of the time and place of the meeting and received proof
of service of the notice. See NRS 241.033(1)(a) and (b). This applies whether the meeting will be
open or closed.
NRS 41.033(2)(c) requires a properly drafted notice to include a list of the general topics
concerning the person who will be considered by the public body during the closed meeting; and
a statement of the provisions of subsection 4, if applicable. Subsection 4 states:
That the person being considered by the public body must be

permitted to attend the closed meeting;
That the person being considered may have an attorney or other

representative of his/her choosing present during the closed
meeting; and
That the person being considered may present written evidence,

provide testimony, and present witnesses relating to his character,
alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or
mental health to the public body during the closed meeting.
NRS 241.033(2)(b) states that a public body may include an informational statement
in the notice that administrative action may be taken against the person after the public body
considers his/her character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental
health. If the notice pursuant to NRS 241.033 includes this informational statement, no further
notice is required pursuant to NRS 241.034.
The notice must be delivered either personally to that person at least five working days
before the meeting or must be sent by certified mail to the last known address of that person at
least 21 working days before the meeting. A similar notice is required by NRS 241.034 to
persons against whom administrative action will be taken or whose real property will be acquired
by eminent domain unless the public body includes an informational statement that
administrative action may be taken against the person in the notice under NRS 241.033. See
discussion above.
The public body must receive proof of service of the notice before the meeting may be
held.
-53-
Notice provisions of NRS 241.033 do not apply to applicants for employment with a
public body. NRS 241.033(7) exempted public meetings held to consider applicants for
employment with the public body from the provisions of NRS 241.033.
OML complainant alleged that the public body member made comments during the
public meeting to consider his appointment to an advisory body. It was alleged that the
comments impugned complainant’s character, effectively calling him a person “of less than
truthful character.” A public body member made comments about complainant not being a team
player, which caused the public body to focus the discussion on the complainant’s character.
This was a violation of NRS 241.033. Public bodies must carefully consider the ramifications of
a discussion of any person’s character, even if it is unintentional and even if it suddenly arises
during any agenda item. Remember to stick to the agenda. AG File No. 10-061 (March 29,
2011).
The Nevada Athletic Commission is exempt from the timing requirements (e.g.,
five working days for personal service or 21 days for certified mail) but still must give written
notice of the time and place of the meeting and must receive proof of service before conducting
the meeting. NRS 241.033(3).
“Casual or tangential references to a person or the name of a person during a closed

meeting do not constitute consideration of the character, alleged misconduct, professional
competence, or physical or mental health of the person.” NRS 241.033(7)(b); See also OMLO
2004-14 (April 20, 2004); OMLO 2003-18 (April 21, 2003); and OMLO 2003-28 (November 14,
2005) where the public body violated the Open Meeting Law by considering an employee’s
character or alleged misconduct without providing notice, but the mere mention of other
employees did not require notice to the other employees.
Notice requirements of NRS 241.033 only apply to natural persons because non-natural
persons cannot have “physical or mental health.” Thus, proper statutory construction dictates
that the notice under NRS 241.033 only must be provided to natural persons. See OMLO 2004-
13 (April 19, 2004).
If a public body discusses a pending lawsuit involving a particular person, a discussion of

that lawsuit which mentions the name of that person does not require the public body to provide
notice under NRS 241.033. See OMLO 2003-14 (March 21, 2003).
Notice requirements apply to applicants for professional licenses if their character,

alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health is to be considered at
the meeting. See Attorney General Letter Opinion to Jerry Higgins, Nevada Board of
Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, dated October 28, 1993 (licensing board which will
consider applicant’s character and professional competence must properly notice each applicant
in accordance with NRS 241.033).
There is no prohibition against waivers of the notice, and the courts consistently
recognize that an individual may, by express or implied waiver, relinquish a known statutory
right. However, a waiver carries legal consequences, and therefore must be a valid waiver. A
-54-
waiver of a statutory right is deemed valid if it is clear and unambiguous, given voluntarily, and
intended to relinquish a known statutory right. CBS, Inc. v. Merrick, 716 F.2d 1292 (9th Cir.
1983); State Board of Psychological Examiners v. Norman, 100 Nev. 241, 679 P.2d 1263 (1984).
It is recommended that the waiver be obtained in writing expressing: (1) the voluntary
nature of the waiver; (2) the applicant’s knowledge about the statutory right; and (3) the
applicant’s intention to relinquish that right. See Attorney General Letter Opinion to Jerry
Higgins, Nevada Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, dated October 28, 1993.
Sample Form 3 satisfies NRS 241.033 notice requirement when a person’s

character or professional competence or alleged misconduct or physical or mental health is
to be discussed by the public body.
§ 5.10 Meeting to consider administrative action against a person or acquisition of real

property by eminent domain (NRS 241.034)
Under NRS 241.034, a public body may not hold a meeting to take administrative actions
against a person or to acquire real property by condemnation from a person unless the public
body has given written notice to that person. The written notice either must be: (1) delivered
personally to the person at least five working days before the meeting; or (2) sent by certified
mail to the last known address of the person at least 21 working days before the meeting. Written
notice to the person is required in addition to the notice of meeting required by NRS 241.020.
See § 6.02.
A public body must receive proof of service of the written notice before the public body
may consider the matter. Proof of receipt of the notice is not required.
The terms “take,” “administrative action,” and “person” are not defined by Chapter 241
or by NRS 241.034. With respect to the eminent domain provision, the terms “acquire,”
“owned,” and “person” are not defined. The terms “administrative action” and “against a
person,” if interpreted and defined broadly, would encompass a myriad of actions performed by
local governments and state agencies, which were not all intended to be covered.
In Harris v. Washoe County Board of Equalization, Case No. 42951, 120 Nev. 1246, 131
P.3d 606 (Nov. 2, 2004), which was an unpublished order of the Supreme Court of Nevada and
not an opinion, the Supreme Court agreed with the above interpretation of the Office of the
Nevada Attorney General. In that case, the petitioners challenged the assessor’s valuation of their
property. The County Board contacted the petitioners one working day before the meeting to
consider their petition, but the County Board properly posted a public notice three working days
before the meeting. The County Board did not provide a personal notice to the petitioners,
pursuant to NRS 241.034. The petitioners filed for a preliminary injunction against the County
Board for failing to provide notice pursuant to NRS 241.034. The District Court denied the
injunction and the petitioners appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
The Court stated, “In this case, the language ‘administrative action against a person,’
which triggers the five-day personal notice requirement, is subject to more than one
-55-
interpretation.” The property owners argued that the language should be read broadly to “include
all administrative actions directed at specific individuals,” and thus, the County Board’s land
valuation hearings. The County Board asserted that the phrase should be tailored more narrowly
“to include only those actions involving an individual’s characteristics or qualifications, not
those of real property.”
The Court stated that the rules of statutory construction compel the Court to adopt the
County Board’s more narrow approach. The broad view advocated by the property owners would
render the notice requirement for eminent domain “nugatory” because any action with regard to a
person’s realty would require notice. The Court determined that such an interpretation was not
the appropriate construction of the statute. The Court then defined the phrase “administrative
action against a person” as “those actions involving an individual’s characteristics or
qualifications, not those of real property.” Therefore, the Court held that the County Board did
not violate the Open Meeting Law.
For purposes of enforcement actions under NRS 241.037(1), this office will follow these
guidelines:
1) Except as noted below, “person” includes natural persons and inanimate entities such as
partnerships, corporations, trusts, and limited liability companies. “Person” includes,
essentially, anything legally capable of holding an interest in property or legally capable
of receiving a permit or license.
2) “Administrative action against a person” does not occur unless the matter being acted on
is uniquely personal to the individual or entity. “Administrative action against a person”
does not occur when the legal basis of the action is consideration of the inanimate
characteristics of a facility or property and no consideration of the characteristics or
qualifications of the individual or entity (the person) that has sought the governmental
approval. See the discussion of Harris above.
For example, a decision against an applicant for a barber’s license for the individual
practitioner is subject to NRS 241.034, but a decision against an applicant for a barbershop
license is not.
Certain business and occupational licenses issued by state and local governments may
depend on an analysis of a blend of personal factors as well as real and personal property. Some
statutes, regulations, and ordinances grant, condition, or deny a particular license solely on the
adequacy of the premises (sanitation, fire codes, square footage, and zoning) without reference to
the personal aspects of the business person seeking the license. These types of business licenses
are not subject to NRS 241.034. But if a business license is granted or denied in part by reference
to the personal aspects of the applicant, then NRS 241.034 applies.
(a) “Action against a person” within the meaning of NRS 241.034 does not include
adoption of ordinances or regulations; the granting or denying of petitions for declaratory orders
or advisory opinions; action on zoning requests, building permits, most variances, and other land
use decisions that do not depend on the identity, status, personal qualifications, or characteristics
-56-
of the person. These decisions are “against” the entire population, whole neighborhoods,
industries, and other interest groups. Notice to such large numbers of persons is not required by
NRS 241.034.
(b) An act is not subject to the additional notice requirements of NRS 241.034 if the
action depends on the application of either objective or discretionary standards and criteria to
land, water, air, or other inanimate matters unrelated to the personal qualities and characteristics
of the owner of the property that is subject to the authority of the public body.
(c) Note that other statutes and ordinances typically have extensive notice provisions
for the special subject matter covered. Those laws must be complied with, but failure to do so
will not be a violation of chapter 241.
(d) Imposing discipline on a person is an “action against a person.” Most penalties

(except for taxation) are uniquely personal because they are based on the misconduct of a person
and, therefore, are “actions against a person.”
3) Decisions to accept gifts and to purchase, sell, encumber, or lease any interest in real or
personal property are examples of non-personal, inanimate-subject decisions that are not
within the meaning of “administrative action against a person,” even though each
decision may be, in a very real sense, “against” someone, unless the purchase involves
eminent domain, in which case the owner of the property must be notified.
-57-
Part 6 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARING
AND FOLLOWING THE AGENDA? (See Sample Form 1)
§ 6.01 General
A public body’s failure to adhere to agenda requirements will result in an Open Meeting
Law violation. Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 156, 67 P.3d 902, 906 (2003). If a
matter is acted upon which was not described clearly and completely on the agenda, the action is
void under NRS 241.036.
NRS 241.020(2)(c) requires public body agendas include the following at a minimum:
2. Except in an emergency, written notice of all meetings must be

given at least three working days before the meeting. The notice
must include:
(a) The time, place and location of the meeting.
(b) A list of the locations where the notice has been posted.
(c)The name and contact information for the person designated
by the public body from who a member of the public may request
the supporting material for the meeting described in subsection 6
and a list of the locations where the supporting material is
available to the public.
(d) An agenda consisting of:
(1) A clear and complete statement of the topics scheduled to
be considered during the meeting.
(2) A list describing the items on which action may be taken
and clearly denoting that action may be taken on those items by
placing the term “for possible action” next to the appropriate item
or, if the item is placed on the agenda pursuant to NRS 241.0365,
by placing the term “for possible corrective action” next to the
appropriate item.
(3) Periods devoted to comments by the general public, if
any, and discussion of those comments. Comments by the general
public must be taken:
(I) At the beginning of the meeting before any items on
which action may be taken are heard by the public body and again
before the adjournment of the meeting; or
(II) After each item on the agenda on which action may be
taken is discussed by the public body, but before the public body
takes action on the item.
The provisions of this subparagraph do not prohibit a public
body from taking comments by the general public in addition
to what is required pursuant to sub-subparagraph (I) or (II).
Regardless of whether a public body takes comments from the
general public pursuant to sub-subparagraph (I) or (II), the public
-58-
body must allow the general public to comment on any matter that
is not specifically included on the agenda as an action item at some
time before adjournment of the meeting. No action may be taken
upon a matter raised during a period devoted to comments by the
general public until the matter itself has been specifically included
on an agenda as an item upon which action may be taken pursuant
to subparagraph (2).
(4) If any portion of the meeting will be closed to consider
the character, alleged misconduct or professional competence of
a person, the name of the person whose character, alleged
misconduct or professional competence will be considered.
(5) If, during any portion of the meeting, the public body will
consider whether to take administrative action regarding a person,
the name of that person.
(6) Notification that:
(I) Items on the agenda may be taken out of order;
(II) The public body may combine two or more agenda
items for consideration; and
(III) The public body may remove an item from the
agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any
time.
(7) Any restrictions on comments by the general public. Any
such restrictions must be reasonable and may restrict the time,
place and manner of the comments, but may not restrict comments
based upon viewpoint.
§ 6.02 Agenda must be clear and complete (See Sample Form 1)
In Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 67 P.3d 902 (2003), the Nevada Supreme
Court analyzed three related issues under Nevada’s Open Meeting Law: (1) the “clear and
complete” standard required for agenda statements by NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), (2) discussion
which exceeds the scope of a properly noticed agenda statement, and (3) whether the Open
Meeting Law violates the First Amendment by improperly restricting members’ right to free
speech. The analysis of the “clear and complete” standard will be discussed in this section of
the manual, the analysis regarding exceeding the scope of the agenda statement will be discussed
in § 7.03 of this manual, and the analysis regarding the First Amendment will be discussed in
§ 13.03 of this manual.
In Sandoval, the Court considered the actions of two different public bodies related
to the University and Community College System of Southern Nevada, the Campus Environment
Committee (Committee) and the Board of Regents (Board). Since the analysis regarding the
Board discussed the “clear and complete” standard under NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), this section of
the manual will discuss only the facts, circumstances, and analysis surrounding the Board. For a
discussion regarding the facts, circumstances, and analysis regarding the Committee exceeding
the agenda statement, see § 7.03 below.
-59-
In September of 2000, the Board held a public meeting and noticed an item that stated:
Committee Reports:
Campus Environment Committee
Chairman Tom Kilpatrick will present a report on the Campus
Environment committee meeting held September 7, 2000 and
requests Board action on the following recommendations of the
committee:
Round Table Discussion of Actions and Schedule of Topics to be
Discussed with Campus Representatives--The committee reviewed
previous actions and unfinished business of the committee and
compiled a schedule of topics for the remainder of the year.
119 Nev. at 152, 67 P.3d at 904.
Regent Kilpatrick properly reported the topics to be discussed for the remainder of the
year, and he discussed the law governing the release of documents. He then informed the Board
that a request was made for the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), report regarding a
dormitory raid, and a document regarding disarming the UNLV police department. After Regent
Kilpatrick’s presentation, Regent Aldean suggested that the Board make available a redacted
version of the NDI report regarding the raid, and the Board agreed with this suggestion. As a
result, the Office of the Attorney General filed suit alleging a violation of the “clear and
complete” standard in NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1). The district court granted summary judgment for
the Board holding that the “germane standard” should apply to Nevada’s Open Meeting Law,
and since the discussion by the Board of the NDI report was germane to the agenda statement,
there was no violation of the Open Meeting Law. The Office of the Attorney General appealed
this decision.
The Supreme Court’s analysis immediately rejected the “germane standard” as

too lenient a standard in Nevada. The Court stated, “[T]he legislative history of
NRS 241.020(2)(c)(1) [now NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1) illustrates that the Legislature enacted the
statute because ‘incomplete and poorly written agendas deprive citizens of their right to take part
in government.’” 119 Nev. at 154, 67 P.3d at 905. The Court also stated, “Nevada’s Open
Meeting Law seeks to give the public clear notice of the topics to be discussed at public meetings
so that the public can attend a meeting when an issue of interest will be discussed.” 119 Nev. at
155, 67 P.3d at 906. As a result, the Court held that the Board violated the Open Meeting Law
because the agenda statement was too broad to place the public on notice that the Board would
take informal action to obtain a redacted NDI report and discuss an examination of disarming the
UNLV police, both issues of public interest.
In 2007, following the Sandoval decision, the Nevada Supreme Court issued another
decision impacting the “clear and complete” rule. In Schmidt v. Washoe County, 123 Nev. 128,
159 P.3d 1099 (2007), the Court decided an issue regarding whether an
agenda item on the BOCC’s agenda was clear and complete. The agenda item stated:
“Legislative Update—this item may be discussed at Monday’s Caucus Meeting and/or Tuesday’s
Board Meeting and may involve discussion by [WCBC] and direction to staff on various bill
-60-
draft requests (BDRs).” The agenda also instructed the public that a list of specific bills which
staff would seek direction from the WCBC would be posted online on the County’s website after
6:00 p.m. on Friday before the Monday caucus meeting. Hard copies would be placed in the
County Manager’s office by 9 a.m. on Monday. The Schmidt Court stated that this factual issue
was a close question. However it determined the WCBC’s agenda item met the “clear and
complete” standard, because the item noticed the public that WCBC and staff planned to discuss
certain BDRs at its Caucus meeting or the following day’s regular meeting and the Court found
the WCBC had provided a list of specific BDR’s on the County’s website three days before the
Caucus.
In an Attorney General opinion, this office reviewed the agenda item to determine
whether it was clear and complete. The disputed agenda item stated: “5(C) Discussion regarding
election of CEO to receive contractual bonus based upon FY 08 positive evaluation.” The issue
was whether it was legally sufficient to impart notice to the CEO that his character and
professional competence would be considered by the Board. This office opined that the Board
exceeded the scope of the agenda item. Among the matters impermissibly discussed and beyond
the scope of the item were the person’s “ongoing communication skills,” discussion of an earlier
professional evaluation, and discussion of his character traits for honesty and integrity. The
person’s general reputation was denigrated before the Board in a significant and substantive
fashion so as to constitute a violation of both the OML’s notice requirement and its “clear and
complete” rule. See AG File No. 10-014 (February 25, 2010).
In another Attorney General Opinion, we reviewed a public body agenda “action” item
which stated in part: “Consideration to Approve Advertisement of Irrigation Water Shares and to
Set Time for Said Auction.” After investigation, it was determined to be incomplete. This item
was not clear and complete so as to indicate to the public that the advertisement was for the lease
of irrigation water shares. Similarly, another agenda item from another meeting of the same
public body did not disclose to the public body that a provision for the lease-back of water was a
condition of sale. Because the issue of fair market value of water rights was of significant
interest to the public body and the public, the absence of disclosure of a lease-back provision
from the agenda item was a violation of the OML’s requirement that agenda topics be expressed
clearly and completely. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1). AG File No. 09-014 (June 30, 2009); see also
AG File No. 09-032 (December 3, 2009).
In AG File No. 09-044 (December 17, 2009), Complainant’s allegation was that the text
of agenda item 31 was not clear and complete because it did not inform the public that (in
Complainant’s view) it committed taxpayers to contingent liabilities beyond current taxing
authority. The OML does not provide oversight to the decision-making process of public bodies.
It does not allow this office to second guess decisions or actions by public bodies even if the
decision might have been improvident. AG File No. 09-044 (December 17, 2009).
The Office of the Attorney General has written several opinions on agendas. See Op.
Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 79-8 (March 26, 1979), and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 91-6 (May 23, 1991);
OMLO 99-01 (January 5, 1999); OMLO 99-02 (January 15, 1999); OMLO 99-03 (January 11,
1999); OMLO 2003-09 (March 4, 2003); OMLO 2003-13 (March 21, 2003); and OMLO 2003-
23 (June 24, 2003). AG File No. 08-007 (June 12, 2008).
-61-
The following guidelines are gleaned from these opinions regarding agenda items and the
clear and complete rule:
a. Merely indicating “Licensing Board” on an agenda without listing the names of the
licensees who will be considered is not proper.
b. An agenda item for consideration of business permits should include the name and,
where appropriate, the address of the proposed business and/or applicants.
c. Agenda items must be described with clear and complete detail so that the public will
receive notice in fact of what is to be discussed by the public body.
d. Use a standard of reasonableness in preparing the agenda and keep in mind the spirit
and purpose of the Open Meeting Law.
e. Always keep in mind that the purpose of the agenda is to give the public notice of
what its government is doing, has done, or may do.
f. The use of general or vague language as a mere subterfuge is to be avoided.
g. Use of broad or unspecified categories in an agenda should be restricted only to those

items in which it cannot be anticipated what specific matters will be considered.
h. An agenda must never be drafted with the intent of creating confusion or uncertainty
as to the items to be considered or for the purpose of concealing any matter from public
notice.
i. Agendas should be written in a manner that actually gives notice to the public of the
items anticipated to be brought up at the meeting.
j. Generic agenda items such as “President’s Report,” “Committee Reports,” “New

Business,” and “Old Business” do not provide a clear and complete statement of the
topics scheduled to be considered. Such items must not be listed as for possible action
items as they do not adequately describe matters upon which action is to be taken. See
OMLO 99-03 (January 11, 1999).
k. Agendas for retreats should identify the event as a retreat, give

the objectives to be accomplished, and include the specific topics for discussion. See
OMLO 99-02 (January 15, 1999). See § 6.02 for items that must be included in the notice
and agenda if not covered in the notice for the meeting.
Additionally, based on some of the complaints received by the Office of the Attorney
General, the following suggestions are offered:
-62-
a. Public bodies should not “approve” or take action on administrative reports by staff
unless the agenda clearly denotes that the report is an item for possible action and
specifically sets out the matter to be acted on from the report.
b. Generic items such as “reports” or “general comments by board members” invite

trouble because discussions spawned under them may be of great public interest and may
lead to deliberations or actions without the benefit of public scrutiny or input. Generic
items should be used sparingly and carefully, and actual discussions should be controlled
tightly. Matters of public interest should be rescheduled for further discussion at later
meetings.
c. Agenda descriptions for resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, rules, or other

such items to be considered by public bodies, should describe to what the statute,
ordinance, regulation, resolution, or rule relates, so that the public may determine if it is a
subject in which they have an interest which might lead to their attendance at the public
meeting. See OMLO 99-01 (January 5, 1999); OMLO 99-03 (January 11, 1999).
Below are synopses of three recent Attorney General Opinions which applied the “clear
and complete” rule:
• Public body’s use of phrase “and all matters related thereto” was a violation of the OML
because use of the phrase allows the public body to stray into discussion on matters not
specifically listed in the item. Use of the phrase “and all matters related thereto” does not
comply with the statute’s requirement that every agenda item contain a clear and
complete statement of topics to be considered. AG File No. 10-049 (December 17, 2010);
• Public body must recognize that a “‘higher degree of specificity [for agenda items]
is needed when the subject to be debated is of special or significant interest to
the public,’” Sandoval, 119 Nev. at 154-155, 67 P.3d at 906 (quoting Gardner
v. Herring, 21 S.W.3d 767, 773 (Tex.App.2000)). Mandatory trash service and billing
was and is an item of significance in the City of Fernley requiring greater agenda item
specificity. A Council agenda item merely stated that “special provisions for inclusion of
[sic] a new franchise agreement(s)” would be discussed at the meeting, but this generic
description was too broad. The public was not alerted that mandatory billing and trash
pickup was the special provision. AG File No. 09-003 (March 27, 2009).
• A public body rejected a staff recommendation for naming a new Las Vegas area Career
and Technical Academy. Agenda item 7.01: “NAMING OF DISTRICT FACILITIES,
VETERANS MEMORIAL CENTRAL CAREER AND TECHNICAL ACADEMY.
Discussion and possible action on approval to name a school the Veterans Memorial
Central Career and Technical Academy, is recommended.” Item 7.01 was not in violation
of the “clear and complete” rule. Nothing in the OML prohibits a public body from
rejecting or amending staff’s recommendation regarding a school name, or that requires
the public body to vote up or down on exact wording of any proposal brought before it.
-63-
This is too narrow an interpretation of NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1)—the “clear and complete”
rule. AG File No. 09-006 (February 2, 2009).
§ 6.03 Stick to the agenda
As discussed in § 7.02, supra, Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 67 P.3d 902
(2003) provided analysis of a public body’s failure to discuss only matters within the scope of its
agenda. In that case, the Campus Environment Committee (Committee) held a meeting on
September 7, 2000. The agenda item stated: “Review of UCCSN Policies on Reporting.” It
further described the item’s scope as:
“Review UCCSN, state and federal statutes, regulations, case law,

and policies that govern the release of materials, documents, and
reports to the public.”
119 Nev. at 151, 67 P.3d at 903–904.
At this meeting, the Committee discussed a controversial NDI report regarding a

dormitory raid by UNLV police. Regent Hill discussed the details of the raid, criticized the
UNLV police department, and recommended that the police department be disarmed. This
discussion occurred against the advice of legal counsel. The Office of the Attorney General sued
the Regents for exceeding the scope of the agenda item. The district court granted summary
judgment for the Committee after applying a “germane standard” to the discussion, concluding
the discussion was germane to the agenda item. The Office of the Attorney General appealed.
The Supreme Court stated that the agenda statement was “clear and complete” under
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), and, in the abstract, the Committee could have discussed the NDI
report. However, the Court held, “[t]he plain language of NRS 241.020(2)(c)(1) [now
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1)] requires that discussion at a public meeting cannot exceed the scope of a
clearly and completely stated agenda topic.” Id, 119 Nev. at 154, 67 P.3d at 905. Here, the
Committee violated the Open Meeting Law by exceeding the scope of the agenda statement
“when it discussed the details of the report, criticized the UNLV police department, and
commented on the impact of drug use on the campus.” The Court said the Committee’s agenda
statement did not inform the public that these matters would be a topic of discussion. Id., 119
Nev. at 155, 67 P.3d at 906.
Many other complaints received by the Office of the Attorney General have to do with
public bodies wandering off their agendas. Discussions may start on an agenda item but then
drift off into other matters. (See AG File No. 10-014 (February 25, 2010) for an example of a
deliberate discussion of a person’s character without notice and beyond the scope of the agenda
item.) The chair for a public meeting or its counsel should be vigilant to stop the discussion
from drifting in order to prevent Open Meeting Law violations. See OMLO 98-03 (July 7, 1998)
for an example of how a public body can violate the Open Meeting Law by wandering off its
meeting agenda. See also OMLO 99-09 (July 28, 1999) for an example of how a budget
workshop designated for discussion and review of a proposed budget resulted in several
-64-
violations of the Open Meeting Law, when members of the public body made decisions on
various items within the proposed budget.
Deviating from the agenda by commencing a meeting prior to its noticed meeting time
violates the spirit and intent of the Open Meeting Law and nullifies the purpose of the notice
requirements set forth in NRS 241.020(2). See OMLO 99-13 (December 13, 1999).
In this Open Meeting law opinion, the public body’s Chairman brought up new subjects
unrelated to agenda item. A Commissioner interjected a call for a parliamentary point-of-order.
Even though the Chair’s remarks strayed beyond the agenda item, which was “review and
discussion of written items sent or received by the Commission since the last regular meeting
and to send correspondence copies for the exhibit file,” the Chair ignored the point of order. His
refusal to acknowledge the point-of-order and return to the subject matter of the agenda was a
violation of the OML. The OML does not permit a public body to discuss a matter not on the
agenda as long as no action is taken. The OML clearly states that each agenda item must be
“clearly and completely” set forth. It is not conditional on whether it is an informational item or
an action item. AG File No. 09-031 (October 22, 2009)
§ 6.04 Matters brought up during public comment; meeting continued to another date
The Open Meeting law requires multiple periods of public comment on each public body
agenda. No action may be taken upon a matter raised in public comment or anywhere else on the
agenda, until the matter itself has been included specifically on a future agenda as an item upon
which action may be taken.
Restrictions on public comment must be reasonable and must be noticed on the agenda,
i.e., time limitations. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(7), see § 8.04, infra. Restrictions must be viewpoint
neutral. At least one of the multiple periods of public comment must allow the public to speak
about any matter within the public body’s jurisdiction, control, or advisory power. See § 8.04 for
the requirements for conducting the public comment period. The Open Meeting Law does not
limit a public body’s discretion to refuse to place on the agenda an item requested by a member
of the public. Any limits are a matter of general administrative law. See AG File No. 00-047
(April 27, 2001).
Where a meeting is continued to a future date, the reconvened meeting must have the
same agenda or portion thereof at the later date. The new date is a second, separate meeting for
purposes of notice and public comment, and a member of the public is entitled to make public
comment on the same subject at both meetings. [For explanation of the public comment
requirement, see AG File No. 01-012 (May 21, 2001).]
§ 6.05 Meeting that must be continued to a future date
A meeting which is continued to a future date where the continuation date does not
appear on the original agenda must be re-noticed as a new meeting. The agenda must be posted
according to NRS 241.020(2) (three working days before the noticed meeting) whether the new
agenda carries over items from the prior agenda or whether it adds new items. The new date is a
-65-
second, separate meeting for purposes of notice and public comment, and a member of the public
is entitled to make public comment on the same subject at both meetings.
A meeting may be recessed and reconvened on the same date it was noticed without
violation of the notice provisions of the OML.
-66-
Part 7 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDUCTING
AN OPEN MEETING?
§ 7.01 General
In conducting meetings, one always should remember the message in NRS 241.010: “In
enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that all public bodies exist to aid in the
conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and
that their deliberations be conducted openly.” In interpreting a similar provision in California’s
open meeting law, the court of appeals delivered a humbling message when it said:
“The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the

agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do
not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for
the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The
people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control
over instruments they have created.”
Stockton Newspapers, Inc. v. Redevelopment Agency, 214 Cal.Rptr. 561, 63 (Ct. App. 1985)
(quoting Cal. Gov’t Code § 54950 (West 1985).
Accordingly, NRS 241.020 requires that, except as otherwise provided by statute, all
meetings of public bodies must be open and public, and all persons must be permitted to attend
any meeting of these bodies; NRS 241.040 makes the wrongful exclusion of any person from a
meeting a misdemeanor.
§ 7.02 Facilities
Public meetings should be held in facilities that are reasonably large enough to
accommodate anticipated attendance by members of the public.
Sometimes controversial public issues generate a larger-than-expected crowd and a

change of location or other methods (e.g., video transmission in adjoining rooms or areas) may
have to be employed in order to accommodate those persons seeking to attend
a particular meeting. But even if reasonable efforts like these prove inadequate to accommodate
everyone, the meeting still would qualify as a public meeting for purposes of the Open Meeting
Law. Gutierrez v. City of Albuquerque, 631 P.2d 304 (N.M. 1981).
Public bodies should avoid holding public meetings in places to which the general public
does not feel free to enter, such as a restaurant, private home, or club. While perhaps not in
violation of the letter of the Open Meeting Law, a meeting in such a location may be in violation
of the law’s spirit and intent. Cf. Crist v. True, 314 N.E.2d 186 (Ohio Ct. App. 1973). It is
unlawful to start a meeting before the public is allowed into the room. The public body must wait
until the public has been admitted to the meeting facility before commencing the meeting. See
AG File No. 01-002 (April 5, 2001).
-67-
§ 7.03 Accommodations for physically handicapped persons
NRS 241.020(1) provides that public officers and employees must make “reasonable
efforts to assist and accommodate physically handicapped persons desiring to attend” meetings
of a public body. In order to comply with this statute, it is required that public meetings be held,
whenever possible, only in buildings that are reasonably accessible to the physically
handicapped, i.e., those having a wheelchair ramp, elevators, etc., as may be appropriate. See
Fenton v. Randolph, 400 N.Y.S.2d 987 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1977).
§ 7.04 Public comment: multiple periods of public comment
comment agenda procedures:
• First, a public body may comply by agendizing one public comment period before any
action items are heard by the public body and later it must hear another period of public
• The second alternative also involves multiple periods of public comment which must be
heard after discussion of each agenda action item, but before the public body takes action
on the item.
• Finally, regardless of which alternative is selected, the public body must allow the public
some time, before adjournment, to comment on any matter within the public body’s
jurisdiction, control, or advisory power. This would include items not specifically
included on the agenda as an action item.
Discussion of public comment is specifically allowed under NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3). This

statute was amended in 1991. Now, it allows discussion of public comment with the public body.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3) provides that the public body must allow periods devoted to
comments by the general public, if any, and discussion of those comments, if the public body
chooses to engage the public in discussion. The statute does not mandate discussion with the
public, but it does allow discussion.
A public body may not inform the public that it legally is prohibited from discussing
public comments, either among themselves, or with speakers from the public.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3) clearly allows discussion with members of the public. Of course, no
matter raised in public comment may be the subject of either deliberation or action. AG File No.
10-037 (October 19, 2010); see § 5.01 for definition of “deliberation.”
§ 7.05 Reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions apply to public meetings
Except during the public comment period required by NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3), the Open
Meeting Law does not mandate that members of the public be allowed to speak during meetings;
-68-
however, once the right to speak has been granted by the Legislature (NRS 241.020(2)(3)), the
full panoply of First Amendment rights attaches to the public’s right to speak. The public’s
freedom of speech during public meetings vigorously is protected by both the U.S. Constitution
and the Nevada Constitution. Freedom of expression upon public questions is secured by the
First Amendment. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 269 (1964). This constitutional
safeguard was fashioned to assure an unfettered interchange of ideas for bringing about political
and social changes desired by the people.
The New York Times Court said that: “[a] rule compelling the critic of official conduct to
guarantee the truth of all his factual assertions and to do so on pain of libel judgment . . . leads to
. . . self-censorship and would deter protected speech.” See AG File No. 11-024 (November 21.
2011) (chairman of public body may not forbid public comment based on his disagreement with
the speaker about the truthfulness of his comment).
Both California and Nevada constitutional provisions (Nevada Constitution Article 1,

section 9) regarding freedom of speech are identical. The California Supreme Court expressed
the strength of these constitutional provisions, when in 1896, it observed that “Every person may
freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the
abuse of this right . . . .” In Dailey v. Superior Court, 112 Cal. 94, 97, 44 P. 458 (1896), the court
continued and said that “the wording of this section is terse and vigorous, and its meaning so
plain that construction is not needed. It is patent that these rights to speak, write, and publish,
cannot be abused until it is exercised, and before it is exercised there can be no responsibility.”
It also is settled law that reasonable rules and regulations during public meetings ensure
orderly conduct of a public meeting and ensure orderly behavior on the part of those persons
attending the meeting. Public bodies may adopt reasonable restrictions, including time limits on
individual comment, but NRS 241.020(2)(d)(7) requires all restrictions on public comment to be
expressed clearly on each agenda.
See AG File No. 10-021 (July 6, 2010). The OML allows considerable discretion to the
public body as to length of time allowed to speakers. There is no statutory or constitutional
requirement that each speaker’s time be correlated mathematically. However, any public
comment limitation, including when public comment will be allowed and whether public
comment will be allowed on current items on the agenda, clearly must be articulated on the
public body’s agenda. See § 8.03 above. OMLO 99-08 (July 8, 1999); see also AG File No. 07-
019 (July 17, 2007) (Board put an “as time allows” restriction on the public’s right to speak, this
restriction was unreasonable); see also AG File No. 07-020 (October 25, 2007) (public body was
advised that the absence of any statement of policy regarding public comment was a violation).
See OMLO 99-08 (July 8, 1999). Requiring prior approval of the use of electronic
devices during public comment is reasonable and not in violation of the Open Meeting Law. See
See OMLO 99-11 (August 26, 1999). The Office of the Attorney General believes that
any practice or policy that discourages or prevents public comment, even if technically in
compliance with the law, may violate the spirit of the Open Meeting Law, such as where a public
body required members of the public to sign up three and one-half hours in advance to speak at a
-69-
public meeting. This practice can have the effect of unnecessarily restricting public comment and
therefore does not comport with the spirit and intent of the Open Meeting Law.
A public body’s restrictions must be neutral as to the viewpoint expressed, but the public
body may prohibit comment if the content of the comments is a topic that is not relevant to, or
within the authority of, the public body, or if the content of the comments is willfully disruptive
of the meeting by being irrelevant, repetitious, slanderous, offensive, inflammatory, irrational, or
amounting to personal attacks or interfering with the rights of other speakers. See AG File No.
00-047 (April 27, 2001).
See AG File No 11-035 (December 23, 2011). In fact, the Ninth Circuit has long
recognized that First Amendment rights of expression are more limited during a meeting than in
a public forum, such as, for example, a street corner. See Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, 586 F.3d
697, 699 (9th Cir. 2009), rev’d on other grounds, 629 F.3d 966 (9th Cir. 2010), cert. denied, City
of Santa Cruz, Cal. v. Norse, 132 S.Ct. 112 (2011). Moreover, government officials performing
discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity where they reasonably believe their
actions to be lawful. Id. (citing Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 202 (2001)). The interpretation
and the enforcement of rules during public meetings are highly discretionary functions. Id.
(citing White v. City of Norwalk, 900 F.2d 1421, 1426 (9th Cir.1990) (“[T]he point at which
speech becomes unduly repetitious or largely irrelevant is not mathematically determinable. The
role of a moderator involves a great deal of discretion.”)).
There is no First Amendment right to remain in a public meeting. “Citizens are not
entitled to exercise their First Amendment rights whenever and wherever they wish.” Kindt v.
Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 67 F.3d 266, 269 (9th Cir. 1995) (upholding a rent control
board's action in ejecting a speaker several times because his conduct disrupted the orderly
processes of meetings). The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that “limitations on
speech at [city council and city board] meetings must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral, but
that is all they need to be.” Id. at 271. A public body may not, in effect, close an open meeting by
declaring that the public has no First Amendment right whatsoever once the public comment
period has closed. Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, 629 F.3d 966, 975 (9th Cir. 2010). As the court
previously had explained in White v. City of Norwalk, 900 F.2d 1421, 1426 (9th Cir. 1990), the
entire meeting held in public is a limited public forum, from beginning to the end, not just
portions of it. The fact that a city may impose reasonable time, place, and manner limitations on
speech does not mean that by doing so it can transform the nature of the forum, much less
extinguish all First Amendment rights. In Santa Cruz, a provocative gesture that was made after
the public comment period closed still was subject to a determination of whether it enjoyed First
Amendment viewpoint protection.
Right to public comment was denied when the Chair made the individual choose between
public comment at the meeting or possibly lose her promised chance to have a future agenda
topic devoted to her issue. This choice meant the individual could speak only once about a matter
within the body’s jurisdiction and control. Public comment during a public meeting has been
bestowed by statute but once bestowed only may be restricted or limited in a constitutional
manner. An individual’s right to comment is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner
-70-
restrictions, but the Chair’s offer of a choice to this speaker was not based on constitutionally
valid time, place, or manner restrictions. See AG File No. 10-012 (May 18, 2010).
A member of the public may not be excluded from a tour taken by a public body during a
meeting, for example, where a jail advisory committee scheduled a tour of the county jail. While
the sheriff may have authority to exclude persons, if persons are excluded, the public body
violates the Open Meeting Law if the tour is taken without the excluded member of the public.
See AG File No. 00-013 (March 30, 2001).
When public comment is allowed during the consideration of a specific topic, the
chairperson may require public comment to be relevant to the topic, provided the restriction is
viewpoint neutral. When public comment is not allowed during the consideration of a specific
topic on the agenda, the public body must allow at least one general period of public comment
during that meeting where the public may speak on any subject within the jurisdiction, control,
or advisory authority of the public body. See AG File No. 01-022 (May 31, 2001) and AG File
No. 00-047 (April 27, 2001).
§ 7.06 Excluding people who are disruptive
If a person willfully disrupts a meeting, to the extent that its orderly conduct is made
impractical, the person may be removed from the meeting. NRS 241.030(4)(a). See AG File No.
10-006 (April 13, 2010). Complainant’s removal from the room by security was justified based
on an intentional disturbance generated by the volume of comments which were audible to the
Board and which prevented orderly conduct of the meeting. The chair of the public body may,
without a vote of the body, declare a recess to remove a person who is disrupting the meeting.
See AG File No. 00-046 (December 11, 2000). See § 8.04 above, for further detailed discussion
of reasonable restrictions during a public meeting.
§ 7.07 Excluding witnesses from testimony of other witnesses
Under NRS 241.030(4)(b), a witness may be removed from a public or private

meeting during the testimony of other witnesses. This applies even if the witness is
an employee of the state agency that is prosecuting the case. Unless otherwise stipulated, the
witness may continue to be excluded after he/she testifies. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 93
(November 21, 1963). The witness should be allowed entrance after all other witnesses
have testified. Aside from these witness exclusion rules, remember that
NRS 241.033(4) prohibits the public body from excluding the person being considered under
NRS 241.030 at any time during the closed meeting, as well as his/her representative or attorney.
§ 7.08 Votes by secret ballot forbidden; voting requirements for elected public bodies
voting requirements for appointed public bodies (NRS 241.0355)
Since a secret ballot defeats the accountability of public servants, vote by secret ballot is
not permitted under the Open Meeting Law. Cf. News & Observer Publ’g Co. v. Interim Bd. of
Educ., 223 S.E.2d 580 (N.C. Ct. App. 1976); Olathe Hosp. Found., Inc. v. Extendicare, Inc., 539
-71-
P.2d 1 (Kan. 1975); State ex rel. Wineholt v. Laporte Super. Ct. No. 2, 230 N.E.2d 92 (Ind.
1967).
But that does not mean all votes must be by roll call. The Open Meeting Law is satisfied
if a vote is by roll call, show of hands, or any other method so that the vote of a public official is
made known to the public at the time the vote is cast. Esperance v. Chesterfield Twp. of Macomb
County, 280 N.W.2d 559 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979).
A public body that is required to be composed only of elected officials may not
take action by vote unless at least a majority of all members of the public body vote in favor of
the action. A public body may not count an abstention as a vote in favor of an action.
NRS 241.0355(1).
In a letter opinion construing public body voting requirements set out in NRS 241.0355,
this office determined that the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC)
was composed of elected officials from statutorily designated public bodies in Clark County;
therefore, it is an elected public body subject to the voting requirements of NRS 241.0355.
Before action can be taken by RTC, NRS 241.0355 requires a majority of the RTC members to
vote affirmatively. There can be no reduction in quorum due to the absence of one or more
commissioners where the public body is required to be composed of elected officials, even if
they are appointed to the RTC by the membership of another elected public body. Letter opinion
to Chairman Larry Brown, Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, July 8,
2011.
“Action” means:
(a) If a public body has a member who is not an elected official,
an affirmative vote taken by a majority of the members present,
whether in person or by means of electronic communication,
during a meeting of the public body, but;
(b) If all the members of a public body must be elected officials,
an affirmative vote taken by a majority of all the members of the
public body. See NRS 241.015(1).
For example, if only three members of a five person county commission (elected body)
are present at a meeting, the three cannot take action by a 2-to-1 vote; the vote must be 3 to 0,
since a majority (3) must be in favor of the action.
The Open Meeting Law never can force a public body to take action on any agenda topic.
See AG File No. 00-018 (June 8, 2000). NRS 241.020(2)(d)(6)(III) (public body may remove an
item from the agenda at any time or delay its discussion at any time).
The Legislature encourages appointed or elected members of public bodies to vote—not

abstain. NRS 281A.420(4)(b) states: “Because abstention by a public officer disrupts
the normal course of representative government and deprives the public and the public
officer’s constituents of a voice in governmental affairs, the provisions of
NRS 281A.420 are intended to require abstention only in clear cases where the independence of
-72-
judgment of a reasonable person in the public officer’s situation would be materially affected by
the public officer’s acceptance of a gift or loan, significant pecuniary interest, or commitment in
a private capacity to the interests of another person.”
§ 7.09 Audio and/or video recordings of public meetings by members of the public
Under NRS 241.035(3), members of the public may be allowed to record on audio tape or
any other means of sound or video reproduction if it is a public meeting and the recording in no
way interferes with the conduct of the meeting.
§ 7.10 Telephone conferences
See § 5.05 for a discussion of the proper way to conduct telephone conferences.
-73-
Part 8 WHEN ARE CLOSED MEETINGS AUTHORIZED AND
HOW ARE THEY TO BE HANDLED?
§ 8.01 General
This part discusses when closed meetings (sometimes referred to as “executive sessions”
or “personnel sessions”) may be held and how they should be conducted.
The opening clause in NRS 241.020(1) provides that all meetings must be open
and public “except as otherwise provided by specific statute.” The words “specific statute”
are important ones. The Nevada Supreme Court is reluctant to imply exceptions
to the rule of open meetings and looks for a specific statute mandating the exception or
exemption. See McKay v. Board of County Commissioners, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987).
See also Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 150 (November 8, 1973). In 2015, the Legislature amended
NRS 241.016(3). Any provision of law, including NRS 91.270, 239C.140, 281A.350, 281A.440,
281A.550, 284.3629, 286.150, 287.0415, 288.220, 289.387, 295.121, 360.247, 385.555, 386.585,
392.147, 392.467, 392.656, 392A.105, 394.1699, 396.3295, 433.534, 435.610, 463.110, 622.320,
622.340, 630.311, 630.336, 639.050, 642.518, 642.557, 686B.170, 696B.550, 703.196, and
706.1725, which provides that any meeting, hearing, or other proceeding is not subject to the
OML or otherwise authorizes or requires a closed meeting, hearing, or proceeding, prevails over
the OML.
NRS 241.020(1) was amended in 2009 with additional clarifying language. The 2009
amendment not only emphasized the importance of statutory authority before a meeting may be
closed, but it also requires strict adherence to the statutory limits imposed on scope of the
meeting. The Open Meeting Law is entitled to a broad interpretation to promote openness in
government and any exceptions thereto should be construed strictly. McKay v. Board of
Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 730 P.2d 438 (1986). Thus, closed sessions should be allowed only
when specifically authorized and their scope must be tightly controlled.
§ 8.02 When closed sessions may be held
Closed sessions may be held:
(1) By any public body to consider character, alleged misconduct, professional

competence, or the physical or mental health of a person, with some exceptions, or to
prepare, revise, administer, or grade examinations administered on behalf of the public
body, or to consider an appeal by a person of the results of an examination administered
on behalf of the public body. See NRS 241.030 and § 9.04.
(2) By the Public Employees Retirement Board: (1) to meet with investment counsel,
provided the closed session is limited to planning future investments or the establishment
of investment objectives and policies, and (2) to meet with legal counsel provided
the closed session is limited to advice on claims or suits by or against the system.
NRS 286.150(2).
-74-
(3) By the State Board of Pharmacy to deliberate on the decision in an administrative
action (subsequent to a public evidentiary hearing) or to prepare, grade, or administer
examinations. See NRS 639.050(3) and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-C (June 25, 1981).
(4) By any public body to take up matters or conduct activities that are exempt under the
Open Meeting Law. See Part 4 of this manual. If the public body has other matters that
must be considered in an open meeting, the Office of the Attorney General believes that a
public body may take up an exempt matter during the open meeting if it desires.
However, by virtue of the exemption, none of the open meeting requirements will apply
to the exempt activity, although it is recommended that a motion or announcement be
made identifying the activity as an exempt activity to avoid confusion between an exempt
activity and a closed session to which certain open meeting requirements may otherwise
apply.
(5) By public housing authorities when negotiating the sale and purchase of property, but
the formal acceptance of the negotiated settlement should be made in an open meeting.
See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 372 (December 29, 1966).
(6) As authorized by a specific statute. NRS 241.020(1).
§ 8.03 When closed sessions may not be held
Closed sessions may not be held:
(1) To discuss the appointment of any person to public office or as a member of a public
body. NRS 241.030(4)(d). See discussion in § 9.04.
(2) To consider the character, alleged misconduct, or professional competence of an

elected member of a public body, or a person who is an appointed public officer or who
serves at the pleasure of a public body as a chief executive or administrative officer or in
a comparable position, including, without limitation, a president of a university, state
college, or community college within the Nevada System of Higher Education, a
superintendent of a county school district, a county manager, and a city manager. See
NRS 241.031(1)(a) and (1)(b) and cf. Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. 81-A (February 23, 1981),
written before NRS 241.031 was enacted.
[Note: The above prohibition does not apply if the consideration of the character,
alleged misconduct, or professional competence of the person does not pertain to his or
her role as an elected member of a public body or an appointed public officer or other
officer described above. NRS 241.031(2).]
(3) When a request to open the meeting is made by the person whose character, alleged
misconduct or professional competence, or physical or mental health is being considered,
the public body must open the meeting at that time unless the consideration of the
character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of
-75-
the requester involves the appearance before the public body of another person who
does not desire that the meeting or relevant portion thereof be open to the public. The
request to open the meeting may be made at any time during the hearing.
NRS 241.030(2). If a necessary witness requests that the meeting remain closed, the
public body must close that portion of the meeting, and open subsequent portions at the
request of the person being considered. NRS 241.030.
(4) To conduct attorney-client communications, unless the communications fall under

the exemption in NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2). See discussion in § 4.05 of this manual.
(5) To select possible recipients for awards. To the extent that a public body is
considering the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or
mental health of a person under consideration for receipt of a public award, a public body
may meet in closed session to discuss such matters. However, any vote taken with respect
to granting the award must be in a public meeting. NRS 241.030.
(6) To consider indebtedness of individuals to a hospital. The Office of the Attorney

General has determined that county hospital board meetings that relate to indebtedness of
individuals to the hospital are required to be open and public. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen.
No. 148 (October 2, 1973).
(7) By a local ethics board to discuss past conduct of a public official. See Op. Nev.
Att’y Gen. No. 94-21 (July 29, 1994).
(8) Where not authorized by law.

interviews and performance evaluations; notice requirements
NRS 241.030(1) states: “Except as otherwise provided in this section and NRS 241.031
and 241.033, a public body may hold a closed meeting to consider the character, alleged
misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of a person.” The Open
Meeting Law does not require a public body to close a meeting to the public. See
NRS 241.030(4)(c).
It is important to remember that NRS 241.033 requires personal notice be provided

to the person being considered before closing a meeting, pursuant to NRS 241.030, and
as a practical matter, a notice pursuant to NRS 241.033 should contain the informational
statement regarding administrative action under NRS 241.033(2)(b). See § 6.09 and
§ 6.10 supra.
A public body must start its public meeting in the open and then it may close the meeting
after passing a motion specifying the nature of the business to be considered in closed session
and the statutory authority pursuant to which the public body is authorized to close the meeting.
In 2009, the Legislature added an important emphasis to the scope of a closed meeting, putting
parameters on the business that can be considered in closed session. NRS 241.020(1) was
-76-
amended emphasizing that a meeting must not exceed the scope of the statutory authorization for
closure. A public body may not stray from the statutory authorization to close a meeting. A
public body may not set the parameters of the meeting; it must follow and obey statutory
parameters.
The exceptions to closed meetings under NRS 241.030 are discussed supra in § 9.03.
The word “character” was defined in Miglionico v. Birmingham News. Co., 378 So. 2d
677 (Ala. 1979) to include one’s general reputation. It also might include such personal traits as
honesty, loyalty, integrity, reliability, and such other characteristics, good or bad, which make up
one’s individual personality.
In Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-A (February 23, 1981), the Office of the Attorney
General, citing Black’s Law Dictionary, opined that character encompassed “[t]hat moral
predisposition or habit or aggregate of ethical qualities, which is believed to attach to
a person on the strength of the common opinion and report concerning him. A person’s fixed
disposition or tendency, as evidenced to others by his habits of life, through
the manifestation of which his general reputation for the possession of a character, good or
otherwise, is obtained.” Op. Nev. Att’y Gen No. 81-A further opined that the word competence
included being “[d]uly qualified; answering all requirements; having sufficient ability or
authority; possessing the natural or legal qualifications; able; adequate; suitable; sufficient;
capable; legally fit.
Closed sessions may be held only to consider the character, alleged misconduct,
professional competence, or physical or mental health of a person. The Open Meeting Law does
not permit taking action in closed session on such matters. This distinction was drawn in McKay
v. Bd. of Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 730 P.2d 438 (1986), where it was held the board did not
violate the Open Meeting Law when it went into closed session to discuss the character, alleged
misconduct, and professional competence of the city manager, but terminating the city manager
in closed session violated the law. See also Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-A (February 23, 1981)
and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-C (June 25, 1981).
The McKay decision has important implications for employment interviews and
performance evaluations. (See § 4.05, infra). While the delineated attributes of individual
employment candidates may be discussed in closed session, the public body may not use the
closed session to narrow down candidates or begin the selection process. See Brown v. East
Baton Rouge Parish School Bd., 405 So. 2d 1148 (La. Ct. App. 1981). Similarly, while the
delineated attributes of existing employees may be discussed in closed session, evaluation forms
may not be filled out during the closed session, nor may the public body form recommendations
or decisions about a rating or an action to take. Those tasks must be done in an open meeting or
delegated to a member to handle. The closed session must be limited to specific discussions
about the specific person. General discussions about general policies or practices may not be
held during a closed session. See Hudson v. Sch. Dist. of Kansas City, 578 S.W.2d 301 (Mo. Ct.
App. 1979).
-77-
While it can be difficult to properly describe an action item relating to a closed personnel
session, because one cannot anticipate the outcome of the closed session, one can describe, on
the agenda, the parameters of allowable action by stating “possible action including, but not
limited to, termination, suspension, demotion, reduction in pay, reprimand, promotion,
endorsement, engagement, retention, or ‘no action’.” See AG File No. 00-007 (June 1, 2000).
The statutes do not authorize closure for general “personnel sessions.” Closed sessions
are authorized only for discussion of the matters specifically listed in NRS 241.030 or in
another specific statute elsewhere in the NRS. See § 4.02, Statutory exemptions infra;
see AG File No. 00-043 (January 24, 2001). It is not adequate to vaguely state that the closed
session is regarding an individual (such as a manager). The agenda description must specifically
state the nature of the business to be considered and the statutory authority authorizing the closed
session. If a person’s character, professional competence, alleged misconduct, or physical
or mental health is the topic of the discussion, the person’s name must appear on the agenda.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(4); see AG File No. 00-050 (March 28, 2001).
See AG File No. 08-037 (February 26, 2009). Board members and the public engaged in
a discussion of a county employee’s character and professional competence without providing
the employee notice as required under NRS 241.033.
See OMLO 2004-01 (January 13, 2004) where the Office of the Nevada Attorney General
opined that deliberations as defined in §5.01 supra, are not allowed in a closed meeting pursuant
to NRS 241.030.
§ 8.05 The appointment to “public office” closed meeting prohibition
Under NRS 241.030(4)(d), closed sessions may not be held “for the discussion of the
appointment of any person to public office or as a member of a public body.” This prohibition
was discussed in City Council of City of Reno v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d
974 (1989). In that case, the city council conducted employment interviews for the city clerk
position in the open and then held a brief, closed meeting to discuss the character and
professional competence of candidates. The council went back into open session to make the
selection, but it was held that the closed session was still a violation of the Open Meeting Law.
The Nevada Supreme Court construed the prohibited “discussion of the appointment” to include
“all consideration, discussion, deliberation and selection done by a public body in the
appointment of a public officer.” The ruling seems to cover all aspects of the appointment
process.
The Open Meeting Law does not define “public officer,” but the Nevada Supreme Court
(see below) has approved the use of the definition of public officer found in NRS 281.005.
NRS 281A.160 also provides a definition of public officer and it also construes the meaning of
“the exercise of a public power, trust or duty.” In Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 193 (September 3,
1975), the Office of the Attorney General opined that NRS 241.030(4)(d) [formerly
NRS 241.030(3)(e)] encompasses: (1) all elected public officers, and (2) all persons appointed to
positions created by law whose duties are specifically set forth in law and who are made
responsible by law for the direction, supervision, and control of their agencies. See also OMLO
-78-
2004-01 (January 14, 2004). In City Council v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d
974 (1989), NRS 281.005 was used by stipulation of the parties to define public officer.

professional competence, or physical and mental health of a person
For closed sessions under NRS 241.030(1), the following procedures are required or
recommended:
Start with a duly noticed open meeting. Closed meetings are still “meetings” within the
definition and ambit of the Open Meeting Law.
To assure compliance with the spirit of NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), it is recommended the

matter be indicated on the agenda as a closed session under NRS 241.030(1), and the person’s
name being considered must be included on the agenda pursuant to NRS 241.020(c)(4). An
agenda item of “Executive Session” does not adequately describe a closed session. See AG File
No. 00-021 (September 7, 2000).
The closed session should not be listed as an “action” item on the agenda because action
cannot be taken during the closed session. See discussion in § 9.04.
If action might be taken on the matter, be sure to include a separate item on the agenda
for action to be taken during open session. See discussion in § 9.04.
Give notice to the subject person as required by NRS 241.033(1). See § 6.09.
At the meeting, a motion must be made to go into closed session, and the motion must
specify the business to be considered during the closed session and the statutory authority
pursuant to which the public body is authorized to close the meeting. NRS 241.030(3). See AG
File No. 01-021 (May 14, 2001), which was drafted prior to the 2005 Legislative Session. Only
the business identified in the motion may be discussed. As stated in Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 81-
A (February 23, 1981), the purpose of the motion is two-fold: (1) so members of the public body
understand the parameters of what can be discussed in closed session so as not to deviate from
the strict requirements of the law, and (2) to assure that notice is given to the person being
discussed so he/she can obtain a copy of the minutes.
The public body must permit the person being considered and his/her representative to
attend the closed meeting. NRS 241.033(4). It is up to the chairperson to decide who else shall be
included in the closed session, or the chairperson can determine who may attend through a
majority vote of the public body, which occurs in an open meeting. NRS 241.033(5).
Before proceeding with the discussion, make sure that proof of service of the notice to
the person has been received. If not, the closed session may not proceed, absent waiver. See
NRS 241.033(1) and § 6.09.
-79-
The closed session must be tape-recorded. NRS 241.035(4). As the recordings
of closed sessions are treated differently than those of open sessions, NRS 241.035(2), it is
recommended the closed session be recorded on a separate tape.
The person being considered must be permitted to present written evidence, testimony
and present witnesses relating to his character, alleged misconduct, professional competence or
physical or mental health to the public body. NRS 241.033(4).
If the subject desires to record the closed session, the Office of the Attorney General
recommends that he or she be permitted to do so. NRS 241.035(3).
Minutes must be kept of the closed session, and they must be prepared with the same
detail as minutes of the open session. NRS 241.035(2).
Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 81-A (February 23, 1981) contains a lengthy discussion about
the improper use and conduct of an executive session, and the possible remedy.
-80-
Part 9 WHAT RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AND MADE AVAILABLE
TO THE PUBLIC? (See Sample Form 2)
§ 9.01 General
This part discusses the requirements for preparing, preserving, and disclosing minutes of
meetings.
§ 9.02 Requirement for and content of written minutes (See Sample Form 2)
NRS 241.035 requires that written minutes be kept by all public bodies of each meeting
they hold regardless of whether the meeting was open or closed to the public. The minutes must
include:
a. The date, time, and place of the meeting;
b. The names of the members of the public body who were present, whether in person or
by means of electronic communication, and those who were absent;
c. The substance of all matters proposed, discussed, or decided and, at the request of any
member, a record of each member’s vote on any matter decided by vote;
d. The substance of remarks made by any member of the general public who addresses
the body if he/she requests that the minutes reflect his or her remarks, or if he/she has
prepared written remarks, a copy of his/her written remarks if he/she submits a copy for
inclusion; and
e. Any other information that any member of the body requests be included or reflected
in the minutes.
See OMLO 98-03 (July 7, 1998) for an example of how a public body may violate the
Open Meeting Law by failing to reflect, in its meeting minutes, the substance of the discussion
by the members of the public body of certain relevant matters.
Verbatim minutes are not required by OML. There is no requirement in NRS 241.035(1)
that verbatim remarks be included in the minutes at the request of any person. NRS 241.035(1)
use of the phrase “any other information” does not include the right to have the public body
insert verbatim remarks in the text of the minutes. Appending prepared written remarks to the
minutes is an accommodation which serves the public interest just as efficiently as the insertion
of verbatim remarks into the text of the public body’s minutes and it also furthers the goal of
openness in government. OMLO 2008-03; see AG File No. 08-011 (June 9, 2008)
///
///
-81-
§ 9.03 Retention and disclosure of minutes
Minutes or audio recordings of public meetings are declared by the Open Meeting Law
to be public records and must be available for inspection by the public within 30 working days
after the meeting is adjourned. See NRS 241.035(2) and OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999).
In the case of a public body that meets infrequently, formal approval of the minutes of
a previous meeting may be delayed several months. NRS 241.035(1) states that unless good
cause is shown, a public body shall approve the minutes of a meeting within 45 days after
the meeting or at the next meeting of the public body, whichever occurs later. The
unapproved minutes must be made available within the time specified in
NRS 241.035(2) to any person who requests them, together with a written statement that such
minutes have not yet been approved and are subject to revision at the next meeting.
The minutes are deemed to have permanent value and must be retained by the public
body for at least five years (NRS 241.035(2)), after which they may be transferred for archival
preservation in accordance with NRS 239.080-239.125.
Minutes of meetings closed pursuant to NRS 241.030(1)(a) and (1)(c) become public
records whenever the public body determines that the matters discussed no longer require
confidentiality and the person whose character, conduct, competence, or health was discussed
has consented to their disclosure. NRS 241.035(2)(a)-(c).
Under NRS 241.033(6), the subject person always is entitled to a copy of the minutes of
the closed session upon request, whether or not they ever become public records. In Davis v.
Churchill County Sch. Bd., 616 F. Supp. 1310, 1314 (D. Nev. 1985), remanded, 823 F.2d 554
(9th Cir. 1987), the court suggested that a student who was the subject of closed hearings may
release “any information he or she chooses,” which presumably includes minutes or tapes of
closed sessions.
§ 9.04 Making and retaining audiotapes or video recordings of meetings
It is a requirement of the Open Meeting Law that each public meeting is audio- or
videotaped or transcribed by a reporter who is certified pursuant to Chapter 656 of
NRS. NRS 241.035(4). A public body must make a good faith effort to comply with this
provision, and if the public body makes a good faith effort to comply, but, for some reason
beyond the control of the public body fails to comply, the public body’s failure to comply with
the provision does not result in a violation of the Open Meeting Law. NRS 241.035(7).
See OMLO 99-09 (July 28, 1999) for an example of the pitfalls associated with using a
tape recorder as the sole source for the record of the meeting.
Recordings of closed sessions made by public bodies also must be retained for at least
one year but are given the same protection from public disclosure as minutes of closed sessions
set out in NRS 241.035(2). The tapes must be made available to the subject of the closed session,
-82-
and under NRS 241.035(6), also must be made available to the Office of the Attorney General
upon request.
§ 9.05 Fees for inspecting or copying minutes and tapes
The Open Meeting Law requires that minutes and tapes be made available “for
inspection” once prepared following a public meeting and does not authorize charging a fee for
inspection, since fees for inspection are not authorized by statute. In 2013, the Legislature
amended NRS 241.035 to require that a copy of the minutes or audio recording must be made
available to a member of the public upon request at no charge. NRS 241.035(2). Court reporters,
who report meetings or transcribe recordings of meetings, are exempt from the requirement to
provide a copy of the transcription he/she prepares to a member of the public at no charge; court
reporters also are not prohibited from charging a fee to the public body for any services relating
to the transcription of a meeting. NRS 241.035(5).
-83-
Part 10 WHAT HAPPENS IF A VIOLATION OCCURS?
§ 10.01 General
When a violation of the Open Meeting Law occurs or is alleged, the Office of the
Attorney General recommends that the public body make every effort to immediately correct the
apparent violation. Although it may not completely eliminate a violation, corrective action can
mitigate the severity of the violation and further ensure that the business of government is
accomplished in the open.
The following sections discuss the possible remedies available to the public body for
apparent violations of the Open Meeting Law, and a requirement that public bodies include any
Attorney General opinion finding an OML violation by the public body on the public body’s
next agenda. NRS 241.0395.
§ 10.02 Correcting a violation
Some examples of ways to stop, contain, and take corrective action for apparent
violations follow. Of course, as circumstances vary, so may the remedies.
a. Improper notice given for meeting.
If proper notice has not been given for a meeting, the meeting must be stopped. See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999). To remedy the violation, the Office of the Attorney
General believes that the meeting may be convened or continued solely for the
purpose of rescheduling a meeting and adjourning. To otherwise continue a meeting
after it is discovered that the meeting was not properly noticed could be viewed as
evidence of a willful violation of the Open Meeting Law. Discussions of any public
significance which were held before the discovery of the improper notice should be
repeated at a later meeting. All actions taken before adjournment are void, but may be
taken again at a subsequent meeting as discussed below.
b. Discussion of items not stated clearly on agenda.
If a public body begins discussion on an item that is not stated clearly on the agenda,
it is recommended that the public body stop the discussion and schedule it for a future
meeting under a more comprehensive agenda. At the subsequent meeting, it would be
advisable to summarize or repeat the conversations that occurred at the previous
meeting.
c. Taking action on items listed as discussion items only.
Remembering the expanded definition of “action” in NRS 241.015(1), if a public

body takes action on an item which has not been identified on the agenda as an action
item, the action is void but may be taken up again at a future duly-noticed meeting,
-84-
where the former action may be rescinded to indicate that the public body
understands that the prior action was void. At the subsequent meeting, the rationale
for the action should be discussed again or at least the record of the previous meeting
be made available.
d. No proof of service on the subject of a meeting to consider character, alleged

misconduct, competence, or health.
If there is no proof of service of notice on a person whose misconduct, character,

professional competence, or mental or physical health is being considered, and the
person is not present, the item must be postponed to another meeting, and the subject
must be notified again about the new meeting. If the person is present, he/she may be
asked if he or she would be willing to waive the notice requirements. The right to
notice must be explained thoroughly to the person, and the person should be given the
opportunity, free of threat or pressure, to postpone consideration of the matter or to
waive the right to notice. As explained in § 6.09 of this manual, any waiver of the
right to notice must be knowing and voluntary. A complete record should be made to
resolve allegations that may arise later.
e. Public body voted to rescind earlier votes on items that had not been agendized.
Multiple matters were rescinded in a public vote.
Since any action taken on an item that is not properly agendized is void as a matter
of law, a public body may vote to rescind the prior vote on an illegal action during
the same meeting or in another future public meeting. Otherwise, the public may be
confused about the legal status of the prior illegal action. See § 11.03 below.
Following rescission items that were the subject of illegal action then may be placed
on a future agenda for lawful consideration and possible action. AG File No. 08-002
(May 12, 2008).
f. Effective corrective action can be taken at a meeting even when a serious but
inadvertent violation occurs.
Our opinion in OMLO 2008-02: AG File No. 07-051 (February 7, 2008) is an

example of how a public body may correct even a serious violation. The Douglas
County Board of County Commissioners quickly corrected a violation of the OML
during its public meeting. A quorum of the Board had gathered in an unscheduled
non-noticed meeting during the Board’s recess while Counsel was absent researching
a legal issue. A member of the public brought the violation to the attention of the
Board at the end of the recess. There had been no recording or minutes taken of this
gathering. Board Counsel immediately asked members to explain what had occurred
during the recess. In response to questions from counsel, it became clear that the
gathering of a quorum to discuss a matter on the agenda was inadvertent. No
promises or decisions had been given or made during the recess. To the extent there
was deliberation among the quorum, it was corrected by immediate disclosure of
what had been discussed during the inadvertent meeting. When the Board reconvened
-85-
and disclosure had been made, the Chairman reopened public comment to allow
anyone to comment about the violation or anything else. Public comment was not
restricted. This prompt action satisfied the legislative mandate found in NRS 241.010.
The Douglas County Planning Commission took effective remedial action to correct
an acknowledged violation.
In 2013, the Nevada Legislature enacted NRS 241.0365 that allows corrective action by
the public body when violations of the OML occur or are alleged. Voluntary corrective action
may be taken prior to adjournment of the meeting at which the apparent violation occurs.
Otherwise, corrective action of an apparent violation may be taken at a future meeting if the
following steps are taken:
1. Notice of corrective action must be included as an agenda item for a subsequent

meeting at which the public body intends to take correction action; and
2. The public body must take corrective action within 30 days of the apparent violation.
If the public body takes corrective action within 30 days after posting notice of the intent
to take corrective action on its agenda, the Attorney General may forego prosecution of the
alleged violation if it appears that forbearance is in the best interests of the public.
If the public body takes corrective action within 30 days of the alleged violation, the
statutory limitations’ period applicable to the time for bring suit by the Attorney General or a
private party, pursuant to NRS 241.037, is tolled for 30 days.
Any corrective action taken by the public body to correct an alleged violation is effective
only prospectively.
Efforts to correct a violation can mitigate the severity of the violation and may reduce the
degree of culpability of the violators. However, even though a violation may have been
mitigated by corrective action, the violation still may be the subject of the sanctions detailed
below. See OMLO 2015-01: AG File No. 13897-141 (January 12, 2016) for an example of how
a public body that voluntarily and unanimously takes prompt corrective action as soon as an
alleged violation becomes apparent can effectively mitigate the severity of the earlier violation.
§ 10.03 Actions taken in violation are void
The action of any public body taken in violation of any provision of the Open Meeting
Law is void, i.e., the action has no legal force or binding effect. NRS 241.036.
However, lawsuits to obtain a judicial declaration that an action is void must be

commenced within 60 days after the offending action occurred. NRS 241.037(3).
It appears that only those actions defined in NRS 241.015(1) (decisions, commitments,
or affirmative votes by a majority of the members) are voided by NRS 241.036.
-86-
§ 10.04 Reconsidering an action that is void
A public body that takes action in violation of the Open Meeting Law, which action is
null and void, is not forever precluded from taking the same action at another legally called
meeting. Valencia v. Cota, 617 P.2d 63 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980); Cooper v. Arizona W. Coll. Dist.
Governing Bd., 610 P.2d 465 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980); Spokane Education Ass’n v. Barnes, 517
P.2d 1362 (Wash. 1974). However, mere perfunctory approval at an open meeting of a decision
made in an illegally closed meeting does not cure any defect of the earlier meeting or relieve any
person from criminal prosecution for the same violation. Scott v. Town of Bloomfield, 229 A.2d
667 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 1967). The matter should be put on an agenda for an open
meeting, and reheard.
The following examples illustrate a few methods used by public bodies to correct OML
violations:
• A public body corrected a violation almost two months following the violation. The
trustee subcommittee had met in private without notice or agenda to summarize the
superintendent’s evaluation and backup materials for formal presentation to the trustees
at a later meeting. At the later meeting, trustees voted to approve the superintendent’s
evaluation. Complainant said that the earlier private non-noticed meeting had constituted
a subcommittee under the OML and should have been subject to public oversight.
Corrective action (despite denial by the chair that a violation had occurred) was taken 55
days later when the subcommittee met for a special meeting prior to the trustee’s regular
meeting, during which the subcommittee formally approved the evaluation materials and
compilation process in a publicly noticed meeting, and it again voted on the
superintendent’s evaluation, so as to remove any conflict with the OML. AG File No.
09-024 (October 13, 2009).
• A private attorney filed a petition on behalf of a public body. The petition had not been
approved or voted on by the public body in open session before it was filed. The public
body then agendized the petition for public meeting and voted to ratify the earlier filing
of the petition. Even if the complainant’s charge that the filing of the petition was an
illegal act on behalf of the public body, the OML does not forbid corrective action to
either ratify the action complained of, or to reject the action. AG File No. 10-038 (August
24, 2010).
• A public body took immediate corrective action prior to an OML complaint when
it redrafted and revised possibly defective agenda items and re-agendized them to a future
meeting agenda. AG File No. 10-045 (November 2, 2010).
• An allegation was made that a city council’s process to fill a vacancy within its own
membership kept the public in the dark as to its deliberations and assessments of the
various candidates and that it violated the letter and spirit of the Open Meeting Law. The
Henderson City Council took corrective action after this office contacted the city
attorney. It released to the public recertified ballots cast by the Council members, each
with the signature of the corresponding voting member. The Council’s selection process
-87-
had been defective because it failed to make known the identity of each member’s ballot
at the time it was cast or at some time during the meeting. But, failure to verbally
deliberate and/or assess the candidates before each ballot was cast was not a violation of
the OML. AG File No. 09-029 (November 4, 2009).
§ 10.05 Any person denied a right under the law may bring a civil suit
Under NRS 241.037(2), any person denied a right conferred by the Open Meeting Law
may bring a civil suit:
a. To have an action taken by the public body declared void;
b. To require compliance with or prevent violations of the Open Meeting Law; or
c. To determine the applicability of the law to discussions or decisions of the public

body.
Additionally, it may be possible for an aggrieved person to seek injunctive relief, as

explained in City Council of City of Reno v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d 974,
976 (1989).
If the plaintiff prevails, the court may award him/her reasonable attorney’s fees and court
costs. NRS 241.037(2).
§ 10.06 The Office of the Attorney General may bring a civil suit
The Office of the Attorney General also may bring suit:
a. To have an action taken by a public body declared void, or
b. To seek injunctive relief against a public body or person to require compliance

with or prevent violations of the Open Meeting Law. The injunction may issue
without proof of actual damage or other irreparable harm sustained by any person.
NRS 241.037(1).
c. To seek a monetary civil fine not to exceed $500.00 in a court of competent

jurisdiction for a violation of the OML where the person(s) participated (took
affirmative action) in a knowing violation of the OML. NRS 241.040.
If an injunction is obtained, it does not relieve any person from criminal prosecution for
the same violation. NRS 241.037(1). See §11.07 for further discussion of the A.G.’s policy of
enforcement of the OML.
///
///
-88-
§ 10.07 Time limits for filing lawsuit; policy for enforcement of complaints
Any suit which seeks to void an action, and/or to require compliance with the provisions
of the Open Meeting Law, and/or to seek injunctive relief must be brought within
the statutory 60/120 day limitations’ periods after the action objected to, is taken.
NRS 241.037(3). There are two limitations periods—60 days and 120 days. They run
concurrently from the date of an alleged OML violation. If the Attorney General has not brought
a suit to void a public body’s action within 60 days of the alleged violation, thereafter, the
Attorney General is barred from seeking to void the action. But the Attorney General still has
jurisdiction under the 120-day limitations’ period which continues to run for 60 more days.
Should a suit be brought during this period of time, the Attorney General may seek injunctive
relief to force compliance with the OML.
Any suit brought to have an action declared void must be commenced within 60
days after the action objected to, is taken by the public body.
NRS 241.037(3). In Kennedy v. Powell, 401 So. 2d 453 (La. Ct. App. 1981), the court observed
that the legislature limited suits to challenge actions of public bodies for violation of the open
meeting law to a short period of 60 days to ensure a degree of certainty in the actions of public
bodies. The 60-day limitation is absolute and is in no way dependent upon knowledge of a
violation. According to the court, running of the 60-day time period destroys the cause of action
completely. A complaint brought in a court of competent jurisdiction beyond the running of the
OML’s concurrent 60/120 day limitations’ periods, as expressed in NRS 241.037, is subject to
dismissal. NRS 11.010.
A suit by the Attorney General seeking monetary civil penalties (NRS 241.040(4)) is
subject to a one-year limitations’ period following the date of the action taken in violation of this
chapter.
The Attorney General’s policy for enforcement of Open Meeting Law complaints is:
• The Attorney General may proceed with an appropriate legal action, issue an Open
Meeting Law Opinion pursuant to its prosecutorial discretion, or choose not to
prosecute an Open Meeting issue prior to the running of the 120-day statute of
limitations.
• The Attorney General will not investigate or act upon a complaint alleging an Open
Meeting Law violation received after the 120-day statute of limitations unless it is
relevant to an existing action or the attorney is commencing a criminal prosecution
• The Attorney General will not issue an Open Meeting Law Opinion pursuant to
his/her prosecutorial discretion after the 120-day statute of limitations.
///
///
-89-
§ 10.08 Jurisdiction and venue for suits
A suit may be brought by an aggrieved citizen in the district court in the district in
which the public body ordinarily holds its meetings or in which the plaintiff resides.
NRS 241.037(2).
A suit brought by the Office of the Attorney General may be brought “in any court of
competent jurisdiction.” NRS 241.037(1).
However, even though a court has jurisdiction, a defendant may raise objections as to
proper venue. Board of County Comm’rs v. Del Papa, 108 Nev. 170, 825 P.2d 1231 (1992).
§ 10.09 Standards for injunctions and enforcing injunctions
For a discussion of the standards for imposing injunctions and enforcing them, see City
Council v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d 974 (1989).
§ 10.10 Criminal sanctions
Each member of a public body who attends a meeting of that body where action is taken
in violation of any provision of the Open Meeting Law, with knowledge of the fact that the
meeting is in violation thereof, is guilty of a misdemeanor. NRS 241.040(1).
Further, wrongful exclusion of any person or persons from a meeting is a misdemeanor.

NRS 241.040(2).
However, a member of a public body who attends a meeting of that public body at
which action is taken in violation of the Open Meeting Law is not the accomplice of any other
member so attending. NRS 241.040(3).
Upon conviction, punishment may include a jail term of up to six months, a fine not to
exceed $1,000, or both.
General opined there are two requirements before a criminal prosecution may be commenced
under the Open Meeting Law. Those requirements are:
1) Attendance of a member of a public body at a meeting of that public body where

action is taken in violation of any provision of the Open Meeting Law. The opinion
recognized the distinction in the Open Meeting Law between actions and
deliberations and concluded that criminal sanctions may be appropriate when actions
are taken in violation of the Open Meeting Law, but where procedural violations
occur involving a meeting where no action is taken, civil remedies are made available
to compel compliance or prevent such violations in the future.
-90-
2) Knowledge by a member of a public body that the meeting is in violation of the Open
Meeting Law. The opinion held that, when members of a public body rely on advice
of counsel, they should not be held to know that a violation occurred.
While the Open Meeting Law does not require the attorney for the public body to be present
at a meeting (AG File No. 00-013 (April 21, 2000)), the presence of the attorney may allow the
member to receive advice upon which a member can rely as to whether the member knows that
the meeting is in violation of the Open Meeting Law.
§ 10.11 Public officers may be removed from office
Under NRS 283.040(1)(d), a person’s office becomes vacant upon a conviction of a

violation of NRS 241.040, which is discussed in § 10.10 above.
§ 10.12 Filing a complaint; procedure; Attorney General subpoena power; public records
FILING A COMPLAINT: A person alleging that the OML has been violated by a
public body or that his/her public comment right has been denied, may seek redress in the courts
as explained above. That person also may complain to the Office of the Attorney General, but
filing a complaint with the Office of the Attorney General does not toll the time periods for the
person to take his own action
Under NRS 241.040(4), the Office of the Attorney General must investigate and
prosecute alleged violations of the Open Meeting Law. The Office of the Attorney General
believes that any person may file a complaint with the Office of the Attorney General even if that
person is not aggrieved directly by the offense. See §10.07 above, for an explanation of the
Attorney General’s policy regarding enforcement of the OML.
All such complaints must be in writing, signed by the complaining person, and contain a
full description of the facts known to the complainant. The Office of the Attorney General
considers all such complaints to be public records and may release them accordingly. Complaints
must be sent to:
Open Meeting Law Coordinator

Office of the Attorney General
100 North Carson Street
Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717
Complaints may be sent by facsimile to (775) 684-1108.
INVESTIGATION PROCESS: Complaints which allege a cognizable violation of the

OML will be investigated. The complaint is sent to the public body along with any supporting
documents attached to the complaint. The public body is given time to respond to the
allegation(s) by written statements, copies of the agenda, minutes, (even if in draft form), video
or audio recordings of the meeting, and the Attorney General may subpoena additional relevant
documents, records, or materials for purposes of the investigation. After review of the complaint
-91-
and the public body’s response, the Attorney General may issue a written opinion that resolves
the matter, or he/she may initiate a civil or criminal suit seeking compliance with the OML.
Considering the time limits for bringing lawsuits, it is important that complaints be
promptly filed with the Office of the Attorney General to allow sufficient time for investigation
and evaluation. Investigation of an OML complaint must occur within the 60/120 day limitations
periods described in §11.07.
SUBPOENA POWER: The Legislature authorized the Attorney General to issue

subpoenas when conducting an investigation. NRS 241.039(4) and (5) state: “In any
investigation conducted pursuant to subsection 2, the Attorney General may issue subpoenas for
the production of any relevant documents, records, or materials. A person who willfully fails or
refuses to comply with a subpoena issued pursuant to this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.”
Records, relevant documents, or other materials now subject to discovery may include
e-mails among members of a public body; records of their phone calls; and other electronic
communications made by a member of a public body while engaged in the public body’s public
business. NRS 241.039.
It is important to remind a public body of the Open Meeting Law’s prohibition against
“walking quorums” or “constructive quorums” that can be created through conversations with
other members or through electronic communication shared among a quorum of a public body.
NRS 241.015(3)(a)(2). Subpoena of relevant records may reveal e-mails or phone calls among
members which could have to be explained or justified to avoid a violation of the Open Meeting
Law.
PUBLIC RECORDS: While the complaints themselves are considered public records,
investigative files will be held confidential until the investigation is complete, and then the file
will become a public record. NRS 241.039(3). Records of closed sessions which are obtained as
a part of the investigation will remain confidential until made a public record through the process
in NRS 241.035(2)(a)–(c).
§ 10.13 Public notice of Attorney General Opinion finding violation by public body
The 2011 Legislature amended the Open Meeting Law with a new requirement for
public bodies designed to provide information and transparency to all members of the public.
NRS 241.0395(1) requires public notice of an Attorney General opinion if the Attorney
General makes findings of fact and conclusions of law that a public body has taken action in
violation of any provision of NRS 241. The public body must include an item on its next agenda
which acknowledges the Attorney General’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. The opinion
of the Attorney General must be treated as supporting material for the item on the agenda for the
purposes of NRS 241.020.
The inclusion of an item on the agenda for a meeting of a public body pursuant
to subsection 1 is not an admission of wrongdoing for the purposes of a civil action, criminal
prosecution, or injunctive relief. NRS 241.0395(2).
-92-
NRS 241.0395 serves the OML’s central tenet—transparency. Public notice of the
opinion simply is an acknowledgment of a finding by the Attorney General that the public body
has taken an action in violation of the OML. The opinion of the Attorney General must be
included in supporting materials for that agenda item. The item may be an informational item as
there is no statutory requirement that any action be taken. The underlying reason for this change
is to provide notice to the public of the Attorney General’s opinion and to provide a forum for
discussion, if any, between the public and the public body.
§ 10.14 Monetary penalty for willful violation; one-year limitations period
NRS 241.040(4) provides that each member of a public body is subject to a civil penalty
not to exceed $500.00 for participation in a willful violation of the OML. It states:
In addition to any criminal penalty imposed pursuant to this

section, each member of a public body who attends a meeting of
that public body where action is taken in violation of any provision
of this chapter, and who participates in such action with knowledge
of the violation, is subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to
exceed $500. The Attorney General may recover the penalty in a
civil action brought in the name of the State of Nevada in any court
of competent jurisdiction. . . .
Such an action must be commenced within one year after the date of the action taken in
violation of this chapter. A civil penalty is applicable only when a member of a public body, who
attends a meeting of that public body where action is taken in violation of any provision of the
OML, participates in such action with knowledge of the violation.
The key to understanding how this penalty will be enforced depends on an understanding
of the act of “participation,” a requirement of the statute. Enforcement against a member of a
public body based on “participation” only may occur when the member makes a commitment,
promise, or casts an affirmative vote to take action on a matter under the public body’s
jurisdiction or control when the member knew his/her commitment, promise, or vote was taken
in violation of the OML.
The civil penalty requires that a public body take action in order for the civil penalty to
be potentially applicable. “Action” is defined in NRS 241.015(1) as an affirmative act; mere
silence or inaction by members is not sufficient to rise to the level requiring enforcement.
This office would not seek to punish individual members who attempt to comply with the
OML, only those who actually violate it. Even then, enforcement under NRS 241 requires
discretion based on investigation and review of the facts. Evidence in the record that an
individual attempted to comply and/or sought to avoid violating the OML would put them
outside the scope of liability for the civil penalty, even if the other members of their public body
proceeded to knowingly violate the OML.
-93-
Part 11 HOW IS THE OPEN MEETING LAW INTERPRETED AND APPLIED?
§ 11.01 General
As with any statute, courts use many principles of statutory construction to construe the
Open Meeting Law and apply it to circumstances before them. Discussion of those principles is
beyond the scope of this manual, but the Office of the Attorney General has some observations
that may be useful in determining how to comply with the Open Meeting Law.
§ 11.02 Legislative declaration and intent
The Legislature declared in NRS 241.010, “In enacting this chapter, the legislature finds
and declares that all public bodies exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the
intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted
openly.” This spirit was a guiding consideration in several cases. See McKay v. Board of
Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 647, 730 P.2d 438, 441 (1986); McKay v. Board of County Comm’rs,
103 Nev. 490, 493, 746 P.2d 124, 125 (1987); Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 393,
956 P.2d 770, 774 (1998); Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 67 P.3d 902 (2003);
Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 94, 64 P.3d 1070, 1075 (2003).
§ 11.03 Standards of interpretation
A statute enacted for the public benefit, such as a sunshine or public meeting law,
should be construed liberally in favor of the public, even though it contains a penal provision.
Wolfson v. State, 344 So. 2d 611 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977); City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245
So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971); Laman v. McCord, 432 S.W.2d 753 (Ark. 1968). The Open Meeting Law
is entitled to a broad interpretation to promote openness in government, while any exceptions
thereto should be construed strictly. McKay v. Bd. of Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 730 P.2d 438
(1986); Wexford County Prosecuting Attorney v. Pranger, 268 N.W.2d 344 (Mich. Ct. App.
1978). A construction which frustrates all evasive devices is preferred for an open meeting law.
Florida Parole & Prob. Comm’n v. Thomas, 364 So. 2d 480 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978). See also
Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 85-19 (December 17, 1985).
§ 11.04 Use of standard of reasonableness
In circumstances where the Open Meeting Law provides no clear standards or

guidelines, public bodies must consider themselves as being governed by a standard of
reasonableness. See Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 79-8 (March 26, 1979).
§ 11.05 Attorney General Opinions
While Attorney General Opinions are intended to be helpful in fashioning compliance

with the Open Meeting Law, they are not binding on the courts even though the Office of the
Attorney General is given the duty of investigating and prosecuting Open Meeting Law
complaints. See Tahoe Reg’l Planning Agency v. McKay, 590 F. Supp. 1071, 1074 (D. Nev.
-94-
1984), aff’d, Tahoe Reg’l Planning Agency v. McKay, 769 F.2d 534, 539 (9th Cir. 1985).
However, the Nevada Supreme Court in Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 956 P.2d
770 (1998), stated that the opinions of the Office of the Attorney General will receive the same
deference as an administrative body interpreting a law that it is responsible for enforcing. Thus,
where the Legislature has had reasonable time to amend the law to reverse the opinion of the
Attorney General, but does not do so, it is presumed the Legislature has acquiesced to the
opinion of the Attorney General. Hughes Properties, Inc. v. State, 100 Nev. 295, 298, 680 P.2d
970, 972 (1984).
In addition, the Office of the Attorney General has a long-standing policy of

reserving opinions regarding Open Meeting Law complaints that are in litigation, even though
NRS 241.040(4) gives the Office of the Attorney General investigative and prosecutorial powers.
See OMLO 98-05 (September 21, 1998).
-95-
Part 12 WHAT ELSE DO I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE
OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 12.01 General
This part covers special questions or topics not discussed elsewhere in this manual.

NRS Chapter 233B
The 2009 Legislature made changes to the method of adopting regulations by agencies
that are subject to Nevada’s Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Each workshop and public
hearing must be conducted in accordance with NRS 241. NRS 233B.061(5). In addition,
workshops or hearings may be held only after the Legislative Counsel has returned the proposed
regulation to the agency. NRS 233B.060.
All workshops and public hearings must be conducted in accordance with the OML.
NRS 233B.061 now applies the OML to all executive branch agencies subject to the APA,
whether the agencies adopt regulations by board, commission, or other public body, or by an
individual. Agencies headed by a single person, such as the Insurance Commissioner, are
included.
The notice requirements for both NRS 233B and NRS 241.020 may be met in the same
notice document so that duplication of notices at different times may be avoided. The OML’s
minimum notice requirement is before 9:00 a.m., three working days before the meeting.
The Nevada Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Chapter 233B of NRS, requires some
agencies to give notice and conduct public hearings before adopting rules and regulations. The
2011 Legislature amended the rules of conduct of some bodies which meet or operate under
NRS 233B. NRS 241.016(1) subjects all meetings of public bodies, when meeting as a quasi-
judicial body, to the OML. See § 3.10 above.
If the agency is a “public body” (see Part 3 of this manual), both the Open Meeting
Law and the APA will apply, and it will be necessary to coordinate the proceedings. The Office
of the Attorney General recommends that the APA notice be prepared and distributed as required
by the APA, that a meeting of the public body be noticed and put on the agenda under the Open
Meeting Law, and that the hearings be included as an action item on the agenda.
The APA also governs the hearings of “contested cases” before administrative agencies
and, again, if the agency is a “public body,” the Open Meeting Law also will apply to
the hearings. Public comment must be conducted to satisfy both the OML and the requirement in
NRS 233B. Prior to the commencement and conclusion of a contested case or a quasi-judicial
proceeding that may affect the due process rights of an individual, the public body may refuse to
consider public comment. See NRS 233B.126. Once the board or commission has rendered a
-96-
decision on the contested case, it may entertain public comment on the proceeding at that time.
The specific statute governing the activities of the agency may have to be considered as well.
If the Open Meeting Law applies to a contested case hearing, a question arises whether
a closed session may be held. Absent a specific statute to the contrary, the contested
case must be heard in an open meeting context, and the public body may go into closed session
under NRS 241.030 only to consider the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence,
or mental or physical health of a person, as discussed in Part 9 of this manual. See Op. Nev.
Att'y Gen. No. 81-C (June 25, 1981). If the public body is going to conduct a closed session
under NRS 241.030(1), the notice requirements of NRS 241.033(1) must be met. If the notice of
hearing prepared under NRS Chapter 233B or other relevant statute provides for timing and
notice requirements equivalent to NRS 241.033(1), the notices may be coordinated.
§ 12.03 Relationship of Open Meeting Law to the First Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States
The full panoply of First Amendment rights attaches to the public’s right to speak at a
meeting pursuant to NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3). The public’s freedom of speech during public
meetings is vigorously protected by both the U.S. Constitution and the Nevada Constitution.
Freedom of expression upon public questions is secured by the First Amendment. New York
Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 269 (1964). This constitutional safeguard was fashioned to
assure an unfettered interchange of ideas for bringing about political and social changes desired
by the people. See §§ 8.04 and 8.05 above, for a detailed discussion of the scope of public
comment.
In Sandoval, 119 Nev. at 156, 67 P. 3d at 906-07 (2003), the Board of Regents alleged
that limiting the discussion of the Regents to the topics on the agenda unlawfully limited the
Regents’ right to free speech. The Supreme Court denied this argument and stated that the Open
Meeting Law was not overly burdensome on the Regents’ right to free speech because the
Regents could discuss what they wanted, whenever they wanted, just not at a meeting governed
by the Open Meeting Law at which the issue for discussion was not agendized.
§ 12.04 Relationship of Open Meeting Law and defamation
In 2005, the Legislature amended the OML to provide immunity from an action alleging
defamation to members of a public body for statements made during the meeting and
the Legislature also provided immunity to witnesses testifying before a public body.
NRS 241.0353 states:
1. Any statement which is made by a member of a public body

during the course of a public meeting is absolutely privileged and
does not impose liability for defamation or constitute a ground for
recovery in any civil action.
2. A witness who is testifying before a public body is absolutely
privileged to publish defamatory matter as part of a public
-97-
meeting, except that it is unlawful to misrepresent any fact
knowingly when testifying before a public body.
-98-
SAMPLE FORM 1: Notice and Agenda of Public Meeting (With Comments)
Comments Sample Form

See Parts 6 and 7 of the NEVADA (This only is a sample. Other formats may be used.)
OPEN MEETING LAW MANUAL,
Twelfth Edition, 2015, for details.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
of the
Name of public body COMMISSION FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT
Must state the time, place, and The Commission for Open Government will conduct a
location of meeting. public meeting on November 14, 1997, beginning at
9 a.m. at the following locations:
This shows how a meeting, to be held at its principal office at 1801 North Carson Street,
at multiple locations, may be noticed. Suite 104, Carson City, Nevada, and
Sites should be connected by speaker
phone or other device where all at its Las Vegas office in the Grant Sawyer Building,
persons at all locations may hear all 2501 Washington Street, Suite 401, Las Vegas,
persons at all other locations. Nevada.
The sites will be connected by speaker telephones.

The public is invited to attend at either location.
Notification pursuant to NOTICE

NRS 241.020(2)(d)(6) and (7) 1. Items may be taken out of order;
2. Two or more items may be combined;
3. Items may be removed from agenda or delayed at
any time;
4. Any restrictions on public comment must be set
out and this notice must state that comment can’t
be restricted based on viewpoint.
See NRS 241.020(1). Giving the Reasonable efforts will be made to assist and
name and telephone number of a accommodate physically handicapped persons
contact person is not required, but desiring to attend the meeting. Please call number
may avoid time delays or listed in advance so that arrangements for attendance
embarrassment. may be made.
Reasonable restrictions on public Public comment is limited to (set out the allowed
comment must be set out in notice time) minutes per person.
form on the agenda.
-99-
AGENDA
Agenda must consist of a clear Action may be taken only on those items denoted “For
and complete statement of the possible action.”
topics scheduled to be
considered during the meeting.
Agenda must include a list 1. Call to Order and Roll Call.

describing the items on which
action may be taken and clearly
denote “for possible action” on 2. Public comment and discussion. (Discussion)
those items. No action may be taken on a matter raised under this
item of the agenda until the matter itself has been
included specifically on an agenda as an item upon
which action will be taken.
3. Approval of minutes of previous meeting.

(For possible action)
4. Report by Committee on Abuse of Open Meeting

Laws. (Discussion)
See Part 9 of the Nevada Open 5. Closed session to consider the character, alleged
Meeting Law Manual for misconduct, or professional competence of John Doe,
discussion of when closed a staff employee of the Commission. (Discussion).
sessions are authorized and how Before closing a meeting, the public body must
they are to be handled. approve a member’s motion to close the meeting
which specifies the nature of the business to be
considered and the statutory authority on which
the meeting will be closed. If closure is pursuant
to NRS 241.030(3) the name of the person to be
considered must appear on the agenda.
No action may be taken in a 6. Performance Evaluation of Sue Smith including, but

closed session. These are not limited to, termination, suspension, demotion,
examples of how to notice an reduction in pay, reprimand, promotion, endorsement,
item where the public body may engagement, retention, or “no action.” (For possible
go into closed session. Okay to action) (Closed session may be held to consider
list only the attributes before character, alleged misconduct, professional
taking action in open session competence, and physical or mental health pursuant
(i.e., character, professional to NRS 241.030.)
competence, health, etc.) that But see § 6.09: Notice provisions of NRS 241.033 do
will be considered. not apply to applicants for employment with a public
body. NRS 241.033(7)(a) exempts public meetings
held to consider applicants for employment from the
-100-
If action is to be taken, it must be 7. Disciplinary Hearings (For possible action)
in an open session, and the Public Body may take administrative action against the
names of the subject persons following persons which might include employment
should be listed. termination, suspension, demotion, reduction in pay,
reprimand, promotion, retention, or no action.
a. Sam Smith
b. Harry Brown
If there are topics of known 8. Report by Executive Officer (Discussion) including:

public interest upon which the (formal approval of Report: for possible action; all
public body may deliberate, it other matters in this item are informational only)
should be identified. If action
might be taken (including a. Salary of executive director
approval of a report), this should b. Legislative audit of Division
be listed as “for possible action”
and must contain a description of
the items on which action will be
taken.
Multiple periods of public 9. Public comment and discussion. (Discussion) No

comment are mandatory. There action may be taken on a matter raised under this item
are now two alternatives for of the agenda until the matter itself has been
public comment available to a specifically included on an agenda as an item upon
public body. The alternatives which action will be taken.
may be combined for even more
transparency.
NRS 41.020(2)(d)(3).
10. Adjournment. (Action)
Supporting material is available from [name] at [physical

address]. Anyone desiring supporting documentation or
additional information is invited to call [phone number]
or email [address].
Notice and agenda must be This notice and agenda has been posted on or before
posted not later than 9 a.m. on 9 a.m. on the third working day before the meeting at
the third working day before the [website] and at the following locations:
meeting. Do not count the day of
the meeting as one of the three
working days.
Notice and Agenda must be (1) The Commission’s principal office at 1801 North
posted at the principal office of Carson Street, Suite 104, Carson City, Nevada
-101-
the public body, or if it has no
principal office, then at the (2) Grant Sawyer Building, 2501 Washington Street,
building where the meeting will Las Vegas, Nevada
be held, and at least three other
separate, prominent places (3) Las Vegas City Hall, 1401 Main Street,
within the jurisdiction of the Las Vegas, Nevada
public body. Notice also must be
posted on (1) the State’s official (4) Reno City Hall, 490 South Center Street, Reno,
website, https://notice.nv.gov Nevada
and (2) the public body’s
website, if it maintains a website.
-102-
SAMPLE FORM 2: MINUTES
Other formats or styles may be used. This is not intended to be a complete set of minutes, only to
show how certain matters listed on Sample Form 1 might be handled in the minutes in order to
comply with the Open Meeting Law. The public body must take into account other statutory,
procedural, or record keeping requirements.
MINUTES
of the meeting of the
COMMISSION FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT
(Date of the Meeting)
The Commission for Open Government held a public meeting on (date), beginning at (time)
a.m. at the following locations:
at its principal office at 1801 North Carson Street, Suite 104, Carson City, Nevada, and at its
Las Vegas office in the Grant Sawyer Building, 2501 Washington Street, Suite 401, Las
Vegas, Nevada.
The sites were connected by speaker telephones.1
1. Call to order, roll call
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Shirley Brown. Present were
commissioners Harry Smith, Peter Knowitall, Roger Dodger, Mike Brown, and Sue Doe.
Absent was Commissioner Henry.
Also present were Executive Director Sue Smith and various staff members of the
commission. Members of the public were asked to sign in, and the sign-in-sheet is attached to
the original minutes as Exhibit A.
2. Public comment (1st period)
However, if the public body chooses the second alternative set forth in NRS 241.020 and
if it allows public comment for each “for possible action” agenda item, it still must allow a
period of general public comment before adjournment for any and all matters within the
jurisdiction or control of the public body, i.e., non-agenda items.
1
The date, time, and place of meeting, as well as the members of the public body who were present and
absent, is required. NRS 241.035(1). Listing others present is not required by the Open Meeting Law but may be
helpful in resolving Open Meeting Law and other complaints regarding the proceeding.
-103-
2. Approval of minutes of previous meeting
The minutes of the October 10 meeting were approved with changes.2
3. Report by the Committee on Abuse of Open Meeting Laws
Mr. Rodgers reported that the Committee had completed its report on abuse of Open
Meeting Laws. A copy of the report is attached to the original minutes as Exhibit B.
Commissioner Dodger asked about the incident involving Mayor Smith in Little Town on
August 17 and wanted the Commission to file litigation. He was reminded that the report was
listed on the agenda as a discussion item, and action may not be taken. Further, Mayor Smith
would have to be notified if the Commission was going to discuss his misconduct.
Commissioner Knowitall thanked the Committee for its fine work.3
4. Closed session to discuss the character, alleged misconduct, and professional

competence of a staff employee of the Commission
On motion by Commissioner Dodger, seconded by Commissioner Brown, and approved

with a unanimous vote, a closed session was conducted to discuss the character, alleged
misconduct, and professional competence of a staff employee of the Commission. The
Commission received proof that the employee was notified as required by law. Separate
minutes of the session have been prepared.4 No action was taken.
5. Performance Evaluation of Sue Smith
The Commission received proof that Mrs. Smith was notified as required by law.5
Mrs. Smith objected to comments regarding her professional competence, indicating that
she was new on the job and shouldn’t be held to the standards of an experienced employee.
A member of the public addressed the Commission and asked that her remarks be
included in the record. A copy of her remarks is attached to the original of these minutes as
Exhibit C.6
2
If requested by a member, the minutes must record each member’s vote. NRS 241.035(1)(c). Otherwise,
for Open Meeting Law purposes, a matter like this may be handled this way. For other purposes, it may be advisable
to give details about who made and seconded motions and how votes were cast. Consult with counsel.
3
The substance of the discussion must be reported. NRS 241.035(1)(c).
4
The minutes should reflect that all the procedural requirements and limitations of a closed session have
been followed. See § 9 for a discussion.
5
The agenda suggested that the Commission may go into closed session, but in this instance, it handled the
whole matter in an open session. Even if it does so in an open meeting, the Commission still must receive proof of
service required by NRS 241.033(1).
-104-
with a unanimous vote, the evaluation attached to the original of these minutes as Exhibit D
was approved.
6. Disciplinary Hearing re: Harry Brown
A disciplinary hearing was held regarding alleged misconduct by Harry Brown. Opening
remarks were made by Deputy Attorney General Joe Smith and by counsel for Mr. Brown,
Gerry Spence.
Six witnesses testified and were cross-examined. Fifteen exhibits were received into
evidence. A record of the proceeding was made by a court reporter and a transcript is
available.7

misconduct, and professional competence of Mr. Brown. The Commission received proof
that the employee was notified as required by law. Separate minutes of the session have been
prepared.
Following the closed session, the Commission went back into open session to take action.
On motion by Commissioner Dodger, seconded by Commissioner Doe, and upon a vote of 4-
2, the Commission found that Mr. Brown had violated various provisions of the Open
Meeting Law as alleged in the complaint. Mr. Brown was ordered to pay a $1,000 fine.
Counsel for the Commission was instructed to prepare Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law,
and Order to be approved and signed by Chairman Brown, and it will be filed with the
original of these minutes.
7. 2nd period of Public Comment and Discussion
Mrs. Henrietta Cobb addressed the Commission, indicating there is a serious flaw in the
Open Meeting Law regarding serial communications and asked the Commission to propose
legislation to plug up the gap. She gave an example of Brown County, where the County
Manager approved a contract with Henry’s Construction Company after discussing it with
each Commissioner, one at a time. At the meeting, the County Commission voted to ratify
the contract without any discussion or input from the community. Commissioner Brown said
he would consider having the matter put on an agenda for a future meeting, and Mrs. Cobb
would be invited to participate.
6
See NRS 241.035(1)(d). If the commentator does not have written remarks, then his/her oral remarks must
be reflected.
7
More detail may be required by the law that governs hearings by the body. For Open Meeting Law
purposes, this shows what happened in the open and closed sessions and that a separate record has been made.
-105-
Commissioner Dodge presented to the Commission a report by the Greenpeace
organization regarding the massacre of thousands of people in Uganda. He commented that
something should be done about it and asked that the report and his remarks be included in
the record of this meeting. The report is attached to these minutes but was not read by other
Commissioners, and there was no discussion about his remarks.8
8. Adjournment was unanimously approved at nine p.m.
8
Any other information that is requested to be included or reflected in the minutes by any member of the
body must be included, even if not relevant or discussed. NRS 241.035(1)(e).
-106-
SAMPLE FORM 3: NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER, CHARACTER,
MISCONDUCT, COMPETENCE OR HEALTH OF A PERSON.
NRS 241.033

1801 North Carson Street, Suite 104
Carson City, Nevada 89701
December 10, 2005
Ms. Sue Smith

1102 Center Street
Reno, Nevada 89504
Re: Notice of meeting of the Commission to consider your character,

alleged misconduct, professional competence, or health.
Dear Ms. Smith:
In connection with your performance evaluation, the Commission may consider your
character, alleged misconduct, professional competence or health at its meeting on January 14,
2005.1 The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. at 1801 North Carson Street, Suite 104, in Carson City,
Nevada. The meeting is a public meeting, and you are welcome to attend. The Commission may
go into closed session to consider the following general topics: your performance as
administrative assistant to the executive director, your job description, your job duties, and
matters properly related thereto.2 You are welcome to attend the closed session, have an attorney
or other representative of your choosing present during the closed meeting, present written
evidence, provide testimony, and present witnesses relating to your character, alleged
misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health.3
If the Commission determines it necessary after considering your character, alleged

misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health whether in a closed meeting
1
2
The list of general topics should be as inclusive as possible. NRS 241.033(2)(c).
3
The substance of the discussion must be reported. NRS 241.035(1)(c). The minutes should reflect that all
the procedural requirements and limitations of a closed session have been followed. See §§ 6.09 and 9 for a
discussion. This sentence meets the requirements of NRS 241.033(4).
-107-
or open meeting, it may also take administrative action against you at this meeting.4 This
informational statement is in lieu of any notice that may be required pursuant to NRS 241.034.5
This notice is provided to you under NRS 241.033.6
Very truly yours,
Commission Secretary
4
NRS 241.020 requires agenda statement both for the closed meeting consideration and the administrative
action item, which must occur in an open meeting. See NRS 241.010. For informational statement, see
NRS 241.033(2)(b).
5
See NRS 241.034(3).
6
See NRS 241.035(1)(d). If the commentator does not have written remarks, then his or her oral remarks
must be reflected.
-108-
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, , hereby swear or affirm under penalty of perjury, that in

accordance with NRS 241.033, I served the foregoing Notice of Meeting of the Commission to
consider character, alleged misconduct, competence, or health
By personally serving it on Sue Smith at
By depositing it in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, certified mail

#_________________, addressed to Sue Smith at
on this day of , 1997.
Signature of person making service
State of Nevada )
) ss:
__________ County )
Signed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me by

(name)
on .
(date)
Notary Public
Commission Expires ______________
-------------------------------------------------------Notes-------------------------------------------------------
This only is a sample format. Other formats, styles, or preprinted forms may be used as long as
they contain all the information required by NRS 241.033. This document must be entered into
the record before a public body may proceed with the meeting, pursuant to NRS 241.033(1)(b).
-109-
INDEX
[INDEX IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION]
-A-
Accommodations for physically handicapped
Action
defined
must be in open meeting
rescheduling void actions
Administrative Procedure Act
hearings are open meetings
regulation making
relationship to Open Meeting Law
Advisory bodies
Agency heads
Agency staff meetings
Agenda
clear and complete
closed sessions, agenda items
fees for providing copy
general requirements
items taken out of order
listing action items
matters brought up during public comment
providing copy on request
Sample Form 1
sticking to
support material, providing on request
Appointment of public officer, closed sessions to consider
Attorney-client privilege
Attorneys’ fees
Attorney General
civil actions
complaints to
opinions
prosecution
venue of actions by
Audiotapes of meetings, see Tapes of meetings
-B-
Board of Architecture
Board of Dental Examiners
Board of Pharmacy, closed sessions
Bodies headed by one person may not be covered by law
-110-
-C-
Certified Court Reporters Board, closed sessions of
Character, defined
Circumventing the law
Civil actions
Closed meetings
court reporters
disclosures of minutes, tapes
how to handle
minutes
motions
no action may be taken during some
preserving confidentiality on agenda and motions
proof of service
recordings of
to consider character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or
mental health of a person
when may be held
when may not be held
when not authorized
Competence, defined
Compliance Checklist, Part 1
Committees
Commissions
Confidential
agenda, preserving confidentiality for closed sessions
attorney-client memorandums
gaming proceedings
information which need not be provided
minutes, tapes
Containing and correcting violations
Complaint to the Attorney General
Conferences
Conventions
Costs
Criminal prosecutions
-D-
Definitions
action
character
competence
deliberate
emergency
-111-
gathering
present
public body
quorum
working days
Defamation, defined
Deliberate, defined
Deliberations must be in open meeting
Deliberation vs. taking action
Disruptive people, removing
-E-
Educational foundations covered
Electronic polling
Elected member of public body, closed sessions for
Emergency meetings or items on agenda
defined
how to handle
Employment interviews
Ethics commissions
Exclusion of persons from meetings
disruptive people
witnesses
Executive sessions, See Closed Meetings
Executive officers not covered
Exemptions
activities exempt
express
Governor
Gaming Control Board and Commission
hearings for suspension or expulsion of pupils
implied by statute
judicial proceedings
medical, dental screening panels
labor negotiations
local ethics committees
Legislature
statutory
State Ethics Commission
strict construction, exemptions
-F-
Facilities
Fees
for providing notice and agenda
for providing support material
-112-
First Amendment
Forms, sample
minutes, Sample Form 2
notice of public meeting, Sample Form 1
notice of intent to consider character, misconduct, competence, or
health of a person and proof of service, Sample Form 3
-G-
Gaming Control Board
Gathering, defined
Governor exemption
-H-
Handicapped, see Accommodations of physically handicapped
Health, consideration in closed session
-I-
Implied exceptions to rule of open meetings
Informal gatherings and discussions
Injunctions
actions by individuals for
actions by Office of the Attorney General for
standards for issuing and enforcing
time limits for bringing actions
Interpretations of Open Meeting Law
attorney general opinions
implied exceptions
standards for
standard of reasonableness
-J-
Judicial exemption
-L-
Labor negotiations
Legislative declaration and intent of Open Meeting Law
Legislative exemptions
License applicants, licensees, consideration of character, allegations of misconduct,
professional competence
Limitations on actions
Local ethics commissions
-M-
Mailing
ballots
-113-
fees
notices
timing
Mail polls
Meetings
defined
closed meetings
held out-of-state
informal gatherings and discussions
seminars, conferences, conventions
social gatherings
which “meetings” must be open
Medical, Dental Screening Panels
Members elect of public bodies
Minimum notice, see Notice Requirements
Minutes
closed session
fees for copying
general
inspection by public
public records
request for copies
required contents
retention and disclosure
Sample Form 2
Misdemeanor
Motion to go into closed session
-N-
Nevada Athletic Commission
Nevada Interscholastic Association
Non-profit entities
Notice Requirements
agenda must be included
calculating 3 working days
fees
improper notice, containing and correcting
mailing
posting
required contents
recommended contents
Sample Form 1 1
to persons whose character, alleged misconduct, professional competence,
physical or mental health is being considered
-114-
Sample Form 3
to persons against whom the public body may take certain administrative
actions or from whom the public body may acquire property through eminent
domain
-O-
Open Meeting
facilities
notice and agenda requirements
Out-of-State meetings
-P-
Performance evaluations
Personnel sessions
PERS (Public Employees Retirement System)
Penalties
Persons whose character, alleged misconduct, professional competence,
physical or mental health is to be considered
Physically handicapped, accommodations
Polling
Posting
locations must be listed on notice
prominent place, posting guidelines
requirements
Present, defined
Private briefings
Privilege, attorney-client
Proof of Service, Sample Form 3
Private non-profit organizations
Public
awards, considering candidates
record, minutes and tapes
recording of meetings
remarks, see Public comment
Public body
bodies headed by one person
definition
examples
must be administrative, advisory, executive or legislative body of state
or local government
must be collegial body
Public comment
allowing members of public to speak
item required on notice and agenda
matters brought up during
-115-
reasonable rules and regulations
remarks to be put in minutes
Public officers
closed meetings not authorized to select
may be removed from office for violating Open Meeting Law
Pupils, closed sessions for expulsion hearings
-Q-
Quasi-judicial functions
Quorum, defined
Quorum, mayor not counted in determining
Quorum, meetings held with another public body
Quorum, walking
-R-
Reasonableness, standard of,
Records
Recordings of meetings
closed sessions
providing copy to members of public
providing copy to subjects of closed sessions
retention
who may record sessions
Removal from office for violating Open Meeting Law
Requests for public notice
Requests for agenda, ordinances, regulations or support materials
-S-
Sample Form 1
Sample Form 2
Sample Form 3
Sanctions
Secret ballots
Seminars
Serial communications
Social gatherings
Standards of interpretation
Staff meetings
Statute of limitations
Strict construction of exceptions to open meeting requirements
Student governments
Subcommittees
Support material, providing on request
-116-
-T-
Tape recordings of meetings
fees for copying
of closed sessions
retention of tapes
Tax revenues, broadly interpreted
Telephonic meeting
Telephonic voting
Time periods
3 working days
30 days for minutes, tapes
60 days to void actions
120 days for injunctive relief
-U-
University foundations are public bodies
University and Community College System, student governments
-V-
Venue of actions
Video tapes, see Tape recordings of meetings
Video conferences
Violations
actions taken in violation are void
attorney general to investigate and prosecute
containing and curing violations
criminal sanctions
right of citizens to bring lawsuits for
time limits for bringing suit
what happens if one occurs
Void actions
Voting
agenda to reflect action items
action items must be denoted on items on agenda
by mail
majority voting requirements
polling
prohibited in closed session
reflected in minutes
secret ballot
telephonic
-117-
-W-
Walking quorums
Waiver of personal notice requirements
Witness exclusion
Working days
Wrongful exclusion of person from meeting
-118-
From: Bruce Parks [bruce122@ymail.com] on behalf of Bruce Parks <bruce122@ymail.com>
Subject: Minutes
Attachments: OML Manual 2019-03-26_OML_12TH_AGOMANUAL.pdf
Hello Mr. Scott,
Best regards,
Bruce Parks
NEVADA
OPEN MEETING LAW
MANUAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL
AARON FORD
100 NORTH CARSON STREET

CARSON CITY, NEVADA 89701-4717
Telephone (775) 684-1100; Fax (775) 684-1108
Las Vegas: Telephone (702) 486-3420; Fax (702) 486-3768
Reno: Telephone (775) 688-1818; Fax (775) 688-1822
This manual is published online at ag.nv.gov
Twelfth Edition
January 2016 -
Updated
3/26/2019
FOREWORD
The Nevada Legislature enacted significant amendments to the Open Meeting Law
(OML) in 2013 and 2015. This newly revised 2016 Open Meeting Law Manual incorporates
those new amendments. Comments and suggestions are welcome regarding this revision or
future revisions.
The full Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 241—Meetings of State and Local
Agencies—can be found at: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-241.html.
We encourage the reader to visit the Attorney General’s web page at http://ag.nv.gov.
There, you will find links to Open Meeting Law Opinions beginning in 1993, this Manual, the
OML compliance checklist, and the OML complaint form.
Open Meeting Law Opinions are annotated in NRS Chapter 241 by the Legislative
Counsel Bureau. Other opinions are labeled “AG File No.” and also are published on our
webpage, which is searchable by the reader. Together, these opinions provide the reader with a
multitude of factual scenarios and are a useful guide to this office’s interpretation and application
of the OML.
-i-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Reference is made throughout the manual to Open Meeting Law Opinions (OMLO),
which are opinions rendered by the Office of the Attorney General as a guideline for enforcing
the Open Meeting Law and not as a written opinion requested pursuant to NRS 228.150. OMLO
Opinions can be found at: ag.nv.gov/open government. Additional references may be found
at Attorney General Opinions (Op. Nev. Att'y Gen.), which are opinions rendered pursuant to
NRS 228.150.
PART 1 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST……………………………………………………8
PART 2 WHAT IS A “PUBLIC BODY” THAT MUST CONDUCT ITS

MEETINGS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?........15
§ 2.01 General: discussion of statutory definition of public body………………………...15
§ 2.02 Blue ribbon commissions; Governor-appointed committees; executive agency

boards, committees …………………………………………………………………16
§ 2.03 Agency staff………………………………………………………………………...17
§ 2.04 Committees; subcommittees; advisory bodies.......................................................... 18
§ 2.05 Commissions or committees appointed by the Legislature ...................................... 20
§ 2.06 Members-elect of public bodies .............................................................................. 20
§ 2.07 Appointment of designee to public body .................................................................. 20
§ 2.08 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed to be public bodies............ 21
§ 2.09 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed not to be public bodies...... 21
§ 2.10 Private, nonprofit organizations…………………………………………………….22
§ 2.11 Quasi-judicial proceedings…………………………………………………………23
PART 3 WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE EXEMPT FROM THE

OPEN MEETING LAW?.......................................................................................24
§ 3.01 General……………………………………………………………………..……….24
§ 3.02 Statutory exemptions……………………………………………………………….25
-ii-
§ 3.03 Certain confidential investigative proceedings of the Gaming Control
Board and Commission………………………………………………………...…...28
§ 3.04 Quasi-judicial proceedings no longer exempt from OML........................................ 28
§ 3.05 Attorney-client conference exception ...................................................................... 28
§ 3.06 Student governments …………………………………………………………..…...29
§ 3.07 Pre-meeting discussion to remove or delay discussion of items from agenda ......... 29
PART 4 WHAT GATHERINGS MUST BE CONDUCTED IN COMPLIANCE

WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?................................................................. 30
§ 4.01 General; statutory definitions .............................................................................. 30
§ 4.02 Informal gatherings and discussions that constitute deliberation ............................. 31
§ 4.03 Social gatherings……………………………………………………………...…….33
§ 4.04 Seminars, conferences, conventions ......................................................................... 34
§ 4.05 Telephone conferences/video conferences ............................................................... 34
§ 4.06 Electronic polling……………………...................................................................... 35
§ 4.07 Mail polls……………………………… .................................................................. 36
§ 4.08 Serial communications, or “walking quorums” ........................................................ 36
§ 4.09 “Private briefings” among staff of public body and non-quorum of members......... 39
§ 4.10 Meetings held out-of-state or out-of-local jurisdiction............................................. 39
§ 4.11 Exception for conferring with counsel...................................................................... 39
§ 4.12 Meetings held with another public body................................................................... 40
§ 4.13 Appointment of public officer……………………………………………………...40
PART 5 WHAT ARE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE

OPEN MEETING LAW? (see Sample Forms 1 and 3) ………………………..42
§ 5.01 General……………………………………………………………………………...42
§ 5.02 Contents of notice ………………………………………………………………….42
-iii-
§ 5.03 Posting the notice………………………………………………………………….. 44
§ 5.04 Mailing the written notice; mailing list..................................................................... 45
§ 5.05 Calculating “three working days”............................................................................. 46
§ 5.06 Providing copies of agenda and supporting material upon request .......................... 46
§ 5.07 Fees for providing notice of copies of supporting material ...................................... 50
§ 5.08 Emergencies………………………………………………………………………...51

waivers of notice; exemption from OML for meetings held to consider
individual applications for employment (NRS 241.033)…………………………..53
§ 5.10 Meeting to consider administrative action against a person or acquisition

of real property by eminent domain (NRS 241.034………………………………. 55
PART 6 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARING AND

FOLLOWING THE AGENDA? (See Sample Form 1)………………………..58
§ 6.01 General……………………………………………………………………………..58
§ 6.02 Agenda must be clear and complete (See Sample Form 1) ……………………….59
§ 6.03 Stick to the agenda………………………………………………………………....64
§ 6.04 Matters brought up during public comment; meeting continued to another date….65
§ 6.05 Meeting that must be continued to a future date ………………………………….65
PART 7 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDUCTING AN

OPEN MEETING?................................................................................................ 67
§ 7.01 General……………………………………………………………………………..67
§ 7.02 Facilities……………………………………………………………………………67
§ 7.03 Accommodations for physically handicapped persons……………………………68
§ 7.04 Public comment: multiple periods of public comment……………………………68
§ 7.05 Reasonable time, place and manner restrictions apply to public meetings………..68
-iv-
§ 7.06 Excluding people who are disruptive ....................................................................... 71
§ 7.07 Excluding witnesses from testimony of other witnesses.......................................... 71
§ 7.08 Vote by secret ballot is forbidden; voting requirements for elected public
bodies; voting requirements for appointed public bodies (NRS 241.0355) ……… 71
§ 7.09 Audio and/or video recordings of public meetings by members of the public….....73
§ 7.10 Telephone conferences…………...……………………………………………...…73
PART 8 WHEN ARE CLOSED MEETINGS AUTHORIZED AND HOW

ARE THEY TO BE HANDLED?........................................................................ 74
§ 8.01 General………………………………………………………………………..……74
§ 8.02 When closed sessions may be held………………………………………………...74
§ 8.03 When closed sessions may not be held…………………………………………….75

interviews and performance evaluations; notice requirements……………...……..76
§ 8.05 The appointment to “public office” closed meeting prohibition…………………...78

professional competence, or physical and mental health of a person……………...79
PART 9 WHAT RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AND MADE AVAILABLE

TO THE PUBLIC? ……………………………………………………………...81
§ 9.01 General…………………………………………………………………………......81
§ 9.02 Requirement for and content of written minutes………………………………….81
§ 9.03 Retention and disclosure of minutes………………………………………………82
§ 9.04 Making and retaining audiotapes or video recordings of meetings……………….82
§ 9.05 Fees for inspecting or copying minutes and tapes………………………………...83
-v-
PART 10 WHAT HAPPENS IF A VIOLATION OCCURS?..........................................84
§ 10.01 General…………………………………………………………………………. ..84
§ 10.02 Correcting a violation……………………………………………………..............84
§ 10.03 Actions taken in violation are void.........................................................................86
§ 10.04 Reconsidering actions that are void………………………………. .…………….87
§ 10.05 Any person denied a right under the law may bring a civil suit…….……………88
§ 10.06 The Office of the Attorney General may bring a civil suit……………………….88
§ 10.07 Time limits for filing lawsuit; policy for enforcement of complaints……………89
§ 10.08 Jurisdiction and venue for suits ……………………………………………….....90
§ 10.09 Standards for injunctions and enforcing injunctions……………………………..90
§ 10.10 Criminal sanctions…..……………………………………………………………91
§ 10.11 Public officers may be removed from office……………………………………..91
§ 10.12 Filing a complaint; procedure; Attorney General subpoena power;

public records……………………………………………………………………..91
§ 10.13 Public notice of Attorney General Opinion finding violation by public body…...92
§ 10.14 Monetary penalty for willful violation: one-year limitations period……………..93
PART 11 HOW IS THE OPEN MEETING LAW INTERPRETED

AND APPLIED?.................................................................................................. 95
§ 11.01 General……………………………………………………………………………95
§ 11.02 Legislative declaration and intent………………………………………………...95
§ 11.03 Standards of interpretation………………………………………………………. 95
§ 11.04 Use of standard of reasonableness……………………………………………… 95
§ 11.05 Attorney General Opinions……………………………………………………… 95
-vi-
PART 12 WHAT ELSE DO I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE
OPEN MEETING LAW?...................................................................................97
§ 12.01 General…………………………………………………………………………...97

NRS Chapter 233B…………………………………………………………........98
§ 12.03 Relationship of Open Meeting Law to First Amendment

to the Constitution of the United States………………………………………....98
§ 12.04 Relationship of Open Meeting Law and defamation……................................... 98
SAMPLE FORM 1: NOTICE AND AGENDA OF PUBLIC MEETING

(WITH COMMENTS)………………………………………….100
SAMPLE FORM 2: MINUTES……………………………………………………….104
SAMPLE FORM 3: NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER CHARACTER,

MISCONDUCT, COMPETENCE OR HEALTH OF A
PERSON, NRS 241.033 ..………………………………………108
PROOF OF SERVICE……………………………………………………………………..110
INDEX………………………………………………………………………….……………111
-vii-
Part 1 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
This is a checklist to reference when applying the Open Meeting Law. References
in brackets are to the NRS and to sections of this manual.
_______ Does the Open Meeting Law apply?
_______ Is the entity a public body? [NRS 241.015(4), §§ 3.01-3.10]
_______ Is there an exemption or exception from the Open Meeting Law? [§§ 4.01-4.07]
_______ Is a meeting going to occur? [NRS 241.015(3), §§ 5.01-5.13]
_______ Will a quorum of the members of the public body be present? [§ 5.01]
_______ Will a quorum deliberate toward a decision or take action on any matter over
which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power?
[§ 5.01]
Agenda (see Sample Form 1)
_______ Has a clear and complete agenda of all topics to be considered been prepared?
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1) §§ 6.02, 7.02]
_______ Does the agenda list all topics scheduled to be considered during the meeting?
[§§ 6.02, 7.02]
_______ Have all the topics been described clearly in the agenda in order to give the public
adequate notice? [§§ 6.02, 7.02]
_______ Does the agenda include designated periods for public comment?
Does the agenda state that action may not be taken on the matters discussed
during this period until specifically included on an agenda as an action item?
[§§ 6.02, 7.04, 8.04]
_______ Does the notice inform the public that (1) items may be taken out of the order
listed on the agenda, and (2) agenda items may be combined for consideration,
and (3) items may be delayed or removed at any time? [§ 6.02]
_______ Does the agenda (1) describe the items on which action may be taken and
(2) clearly denote that these items are for possible action? [§§ 6.02, 7.01, 7.02]
-8-
_______ Has each closed session been denoted, including the name of the person being
considered in the closed session, and if action is to be taken in an open session
after the closed session, was it indicated on the agenda? [§§ 7.02, 9.06, NRS
241.020(2)(d)(4)]
Notice, posting, and mailing (see Sample Form 1)
_______ Has written notice of the meeting been prepared? [NRS 241.020(2), § 6.01]
_____ Does the notice include:
_____ The time, place, and location of the meeting? [§ 6.02]
_____ An agenda of topics for discussion or possible action; for further

information,,see Sample Form 1, this manual, or Index under
“Agenda.”
_____ A list of places where the notice was posted? [§ 6.03]
_____ A statement regarding assistance and accommodations for

physically handicapped people? [§ 6.02]
_______ Was the written notice [NRS 241.020(3)(a), § 6.03]:
_____ Posted at the principal office of the public body (or if there is no principal
office, at the building in which the meeting is to be held)? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted at not less than three other separate, prominent places within the
jurisdiction of the public body? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted on the official website of the State, https://notice.nv.gov? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted on the public body’s website if the public body maintains a
website? [§ 6.03]
_____ Posted no later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting?
(Do not count day of meeting) [§§ 6.03, 6.05]
_____ In compliance with minimum public notice, is there written documentation

for the public body’s record of meeting? [NRS 241.020(4)]
_______ Was the written notice mailed at no charge to those who requested a copy?
[§§ 6.04, 6.07]
_______ Was it mailed in the same manner in which the notice is required to be mailed to a
-9-
_______ Was it delivered to the postal service used by the body no later than 9 a.m. of the
third working day before the meeting? [§ 6.04]
_______ Have persons who requested notices of the meeting been informed with the first
notice sent to them that their request lapses after six months?
[NRS 241.020(3)(c), § 6.04]
_______ If a person’s character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical

or mental health is going to be considered at the meeting, has that person been
given written notice of the time and place of the meeting?
[NRS 241.033(1), § 6.09]
_______ Does the notice contain a list of the general topics concerning the person, inform
the person that he/she may attend the closed session, bring a representative,
present evidence, provide testimony, and present witnesses? [NRS §241.033(4)]
_______ Does the notice inform the person that the public body may take administrative
action against the person? If so, then the requirements of NRS 241.034
have been met. [NRS §241.033(2)(b)]
_______ Was the notice personally delivered to the person at least five working days
before the meeting or sent by certified mail to the last known address of that
person at least 21working days before the meeting? (Nevada Athletic
Commission is exempt from these timing requirements.) [NRS 241.033(1)-(2)]
_______ Did the public body receive proof of service of the notice before holding the
meeting? (Nevada Athletic Commission not exempt from this requirement.)
[NRS 241.033(1) (a) and (b)]
Agenda support material made available to public
_______ Has at least one copy of an agenda, a proposed ordinance or regulation that will
be discussed at the meeting, and any other supporting material (except
confidential material as detailed in the statute) been provided at no charge to each
person who so requests copies? [NRS 241.020(6) and (7) §§ 6.06, 6.07]
_______ Has the governing body of a city or county whose population is greater than
45,000 posted its supporting materials to its website no later than the time the
material is provided to members of the governing body? Material provided to the
governing body during its meeting must be uploaded to its website within 24
hours after conclusion of the meeting. [NRS 241.020(8)]
_______ Does each agenda list the contact information for the person(s) from whom a
requester may obtain a copy of meeting supporting materials or the place where
a copy may be obtained?
-10-
Emergency Meeting
_______ Is this an emergency meeting? [NRS 241.020(2) and (10), § 6.08]
_______ Were the circumstances giving rise to the meeting unforeseen?
_______ Is immediate action required?
_______ Has the entity documented the emergency?
_______ Has an agenda been prepared limiting the meeting to the emergency item?
_______ Has an attempt been made to give public notice?
_______ While the notice and agenda requirements may be relaxed in an emergency, are
other provisions of the Open Meeting Law complied with (e.g., meeting open and
public, minutes kept, etc.)?
Closed Session (see Sample Form 3)
_______ Is a closed session specifically authorized by statute? [NRS 241.020(1);

NRS 241.030(1), §§ 9.01-9.07]
_______ Have all the requirements of that statute been met?
If a closed session is being conducted to consider character, misconduct,

competence, or physical or mental health of a person or to consider an appeal by a
person of the results of an examination, see NRS 241.033:
_____ Is the subject person an elected member of a public body? If so, a closed
session is not authorized. [NRS 241.031, § 9.04]
_____ Is the closed session to consider the character, alleged misconduct, or

professional competence of an appointed public officer or a chief
executive or administrative officer in a comparable position of a public
body (i.e., president of a university, state college or community college
within NSHE system, county school superintendent, or city or county
manager)? If so, a closed meeting is prohibited. [NRS 241.031(1)(b)]
_____ Is the closed session to discuss the appointment of any person to public
office or as a member of a public body? If so, a closed session is not
authorized. [NRS 241.030(4)(d), § 9.03]
_____ Has the subject been notified as provided above? Has proof of service
been returned to the public body? NRS 241.033(1), [§ 6.09]
-11-
_____ If a recording was made of the open session, was a recording also made of
the closed session? [NRS 241.035(4), § 9.06]
_____ Was the subject person given a copy of the recording of the closed session
if requested? [NRS 241.035(6), NRS 241.033(6), § 9.06]
_____ Have minutes been kept of the closed session? [NRS 241.035(2) § 10.02]
_____ Have minutes and recordings of the closed session been retained
and disposed of in accordance with NRS 241.035(2)? [§ 10.03]
_____ Was a motion made to go into closed session which specifies the nature of
the business to be considered and the statutory authority pursuant to which
the public body is authorized to close the meeting?
[NRS 241.030(3), § 9.06]
_____ Was the discussion limited to specific matters specified in the motion?
[§ 9.06]
_____ Did the public body go back into open session to take action on the subject
discussed? (This must be done unless otherwise provided in a specific
statute) [§ 9.06]
_____ Has the subject requested the meeting be open? If so, the public body
must open the meeting unless another person appearing before the public
body requests that the meeting remains closed.
[NRS 241.030(2)(a) and (b)]
Meeting open to public; accommodations
_______ Have all persons been permitted to attend? [NRS 241.020, § 8.01]
_______ Was exclusion of witnesses at hearings during the testimony of other witnesses
handled properly? [NRS 241.030(4)(b), 241.033(5), § 8.07]
_______ Was exclusion of persons who willfully disrupted a meeting to the extent that its
orderly conduct is made impractical handled properly?
[NRS 241.030(4)(a), § 8.06]
_______ Have members of the public been given an opportunity to speak during the public
comment period? [NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3), § 8.04]
_______ Are facilities adequate and open? [§ 8.02]
_______ Have reasonable efforts been made to assist and accommodate physically
handicapped persons desiring to attend? [NRS 241.020(1), § 8.03]
-12-
_______ If the meeting is by telephone or video conference, can the public hear each
_______ Have members of the general public been allowed to record public meetings on
audiotape or other means of sound reproduction as long as it in no way interferes
with the conduct of the meeting? [NRS 241.035(3), § 8.08]
Stick to agenda; emergency agenda items
_______ Have actual discussions and actions at the meeting been limited to only those
items on the agenda? [§ 7.03]
_______ If an item has been added to the agenda as an emergency item:

[NRS 241.020(2) and (10), § 6.08]
_____ Was it due to an unforeseen circumstance?
_____ Was immediate action required?
_____ Has the emergency been documented in the minutes?
_____ Did the body refrain from taking action on discussion items or public
comment items? [NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3), § 7.04]
Recordings
_______ The public body shall record its public meeting [NRS 241.035(4), § 10.04]:
_____ Have recordings been made of the closed session as well as open sessions?
[NRS 241.035(4), § 9.06]
_____ Recordings of public meetings must be made available to the public within
30 workings days after adjournment of the meeting. [NRS 241.035(2)]
_____ Recordings must be retained for at least one year after the adjournment
of the meeting. [NRS 241.035(4)(a)]
_____ Recordings of public meetings must be treated as public records in

accordance with public records statutes. [NRS 241.035(4)(b)]
_____ Have recordings of closed sessions been made available to the subjects
of those sessions, if requested? [NRS 241.033(6)]
-13-
Minutes (see Sample Form 2)
_______ Have minutes or an audio recording been made available for both open and closed
sessions? [NRS 241.035(2), (4) and (6), § 10.02]
_______ Do they include at a minimum the material required by NRS 241.035(1)?

[§ 10.02]
_______ Are minutes of open sessions kept as public records under the public record
statutes and NRS 241.035(2)?
_______ Have minutes of open sessions been made available for inspection by the public
within 30 working days after the adjournment of the meeting, retained for at least
five years, and otherwise treated as provided in NRS 241.035(2)?
_______ Have minutes of closed sessions been made available to the subjects of those
sessions if requested? [NRS 241.033(6)]
Non-compliance
_______ Have any areas of noncompliance been corrected?

[§§ 11.01, 11.02, 11.03, 11.04]
_______ If litigation is brought to void an action or seek injunctive or declaratory relief,

was it brought within the time periods in NRS 241.037(3)? [§ 11.07]
-14-
Part 2 WHAT IS A “PUBLIC BODY” THAT MUST CONDUCT ITS MEETINGS
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 2.01 General: discussion of statutory definition of public body.
The definition of “public body” was clarified and its scope expanded by the 2011
Legislature. A public body’s manner of creation rather than its function is the new touchstone of
the definition.
NRS 241.015(4)(b) ensures that the actions and deliberations of certain multimember
groups appointed by the Governor or a public officer and/or a public entity under his direction
and control are subject to the OML, as long as at least two members of the appointed body are
not employees of the Executive Department of State Government. The Legislature deemed this
expansion of the scope of the OML appropriate given the growing role such groups play in the
formulation of public policy.
NRS 241.015(4)(a) requires a public body to be connected to state or local government in

order to be subject to the OML. Set out below is the definition of “public body.”
NRS 241.015(4) defines a public body as:
4. Except as otherwise provided NRS 241.016, “public body”

means:
(a) Any administrative, advisory, executive or legislative body
of the state or a local government which expends or disburses or is
supported in whole or in part by tax revenue or which advises or
makes recommendations to any entity which expends or disburses
or is supported in whole or in part by tax revenue, including, but
not limited to, any board, commission, committee, subcommittee
or other subsidiary thereof and includes an educational foundation
as defined in subsection 3 of NRS 388.750 and a university
foundation as defined in subsection 3 of NRS 396.405, if the
administrative, advisory, executive, or legislative body is created
by:
(1) The Constitution of this State;
(2) Any statute of this State;
(3) A city charter and any city ordinance which has been
filed or recorded as required by the applicable law;
(4) The Nevada Administrative Code;
(5) A resolution or other formal designation by such a body
created by a statute of this State or an ordinance of a local
government;
(6) An executive order issued by the Governor; or
(7) A resolution or an action by the governing body
political subdivision of this State;
-15-
(b) Any board, commission or committee consisting of at
least two persons appointed by:
(1) The Governor or a public officer who is under the
direction of the Governor, if the board, commission or committee
has at least two members who are not employees of the Executive
Department of the State Government;
(2) An entity in the Executive Department of the State
government consisting of members appointed by the Governor, if
the board, commission or committee otherwise meets the definition
of a public body pursuant to this subsection; or
(3) A public officer who is under the direction of an agency
or other entity in the Executive Department of the State
Government consisting of members appointed by the Governor, if
the board, commission or committee has at least two members who
are not employed by the public officer or entity; and
(c) A limited-purpose association that is created for a rural
agricultural residential common-interest community as defined in
subsection 6 of NRS 116.1201.
5. “Quorum” means a simple majority of the membership of a public body or
another proportion established bylaw.
The definition of “public body” is not a drastic change; rather it codifies prior Attorney
General Opinions, so that the definition of public body is dependent explicitly on its manner of
creation rather than its function. It always has been true that a public body must be collegial, that
is, it must consist of more than two persons. NRS 241.015(4) requires at least two persons to
comprise a public body. The Open Meeting Law concerns itself with meetings, gatherings,
decisions, and actions obtained through the collective consensus of a quorum of the public body
membership. See also Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 64 P.3d 1070 (2003)
(collective process of decision making must be accomplished in public). The Court emphasized
that public bodies may only act collectively. Similarly, in Del Papa v. Board of Regents¸114
Nev. 388, 400, 956 P.2d 770, 778–779 (1988) the Court said: “the constraints of the Open
Meeting Law apply only where a quorum of a public body, in its official capacity as a body,
deliberates toward a decision or makes a decision.”
In a letter opinion, the Office of the Attorney General opined that when determining if a
body is supported by tax revenues, the term “tax revenues” should be construed in its broadest
possible sense to include not only those items traditionally thought of as taxes but also the
license fees paid to various professional licensing boards pursuant to state law. See Attorney
General letter opinion addressed to Mr. Arne R. Purhonen, Nevada State Board of Architecture,
dated September 1, 1977.
§ 2.02 Blue ribbon commissions; Governor appointed committees; executive agency

boards, committees
Following the principle that a “public body” must be a multi-member entity, the Office
of the Attorney General opined that the Open Meeting Law does not apply to the Governor when
-16-
he/she is acting in his official executive capacity because the Governor is not a multi-member
body. See Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 241 (August 24, 1961).
As explained in § 3.01 above, any commission, committee, or board appointed by the

Governor with at least two members who are not employees of the State Executive Department
are now defined as a public body and subject to the Open Meeting Law. But all other bodies,
regardless of composition, which are appointed by executive heads of local governments or
agencies including, but not limited to, mayors and city and county managers, continue to be
exempt from the Open Meeting Law.
An executive officer of a board or commission who carries out the directives, orders, and
policies of a board or commission in day-to-day administration of an agency of government is
not considered the alter ego of the board or commission so as to require him to comply with the
Open Meeting Law. Bennett v. Warden, 333 So. 2d 97 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976) (meetings
between college president and his advisors or staff personnel are not covered).
Along this line, the Office of the Attorney General held that staff meetings to advise a
city manager who, in turn, arrives at his own decision and recommendation on an insurance
claim were not within the ambit of the Open Meeting Law. See Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 79-5
OMLO 2010-02 (April 7, 2010) (“committee, subcommittee or subsidiary thereof,” is not

defined in statute, but the OML Manual interprets the statute to mean that to the extent a group is
appointed by a public body and is given the task of making decisions for or recommendations to
the public body, the group would be governed by the OML). For further treatment of this issue,
see § 3.04 NEVADA OPEN MEETING LAW MANUAL (11th ed. 2011); OMLO 2002-017 (April 18,
2002) and OMLO 2002-27 (June 11, 2002). See also OMLO 2007-03 (July 17, 2007) (Walker
Basin Project Stakeholder’s Group found not to be public body: it was created by UNR Vice-
Chancellor’s steering committee, it was not advisory to any other body, and it was not created by
statute). See also OMLO 2007-04 (September 10, 2007) (OML does not apply to Douglas Selby,
Las Vegas City Manager, when acting in his official capacity, he appointed a citizens advisory
body).
The Open Meeting Law applies only to public bodies; the Fernley City Council is a
public body, but the citizens’ recruitment committee formed by the Mayor was not a public
body. Council played no role in the initial interviews and screening of applications for
appointment to City Manager position. Council did not deny a request for access to the initial
candidate’s resumes. Once initial screening was accomplished by the Mayor and his citizen’s
recruitment committee, and names were forwarded to the Council, then the OML applied. The
Council complied with the OML; the finalists’ applications and resumes were made public
before the meeting. AG File No. 09-026 (June 14, 2009)
§ 2.03 Agency staff
The Open Meeting Law usually does not apply to the typical internal agency staff
meetings where staff members make individual reports and recommendations to a superior,
-17-
where the technical requirements of a quorum do not apply, and where decisions are not reached
by a vote or consensus. See OMLO 2004-02 (January 20, 2004) for a further discussion and
analysis on this topic.
However, when a public body delegates de facto authority to a staff committee to act on
its behalf in the formulation, preparation, and promulgation of plans or policies, the staff
committee stands in the shoes of the public body and the Open Meeting Law may apply to the
staff meetings. See News-Press Publishing Co., Inc. v. Carlson, 410 So.2d 546 (Fla. Dist. Ct.
App. 1982) (When the governing authority of a hospital district delegated responsibility of
preparation of a proposed budget to an internal budget committee, the open meeting law applied
to the committee, even though it consisted of staff personnel.).
Following the above principles, the Office of the Attorney General opined that the Open
Meeting Law did not apply to internal staff meetings of an executive agency or interagency staff
meetings except where a public body delegates policy formulation or planning functions to a
staff committee and these policies or plans are the subject of foreseeable action by the public
body. See Letter Opinion to Mr. William A. Molini dated February 11, 1985.
§ 2.04 Committees; subcommittees; advisory bodies
NRS 241.015(4) specifically includes committees, subcommittees, or subsidiaries thereof

within the definition of a “public body.” A committee or subcommittee is covered by the law
whenever a quorum of the committee or subcommittee gathers to deliberate or make a decision
including taking action to make a recommendation to the parent body. NRS 241.015; Lewiston
Daily Sun, Inc. v. City of Auburn, 544 A.2d 335 (Me. 1988); Arkansas Gazette Co. v. Pickens,
522 S.W.2d 350 (Ar. 1975).
Legislative committees are exempt from the OML. In 1994, the Nevada Constitution was
amended to exempt legislative committees from the OML. Nevada Constitution article 4, § 15.
The Open Meeting Law does not define “committee, subcommittee or subsidiary
thereof,” so counsel for the public body should be consulted for a determination of whether
the Open Meeting Law extends to a particular group of persons. Review
of §§ 3.01–3.02 above, is recommended. Following the principles of the cases cited above and in
§ 3.03, to the extent that a group is appointed by a public body and is given the task of making
decisions for or recommendations to the public body, the group would be governed by the Open
Meeting Law. See OMLO 2002-017 (April 18, 2002) and OMLO 2002-27 (June 11, 2002). But
see AG File No. 07-030 (September 10, 2007) (OML does not apply to the appointment of a
citizen advisory panel to advise Las Vegas City Manager when acting in his official capacity (see
infra at § 3.03).
If a subcommittee recommendation to a parent body is more than mere fact-finding

because the subcommittee has to choose or accept options, or decide to accept certain facts while
rejecting others, or if it has to make any type of choice in order to create a recommendation, then
it has participated in the decision-making process and is subject to the OML. Negotiations with
unions, private contractors, and others conducted by a subcommittee of a public body, which
-18-
result in a recommendation to the parent body, are subject to the OML, unless specifically
exempted by statute.
Failure to notice on its agenda the break-up of an advisory body into study groups, and
failure to provide the study groups with recorders or designate someone to keep minutes of the
meeting was a violation of NRS 241.015(4)(a). The facilitator’s strategy for dividing the
committee into study groups coupled with that group’s assignment should have been noticed on
the agenda and real minutes should have been kept along with a tape recording. AG File No. 07-
027 (August 15, 2007).
NRS 241.015(4) specifically includes within the definition of public body an “advisory
body of the state or a local government which expends or disburses or is supported in whole or in
part by tax revenue or which advises or makes recommendations to any entity which expends or
disburses or is supported in whole or in part by tax revenue. . . .”
For additional guidance, see the following: § 3.07, infra; OMLO 98-03 (July 7, 1998),
where the Office of the Attorney General opined that a subcommittee informally appointed by
the president of a school board was a public body as defined in NRS 241.015(4) where, even
though the subcommittee was not formally appointed, its members shared equal voting power,
formed a consensus to speak to the school board with one voice, and the school board knew of its
existence and treated it as a board subcommittee; and OMLO 98-04 (July 7, 1998) where the
Office of the Attorney General opined that two school board members, while self-appointed and
initially acting as individuals, became a public body as defined in NRS 241.015(4) when the
school board began recognizing them as a subcommittee and encouraging them to meet with
staff to formulate a school safety proposal to be presented to the board, after which they met as a
collegial body with staff to form a proposal which was formally presented to the board in the
name of the “School Safety Subcommittee.” The Office of the Attorney General opined that
formality in appointment is not the sole dispositive factor in determining what constitutes a
public body under the Open Meeting Law, and informality in appointment should not be an
escape from it; to hold otherwise would encourage circumvention of the Open Meeting Law
through the use of unofficial committees.
An elected Public Body, subject to NRS 241.0355, which statute forbids action by the
body unless a majority of all the members of the elected body vote affirmatively for the action,
asserted that NRS 241.0355 does not apply to its committees because its bylaws do not require
any committee to be composed of elected officials only. Bylaws do not rise to the level of statute
and bylaws do not have the force and effect of law. Standing and Special committees of this
public body were elected public bodies for purposes of the OML. AG File No. 09-017 (May 29,
2009); see also OMLO 2001-57 and AGO 2001-25 for further discussion of the two-tiered
voting requirement found in NRS 241.0355.
The Legislature intended that “committee, subcommittee, or any subsidiary there-

of” be applied to any gathering that makes a decision or recommendation to a parent body. The
label given to the sub-group is immaterial and will not prevent the application of the OML to
groups with other labels besides “committee” or “sub-committee.” Even in the absence of a
formal appointment process (see NRS 241.015(4)(a)(7)), the Open Meeting Law applies to a
-19-
staff committee with de facto authority from the parent public body to act on its behalf. The staff
committee stands in the shoes of the public body. Legislative intent and explicit language mean
the OML applies whenever a quorum of committee, subcommittee, or any subsidiary
thereof, meets to deliberate or take action. AG File No. 08-014 (July 2, 2008).
§ 2.05 Commissions or committees appointed by the Legislature
NRS 241.016(2)(a) exempts the Legislature from the requirements of the OML. Since the
Legislature is not a public body, none of its various committees or subcommittees had been
considered to be subject to the OML.
However, the Nevada Constitution was amended in 1994 after a vote by the people to
ensure that meetings of all legislative committees must be open to the public, except meetings
held to consider the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or
mental health of a person. NEV. CONST. ART. 4, §15.
§ 2.06 Members-elect of public bodies
Although the literal language of the Open Meeting Law appears to limit its application to
actual members of a public body, the Office of the Attorney General believes the better view is
set forth in Hough v. Stembridge, 278 So. 2d 288 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973), where the court held
that members-elect of boards and commissions are within the scope of an open meeting law.
Otherwise, members-elect could gather with impunity behind closed doors and make decisions
on matters soon to come before them, in clear violation of the purpose, intent, and spirit of our
Open Meeting Law. Application of the provisions of the statute to members-elect of public
bodies is consistent with the liberal interpretation mandated for the Open Meeting Law. See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999) and AG File Nos. 01-003, 01-008 (April 12, 2001).
§ 2.07 Appointment of designee to public body
Under the Open Meeting Law, a member of a public body is prohibited from designating
a person to attend a meeting of the public body in the place of the member unless the designation
is expressly authorized by the legal authority pursuant to which the public body was created. See
NRS 241.025.
Designation may occur only if the public body’s creating authority specifically allows for
designation. If there is no express authority authorizing a designee, then one cannot be
appointed. However, if the legal authority creating the public body expressly authorizes a
designee, then the process of designation of a person may occur either in a written document or
on the record at a meeting of the public body.
Once a person is designated to attend a meeting in place of the member, that person is:
(1) deemed to be a member of the body for the purpose of determining a quorum at the meeting;
and (2) may exercise the same powers as the regular member of the body at that meeting.
-20-
There is nothing in NRS 241.025 which forbids designation of a person for multiple
meetings as long as the process is followed and the term of the designation explicitly is set forth
so there can be no confusion about the designee’s term.
§ 2.08 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed to be public bodies
If a group or body was a public body under interpretation of the definition of “public
body” prior to the 2011 legislative session, it only had to be connected to state or local
government and it must expend or disburse tax. The 2011 Legislature clarified the scope of the
definition of public body so that our prior interpretation of the definition still is true if the body
was created by statute, constitution, ordinance, the NAC, resolution or other formal designation
by a parent public body, Governor’s executive order, and resolution or action by the governing
body of a political subdivision of this State.
Nevada Interscholastic Activities Non-profit corporation authorized by

Association NRS 386.420
Nevada Board of Architecture Created by NRS 623.050: see

Attorney General Letter Opinion
dated September 1, 1977
Community Development OMLO 2001-17 (April 12, 2001)

Corporation and the Eureka
County Economic Development
Council
Storey County Cemetery Board See OMLO 2002-27 (June 11, 2002)
§ 2.09 Specific examples of entities which have been deemed not to be public bodies
The following entities specifically have been deemed not to be public bodies under
interpretation of “public body” prior to the 2011 legislative session. These bodies carefully
should review the definition of “public body” to ensure continuing compliance:
Committee to prepare arguments See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 2000-18
advocating and opposing approval (June 2, 2000).
of ballot for a city.
A private, not-for-profit electric See AG File No. 00-055

utility company. (March 12, 2001).
Non-profit community senior See OMLO 99-035 (April 3, 2000).

citizen’s center.
Economic Development See OMLO 99-05 (January 12, 1999).

Authority of Western Nevada
-21-
Faculty Senate at the Community See OMLO 2003-19 (April 21, 2003).
College of Southern Nevada
Clark County Civil Bench/Bar See AG File No. 10-011 (April 12, 2010).
Committee: Eighth Judicial District
Court.
Nevada Department of Corrections See OMLO 2003-21 (May 21, 2003) and
Psychological Review Panel OMLO 2004-15 (May 5, 2004).
Nevada Discovery Museum See OMLO 2008-01 (January 30, 2008).
Head Start of Northeastern Nevada See OMLO 2004-20 (May 18, 2004).
Nevada State Board of Parole See 2011: NRS 241.030(4) (not a public
Commissioners body when acting to grant, deny, con-
tinue, or revoke parole of a prisoner).
Elko County Juvenile Probation See OMLO 2004-25 (June 29, 2004).
Committee
Nevada Humane Society (a non- See AG File No. 10-051

profit corporation not created by (January 4, 2011).
ordinance or statute).
Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs See AG File No. 09-038

Association: Domestic non-profit (September 23, 2009).
corporation. Its creation has no
statutory connection to state or local
government.
§ 2.10 Private, nonprofit organizations
Where a government body or agency itself establishes a civic organization, even though it
is composed of private citizens, it may well constitute a “public body” under the law. See OMLO
2001-17, citing Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So.2d 473 (Fla. 1974). In Nevada, this would be
true if the civic organization is intended to perform any administrative, advisory, executive, or
legislative function of state or local government and it expends or disburses or is supported in
whole or in part by tax revenue, or if it is intended to advise or make recommendations to any
other Nevada governmental entity which expends or disburses or is supported in whole or in part
by tax revenue. See, e.g., Seghers v. Community Advancement, Inc., 357 So. 2d 626 (La. Ct. App.
1978); Raton Public Service Co. v. Hobbes, 417 P.2d 32 (N.M. 1966).
The mere receipt of a grant of public money does not by itself transform a private,
nonprofit civic organization into a “public body” for purposes of the Open Meeting Law, nor
-22-
does the membership of a few government officials on the organization's board of directors, per
se, make the organization a “public body.” See OMLO 2004-03 (February 10, 2004) and OMLO
2004-20 (May 18, 2004). A private, non-profit corporation is a public body if it is formed by a
public body; acts in an administrative, advisory, and executive capacity in performing local
governmental functions; and is supported in part by tax revenue from the public body. See
OMLO 2001-17 (April 12, 2001); but see AG File No. 10-051 (January 4, 2011) (non-profit
corporation did not act in administrative, advisory, or executive capacity nor was it supported in
part by tax revenue).
§ 2.11 Quasi-judicial proceedings
The 2011 Legislature subjected all public body meetings of a quasi-judicial nature to the
OML. See NRS 241.016(1). Only meetings of the Parole Board of Commissioners are exempt,
but only when acting to grant, deny, continue, or revoke parole of a prisoner, or when modifying
the terms of the parole of a prisoner. See NRS 241.016(2)(c).
“Quasi-judicial proceedings are those proceedings having a judicial character that

are performed by administrative agencies.” Stockmeier v Nevada Dep’t of Corr. Psychological
Review Panel, 122 Nev. 385, 390, 135 P.3d 200, 224-25 (2006), abrogated by, Buzz Stew, LLC v.
City of North Las Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 228 n.6, 181 P.3d 670, 672 n.6 (2008). The Court in
Stockmeier stated that an administrative body acts in a quasi-judicial manner when it refers to a
proceeding as a trial, takes evidence, weighs evidence, and makes findings of fact and
conclusions of law from which a party may appeal an adverse decision to a higher authority. Id.
at 391-92, 135 P.3d 224-25. The Stockmeier Court stated that “‘the taking of evidence only upon
oath or affirmation, the calling and examining of witnesses on any relevant matter, impeachment
of any witness, and the opportunity to rebut evidence presented against the employee’ was
‘consistent with quasi-judicial administrative proceedings.’’’ Id. at 390, 135 P.3d at 223 (citing
Knox v. Dick, 99 Nev. 514, 518, 665 P.2d 267, 270 (1983)).
-23-
Part 3 WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE EXEMPT FROM THE
OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 3.01 General
The opening clause in NRS 241.020(1) provides that the Open Meeting Law applies
“except as otherwise provided by specific statute.” The word “specific” is an important one. The
Nevada Supreme Court is reluctant to imply exceptions to the rule of open meetings. See McKay
v. Board of County Comm’rs, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987). See also Op. Nev. Att'y Gen.
No. 150 (November 8, 1973).
Some public body proceedings or hearings are exempt from the Open Meeting Law by
specific statute, or it may have a limited statutory exception from the OML. A non-exclusive list
of exempt entities is set out below in § 4.02.
Exemption means that certain public business may be conducted without regard to any
requirement of the Open Meeting Law because the Legislature has weighed the benefits of
secrecy with the OML’s policy of openness, while other statutes merely allow certain activities
to be closed to the public. These statutes create exceptions to the OML, but a public body still
must record and keep minutes of closed meetings under statutes allowing for exceptions. The
distinction is important because openness still is the norm; openness strictly will be enforced, so
a public body must ensure that its statute either creates an exemption or an exception, because
the OML still applies to exceptions. Any action taken in violation of the Open Meeting Law is
void. But even though some statutes permit or require “deliberations” of certain matters to be
closed to the public, that statutory authority does not imply necessarily that action taken after
deliberations is exempt from the Open Meeting Law.
The distinction sometimes is obfuscated by statutory language that is not as specific as

contemplated by NRS 241.020(1). In those cases, interpretation of the statutes should be
employed using the standards discussed in Part 12 of this manual.
Because the OML still applies to all public body activities outside its statutory exception,
a government body advising the public body may not be estopped from performing its
governmental function even where the public body wrongly had interpreted the exception for
several years. The Nevada Supreme Court in Chanos v Nevada Tax Comm’n., 124 Nev. 232,
238, 181 P.3d 675, 679 (2008), after review of legislative intent, decided that the Nevada Tax
Commission’s statutory exception had not been applied correctly to taxpayer refund applications,
despite earlier advice from the Attorney General’s office that its hearing procedure was in
violation of the OML. The Attorney General brought suit against the Tax Commission. The
Supreme Court held that the statutory exception (NRS 360.247) allowed the Tax Commission to
close only the portion of its hearing at which it received confidential evidence, questioned
parties, and heard argument concerning confidential information. The Court found an OML
violation even after a lengthy period of misinterpretation resulting in closed meetings upon only
a request by an affected taxpayer. The Court also held that estoppel does not apply to estop the
Attorney General from enforcing an interpretation of the OML, which may have been
-24-
contradictory with past practices at the Nevada Tax Commission for two reasons: firstly, the Tax
Commission and Edison (defendants) failed to prove that they were ignorant of the true state of
the facts, and, secondly, a government body may not be estopped from performing its
governmental function.
Below is a discussion of some governmental body proceedings, meetings, and other

activities that are statutorily exempt from the Open Meeting Law, and some that are not.
§ 3.02 Statutory exemptions
The following public body proceedings, meetings, and hearings either are exempt from
the Open Meeting Law or the public body has an exception under the statutes cited. Because the
statutes may change after the printing of this manual, be sure to check the statutes and make sure
all the conditions or requirements of the statutes are followed.
Should a body choose to conduct any of these proceedings as part of an open meeting, the
Office of the Attorney General recommends the proceedings be included on the agenda as an
exempt proceeding, citing the provision that provides the exemption; but the exemption from the
open meeting requirements still applies to the proceeding whether or not the exemption was
placed on the agenda.
Judicial Proceedings See NRS 241.016(2)(b) and Goldberg v. Eighth

Judicial District Court, 93 Nev. 614, 572 P.2d 521
(1977). The Open Meeting Law does not apply to
proceedings before the Commission on Judicial
Selection and, except as otherwise provided in
NRS 1.4687, the Commission on Judicial
Discipline.
Legislature NRS 241.016(2)(a) excludes the Legislature

from the definition of public body. See Article 4 §
15 of the Nevada Constitution. See discussion in §
3.05.
State Ethics Commission Meetings or hearings to receive information

or evidence concerning the propriety of the
conduct of any public officer or employee
under NRS Chapter 281 are exempt under
NRS 281A.440(15).
Local Ethics NRS 281A.350 provides a specific statutory

exception to the Open Meeting Law that allows a
local ethics committee to render a confidential
opinion to an elected city councilperson. See Op.
Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 94-10 (May 24, 1994).
-25-
A local ethics board may not meet in closed
session to discuss the past conduct of a public
official due to lack of a statutory exception to the
open meeting requirements. See Op. Nev. Att'y
Gen. No. 94-21 (July 29, 1994).
Hearings by public school See NRS 392.467(3), Davis v. Churchill

boards to consider expulsion of County Sch. Bd., 616 F. Supp. 1310 (D. Nev.
pupils; hearings by charter 1985), remanded, 823 F.2d 554 (9th Cir.
school boards to consider 1987), and OMLO 99-04 (January 11, 1998);
expulsion of pupils see NRS 386.585(2).
Certain labor negotiations The following proceedings conducted under

proceedings NRS Chapter 288 are exempt: (1) any
negotiation or informal discussion between a
local government employer and an employee
organization or individual employees whether
conducted by the governing body or through a
representative or representatives; (2) any
meeting of a mediator with either party or both
parties to a negotiation; (3) any meeting or
investigation conducted by a fact finder; (4)
any meeting of the governing body of a local
government employer with its management
representative or representatives, and (5)
deliberations of the board toward a decision on
a complaint, appeal, or petition for declaratory
relief. See NRS 288.220, but see AG File No.
10-020 (June 22, 2010). Even exempt
meetings should be limited by statutory
authority. The legislative intent underlying an
exemption is to allow these meetings as long
as the meetings confine discussion to
negotiations between a local government
employer and an employee organization and/or
the defined exceptions in NRS 288.220.
Exempt meetings cannot be used to
circumvent the legislative intent expressed in
NRS 241. Exempt meetings under NRS
288.220 cannot be used as a shield to
improperly discuss persons or any other issue
not within the scope of the exemption.
Nevada Commission NRS 239C.140(2) states:

on Homeland Security The Commission may hold a closed
meeting to:
-26-
(a) Receive security briefings;
(b) Discuss procedures for responding to
acts of terrorism and related emergencies;
or
(c) Discuss deficiencies in security with
respect to public services, public facilities
and infrastructure,
if the Commission determines, upon a
majority vote of its members, that the
public disclosure of such matters would be
likely to compromise, jeopardize or
otherwise threaten the safety of the public.
Committee on A meeting or hearing held by the

Catastrophic Leave Committee to carry out the provisions of
this section (an appeal of the appointing
authority) and the Committee’s
deliberations on the information or evidence
received are not subject to any provision of
chapter 241 of NRS.
See NRS 284.3629(7).
Committees formed to Committees created pursuant to NRS

present arguments on 295.121
ballot questions. to present the arguments on a ballot
question
are exempt from the Open Meeting Law.
See
NRS 295.121(12) and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen.
2000-18 (June 2, 2000).
Board of Medical Any deliberations conducted or vote taken

Examiners by the Board or any investigative committee
of the Board regarding its ordering of a
of respiratory care to undergo a physical
or mental examination or any other
examination designated to assist the Board
or committee in determining the fitness of a
of respiratory care are not subject to the
requirements of NRS 241.020.
See NRS 630.336(1).
NRS 360.247 states:

Nevada Tax 1. Except as otherwise provided in this
-27-
Commission section, any appeal to the Nevada Tax
Commission which is taken by a taxpayer
concerning his/her liability for tax must be
heard during a session of the Commission
which is open to the public. Upon request
by the taxpayer, a hearing on such an appeal
must be closed to the public to receive
proprietary or confidential information.
Occupational NRS 622.320 states:

Licensing Boards 1. The provisions of NRS 241.020 do not
apply to proceedings relating to an
investigation conducted to determine
whether to proceed with disciplinary action
against a licensee, unless the licensee
requests that the proceedings be conducted
pursuant to those provisions.
2. If the regulatory body decides to proceed
with disciplinary action against the licensee,
all proceedings that are conducted after
that decision and are related to that
disciplinary action are subject to the
§ 3.03 Certain confidential investigative proceedings of the Gaming Control Board and
Commission
NRS 463.110(2) holds that all meetings of the Gaming Control Board are open to the
public except for investigative hearings that may be conducted in private at the discretion of the
board or hearing examiner. NRS 463.110(4) holds that investigative hearings of the board or
hearing officer may be conducted without notice.
Also, the Office of the Attorney General opined in Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 150
(November 8, 1973) that certain investigative proceedings involving the Gaming Commission
receiving information that is confidential by law may be exempt from the Open Meeting Law up
to the point where the proceeding moves into deliberations or taking action. See Op. Nev. Att'y
Gen. No. 150 (November 8, 1973). Cf. Marston v. Gainesville Sun Publishing Co., Inc., 341 So.
2d 783 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976).
§ 3.04 Quasi-judicial proceedings no longer exempt from OML
The 2011 Legislature made all meetings of a public body that are quasi-judicial in nature
subject to the OML. NRS 241.016(1). The Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners is exempt,
but only when acting to grant, deny, continue, or revoke parole for a prisoner or to establish or
modify the terms of the parole of a prisoner. NRS 241.016(2)(c).
-28-
§ 3.05 Attorney-client conference exception
NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2) excepts from the definition of “Meeting,” for purposes of the Open
Meeting Law, a meeting of a quorum of a public body “[t]o receive information from the
attorney employed or retained by the public body regarding potential or existing litigation
involving a matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory
power and to deliberate toward a decision on the matter, or both.”
A meeting held for the purpose of having an attorney-client discussion of potential and
existing litigation pursuant to NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2) is not a meeting for purposes of the Open
Meeting Law and does not have to be open to the public. In fact, no agenda is required to be
posted and no notice is required to be provided to any member of the public. See OMLO 2002-21
(May 20, 2002). However, the Office of the Attorney General advises that if the public body
interrupts its meeting to confer with its legal counsel pursuant to NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2), the
public body should place this interruption of the open meeting on the agenda to avoid any
confusion. See § 5.11 of this manual for more information regarding meetings to confer with
counsel.
It is important to note that a public body may deliberate “collectively to examine, weigh
and reflect upon the reasons for or against the action,” which connotes collective discussion in an
attorney-client conference. See NRS 241.015(2); Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87,
97, 64 P.3d 1070, 1077 (2003), OMLO 2001-09 (March 28, 2001) and OMLO 2002-13 (March
22, 2003). However, NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2) does not permit a public body to take action in an
attorney-client conference.
§ 3.06 Student governments
NRS 241.017 requires the Board of Regents of the University of Nevada to establish
requirements equivalent to the Open Meeting Law for student governments in the Nevada
System of Higher Education and to provide for their enforcement. See OMLO 2004-09 (March
19, 2004) where the Office of the Attorney General opined that pursuant to
NRS 241.038, it did not have jurisdiction to investigate or enforce an alleged violation by the
UNLV Rebel Yell Advisory Board.
§ 3.07 Pre-meeting discussion to remove or delay discussion of items from agenda
The Nevada Supreme Court decided that pre-meeting discussions by a public body to
remove an item from its agenda did not violate the OML because a public body may remove or
refuse to consider an agenda item at any time, therefore, pre-meeting discussions regarding
whether to remove an agenda item do not implicate the OML. Schmidt v. Washoe County, 123
Nev. 128, 135, 159 P.3d 1099, 1104 (2007), abrogated by, Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of North Las
Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 228 n.6, 181 P.3d 670, 672 n.6 (2008).
See NRS 241.020(2)(c)(6)(III)(public body may remove an item from its agenda at any
time.)
-29-
Part 4 WHAT GATHERINGS MUST BE CONDUCTED IN COMPLIANCE
WITH THE OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 4.01 General; statutory definitions
NRS 241.015(3(a)(1) and (2) define “meeting” as:
(1) The gathering of members of a public body at which a

quorum is present, whether in person or by means of electronic
communication, to deliberate toward a decision or to take action
on any matter over which the public body has supervision,
control, jurisdiction or advisory power.
(2) Any series of gatherings of members of a public body at
which:
(I) Less than a quorum, whether in person or by means of
electronic communication, is present at any individual gathering;
(II) The members of the public body attending one or more of
the gatherings collectively constitute a quorum; and
(III) The series of gatherings was held with the specific intent to
avoid the provisions of this chapter.
As discussed in §4.05, NRS 241.015(3)(b) excludes from the definition of meeting:
A gathering or series of gatherings of members of a public body, as

described in paragraph (a), at which a quorum is actually or
collectively present, whether in person or by means of electronic
communication:
(1) Which occurs at a social function if the members do not
deliberate toward a decision or take action on any matter over
which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction or
advisory power.
(2) To receive information from the attorney employed or
retained by the public body regarding potential or existing
litigation involving a matter over which the public body has
supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power and to
deliberate toward a decision on the matter, or both.
Some of the key words in that definition are:
“Gathering” In Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 85-19 (December 17, 1985), the Office
of the Attorney General defined “gathering” to mean to bring
together, collect, or accumulate and to place in readiness.
Accordingly, a “gathering” of members of a public body within the
conception of an open meeting would include any method of
collecting or accumulating the deliberations, or decisions of a
-30-
quorum of these members.
“Quorum” A “quorum” of a public body is defined in NRS 241.015(5) as “a

simple majority of the membership of a public body or another
proportion established by law.”
“Present” NRS 241.010(2) states “[I]f any member of a public body is present
by means of teleconference or videoconference at any meeting of
the public body, the public body shall ensure that all the members
of the public body and the members of the public who are present at
the meeting can hear or observe and participate in the meeting.” A
member of a public body may be present through video conference
or teleconference, but not through social media, such as a chat
room, or email. The public must be able to view and/or hear the
public body and be able to participate in the public meeting.
“Deliberate” Under NRS 241.015(2), “deliberate” means “collectively to

examine, weigh and reflect upon the reasons for or against the
action. The term includes, without limitation, the collective
discussion or exchange of facts preliminary to the ultimate
decision.” See Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 97,
64 P.3d 1070, 1077 (2003) and Sacramento Newspaper Guild v.
Sacramento County Bd. of Supervisors, 69 Cal.Rptr. 480 (Cal.
Ct. App. 1968) discussed in § 5.02 below. See OMLO 2010-06
(September 10, 2010) (collective deliberation is required to
constitute a meeting of Board of school trustees).
“Action” Under NRS 241.015(1), “action” means: “(a) a decision made by a

majority of the members present, whether in person or by means of
electronic communication, during a meeting of a public body; (b) a
commitment or promise made by a majority of the members
present, whether in person or by means of electronic
communication, during a meeting of a public body; (c) if a public
body may have a member who is not an elected official, an
affirmative vote taken by a majority of the members present,
whether in person or by means of electronic communication, during
a meeting of the public body; or (d) if all the members of a public
body must be elected officials, an affirmative vote taken by a
majority of all the members of the public body.
Application of the definitions to common circumstances follows.
§ 4.02 Informal gatherings and discussions that constitute deliberation
The Nevada Supreme Court cited Sacramento Newspaper Guild v. Sacramento County
Board of Supervisors (see § 5.01 above, for citation) for clarification of the meaning of
-31-
“deliberation.” All five members of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors went to a
luncheon gathering with the county counsel, a county executive, the county director of welfare,
and some AFL-CIO labor leaders to discuss a strike of the Social Workers Union against the
county. Newspaper reporters were not allowed to sit in on the luncheon, and litigation resulted.
The board of supervisors contended that the luncheon was informal and merely involved
discussions that were neither deliberations nor actions in violation of California’s open meeting
law.
The California Court of Appeals disagreed and upheld an injunction against the board,
ruling that California’s open meeting law extended to informal sessions or conferences designed
for discussion of public business. Among other things, the Court observed:
“Recognition of deliberation and action as dual components of the

collective decision-making process brings awareness that the
meeting concept cannot be split off and confined to one component
only, rather it comprehends both and either.”
“To deliberate is to examine, weigh and reflect upon the

reasons for or against the choice. . . . Deliberation thus
connotes not only collective discussion, but the collective
acquisition or the exchange of facts preliminary to the ultimate
decision.”
“An informal conference or caucus permits crystallization of secret

decisions to a point just short of ceremonial acceptance. There is
rarely any purpose to a nonpublic, pre-meeting conference
except to conduct some part of the decisional process behind
closed doors. Only by embracing the collective inquiry in
discussion stages, as well as the ultimate step of official action, can
an open meeting regulation frustrate these evasive devices. As
operative criteria, formality and informality are alien to the law’s
design, disposing it to the very evasions it was designed to prevent.
Construed in light of the Brown Act’s objectives, the term
“meeting” extends to informal sessions or conferences of board
members designed for the discussion of public business. The
Elks Club luncheon . . . was such a meeting.”
69 Cal.Rptr. at 485.
There are important objectives to be achieved from requiring the deliberations and
actions of public agencies to be open and public. As stated in the article, Access to Government
Information in California:
“The goal in requiring that deliberations take place at meetings

that are open and public is that committee members make a
conscientious effort to hear viewpoints on each issue so that the
-32-
community can understand on what their premises are based, add
to those premises when necessary, and intelligently evaluate and
participate in the process of government.”
54 Cal. L. Rev. 1650 (1966).
The Office of the Attorney General agrees with the foregoing and believes that if a
majority of the members of a public body should gather, even informally, to discuss any matter
over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power, it must
comply with the Open Meeting Law. Cf. Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 241 (August 24, 1961) and
Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 380 (January 1, 1967), certain aspects of which were written before the
statutory definition of “meeting” was established.
For an example of the foregoing discussion of informal meeting:
A quorum of the City Council discussed public business with a volunteer

firefighter. Two members constituted a quorum of the City Council and these two
were employed by the same employer. However, after an interview with the
witness firefighter, no evidence was uncovered which indicated that a
commitment or promise about a matter within the City Council’s supervision,
control, jurisdiction, or advisory power had been made. Warning was issued to the
Council. AG File No. 08-003 (April 7, 2008).
Under some city charters, the mayor is not a member of the city council, and the mayor’s
powers usually are limited to a veto or casting a tie-breaking vote. In such cases, the presence of
the mayor is not counted in determining the presence of a quorum of the council. See Op. Nev.
Att’y Gen. No. 2001-13 (June 1, 2001).
§ 4.03 Social gatherings
Nothing in the Open Meeting Law purports to regulate or restrict the attendance of
members of public bodies at purely social functions. A social function only would be reached
under the law if it is scheduled or designed, at least in part, for the purpose of having a majority
of the members of the public body deliberate toward a decision or take action on any matter over
which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. As described by
the California Court of Appeals in Sacramento Newspaper Guild, 69 Cal.Rptr. at 487 n.8, supra
at § 5.02:
There is a spectrum of gatherings of public agencies that can be called a meeting, ranging
from formal convocations to transact business to chance encounters where business is discussed.
However, neither of these two extremes is an acceptable definition of the statutory word
“meeting.” Requiring all discussions between members to be open and public would preclude
normal living and working by officials. On the other hand, permitting secrecy, unless there is a
formal convocation of a body, invites evasion. Although one might hypothesize quasi-social
occasions whose characterization as a meeting would be debatable, the difference between a
-33-
social occasion and one arranged for pursuit of the public’s business usually will be quite
apparent.
The definition of meeting now explicitly excludes a gathering or series of gatherings

of members of a public body at which a quorum is actually or collectively present which occurs
at a social function, if the members do not deliberate toward a decision or take action on any
matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. See
NRS 241.015(3)(b)(1).
§ 4.04 Seminars, conferences, conventions
When a majority of the members of a public body attend a state or national seminar,
conference, or convention to hear speakers on general subjects of interest to public officials or to
participate in workshops with their counterparts from around the state or nation, it usually may
be assumed they are there for the purpose of general education and social interaction and not to
conduct meetings to deliberate toward a decision or to take action on any matter over which their
public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power, even if presentations at the
seminar touch on subjects within the ambit of the public body’s jurisdiction or advisory power.
Thus, such seminars, conferences and conventions do not fall under the definition of “meeting”
found in NRS 241.015(3). However, should the gathering have the purpose of or in fact exhibit
the characteristics of a “meeting” as defined in NRS 241.015(3), then the provisions of the Open
Meeting Law apply. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. 2001-05 (March 14, 2001).
§ 4.05 Telephone conferences/video conferences
Nothing in the Open Meeting Law prohibits a quorum of the members of a public body
from deliberating toward a decision or taking action on public business via a telephone
conference call or video conference in which they simultaneously are linked to one another
telephonically. However, since this is a “meeting,” the notice requirements of the Open Meeting
Law must be complied with, and the public must have an opportunity to listen to the discussions
and votes by all the members through a speaker phone or video conference equipment. This may
be accomplished by including in the meeting notice the location and address of a place where
members of the public may appear and listen to the meeting discussion over a telephone speaker
device or other electronic media. See Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 956 P.2d 770
(1998) for a discussion regarding the applicability of the Open Meeting Law to a public body’s
use of telephones, fax machines, and other electronic devices to deliberate and/or take action.
Although a telephone conference may be a lawful method of conducting the public’s

business, it never should be used as a subterfuge to avoid compliance with the Open Meeting
Law and its stated intent that the actions of public bodies are to be taken openly and their
deliberations conducted openly. NRS 241.016(4).
///
///
-34-
§ 4.06 Electronic polling
NRS 241.016(4) specifically provides that electronic communications must not be used to
circumvent the spirit or letter of the Open Meeting Law in order to discuss or act upon a matter
over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory powers.
This statute applies to telephone polls (unless done as a part of an open meeting as
discussed above) and to polls by facsimile or e-mail.
In Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 956 P.2d 770 (1998), the Chairman of
the Board of Regents of the University of Nevada sent by facsimile a draft advisory to all but one
regent rebutting public statements made by that regent to the press. The draft advisory was
accompanied by a memo requesting feedback on the advisory and sought advice from the other
regents on whether to release the advisory to the press. The memo stated that no press release
would occur without Board approval. Of the ten regents who received the fax, five responded in
favor of releasing the advisory, one wanted it released under the chairman’s name only, one was
opposed, two had no opinion, and one did not respond. The regents who responded did so by
telephone calls either to the chairman or the interim director of public information for the
University. In finding that the Board violated the Open Meeting Law by deciding whether to
release the draft advisory privately by “facsimile” and telephone rather than by public meeting,
the Nevada Supreme Court stated:

lobby for votes. However, if a quorum is present, or is gathered by
serial electronic communications, the body must deliberate and
actually vote on the matter in a public meeting.
Id. at 400, 956 P.2d at 778.
Where two county commissioners (three were a quorum) discussed the termination of
the County Manager between themselves, the OML was not offended because no other
commissioner acknowledged discussion about termination with them. The failure to create
a constructive quorum barred application of the OML. AG File No. 07-011 (June 11, 2007);
NRS 241.015(3) sets the serial communication bar at “collective deliberations or actions”
(exchange of facts that reflect upon reasons for or against the choice) involving a quorum of
members of a public body. Dewey, 119 Nev. at 87, 64 P.3d at 1070. See also AG File No. 07-015
(September 10, 2007) (allegation that Board of School Trustees created constructive quorum
through emails and private meetings).
///
-35-
§ 4.07 Mail polls
In view of the legislative declaration of intent that all actions of public bodies are to be
taken openly, the making of a decision by a mail poll that is not subject to public attendance
appears inconsistent with both the spirit and intent of the law. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 85-19
(December 17, 1985).
§ 4.08 Serial communications, or “walking quorums”
The Open Meeting Law forbids “walking quorums” or constructive quorums. Serial
communication invites abuse if it is used to accumulate a secret consensus or vote of the
members of a public body. Any method of meeting where a quorum of a public body discusses
public business, whether gathered physically or electronically, is a violation of the OML.
Nevada is a “quorum state,” which means that the gathering of less than a quorum of
the members of a public body is not within the definition of a meeting under NRS 241.015(3).
Where less than a quorum of a public body participates in a private briefing with counsel or staff
prior to a public meeting, it may do so without violating the Open Meeting Law. Dewey, 119
Nev. at 99, 64 P.3d at 1078.
While the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that meetings between a quorum of a public body
and its attorney are not exempt from the Open Meeting Law, it observed in McKay v. Board of
County Commissioners, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987) that:
Nothing whatever precludes an attorney for a public body

from conveying sensitive information to the members of
a public body by confidential memorandum; nor does anything
prevent the attorney from discussing sensitive information
in private with members of the body, singly
or in groups less than a quorum. Any detriment suffered
by the public body in this regard must be assumed to have been
weighed by the Legislature in adopting this legislation. The
Legislature has made a legitimate policy choice-one in which this
court cannot and will not interfere.
McKay, 103 Nev. at 495–96, 746 P.2d at 127.
In another case, the Nevada Supreme Court observed that the OML did not forbid all
discussion among public body members even when discussing public business:

-36-
lobby for votes. (Emphasis added.)
Del Papa, 114 Nev. at 400, 956 P.2d at 778.
Serial communication invites abuse of the Open Meeting Law if it is used to accumulate
a secret consensus or vote of the members of a public body. In McKay v. Board of County
Commissioners, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987), the Court stated that sensitive information
may be discussed in serial meetings where no quorum is present in any gathering. But there can
be no deliberation, action, commitment, or promise made regarding a public matter in such a
serial meeting.
In Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 64 P.3d 1070 (2003), the
Court reaffirmed its position in McKay and provided a substantial discussion regarding “serial
communications” and non-quorum private briefings by staff. Please note that
NRS 241.015(3)(a)(2), which defines “serial communications” as a “meeting” for purposes of
the Open Meeting Law, was enacted after the Dewey case was decided. However, the Office of
the Attorney General believes the Court’s analysis in Dewey provides substantial insight into the
facts the Supreme Court will analyze to determine if “serial communications” occurred.
In Dewey, the Redevelopment Agency for the City of Reno (Agency) owned the Mapes
Hotel, an historic landmark listed on the National Trust for Historic Preservation. In 1999, the
Agency adopted a resolution in which it would accept bids to rehabilitate the Mapes Hotel. The
Agency’s staff put together a request for proposals (RFP), which was sent to more than 580
developers. In response to the RFP, the Agency received six proposals to rehabilitate the Mapes
Hotel.
On August 31, 1999, the Agency’s staff conducted two private back-to-back briefings
with a non-quorum of the Agency attending each briefing; three members attended one briefing
and two members attended the other briefing. For the purposes of an Agency meeting, a quorum
was four or more members.
The purpose of these meetings was to inform the Agency members of potential issues
with the RFP responses. The testimony at trial was clear that the Agency members neither
provided their opinions, voted on the issue, nor were they polled by staff as to their opinions or
votes at the briefings. The purpose of the briefings was to provide Agency members with
information regarding a complex public policy issue.
Dewey, as well as other plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit against the Agency alleging a violation
of the Open Meeting Law. The trial court held that there was a violation of the Open Meeting
Law because the meetings constituted a constructive quorum for purposes of the Open Meeting
Law. However, the Court only issued an injunction and refused to void the Agency’s actions. In
response, Dewey appealed the court’s final order in hopes of voiding the Agency’s actions, and
the Agency cross-appealed alleging that the Court erred in finding an Open Meeting Law
violation.
-37-
On appeal, the Nevada Supreme Court stated, “[W]e have . . . acknowledged that the
Open Meeting Law is not intended to prohibit every private discussion of a public issue. Instead,
the Open Meeting Law only prohibits collective deliberations or actions where a quorum is
present.” (Emphasis added.) Dewey, 119 Nev. at 94–95, 64 P.3d at 1075. The Court stated, in
part, that deliberations meant the collective discussion by a quorum. (See §5.01, infra for the full
definition of deliberations.) Since a quorum of the Agency did not attend the back-to-back
briefings, a collective discussion equaling deliberations could not have occurred. In order for a
constructive quorum to exist, the Agency members or staff would have to participate in serial
communications. The trial court shifted the burden to the Agency to prove that the Agency did
not participate in serial communications. The Supreme Court held that shifting the burden was
inappropriate because a quorum of the public body did not attend the briefings. Thus, the burden
was on Dewey to provide substantial evidence that the Agency conducted serial
communications.
The Court then reviewed the record to determine whether substantial evidence existed to
prove serial communications occurred. The Court stated that the record did not provide
substantial evidence that the Agency member’s thoughts, questions, or opinions from one
briefing were shared with the members of the other briefing. There also was no evidence of
polling by the Agency’s staff to determine the opinions or votes of the Agency’s members.
Further, there was no evidence in the record that the briefings resulted in the Agency taking
action or deliberating on the issue. Finally, the record indicated that the Agency’s staff intended
to comply with the Open Meeting Law in conducting the briefings in the non-quorum back-to-
back fashion. As a result, the Court held that substantial evidence did not exist to prove the
briefings resulted in serial communications creating a constructive quorum, and that the
Agency’s back-to-back briefings were not “meetings” for purposes of the Open Meeting Law.
Further citations illustrating the discussion above:
• The Office of the Attorney General accepts affidavits or written statements from
members of a public body as evidence whether “serial communications” occurred.
See OMLO 2004-16 (May 65, 2004).
• See OMLO 2004-26 (July 21, 2004) for an example of “serial communications”
in violation of the Open Meeting Law, and see OMLO 2003-11 (March 6, 2003)
for an analysis finding no “serial communication” consistent with Dewey.
• See OMLO 2008-010: A public body quorum met to discuss District business
immediately following adjournment of a noticed meeting. The meeting had been
arranged without notification to the public that a quorum would remain after
adjournment of the regularly scheduled meeting. The fact that the meeting only
concerned discussion of matters not appearing on a public body’s agenda did not
exempt the discussion from the application of the OML. OML is applicable
whenever a quorum of a public body deliberates or takes action on any matter
over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory
power. AG File No. 08-010 (July 23, 2008); AG File No. 08-035 (November 17,
2008) (two members of public body were mistaken in their belief that a quorum
-38-
can only be achieved by a physical gathering of a quorum at the same time and
place.)
§ 4.09 “Private Briefings” among staff of public body and non-quorum of members
In Dewey, 119 Nev. at 94, 64 P.3d at 1075, the Nevada Supreme Court stated that private
briefings among staff of a public body and a non-quorum of members of a public body are not
meetings for purposes of the Open Meeting Law, and such a meeting is not prohibited by law.
See §5.08 supra for a further discussion of Dewey.
§ 4.10 Meetings held out-of-state or out of local jurisdiction
The Open Meeting Law applies even if the meeting occurs outside of Nevada. For
example, minutes must be kept, and a clear and complete agenda must be noticed properly.
Nothing in the Open Meeting Law limits its application only to meetings in Nevada, and
any such interpretation would only invite evasion of the law by meeting across state lines. A
county-based public body may lawfully meet outside the county. See AG File No. 00-040
(January 5, 2001).
See also § 4.05, Attorney-Client conferences.
While the Open Meeting Law does not prohibit out-of-jurisdiction meetings, other
statutes might. See, for example, the limitations on county commission meetings in
NRS 244.085.
§ 4.11 Exception for conferring with counsel
“Meeting” has been redefined to exclude a gathering or series of gatherings of members

of a public body at which a quorum is present (1) to receive information from the attorney for the
public body regarding potential or existing litigation involving a matter over which the public
body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power and (2) to deliberate toward a
decision on the matter.
The law specifically allows the members of a public body to deliberate, but not
act, information obtained from its counsel in an attorney-client conference. See § 4.05 supra.
However, any action must be taken in an open meeting. The agenda should note that the public
body may interrupt the open meeting and exclude the public for the purpose
of having an attorney-client discussion of potential and existing litigation, pursuant to
NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2).
Alternatively, the public body may gather to confer with legal counsel at times other than
the time noticed for a normal meeting. In such instances, there is no notice or agenda required.
However, the usual notice and agenda will be required in order to later convene an open meeting
in order to take any action based on the attorney-client conference. A decision on whether to
-39-
settle a case or to make or accept an offer of judgment must be made in an open meeting. See
OMLO 2002-21 (May 20, 2002).
However, a conference between counsel and a quorum of a public body that does not
involve potential or existing litigation on a matter over which the public body has supervision,
control, jurisdiction or advisory power, is not exempt from the OML. (See § 4.02 for examples
of other statutory exemptions from the OML.) The Open Meeting Law bans closed meetings in
all cases not specifically excepted by statute. McKay, 103 Nev. at 495–96, 746 P.2d at 127–28;
NRS 241.020(1). “Any detriment suffered by the public body in this regard [limitations on the
ability to meet privately with legal counsel] must be assumed to have been weighed by the
Legislature in adopting this legislation. The Legislature has made a legitimate policy choice –
one in which this court cannot and will not interfere.” Id., 103 Nev. at 496, 746 P.2d at 127.
§ 4.12 Meetings held with another public body
Whenever a quorum of a public body gathers and collectively discusses, deliberates, or

takes action on matters over which the body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory
power, a meeting of that body takes place within the meaning of NRS 241.015(3) even if the
public body is meeting with another public body at the same time and place. A meeting of two or
more public bodies must be conducted in accordance with the Open Meeting Law and each
public body must give notice of its meeting even if the meeting is also publicly noticed as a
meeting of another public body. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 2001-05 (March 14, 2001). Notice
of a meeting of each public body may utilize one agenda, combined to indicate to the public that
two or more public bodies are meeting and may take action separately.
However, even if a quorum of a parent public body attends a meeting of its own standing
subcommittee, where the quorum of the parent body merely listens, does not participate, does not
ask questions, does not deliberate, and does not take action or collectively discuss any matter
within the parent’s jurisdiction or control, no meeting within the meaning of NRS 241.015(3) has
occurred and no violation of the OML has occurred. OMLO 2010-06 (September 10, 2010).
§ 4.13 Appointment of public officer
NRS 241.031 prohibits a closed meeting for the purpose of appointing a public officer or
a person to a position for which the person serves at the pleasure of a public body as a chief
executive or administrative officer or in a comparable position. Public officer is defined in
NRS 281.005 to mean a person elected or appointed to a position which: “(a) is established by
the Constitution or a statute of this State, or by a charter or ordinance of a political subdivision of
this State; and (b) involves the continuous exercise, as part of the regular and permanent
administration of the government, of a public power, trust or duty.” University and Community
College System v. DR Partners, 117 Nev. 195, 201, 18 P.3d 1042, 1046 (2001) (NRS 281.005 is
in harmony with judicial definition of “public officer”). For further treatment of this issue, see §
9.05, infra: Appointment to public office; closed meeting prohibition. See NRS 281A.160, Ethics
in Government, for a similar definition of public officer which also clarifies the scope of the
phrase, “public power, trust or duty.”
-40-
The OML prohibits holding a closed meeting for the discussion of the appointment of
any person to public office, or appointment as a member of a public body. If a public body
participates in any part of the selection process for the position of public officer or for a person
who serves at the pleasure of the public officer, or for the appointment of a person to a
public body, then all discussion of the appointment process must occur in a public meeting.
NRS 241.030(4)(d). In City Council of City of Reno v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886,
891, 784 P.2d 974, 977 (1989) the Court stated that the phrase “discussion of appointment” in
NRS 241.030(4)(d) [formerly NRS 241.030(3)(e)] means “all consideration, discussion,
deliberation, and selection” of a public officer or one who serves at the pleasure of a public body.
The Nevada Supreme Court explicitly stated that the OML applies only to an appointment
process conducted by a public body. The Fernley City Council is a public body, but the citizen
recruitment committee formed by the Mayor was not a public body. The Open Meeting Law did
not apply to it and consequently, complainant’s demand for access to all the original candidates’
applications and resumes is not supported by the OML. AG File No. 09-026 (June 14, 2009).
Where the remaining members of a public body selected the new member to fill a
vacancy following the resignation of one member, no OML violation occurred where there was
no discussion among the members of the public body before it voted on appointment of the new
member. NRS 241.015 does not require verbal discussion, assessment, or verbal deliberation
among the members of a public body before it takes action. NRS 241.015 states that a meeting
occurs where a public body deliberates or takes action. The Legislature intended that
deliberations be conducted openly, but it did go so far as to void action in the absence of verbal
discussion or deliberation by members prior to action. AG File No. 09-029 (November 4, 2009).
-41-
Part 5 WHAT ARE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS UNDER
THE OPEN MEETING LAW? (See Sample Forms 1 and 3)
§ 5.01 General
The right of citizens to attend open public meetings is diminished greatly if they are not
provided with an opportunity to know when the meeting will take place and what subject or
subjects will be considered. One of the primary objectives of the Open Meeting Law is to allow
members of the public to make their views known to their representatives on issues of general
importance to the community. This type of communication would be impossible if the public
were denied the opportunity to appear at the meeting through lack of knowledge that a meeting
would be held.
Except in an emergency, written notice of all meetings of all public bodies must be
posted in at least four places within the jurisdiction of the public body and mailed at least three
working days before the meeting is to occur, as specified below.
Details about how the notice is to be prepared, posted, and mailed are discussed below. A
sample form of a notice is included as Sample Form 1. This sample is intended only as a sample,
and public bodies may use whatever form or format they wish.
In Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 150, 67 P.3d 902, 903 (2003), the
Supreme Court of Nevada stated that Nevada’s Open Meeting Law “clearly includes stringent
agenda requirements.” See § 7.02.
Additionally, NRS 241.033 requires personal notice be given to individuals whose character,
alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health are to be considered
at a meeting. See § 6.09.
NRS 241.034 requires personal notice must also be given to individuals against whom the
public agency is going to take certain administrative actions or from whom real property will be
taken by eminent domain. See § 6.10.
§ 5.02 Contents of notice (see Sample Form 1)
NRS 241.020 sets forth specific notice requirements that are mandatory and must appear
on every agenda.
I. Certain disclosures on how the meeting will be conducted
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(6) and (7) require the following disclosures on the agenda:
Notice that:
(1) Items may be taken out of order;
-42-
(2) Items may be combined for consideration by the public body; and
(3) Items may be pulled or removed from the agenda at any time.
Notice must be made to the public of reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and
manner of public comment. Restriction must be reasonable and cannot restrict comment based
on viewpoint.
II. Minimum requirements for public comment
comment agenda plans.
First, a public body may comply by agendizing one public comment period before
any action items are heard by the public body and then provide for another period of public
The second alternative also involves multiple periods of public comment but only
after discussion of each agenda action item and before the public body takes action on the item.
Finally, regardless of which alternative is selected, the public body must allow the
public time to comment on any matter not specifically included on the agenda as an action item
some time before adjournment.
A public body may combine these two public comment alternatives, or take portions
of one to add to the requirements of the other. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3) represents the minimum
Legislative requirements regarding public comment.
III. Items the meeting notice must include
The time, place, and location of the meeting. NRS 241.020(2)(a). See OMLO 2004-
27 (July 13, 2004) where the Office of the Attorney General opined that starting a meeting late
after staff took extraordinary measures to ensure that the public received notice that the meeting
would start late was not a violation of the Open Meeting Law.
A list of locations where the notice has been posted. NRS 241.020(2)(b). See, e.g.,
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999).
The name and contact information for the person designated by the public body from
whom a member of the public may request the supporting material for the meeting and a list of
the locations where the supporting material is available to the public. NRS 241.020(2)(c).
An agenda consisting of:
a) A clear and complete statement of the topics scheduled to be considered during

the meeting. NRS.241.020(2)(d)(1) See § 7.02.
-43-
b) A list describing the items on which action may be taken and clearly denoting that
action may be taken on those items, by placing next to the agenda item, the phrase
“for possible action”. It is not sufficient to place “action” next to the item or to
place an asterisk next to the item to signify an action item. The phrase “for
possible action” must be used. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(2), see e.g., OMLO 2003-13
(March 21, 2003).
c) Multiple periods of public comment: one before any action item and one before
adjournment, and discussion of those comments, if any. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3)
alternatively allows the public body to hear comment prior to taking action on
each and every agenda action item. No action may be taken upon a matter raised
under this item of the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included
on an agenda as an item upon which action will be taken. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3).
See, e.g. OMLO 2003-13 (March 21, 2003).
d) If any portion of the meeting will be closed to consider the character, alleged
misconduct or professional competence of a person, the name of the person whose
character, alleged misconduct or professional competence will be considered.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(4).
e) If, during any portion of the meeting, the public body will consider whether to
take administrative action regarding a person, the name of that person.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(5).
IV. Accommodation for members of the public with physical disabilities
In addition, an agenda must inform the public that the public body and employees
responsible for the meeting shall make reasonable efforts to assist and accommodate persons
with physical disabilities desiring to attend a meeting. See NRS 241.020(1). The notice should
include the name and telephone number of a person who may be contacted so arrangements can
be made in advance to avoid last minute problems. See § 7.02 of this manual for guidance in
preparing the agenda.
§ 5.03 Posting the notice
NRS 241.020(3)(a) and (b) requires that a copy of the notice must be posted in at least
four places not later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting.
The notice must be posted at the principal office of the public body, or if there is no such
office, then at the building in which the meeting is to be held.
The notice must be posted on the official website of the State [https://notice.nv.gov]
The notice must be posted at a minimum of three other separate, prominent places within
the jurisdiction of the public body. Thus, a state agency must post in at least three prominent
-44-
places within the state, and a local government must post in at least three prominent places
within the jurisdiction of the local government (e.g., county, city, town, etc.).
The notice must be posted in “prominent” places. The statute does not define
“prominent,” and whether a notice is properly posted must be judged on the individual
circumstances existing at the time of the posting. As a general proposition, the Office of the
Attorney General offers the following suggestions:
• Try to post the notices in places where they can be read or obtained by members of the
public and media who seek them out.
• Unless required by the statute, avoid posting the notices in buildings that will be closed
during the notice period.
• If the meeting concerns a regulated industry or profession, post additional notices at trade
or professional associations for the industry.
• Community bulletin boards at city halls and county administration buildings may be
used.
If the public body maintains an Internet website, posting on that website is also required.
NRS 241.020(5). A public body is not required to create a website if it already does not have
one. Inability to post notice of a meeting on its website as a result of a technical problem is not a
violation of the law. Website notice is not a substitute for the minimum notice required by
NRS 241.020(3). See OMLO 2004-16 (May 6, 2004) in which this office opined that a public
body, which usually posted its agenda on the website of another government agency or public
body, did not violate the Open Meeting Law when it failed to post its agenda on that website
because it did not “maintain” the website.
Each public body must make and keep a record of compliance with the statutory requirement for
posting the notice and agenda before 9 a.m. of the third working day before a public meeting.
The record is to be made by the person who posted a copy of the public notice and it must
include: (1) date and time of posting, (2) address of location of posting, and (3) name, title, and
signature of person who posted the public notice. NRS 241.020(4).
§ 5.04 Mailing the written notice; mailing list
In addition to posting the notice, a public body must mail a copy of the notice to any
person who has requested notice of meetings. NRS 241.020(3)(c). A public body should
implement internal record keeping procedures to keep track of those who have requested notice.
The mailing requirement of the law does not require actual receipt of the notice by the
person to whom the notice must be mailed; it only requires that the notice be postmarked before
9 a.m. on the third working day before the meeting. See AG File No. 00-015 (April 7, 2000).
-45-
The written notices must be mailed to the requestors “in the same manner in which
notice is required to be mailed to a member of the body” and must be “delivered to the postal
service used by the body not later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting.”
NRS 241.020(3)(c)(1). A public body does not satisfy the requirements of the Open Meeting
Law by sending an e-mail to an individual who has requested personal notice of public meetings,
unless the individual waived his or her statutory right to personal notice by regular mail and
instead elected to receive notice by e-mail. See NRS 241.020(3)(c)(2) and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen.
No. 2001-01 (February 9, 2001).
NRS 241.020(3)(c) states that a request for mailed notice of meetings automatically
lapses six months after it is made to the public body and that the public body must inform the
requestor of this fact by enclosure or notation upon the first notice sent. (Emphasis added.)
Members of the public do not have to make separate written request for notice of each meeting,
but a request for both written and electronic notice lapses after six months unless the requestor
renews the request.
§ 5.05 Calculating “three working days”
“Working day” means every day of the week except Saturday, Sunday, and any day
declared to be a legal holiday, pursuant to NRS 236.015. NRS 241.015(6). The actual day of a
meeting is not to be considered as one of the three working days referenced in the statute. See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999).
For example, a Thursday meeting should be noticed by 9 a.m. on Monday of the same
week, while a Tuesday meeting must be noticed no later than 9 a.m. Thursday of the preceding
week; if the Monday before a Tuesday meeting were a legal holiday, notice would be posted no
later than 9 a.m. on Wednesday of the prior week.
§ 5.06 Providing copies of agenda and supporting material upon request
6. Upon any request, a public body shall provide, at no charge, at

least one copy of:
(a) An agenda for a public meeting;
(b) A proposed ordinance or regulation which will be discussed
at the public meeting; and
(c) Subject to the provisions of subsection 7 or 8, as applicable,
any other supporting material provided to the members of the
body, except materials:
(1) Submitted to the public body pursuant to a nondisclosure or
confidentiality agreement which relates to proprietary information;
(2) Pertaining to the closed portion of such a meeting of the
public body; or
-46-
(3) Declared confidential by law, unless otherwise agreed to by
each person whose interest is being protected under the order of
confidentiality.
As used in this subsection, “proprietary information” has the meaning ascribed to it in

NRS 332.025.
7. A copy of supporting material required to be provided upon

request pursuant to paragraph (c) of subsection 6 must be:
(a) If the supporting material is provided to the members of the
public body before the meeting, made available to the requester at
the time the material is provided to the members of the public
body; or
(b) If the supporting material is provided to the members of the
public body at the meeting, made available at the meeting to the
members of the public body.
If the requester has agreed to receive the information and material set forth in
subsection 6 by electronic mail, the public body shall, if feasible, provide the information and
material by electronic mail.
8. The governing body of a county of city whose population is

45,000 or more shall post the supporting material described in
paragraph (c) of subsection 6 to its website not later than the time
the material is provided to the members of the governing body or,
if the supporting material is provided to the members of the
governing body at a meeting, not later than 24 hours after the
conclusion of the meeting. Such posting is supplemental to
the right of the public to request the supporting material pursuant
to subsection 6. The inability of the governing body, as a result of
technical problems with its website, to post supporting material
pursuant to this subsection shall not be deemed to be a violation of
the provisions of this chapter.
9. A public body may provide the public notice, information or

supporting material required by this section by electronic mail.
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, if a public body
makes such notice, information or supporting material available by
electronic mail, the public body shall inquire of a person who
requests the notice, information or supporting material if the
-47-
person will accept receipt by electronic mail. If a public body is
required to post the public notice, information or supporting
material on its website pursuant to this section, the public body
shall inquire of a person who requests the notice, information or
supporting material if the person will accept by electronic mail
a link to the posting on the website when the documents are made
available. The inability of a public body, as a result of technical
problems with its electronic mail system, to provide a public
notice, information or supporting material or a link to a website
required by this section to a person who has agreed to receive such
notice, information, supporting material or link by electronic mail
shall not be deemed to be a violation of the provisions of this
chapter.
Note that while these provisions authorize a public body to provide the notice, agenda,
and/or supporting material by electronic mail, if the requester agrees to accept receipt by
electronic mail, these provisions do not mandate that a public body provide these documents by
electronic mail. Electronic delivery is supplemental to the right of the public to obtain hard
copies of materials under NRS 241.020(6) and (7).
Other examples of how the requirement to make supporting materials available to

the public has been applied:
(1) In AG File No. 08-040 (May 8, 2009) an e-mail communication from a

Superintendent to his staff and to the public body, the Board of School Trustees, was not
included in supporting materials for the meeting nor was it released to a reporter prior to the
meeting, even though it was relevant to a pending agenda item. The e-mail communication was
determined to be privileged and shielded by “executive privilege” as it was both predecisional
and deliberative under a common law doctrine recognized by the Nevada Supreme Court in DR
Partners v. Board of County Commissioners, 116 Nev. 616, 621, 6 P.3d 465, 468 (2000).
(2) The Office of the Attorney General has opined that drafts of proposed orders of the
Public Utilities Commission are agenda supporting material under NRS 241.020(6), formerly
NRS 241.020(4), and copies must be furnished upon request at the time that they are made
available to commission members. See OMLO 98-02 (March 16, 1998). Drafts of minutes of
previous meeting to be approved at upcoming meeting are agenda supporting material under
NRS 241.020(5) and must be provided upon request. See OMLO 98-06 (October 19, 1998); AG
File No. 10-047 (November 8, 2010).
(3) Member of a public body independently distributed a proposed budget document to

other members shortly before meeting. It should have been included in supporting material, but
once distributed to the public body, members discovered it was not included in the agenda
packet; it was treated as a fugitive document; the board did not consider it during the meeting.
AG File No. 10-027 (July 20, 2010).
-48-
(4) Where the Chair of the public body independently obtains a document and discusses
it during a public meeting, although it was not provided to any other member of the public
body, or the public, the independent action of the Chair does not entangle the Commission with
NRS 241.020. Unless the document had been provided to the Commission as support material,
pursuant to NRS 241.020(6) and (7), complainant’s request for its disclosure must be under
NRS 239. AG File No. 10-028 (July 8, 2010).
(5) Inability to provide supporting material to the public because the public body’s clerk,
staff, or other custodian of materials does not have a copy, because the clerk, staff, or other
custodian was not provided a copy, is a violation of NRS 241.020(6) and (7). It does not matter
that the source of supporting material is a private person, the city manager, or any other person.
If all members of the public body receive supporting material for a future agenda item, that
material must be available to the public upon request. AG File No. 09-021 (August 21, 2009).
(6) Requests to provide agenda supporting material under NRS 241.020(7) are treated
separately from standing requests to mail notices of meetings under NRS 241.020(3)(c). See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999). Agenda supporting material need not be mailed but must be
made available over the counter when the material is ready and has been distributed to members
of the public body and at the meeting. See OMLO 98-01 (January 21, 1998) and OMLO 2003-06
(7) The OML does not require supporting materials, such as a settlement agreement, to
be appended to or attached to the publication of the public body’s meeting Notice and Agenda.
Members of the public must request copies of supporting materials before or during the meeting;
the public body has no duty to provide copies of supporting materials except when requested.
AG File No. 10-008 (May 3, 2010).
(8) When a public body is interviewing candidates for a vacant position in an open
session, a request for a copy of candidate resumes may not be refused by the public body because
the resume of the chosen applicant would become part of the personnel file if hired, or on the
grounds that refusal was necessary to accommodate an applicant’s concern that he/she might
suffer an adverse employment reaction from his/her current employer if the applicant’s interest
in the position became known to his/her current employer. See AG File No. 00-035 (August 31,
2000). See also Opinion in AG File No. 08-005 (March 7, 2008) (beginning with a presumption
in favor of open government and public access, disclosure of applicants’ names, application for
employment, and proposed contracts of employment should be deemed public unless there is
sufficient justification, such as an identifiable privacy or law enforcement interest, or other
exigent circumstances, for keeping the record confidential).
(9) Agenda supporting materials are not required to be provided until after the
appointment of a person if a separate statute or regulation declares the materials to be
confidential during the selection and appointment process. See AG File No. 00-036 (September
25, 2000).
(10) In situations where a request for agenda supporting materials is made at the
meeting, a public body does not have to stop or delay its meeting to provide the materials if the
-49-
supporting material requested had been available at the time the agenda was posted. In this
circumstance, a public body can satisfy the Open Meeting Law requirement of providing
supporting materials “upon any request” by having one “public” copy of the supporting materials
available for review at the meeting. NRS 241.020(6).
(11) As to materials that were not available on the agenda posting date, a member of the
public is justified in asking for such materials at the meeting, and the public body must interrupt
its meeting to provide the requested copies. See NRS 241.020(7)(b) and AG File No. 00-025
(October 3, 2000).
(12) Unapproved draft minutes that are on the agenda for approval are agenda support
material which must be provided upon request.
(13) A public body was advised that proposed revised bylaws were supporting materials
for the meeting and a public copy should have been made available at the meeting and upon any
request. AG File No. 09-010 (June 10, 2009).
(14) The Open Meeting Law does not require a public body to honor a blanket request
for supporting materials for multiple meetings. See OMLO 2003-12 (March 11, 2003). The
Legislature intended to treat requests for support material differently than requests for notice and
agenda under NRS 241.020(6).
(15) When all subsections of NRS 241.020 are read together, it is clear that the
legislative purpose behind the phrase “[U]pon any request” refers only to the period of time
before or during a public meeting. Subsection 7 provides direct evidence of legislative purpose.
Parts (a) and (b) explicitly state when the public body’s duty to provide a “no-charge” copy is
applicable. Part (a) states that the public may request a copy before the meeting and part (b)
states the circumstances under which the public body must provide it during the meeting. There
is no subsection authorizing a “no-charge” copy after adjournment of a public meeting. It also is
clear that in order to harmonize the OML and the public records act, the Legislature intended that
supporting materials become a public record following adjournment of the public meeting.
Supporting materials pass to the legal custodian (in this case the County Clerk) when it becomes
subject to public record law—NRS Chapter 239. AG File No. 2011-01 (April 4, 2011); AG File
No. 09-046 (February 11, 2010).
§ 5.07 Fees for providing notice of copies of supporting material
Under NRS 241.020(6), a requested public notice, agenda, a proposed ordinance or

regulation must be provided at no cost to the requester prior to the meeting for which the notice,
agenda, and supporting material were prepared. See §6.06 above. Other requested supporting
materials which are not confidential, or subject to a non-disclosure agreement, or which do not
pertain to a closed portion of a meeting must be made available to the public at the time the
materials are provided to the members of the public body.
No charge may be made for sending copies of a notice and agenda required by
NRS 241.020(3)(c). See OMLO 99-07 (February 4, 1999). Generally, governmental bodies may
-50-
exercise only those powers that are conferred upon them by the Legislature. There is no grant of
power to public bodies in the Open Meeting Law which authorizes them to legislate or charge a
fee to a person who has requested individual notice of the meetings. Further, charging a fee
under such circumstances could have the effect of chilling the right of all Nevada citizens to
receive notice of public meetings. We note that mailing a copy of the meeting notice to anyone
who requests such notices is deemed by the law to be a part of the “minimum public notice”
requirements, which all public bodies must meet. The only restriction contemplated by the law is
a six-month limitation on the request, unless it is renewed by the requestor.
Minutes and audio recordings of public meetings become public records once prepared
following public meetings. All public bodies must make available, free of charge, a copy of the
minutes or an audio recording to a member of the public upon request. Minutes or an audio
recording of a meeting must be made available for inspection by the public within 30 working
days after the adjournment of the meeting. NRS 241.035(2).
§ 5.08 Emergencies
When emergencies occur, a public body may not be able to wait three days to call a
meeting and post a notice and agenda in order to act, or the public body already may have sent
out a notice and agenda and cannot amend the agenda and give three days’ notice of the
emergency item before the meeting.
NRS 241.020(2) provides that except in an emergency, written notice of all meetings
must be given at least three working days before the meeting. NRS 241.020(10) defines an
emergency as: “an unforeseen circumstance which requires immediate action and includes, but is
not limited to: (a) Disasters caused by fire, flood, earthquake or other natural causes; or (b) Any
impairment of the health and safety of the public.”
An emergency meeting may be called or an item may be taken up on an emergency basis

only:
• Where the need to discuss or act upon an item truly is unforeseen at the time the meeting
agenda is posted and mailed, or before the meeting is called; and
• Where an item is truly of such a nature that immediate action is required at the meeting.
In an emergency:
• A meeting may be scheduled with less than three days’ notice if the meeting is limited
only to the matter which qualifies as an emergency. The minutes of the meeting should
reflect the nature of the emergency and why notice could not be timely given.
• If a meeting already has been scheduled, notice already has been posted and mailed, and
less than three working days remain before the meeting, the emergency item may be
added to the agenda at the meeting. The minutes should reflect the nature of the
emergency and why notice could not be timely given.
-51-
• If a meeting has been scheduled, and it is possible to amend the notice and agenda and to
post and mail the amended notice (or a notice of an emergency item to be added to the
agenda) more than three working days before the meeting, the notice and agenda should
be so amended.
In all cases, whenever a matter is taken up as an emergency, the Office of the Attorney
General recommends that the public body provide as much supplementary notice to the public
and the news media as is reasonably possible under the circumstances. Further, all other
requirements of the Open Meeting Law must be observed.
The Office of the Attorney General cautions, however, that a true emergency must exist
and the rule must not be invoked as a subterfuge by a public body to avoid giving notice of that
agenda item to the public. Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-A (February 23, 1981) gives an example
of when an emergency did not exist. This opinion discusses a situation where, in a regularly-
scheduled meeting of a public body, dissention quickly arose between the members so much so
that the meeting became acutely tense and emotional. In an attempt to relieve the pressure, the
board went into an unscheduled executive session to “discuss the professional competence and
character of a person” (including some its members). Noting that the dissention on the board had
been known for months, the Office of the Attorney General determined that a sufficient
emergency did not exist to go into the unscheduled executive session because there was ample
time to provide written public notice of the need for an executive session during a regularly
scheduled meeting to discuss the matters.
See OMLO 99-10 (August 24, 1999), where the Office of the Attorney General opined
that administrative error did not establish grounds to hold an emergency meeting without giving
proper notice. A statutory deadline for action by a county commission to submit a ballot question
is not an unforeseen circumstance. See AG File No. 00-029 (August 9, 2000). The need to seize
records of a development authority is foreseeable and, therefore, not an emergency. See AG File
No. 01-039 (August 20, 2001). See OMLO 2004-22 (June 15, 2004) where the unforeseen
resignation of the General Manager of the sewer treatment plant created an emergency because,
in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare, the public body needed to keep the plant
operating, and thus, an emergency meeting to employ a new manager was appropriate.
Where the financial health of the School District was at stake and where there was
threatened loss of revenue and apparent loss of revenue, the District’s characterization of the
emergency as an “unforeseen” event was appropriate. The Board’s decision to hire a licensed
administrator after a public meeting during which the Superintendent had been unexpectedly
fired was an unforeseen event. AG File No. 07-028 (September 18, 2007).
///
///
///
-52-
waivers of notice (See Sample Form 3); exemption from OML for meetings
held to consider individual applications for employment (NRS 241.034)
NRS 241.033 prohibits a public body from holding a meeting to consider the character,
alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of any person unless
it provided written notice to the person of the time and place of the meeting and received proof
of service of the notice. See NRS 241.033(1)(a) and (b). This applies whether the meeting will be
open or closed.
NRS 41.033(2)(c) requires a properly drafted notice to include a list of the general topics
concerning the person who will be considered by the public body during the closed meeting; and
a statement of the provisions of subsection 4, if applicable. Subsection 4 states:
That the person being considered by the public body must be

permitted to attend the closed meeting;
That the person being considered may have an attorney or other

representative of his/her choosing present during the closed
meeting; and
That the person being considered may present written evidence,

provide testimony, and present witnesses relating to his character,
alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or
mental health to the public body during the closed meeting.
NRS 241.033(2)(b) states that a public body may include an informational statement
in the notice that administrative action may be taken against the person after the public body
considers his/her character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental
health. If the notice pursuant to NRS 241.033 includes this informational statement, no further
notice is required pursuant to NRS 241.034.
The notice must be delivered either personally to that person at least five working days
before the meeting or must be sent by certified mail to the last known address of that person at
least 21 working days before the meeting. A similar notice is required by NRS 241.034 to
persons against whom administrative action will be taken or whose real property will be acquired
by eminent domain unless the public body includes an informational statement that
administrative action may be taken against the person in the notice under NRS 241.033. See
discussion above.
The public body must receive proof of service of the notice before the meeting may be
held.
-53-
Notice provisions of NRS 241.033 do not apply to applicants for employment with a
public body. NRS 241.033(7) exempted public meetings held to consider applicants for
employment with the public body from the provisions of NRS 241.033.
OML complainant alleged that the public body member made comments during the
public meeting to consider his appointment to an advisory body. It was alleged that the
comments impugned complainant’s character, effectively calling him a person “of less than
truthful character.” A public body member made comments about complainant not being a team
player, which caused the public body to focus the discussion on the complainant’s character.
This was a violation of NRS 241.033. Public bodies must carefully consider the ramifications of
a discussion of any person’s character, even if it is unintentional and even if it suddenly arises
during any agenda item. Remember to stick to the agenda. AG File No. 10-061 (March 29,
2011).
The Nevada Athletic Commission is exempt from the timing requirements (e.g.,
five working days for personal service or 21 days for certified mail) but still must give written
notice of the time and place of the meeting and must receive proof of service before conducting
the meeting. NRS 241.033(3).
“Casual or tangential references to a person or the name of a person during a closed

meeting do not constitute consideration of the character, alleged misconduct, professional
competence, or physical or mental health of the person.” NRS 241.033(7)(b); See also OMLO
2004-14 (April 20, 2004); OMLO 2003-18 (April 21, 2003); and OMLO 2003-28 (November 14,
2005) where the public body violated the Open Meeting Law by considering an employee’s
character or alleged misconduct without providing notice, but the mere mention of other
employees did not require notice to the other employees.
Notice requirements of NRS 241.033 only apply to natural persons because non-natural
persons cannot have “physical or mental health.” Thus, proper statutory construction dictates
that the notice under NRS 241.033 only must be provided to natural persons. See OMLO 2004-
13 (April 19, 2004).
If a public body discusses a pending lawsuit involving a particular person, a discussion of

that lawsuit which mentions the name of that person does not require the public body to provide
notice under NRS 241.033. See OMLO 2003-14 (March 21, 2003).
Notice requirements apply to applicants for professional licenses if their character,

alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health is to be considered at
the meeting. See Attorney General Letter Opinion to Jerry Higgins, Nevada Board of
Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, dated October 28, 1993 (licensing board which will
consider applicant’s character and professional competence must properly notice each applicant
in accordance with NRS 241.033).
There is no prohibition against waivers of the notice, and the courts consistently
recognize that an individual may, by express or implied waiver, relinquish a known statutory
right. However, a waiver carries legal consequences, and therefore must be a valid waiver. A
-54-
waiver of a statutory right is deemed valid if it is clear and unambiguous, given voluntarily, and
intended to relinquish a known statutory right. CBS, Inc. v. Merrick, 716 F.2d 1292 (9th Cir.
1983); State Board of Psychological Examiners v. Norman, 100 Nev. 241, 679 P.2d 1263 (1984).
It is recommended that the waiver be obtained in writing expressing: (1) the voluntary
nature of the waiver; (2) the applicant’s knowledge about the statutory right; and (3) the
applicant’s intention to relinquish that right. See Attorney General Letter Opinion to Jerry
Higgins, Nevada Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors, dated October 28, 1993.
Sample Form 3 satisfies NRS 241.033 notice requirement when a person’s

character or professional competence or alleged misconduct or physical or mental health is
to be discussed by the public body.
§ 5.10 Meeting to consider administrative action against a person or acquisition of real

property by eminent domain (NRS 241.034)
Under NRS 241.034, a public body may not hold a meeting to take administrative actions
against a person or to acquire real property by condemnation from a person unless the public
body has given written notice to that person. The written notice either must be: (1) delivered
personally to the person at least five working days before the meeting; or (2) sent by certified
mail to the last known address of the person at least 21 working days before the meeting. Written
notice to the person is required in addition to the notice of meeting required by NRS 241.020.
See § 6.02.
A public body must receive proof of service of the written notice before the public body
may consider the matter. Proof of receipt of the notice is not required.
The terms “take,” “administrative action,” and “person” are not defined by Chapter 241
or by NRS 241.034. With respect to the eminent domain provision, the terms “acquire,”
“owned,” and “person” are not defined. The terms “administrative action” and “against a
person,” if interpreted and defined broadly, would encompass a myriad of actions performed by
local governments and state agencies, which were not all intended to be covered.
In Harris v. Washoe County Board of Equalization, Case No. 42951, 120 Nev. 1246, 131
P.3d 606 (Nov. 2, 2004), which was an unpublished order of the Supreme Court of Nevada and
not an opinion, the Supreme Court agreed with the above interpretation of the Office of the
Nevada Attorney General. In that case, the petitioners challenged the assessor’s valuation of their
property. The County Board contacted the petitioners one working day before the meeting to
consider their petition, but the County Board properly posted a public notice three working days
before the meeting. The County Board did not provide a personal notice to the petitioners,
pursuant to NRS 241.034. The petitioners filed for a preliminary injunction against the County
Board for failing to provide notice pursuant to NRS 241.034. The District Court denied the
injunction and the petitioners appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
The Court stated, “In this case, the language ‘administrative action against a person,’
which triggers the five-day personal notice requirement, is subject to more than one
-55-
interpretation.” The property owners argued that the language should be read broadly to “include
all administrative actions directed at specific individuals,” and thus, the County Board’s land
valuation hearings. The County Board asserted that the phrase should be tailored more narrowly
“to include only those actions involving an individual’s characteristics or qualifications, not
those of real property.”
The Court stated that the rules of statutory construction compel the Court to adopt the
County Board’s more narrow approach. The broad view advocated by the property owners would
render the notice requirement for eminent domain “nugatory” because any action with regard to a
person’s realty would require notice. The Court determined that such an interpretation was not
the appropriate construction of the statute. The Court then defined the phrase “administrative
action against a person” as “those actions involving an individual’s characteristics or
qualifications, not those of real property.” Therefore, the Court held that the County Board did
not violate the Open Meeting Law.
For purposes of enforcement actions under NRS 241.037(1), this office will follow these
guidelines:
1) Except as noted below, “person” includes natural persons and inanimate entities such as
partnerships, corporations, trusts, and limited liability companies. “Person” includes,
essentially, anything legally capable of holding an interest in property or legally capable
of receiving a permit or license.
2) “Administrative action against a person” does not occur unless the matter being acted on
is uniquely personal to the individual or entity. “Administrative action against a person”
does not occur when the legal basis of the action is consideration of the inanimate
characteristics of a facility or property and no consideration of the characteristics or
qualifications of the individual or entity (the person) that has sought the governmental
approval. See the discussion of Harris above.
For example, a decision against an applicant for a barber’s license for the individual
practitioner is subject to NRS 241.034, but a decision against an applicant for a barbershop
license is not.
Certain business and occupational licenses issued by state and local governments may
depend on an analysis of a blend of personal factors as well as real and personal property. Some
statutes, regulations, and ordinances grant, condition, or deny a particular license solely on the
adequacy of the premises (sanitation, fire codes, square footage, and zoning) without reference to
the personal aspects of the business person seeking the license. These types of business licenses
are not subject to NRS 241.034. But if a business license is granted or denied in part by reference
to the personal aspects of the applicant, then NRS 241.034 applies.
(a) “Action against a person” within the meaning of NRS 241.034 does not include
adoption of ordinances or regulations; the granting or denying of petitions for declaratory orders
or advisory opinions; action on zoning requests, building permits, most variances, and other land
use decisions that do not depend on the identity, status, personal qualifications, or characteristics
-56-
of the person. These decisions are “against” the entire population, whole neighborhoods,
industries, and other interest groups. Notice to such large numbers of persons is not required by
NRS 241.034.
(b) An act is not subject to the additional notice requirements of NRS 241.034 if the
action depends on the application of either objective or discretionary standards and criteria to
land, water, air, or other inanimate matters unrelated to the personal qualities and characteristics
of the owner of the property that is subject to the authority of the public body.
(c) Note that other statutes and ordinances typically have extensive notice provisions
for the special subject matter covered. Those laws must be complied with, but failure to do so
will not be a violation of chapter 241.
(d) Imposing discipline on a person is an “action against a person.” Most penalties

(except for taxation) are uniquely personal because they are based on the misconduct of a person
and, therefore, are “actions against a person.”
3) Decisions to accept gifts and to purchase, sell, encumber, or lease any interest in real or
personal property are examples of non-personal, inanimate-subject decisions that are not
within the meaning of “administrative action against a person,” even though each
decision may be, in a very real sense, “against” someone, unless the purchase involves
eminent domain, in which case the owner of the property must be notified.
-57-
Part 6 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARING
AND FOLLOWING THE AGENDA? (See Sample Form 1)
§ 6.01 General
A public body’s failure to adhere to agenda requirements will result in an Open Meeting
Law violation. Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 156, 67 P.3d 902, 906 (2003). If a
matter is acted upon which was not described clearly and completely on the agenda, the action is
void under NRS 241.036.
NRS 241.020(2)(c) requires public body agendas include the following at a minimum:
2. Except in an emergency, written notice of all meetings must be

given at least three working days before the meeting. The notice
must include:
(a) The time, place and location of the meeting.
(b) A list of the locations where the notice has been posted.
(c)The name and contact information for the person designated
by the public body from who a member of the public may request
the supporting material for the meeting described in subsection 6
and a list of the locations where the supporting material is
available to the public.
(d) An agenda consisting of:
(1) A clear and complete statement of the topics scheduled to
be considered during the meeting.
(2) A list describing the items on which action may be taken
and clearly denoting that action may be taken on those items by
placing the term “for possible action” next to the appropriate item
or, if the item is placed on the agenda pursuant to NRS 241.0365,
by placing the term “for possible corrective action” next to the
appropriate item.
(3) Periods devoted to comments by the general public, if
any, and discussion of those comments. Comments by the general
public must be taken:
(I) At the beginning of the meeting before any items on
which action may be taken are heard by the public body and again
before the adjournment of the meeting; or
(II) After each item on the agenda on which action may be
taken is discussed by the public body, but before the public body
takes action on the item.
The provisions of this subparagraph do not prohibit a public
body from taking comments by the general public in addition
to what is required pursuant to sub-subparagraph (I) or (II).
Regardless of whether a public body takes comments from the
general public pursuant to sub-subparagraph (I) or (II), the public
-58-
body must allow the general public to comment on any matter that
is not specifically included on the agenda as an action item at some
time before adjournment of the meeting. No action may be taken
upon a matter raised during a period devoted to comments by the
general public until the matter itself has been specifically included
on an agenda as an item upon which action may be taken pursuant
to subparagraph (2).
(4) If any portion of the meeting will be closed to consider
the character, alleged misconduct or professional competence of
a person, the name of the person whose character, alleged
misconduct or professional competence will be considered.
(5) If, during any portion of the meeting, the public body will
consider whether to take administrative action regarding a person,
the name of that person.
(6) Notification that:
(I) Items on the agenda may be taken out of order;
(II) The public body may combine two or more agenda
items for consideration; and
(III) The public body may remove an item from the
agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any
time.
(7) Any restrictions on comments by the general public. Any
such restrictions must be reasonable and may restrict the time,
place and manner of the comments, but may not restrict comments
based upon viewpoint.
§ 6.02 Agenda must be clear and complete (See Sample Form 1)
In Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 67 P.3d 902 (2003), the Nevada Supreme
Court analyzed three related issues under Nevada’s Open Meeting Law: (1) the “clear and
complete” standard required for agenda statements by NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), (2) discussion
which exceeds the scope of a properly noticed agenda statement, and (3) whether the Open
Meeting Law violates the First Amendment by improperly restricting members’ right to free
speech. The analysis of the “clear and complete” standard will be discussed in this section of
the manual, the analysis regarding exceeding the scope of the agenda statement will be discussed
in § 7.03 of this manual, and the analysis regarding the First Amendment will be discussed in
§ 13.03 of this manual.
In Sandoval, the Court considered the actions of two different public bodies related
to the University and Community College System of Southern Nevada, the Campus Environment
Committee (Committee) and the Board of Regents (Board). Since the analysis regarding the
Board discussed the “clear and complete” standard under NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), this section of
the manual will discuss only the facts, circumstances, and analysis surrounding the Board. For a
discussion regarding the facts, circumstances, and analysis regarding the Committee exceeding
the agenda statement, see § 7.03 below.
-59-
In September of 2000, the Board held a public meeting and noticed an item that stated:
Committee Reports:
Campus Environment Committee
Chairman Tom Kilpatrick will present a report on the Campus
Environment committee meeting held September 7, 2000 and
requests Board action on the following recommendations of the
committee:
Round Table Discussion of Actions and Schedule of Topics to be
Discussed with Campus Representatives--The committee reviewed
previous actions and unfinished business of the committee and
compiled a schedule of topics for the remainder of the year.
119 Nev. at 152, 67 P.3d at 904.
Regent Kilpatrick properly reported the topics to be discussed for the remainder of the
year, and he discussed the law governing the release of documents. He then informed the Board
that a request was made for the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), report regarding a
dormitory raid, and a document regarding disarming the UNLV police department. After Regent
Kilpatrick’s presentation, Regent Aldean suggested that the Board make available a redacted
version of the NDI report regarding the raid, and the Board agreed with this suggestion. As a
result, the Office of the Attorney General filed suit alleging a violation of the “clear and
complete” standard in NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1). The district court granted summary judgment for
the Board holding that the “germane standard” should apply to Nevada’s Open Meeting Law,
and since the discussion by the Board of the NDI report was germane to the agenda statement,
there was no violation of the Open Meeting Law. The Office of the Attorney General appealed
this decision.
The Supreme Court’s analysis immediately rejected the “germane standard” as

too lenient a standard in Nevada. The Court stated, “[T]he legislative history of
NRS 241.020(2)(c)(1) [now NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1) illustrates that the Legislature enacted the
statute because ‘incomplete and poorly written agendas deprive citizens of their right to take part
in government.’” 119 Nev. at 154, 67 P.3d at 905. The Court also stated, “Nevada’s Open
Meeting Law seeks to give the public clear notice of the topics to be discussed at public meetings
so that the public can attend a meeting when an issue of interest will be discussed.” 119 Nev. at
155, 67 P.3d at 906. As a result, the Court held that the Board violated the Open Meeting Law
because the agenda statement was too broad to place the public on notice that the Board would
take informal action to obtain a redacted NDI report and discuss an examination of disarming the
UNLV police, both issues of public interest.
In 2007, following the Sandoval decision, the Nevada Supreme Court issued another
decision impacting the “clear and complete” rule. In Schmidt v. Washoe County, 123 Nev. 128,
159 P.3d 1099 (2007), the Court decided an issue regarding whether an
agenda item on the BOCC’s agenda was clear and complete. The agenda item stated:
“Legislative Update—this item may be discussed at Monday’s Caucus Meeting and/or Tuesday’s
Board Meeting and may involve discussion by [WCBC] and direction to staff on various bill
-60-
draft requests (BDRs).” The agenda also instructed the public that a list of specific bills which
staff would seek direction from the WCBC would be posted online on the County’s website after
6:00 p.m. on Friday before the Monday caucus meeting. Hard copies would be placed in the
County Manager’s office by 9 a.m. on Monday. The Schmidt Court stated that this factual issue
was a close question. However it determined the WCBC’s agenda item met the “clear and
complete” standard, because the item noticed the public that WCBC and staff planned to discuss
certain BDRs at its Caucus meeting or the following day’s regular meeting and the Court found
the WCBC had provided a list of specific BDR’s on the County’s website three days before the
Caucus.
In an Attorney General opinion, this office reviewed the agenda item to determine
whether it was clear and complete. The disputed agenda item stated: “5(C) Discussion regarding
election of CEO to receive contractual bonus based upon FY 08 positive evaluation.” The issue
was whether it was legally sufficient to impart notice to the CEO that his character and
professional competence would be considered by the Board. This office opined that the Board
exceeded the scope of the agenda item. Among the matters impermissibly discussed and beyond
the scope of the item were the person’s “ongoing communication skills,” discussion of an earlier
professional evaluation, and discussion of his character traits for honesty and integrity. The
person’s general reputation was denigrated before the Board in a significant and substantive
fashion so as to constitute a violation of both the OML’s notice requirement and its “clear and
complete” rule. See AG File No. 10-014 (February 25, 2010).
In another Attorney General Opinion, we reviewed a public body agenda “action” item
which stated in part: “Consideration to Approve Advertisement of Irrigation Water Shares and to
Set Time for Said Auction.” After investigation, it was determined to be incomplete. This item
was not clear and complete so as to indicate to the public that the advertisement was for the lease
of irrigation water shares. Similarly, another agenda item from another meeting of the same
public body did not disclose to the public body that a provision for the lease-back of water was a
condition of sale. Because the issue of fair market value of water rights was of significant
interest to the public body and the public, the absence of disclosure of a lease-back provision
from the agenda item was a violation of the OML’s requirement that agenda topics be expressed
clearly and completely. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1). AG File No. 09-014 (June 30, 2009); see also
In AG File No. 09-044 (December 17, 2009), Complainant’s allegation was that the text
of agenda item 31 was not clear and complete because it did not inform the public that (in
Complainant’s view) it committed taxpayers to contingent liabilities beyond current taxing
authority. The OML does not provide oversight to the decision-making process of public bodies.
It does not allow this office to second guess decisions or actions by public bodies even if the
decision might have been improvident. AG File No. 09-044 (December 17, 2009).
The Office of the Attorney General has written several opinions on agendas. See Op.
Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 79-8 (March 26, 1979), and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 91-6 (May 23, 1991);
OMLO 99-01 (January 5, 1999); OMLO 99-02 (January 15, 1999); OMLO 99-03 (January 11,
1999); OMLO 2003-09 (March 4, 2003); OMLO 2003-13 (March 21, 2003); and OMLO 2003-
23 (June 24, 2003). AG File No. 08-007 (June 12, 2008).
-61-
The following guidelines are gleaned from these opinions regarding agenda items and the
clear and complete rule:
a. Merely indicating “Licensing Board” on an agenda without listing the names of the
licensees who will be considered is not proper.
b. An agenda item for consideration of business permits should include the name and,
where appropriate, the address of the proposed business and/or applicants.
c. Agenda items must be described with clear and complete detail so that the public will
receive notice in fact of what is to be discussed by the public body.
d. Use a standard of reasonableness in preparing the agenda and keep in mind the spirit
and purpose of the Open Meeting Law.
e. Always keep in mind that the purpose of the agenda is to give the public notice of
what its government is doing, has done, or may do.
f. The use of general or vague language as a mere subterfuge is to be avoided.
g. Use of broad or unspecified categories in an agenda should be restricted only to those

items in which it cannot be anticipated what specific matters will be considered.
h. An agenda must never be drafted with the intent of creating confusion or uncertainty
as to the items to be considered or for the purpose of concealing any matter from public
notice.
i. Agendas should be written in a manner that actually gives notice to the public of the
items anticipated to be brought up at the meeting.
j. Generic agenda items such as “President’s Report,” “Committee Reports,” “New

Business,” and “Old Business” do not provide a clear and complete statement of the
topics scheduled to be considered. Such items must not be listed as for possible action
items as they do not adequately describe matters upon which action is to be taken. See
OMLO 99-03 (January 11, 1999).
k. Agendas for retreats should identify the event as a retreat, give

the objectives to be accomplished, and include the specific topics for discussion. See
OMLO 99-02 (January 15, 1999). See § 6.02 for items that must be included in the notice
and agenda if not covered in the notice for the meeting.
Additionally, based on some of the complaints received by the Office of the Attorney
General, the following suggestions are offered:
-62-
a. Public bodies should not “approve” or take action on administrative reports by staff
unless the agenda clearly denotes that the report is an item for possible action and
specifically sets out the matter to be acted on from the report.
b. Generic items such as “reports” or “general comments by board members” invite

trouble because discussions spawned under them may be of great public interest and may
lead to deliberations or actions without the benefit of public scrutiny or input. Generic
items should be used sparingly and carefully, and actual discussions should be controlled
tightly. Matters of public interest should be rescheduled for further discussion at later
meetings.
c. Agenda descriptions for resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, rules, or other

such items to be considered by public bodies, should describe to what the statute,
ordinance, regulation, resolution, or rule relates, so that the public may determine if it is a
subject in which they have an interest which might lead to their attendance at the public
meeting. See OMLO 99-01 (January 5, 1999); OMLO 99-03 (January 11, 1999).
Below are synopses of three recent Attorney General Opinions which applied the “clear
and complete” rule:
• Public body’s use of phrase “and all matters related thereto” was a violation of the OML
because use of the phrase allows the public body to stray into discussion on matters not
specifically listed in the item. Use of the phrase “and all matters related thereto” does not
comply with the statute’s requirement that every agenda item contain a clear and
complete statement of topics to be considered. AG File No. 10-049 (December 17, 2010);
• Public body must recognize that a “‘higher degree of specificity [for agenda items]
is needed when the subject to be debated is of special or significant interest to
the public,’” Sandoval, 119 Nev. at 154-155, 67 P.3d at 906 (quoting Gardner
v. Herring, 21 S.W.3d 767, 773 (Tex.App.2000)). Mandatory trash service and billing
was and is an item of significance in the City of Fernley requiring greater agenda item
specificity. A Council agenda item merely stated that “special provisions for inclusion of
[sic] a new franchise agreement(s)” would be discussed at the meeting, but this generic
description was too broad. The public was not alerted that mandatory billing and trash
pickup was the special provision. AG File No. 09-003 (March 27, 2009).
• A public body rejected a staff recommendation for naming a new Las Vegas area Career
and Technical Academy. Agenda item 7.01: “NAMING OF DISTRICT FACILITIES,
VETERANS MEMORIAL CENTRAL CAREER AND TECHNICAL ACADEMY.
Discussion and possible action on approval to name a school the Veterans Memorial
Central Career and Technical Academy, is recommended.” Item 7.01 was not in violation
of the “clear and complete” rule. Nothing in the OML prohibits a public body from
rejecting or amending staff’s recommendation regarding a school name, or that requires
the public body to vote up or down on exact wording of any proposal brought before it.
-63-
This is too narrow an interpretation of NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1)—the “clear and complete”
rule. AG File No. 09-006 (February 2, 2009).
§ 6.03 Stick to the agenda
As discussed in § 7.02, supra, Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 67 P.3d 902
(2003) provided analysis of a public body’s failure to discuss only matters within the scope of its
agenda. In that case, the Campus Environment Committee (Committee) held a meeting on
September 7, 2000. The agenda item stated: “Review of UCCSN Policies on Reporting.” It
further described the item’s scope as:
“Review UCCSN, state and federal statutes, regulations, case law,

and policies that govern the release of materials, documents, and
reports to the public.”
119 Nev. at 151, 67 P.3d at 903–904.
At this meeting, the Committee discussed a controversial NDI report regarding a

dormitory raid by UNLV police. Regent Hill discussed the details of the raid, criticized the
UNLV police department, and recommended that the police department be disarmed. This
discussion occurred against the advice of legal counsel. The Office of the Attorney General sued
the Regents for exceeding the scope of the agenda item. The district court granted summary
judgment for the Committee after applying a “germane standard” to the discussion, concluding
the discussion was germane to the agenda item. The Office of the Attorney General appealed.
The Supreme Court stated that the agenda statement was “clear and complete” under
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), and, in the abstract, the Committee could have discussed the NDI
report. However, the Court held, “[t]he plain language of NRS 241.020(2)(c)(1) [now
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1)] requires that discussion at a public meeting cannot exceed the scope of a
clearly and completely stated agenda topic.” Id, 119 Nev. at 154, 67 P.3d at 905. Here, the
Committee violated the Open Meeting Law by exceeding the scope of the agenda statement
“when it discussed the details of the report, criticized the UNLV police department, and
commented on the impact of drug use on the campus.” The Court said the Committee’s agenda
statement did not inform the public that these matters would be a topic of discussion. Id., 119
Nev. at 155, 67 P.3d at 906.
Many other complaints received by the Office of the Attorney General have to do with
public bodies wandering off their agendas. Discussions may start on an agenda item but then
drift off into other matters. (See AG File No. 10-014 (February 25, 2010) for an example of a
deliberate discussion of a person’s character without notice and beyond the scope of the agenda
item.) The chair for a public meeting or its counsel should be vigilant to stop the discussion
from drifting in order to prevent Open Meeting Law violations. See OMLO 98-03 (July 7, 1998)
for an example of how a public body can violate the Open Meeting Law by wandering off its
meeting agenda. See also OMLO 99-09 (July 28, 1999) for an example of how a budget
workshop designated for discussion and review of a proposed budget resulted in several
-64-
violations of the Open Meeting Law, when members of the public body made decisions on
various items within the proposed budget.
Deviating from the agenda by commencing a meeting prior to its noticed meeting time
violates the spirit and intent of the Open Meeting Law and nullifies the purpose of the notice
requirements set forth in NRS 241.020(2). See OMLO 99-13 (December 13, 1999).
In this Open Meeting law opinion, the public body’s Chairman brought up new subjects
unrelated to agenda item. A Commissioner interjected a call for a parliamentary point-of-order.
Even though the Chair’s remarks strayed beyond the agenda item, which was “review and
discussion of written items sent or received by the Commission since the last regular meeting
and to send correspondence copies for the exhibit file,” the Chair ignored the point of order. His
refusal to acknowledge the point-of-order and return to the subject matter of the agenda was a
violation of the OML. The OML does not permit a public body to discuss a matter not on the
agenda as long as no action is taken. The OML clearly states that each agenda item must be
“clearly and completely” set forth. It is not conditional on whether it is an informational item or
an action item. AG File No. 09-031 (October 22, 2009)
§ 6.04 Matters brought up during public comment; meeting continued to another date
The Open Meeting law requires multiple periods of public comment on each public body
agenda. No action may be taken upon a matter raised in public comment or anywhere else on the
agenda, until the matter itself has been included specifically on a future agenda as an item upon
which action may be taken.
Restrictions on public comment must be reasonable and must be noticed on the agenda,
i.e., time limitations. NRS 241.020(2)(d)(7), see § 8.04, infra. Restrictions must be viewpoint
neutral. At least one of the multiple periods of public comment must allow the public to speak
about any matter within the public body’s jurisdiction, control, or advisory power. See § 8.04 for
the requirements for conducting the public comment period. The Open Meeting Law does not
limit a public body’s discretion to refuse to place on the agenda an item requested by a member
of the public. Any limits are a matter of general administrative law. See AG File No. 00-047
(April 27, 2001).
Where a meeting is continued to a future date, the reconvened meeting must have the
same agenda or portion thereof at the later date. The new date is a second, separate meeting for
purposes of notice and public comment, and a member of the public is entitled to make public
comment on the same subject at both meetings. [For explanation of the public comment
requirement, see AG File No. 01-012 (May 21, 2001).]
§ 6.05 Meeting that must be continued to a future date
A meeting which is continued to a future date where the continuation date does not
appear on the original agenda must be re-noticed as a new meeting. The agenda must be posted
according to NRS 241.020(2) (three working days before the noticed meeting) whether the new
agenda carries over items from the prior agenda or whether it adds new items. The new date is a
-65-
second, separate meeting for purposes of notice and public comment, and a member of the public
is entitled to make public comment on the same subject at both meetings.
A meeting may be recessed and reconvened on the same date it was noticed without
violation of the notice provisions of the OML.
-66-
Part 7 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDUCTING
AN OPEN MEETING?
§ 7.01 General
In conducting meetings, one always should remember the message in NRS 241.010: “In
enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that all public bodies exist to aid in the
conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and
that their deliberations be conducted openly.” In interpreting a similar provision in California’s
open meeting law, the court of appeals delivered a humbling message when it said:
“The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the

agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do
not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for
the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The
people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control
over instruments they have created.”
Stockton Newspapers, Inc. v. Redevelopment Agency, 214 Cal.Rptr. 561, 63 (Ct. App. 1985)
(quoting Cal. Gov’t Code § 54950 (West 1985).
Accordingly, NRS 241.020 requires that, except as otherwise provided by statute, all
meetings of public bodies must be open and public, and all persons must be permitted to attend
any meeting of these bodies; NRS 241.040 makes the wrongful exclusion of any person from a
meeting a misdemeanor.
§ 7.02 Facilities
Public meetings should be held in facilities that are reasonably large enough to
accommodate anticipated attendance by members of the public.
Sometimes controversial public issues generate a larger-than-expected crowd and a

change of location or other methods (e.g., video transmission in adjoining rooms or areas) may
have to be employed in order to accommodate those persons seeking to attend
a particular meeting. But even if reasonable efforts like these prove inadequate to accommodate
everyone, the meeting still would qualify as a public meeting for purposes of the Open Meeting
Law. Gutierrez v. City of Albuquerque, 631 P.2d 304 (N.M. 1981).
Public bodies should avoid holding public meetings in places to which the general public
does not feel free to enter, such as a restaurant, private home, or club. While perhaps not in
violation of the letter of the Open Meeting Law, a meeting in such a location may be in violation
of the law’s spirit and intent. Cf. Crist v. True, 314 N.E.2d 186 (Ohio Ct. App. 1973). It is
unlawful to start a meeting before the public is allowed into the room. The public body must wait
until the public has been admitted to the meeting facility before commencing the meeting. See
AG File No. 01-002 (April 5, 2001).
-67-
§ 7.03 Accommodations for physically handicapped persons
NRS 241.020(1) provides that public officers and employees must make “reasonable
efforts to assist and accommodate physically handicapped persons desiring to attend” meetings
of a public body. In order to comply with this statute, it is required that public meetings be held,
whenever possible, only in buildings that are reasonably accessible to the physically
handicapped, i.e., those having a wheelchair ramp, elevators, etc., as may be appropriate. See
Fenton v. Randolph, 400 N.Y.S.2d 987 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1977).
§ 7.04 Public comment: multiple periods of public comment
comment agenda procedures:
• First, a public body may comply by agendizing one public comment period before any
action items are heard by the public body and later it must hear another period of public
• The second alternative also involves multiple periods of public comment which must be
heard after discussion of each agenda action item, but before the public body takes action
on the item.
• Finally, regardless of which alternative is selected, the public body must allow the public
some time, before adjournment, to comment on any matter within the public body’s
jurisdiction, control, or advisory power. This would include items not specifically
included on the agenda as an action item.
Discussion of public comment is specifically allowed under NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3). This

statute was amended in 1991. Now, it allows discussion of public comment with the public body.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3) provides that the public body must allow periods devoted to
comments by the general public, if any, and discussion of those comments, if the public body
chooses to engage the public in discussion. The statute does not mandate discussion with the
public, but it does allow discussion.
A public body may not inform the public that it legally is prohibited from discussing
public comments, either among themselves, or with speakers from the public.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3) clearly allows discussion with members of the public. Of course, no
matter raised in public comment may be the subject of either deliberation or action. AG File No.
10-037 (October 19, 2010); see § 5.01 for definition of “deliberation.”
§ 7.05 Reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions apply to public meetings
Except during the public comment period required by NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3), the Open
Meeting Law does not mandate that members of the public be allowed to speak during meetings;
-68-
however, once the right to speak has been granted by the Legislature (NRS 241.020(2)(3)), the
full panoply of First Amendment rights attaches to the public’s right to speak. The public’s
freedom of speech during public meetings vigorously is protected by both the U.S. Constitution
and the Nevada Constitution. Freedom of expression upon public questions is secured by the
First Amendment. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 269 (1964). This constitutional
safeguard was fashioned to assure an unfettered interchange of ideas for bringing about political
and social changes desired by the people.
The New York Times Court said that: “[a] rule compelling the critic of official conduct to
guarantee the truth of all his factual assertions and to do so on pain of libel judgment . . . leads to
. . . self-censorship and would deter protected speech.” See AG File No. 11-024 (November 21.
2011) (chairman of public body may not forbid public comment based on his disagreement with
the speaker about the truthfulness of his comment).
Both California and Nevada constitutional provisions (Nevada Constitution Article 1,

section 9) regarding freedom of speech are identical. The California Supreme Court expressed
the strength of these constitutional provisions, when in 1896, it observed that “Every person may
freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the
abuse of this right . . . .” In Dailey v. Superior Court, 112 Cal. 94, 97, 44 P. 458 (1896), the court
continued and said that “the wording of this section is terse and vigorous, and its meaning so
plain that construction is not needed. It is patent that these rights to speak, write, and publish,
cannot be abused until it is exercised, and before it is exercised there can be no responsibility.”
It also is settled law that reasonable rules and regulations during public meetings ensure
orderly conduct of a public meeting and ensure orderly behavior on the part of those persons
attending the meeting. Public bodies may adopt reasonable restrictions, including time limits on
individual comment, but NRS 241.020(2)(d)(7) requires all restrictions on public comment to be
expressed clearly on each agenda.
See AG File No. 10-021 (July 6, 2010). The OML allows considerable discretion to the
public body as to length of time allowed to speakers. There is no statutory or constitutional
requirement that each speaker’s time be correlated mathematically. However, any public
comment limitation, including when public comment will be allowed and whether public
comment will be allowed on current items on the agenda, clearly must be articulated on the
public body’s agenda. See § 8.03 above. OMLO 99-08 (July 8, 1999); see also AG File No. 07-
019 (July 17, 2007) (Board put an “as time allows” restriction on the public’s right to speak, this
restriction was unreasonable); see also AG File No. 07-020 (October 25, 2007) (public body was
advised that the absence of any statement of policy regarding public comment was a violation).
See OMLO 99-08 (July 8, 1999). Requiring prior approval of the use of electronic
devices during public comment is reasonable and not in violation of the Open Meeting Law. See
See OMLO 99-11 (August 26, 1999). The Office of the Attorney General believes that
any practice or policy that discourages or prevents public comment, even if technically in
compliance with the law, may violate the spirit of the Open Meeting Law, such as where a public
body required members of the public to sign up three and one-half hours in advance to speak at a
-69-
public meeting. This practice can have the effect of unnecessarily restricting public comment and
therefore does not comport with the spirit and intent of the Open Meeting Law.
A public body’s restrictions must be neutral as to the viewpoint expressed, but the public
body may prohibit comment if the content of the comments is a topic that is not relevant to, or
within the authority of, the public body, or if the content of the comments is willfully disruptive
of the meeting by being irrelevant, repetitious, slanderous, offensive, inflammatory, irrational, or
amounting to personal attacks or interfering with the rights of other speakers. See AG File No.
00-047 (April 27, 2001).
See AG File No 11-035 (December 23, 2011). In fact, the Ninth Circuit has long
recognized that First Amendment rights of expression are more limited during a meeting than in
a public forum, such as, for example, a street corner. See Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, 586 F.3d
697, 699 (9th Cir. 2009), rev’d on other grounds, 629 F.3d 966 (9th Cir. 2010), cert. denied, City
of Santa Cruz, Cal. v. Norse, 132 S.Ct. 112 (2011). Moreover, government officials performing
discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity where they reasonably believe their
actions to be lawful. Id. (citing Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 202 (2001)). The interpretation
and the enforcement of rules during public meetings are highly discretionary functions. Id.
(citing White v. City of Norwalk, 900 F.2d 1421, 1426 (9th Cir.1990) (“[T]he point at which
speech becomes unduly repetitious or largely irrelevant is not mathematically determinable. The
role of a moderator involves a great deal of discretion.”)).
There is no First Amendment right to remain in a public meeting. “Citizens are not
entitled to exercise their First Amendment rights whenever and wherever they wish.” Kindt v.
Santa Monica Rent Control Bd., 67 F.3d 266, 269 (9th Cir. 1995) (upholding a rent control
board's action in ejecting a speaker several times because his conduct disrupted the orderly
processes of meetings). The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that “limitations on
speech at [city council and city board] meetings must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral, but
that is all they need to be.” Id. at 271. A public body may not, in effect, close an open meeting by
declaring that the public has no First Amendment right whatsoever once the public comment
period has closed. Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, 629 F.3d 966, 975 (9th Cir. 2010). As the court
previously had explained in White v. City of Norwalk, 900 F.2d 1421, 1426 (9th Cir. 1990), the
entire meeting held in public is a limited public forum, from beginning to the end, not just
portions of it. The fact that a city may impose reasonable time, place, and manner limitations on
speech does not mean that by doing so it can transform the nature of the forum, much less
extinguish all First Amendment rights. In Santa Cruz, a provocative gesture that was made after
the public comment period closed still was subject to a determination of whether it enjoyed First
Amendment viewpoint protection.
Right to public comment was denied when the Chair made the individual choose between
public comment at the meeting or possibly lose her promised chance to have a future agenda
topic devoted to her issue. This choice meant the individual could speak only once about a matter
within the body’s jurisdiction and control. Public comment during a public meeting has been
bestowed by statute but once bestowed only may be restricted or limited in a constitutional
manner. An individual’s right to comment is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner
-70-
restrictions, but the Chair’s offer of a choice to this speaker was not based on constitutionally
valid time, place, or manner restrictions. See AG File No. 10-012 (May 18, 2010).
A member of the public may not be excluded from a tour taken by a public body during a
meeting, for example, where a jail advisory committee scheduled a tour of the county jail. While
the sheriff may have authority to exclude persons, if persons are excluded, the public body
violates the Open Meeting Law if the tour is taken without the excluded member of the public.
See AG File No. 00-013 (March 30, 2001).
When public comment is allowed during the consideration of a specific topic, the
chairperson may require public comment to be relevant to the topic, provided the restriction is
viewpoint neutral. When public comment is not allowed during the consideration of a specific
topic on the agenda, the public body must allow at least one general period of public comment
during that meeting where the public may speak on any subject within the jurisdiction, control,
or advisory authority of the public body. See AG File No. 01-022 (May 31, 2001) and AG File
No. 00-047 (April 27, 2001).
§ 7.06 Excluding people who are disruptive
If a person willfully disrupts a meeting, to the extent that its orderly conduct is made
impractical, the person may be removed from the meeting. NRS 241.030(4)(a). See AG File No.
10-006 (April 13, 2010). Complainant’s removal from the room by security was justified based
on an intentional disturbance generated by the volume of comments which were audible to the
Board and which prevented orderly conduct of the meeting. The chair of the public body may,
without a vote of the body, declare a recess to remove a person who is disrupting the meeting.
See AG File No. 00-046 (December 11, 2000). See § 8.04 above, for further detailed discussion
of reasonable restrictions during a public meeting.
§ 7.07 Excluding witnesses from testimony of other witnesses
Under NRS 241.030(4)(b), a witness may be removed from a public or private

meeting during the testimony of other witnesses. This applies even if the witness is
an employee of the state agency that is prosecuting the case. Unless otherwise stipulated, the
witness may continue to be excluded after he/she testifies. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 93
(November 21, 1963). The witness should be allowed entrance after all other witnesses
have testified. Aside from these witness exclusion rules, remember that
NRS 241.033(4) prohibits the public body from excluding the person being considered under
NRS 241.030 at any time during the closed meeting, as well as his/her representative or attorney.
§ 7.08 Votes by secret ballot forbidden; voting requirements for elected public bodies
voting requirements for appointed public bodies (NRS 241.0355)
Since a secret ballot defeats the accountability of public servants, vote by secret ballot is
not permitted under the Open Meeting Law. Cf. News & Observer Publ’g Co. v. Interim Bd. of
Educ., 223 S.E.2d 580 (N.C. Ct. App. 1976); Olathe Hosp. Found., Inc. v. Extendicare, Inc., 539
-71-
P.2d 1 (Kan. 1975); State ex rel. Wineholt v. Laporte Super. Ct. No. 2, 230 N.E.2d 92 (Ind.
1967).
But that does not mean all votes must be by roll call. The Open Meeting Law is satisfied
if a vote is by roll call, show of hands, or any other method so that the vote of a public official is
made known to the public at the time the vote is cast. Esperance v. Chesterfield Twp. of Macomb
County, 280 N.W.2d 559 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979).
A public body that is required to be composed only of elected officials may not
take action by vote unless at least a majority of all members of the public body vote in favor of
the action. A public body may not count an abstention as a vote in favor of an action.
NRS 241.0355(1).
In a letter opinion construing public body voting requirements set out in NRS 241.0355,
this office determined that the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC)
was composed of elected officials from statutorily designated public bodies in Clark County;
therefore, it is an elected public body subject to the voting requirements of NRS 241.0355.
Before action can be taken by RTC, NRS 241.0355 requires a majority of the RTC members to
vote affirmatively. There can be no reduction in quorum due to the absence of one or more
commissioners where the public body is required to be composed of elected officials, even if
they are appointed to the RTC by the membership of another elected public body. Letter opinion
to Chairman Larry Brown, Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, July 8,
2011.
“Action” means:
(a) If a public body has a member who is not an elected official,
an affirmative vote taken by a majority of the members present,
whether in person or by means of electronic communication,
during a meeting of the public body, but;
(b) If all the members of a public body must be elected officials,
an affirmative vote taken by a majority of all the members of the
public body. See NRS 241.015(1).
For example, if only three members of a five person county commission (elected body)
are present at a meeting, the three cannot take action by a 2-to-1 vote; the vote must be 3 to 0,
since a majority (3) must be in favor of the action.
The Open Meeting Law never can force a public body to take action on any agenda topic.
See AG File No. 00-018 (June 8, 2000). NRS 241.020(2)(d)(6)(III) (public body may remove an
item from the agenda at any time or delay its discussion at any time).
The Legislature encourages appointed or elected members of public bodies to vote—not

abstain. NRS 281A.420(4)(b) states: “Because abstention by a public officer disrupts
the normal course of representative government and deprives the public and the public
officer’s constituents of a voice in governmental affairs, the provisions of
NRS 281A.420 are intended to require abstention only in clear cases where the independence of
-72-
judgment of a reasonable person in the public officer’s situation would be materially affected by
the public officer’s acceptance of a gift or loan, significant pecuniary interest, or commitment in
a private capacity to the interests of another person.”
§ 7.09 Audio and/or video recordings of public meetings by members of the public
Under NRS 241.035(3), members of the public may be allowed to record on audio tape or
any other means of sound or video reproduction if it is a public meeting and the recording in no
way interferes with the conduct of the meeting.
§ 7.10 Telephone conferences
See § 5.05 for a discussion of the proper way to conduct telephone conferences.
-73-
Part 8 WHEN ARE CLOSED MEETINGS AUTHORIZED AND
HOW ARE THEY TO BE HANDLED?
§ 8.01 General
This part discusses when closed meetings (sometimes referred to as “executive sessions”
or “personnel sessions”) may be held and how they should be conducted.
The opening clause in NRS 241.020(1) provides that all meetings must be open
and public “except as otherwise provided by specific statute.” The words “specific statute”
are important ones. The Nevada Supreme Court is reluctant to imply exceptions
to the rule of open meetings and looks for a specific statute mandating the exception or
exemption. See McKay v. Board of County Commissioners, 103 Nev. 490, 746 P.2d 124 (1987).
See also Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 150 (November 8, 1973). In 2015, the Legislature amended
NRS 241.016(3). Any provision of law, including NRS 91.270, 239C.140, 281A.350, 281A.440,
281A.550, 284.3629, 286.150, 287.0415, 288.220, 289.387, 295.121, 360.247, 385.555, 386.585,
392.147, 392.467, 392.656, 392A.105, 394.1699, 396.3295, 433.534, 435.610, 463.110, 622.320,
622.340, 630.311, 630.336, 639.050, 642.518, 642.557, 686B.170, 696B.550, 703.196, and
706.1725, which provides that any meeting, hearing, or other proceeding is not subject to the
OML or otherwise authorizes or requires a closed meeting, hearing, or proceeding, prevails over
the OML.
NRS 241.020(1) was amended in 2009 with additional clarifying language. The 2009
amendment not only emphasized the importance of statutory authority before a meeting may be
closed, but it also requires strict adherence to the statutory limits imposed on scope of the
meeting. The Open Meeting Law is entitled to a broad interpretation to promote openness in
government and any exceptions thereto should be construed strictly. McKay v. Board of
Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 730 P.2d 438 (1986). Thus, closed sessions should be allowed only
when specifically authorized and their scope must be tightly controlled.
§ 8.02 When closed sessions may be held
Closed sessions may be held:
(1) By any public body to consider character, alleged misconduct, professional

competence, or the physical or mental health of a person, with some exceptions, or to
prepare, revise, administer, or grade examinations administered on behalf of the public
body, or to consider an appeal by a person of the results of an examination administered
on behalf of the public body. See NRS 241.030 and § 9.04.
(2) By the Public Employees Retirement Board: (1) to meet with investment counsel,
provided the closed session is limited to planning future investments or the establishment
of investment objectives and policies, and (2) to meet with legal counsel provided
the closed session is limited to advice on claims or suits by or against the system.
NRS 286.150(2).
-74-
(3) By the State Board of Pharmacy to deliberate on the decision in an administrative
action (subsequent to a public evidentiary hearing) or to prepare, grade, or administer
examinations. See NRS 639.050(3) and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-C (June 25, 1981).
(4) By any public body to take up matters or conduct activities that are exempt under the
Open Meeting Law. See Part 4 of this manual. If the public body has other matters that
must be considered in an open meeting, the Office of the Attorney General believes that a
public body may take up an exempt matter during the open meeting if it desires.
However, by virtue of the exemption, none of the open meeting requirements will apply
to the exempt activity, although it is recommended that a motion or announcement be
made identifying the activity as an exempt activity to avoid confusion between an exempt
activity and a closed session to which certain open meeting requirements may otherwise
apply.
(5) By public housing authorities when negotiating the sale and purchase of property, but
the formal acceptance of the negotiated settlement should be made in an open meeting.
See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 372 (December 29, 1966).
(6) As authorized by a specific statute. NRS 241.020(1).
§ 8.03 When closed sessions may not be held
Closed sessions may not be held:
(1) To discuss the appointment of any person to public office or as a member of a public
body. NRS 241.030(4)(d). See discussion in § 9.04.
(2) To consider the character, alleged misconduct, or professional competence of an

elected member of a public body, or a person who is an appointed public officer or who
serves at the pleasure of a public body as a chief executive or administrative officer or in
a comparable position, including, without limitation, a president of a university, state
college, or community college within the Nevada System of Higher Education, a
superintendent of a county school district, a county manager, and a city manager. See
NRS 241.031(1)(a) and (1)(b) and cf. Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. 81-A (February 23, 1981),
written before NRS 241.031 was enacted.
[Note: The above prohibition does not apply if the consideration of the character,
alleged misconduct, or professional competence of the person does not pertain to his or
her role as an elected member of a public body or an appointed public officer or other
officer described above. NRS 241.031(2).]
(3) When a request to open the meeting is made by the person whose character, alleged
misconduct or professional competence, or physical or mental health is being considered,
the public body must open the meeting at that time unless the consideration of the
character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of
-75-
the requester involves the appearance before the public body of another person who
does not desire that the meeting or relevant portion thereof be open to the public. The
request to open the meeting may be made at any time during the hearing.
NRS 241.030(2). If a necessary witness requests that the meeting remain closed, the
public body must close that portion of the meeting, and open subsequent portions at the
request of the person being considered. NRS 241.030.
(4) To conduct attorney-client communications, unless the communications fall under

the exemption in NRS 241.015(3)(b)(2). See discussion in § 4.05 of this manual.
(5) To select possible recipients for awards. To the extent that a public body is
considering the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or
mental health of a person under consideration for receipt of a public award, a public body
may meet in closed session to discuss such matters. However, any vote taken with respect
to granting the award must be in a public meeting. NRS 241.030.
(6) To consider indebtedness of individuals to a hospital. The Office of the Attorney

General has determined that county hospital board meetings that relate to indebtedness of
individuals to the hospital are required to be open and public. See Op. Nev. Att’y Gen.
No. 148 (October 2, 1973).
(7) By a local ethics board to discuss past conduct of a public official. See Op. Nev.
Att’y Gen. No. 94-21 (July 29, 1994).
(8) Where not authorized by law.

interviews and performance evaluations; notice requirements
NRS 241.030(1) states: “Except as otherwise provided in this section and NRS 241.031
and 241.033, a public body may hold a closed meeting to consider the character, alleged
misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of a person.” The Open
Meeting Law does not require a public body to close a meeting to the public. See
NRS 241.030(4)(c).
It is important to remember that NRS 241.033 requires personal notice be provided

to the person being considered before closing a meeting, pursuant to NRS 241.030, and
as a practical matter, a notice pursuant to NRS 241.033 should contain the informational
statement regarding administrative action under NRS 241.033(2)(b). See § 6.09 and
§ 6.10 supra.
A public body must start its public meeting in the open and then it may close the meeting
after passing a motion specifying the nature of the business to be considered in closed session
and the statutory authority pursuant to which the public body is authorized to close the meeting.
In 2009, the Legislature added an important emphasis to the scope of a closed meeting, putting
parameters on the business that can be considered in closed session. NRS 241.020(1) was
-76-
amended emphasizing that a meeting must not exceed the scope of the statutory authorization for
closure. A public body may not stray from the statutory authorization to close a meeting. A
public body may not set the parameters of the meeting; it must follow and obey statutory
parameters.
The exceptions to closed meetings under NRS 241.030 are discussed supra in § 9.03.
The word “character” was defined in Miglionico v. Birmingham News. Co., 378 So. 2d
677 (Ala. 1979) to include one’s general reputation. It also might include such personal traits as
honesty, loyalty, integrity, reliability, and such other characteristics, good or bad, which make up
one’s individual personality.
General, citing Black’s Law Dictionary, opined that character encompassed “[t]hat moral
predisposition or habit or aggregate of ethical qualities, which is believed to attach to
a person on the strength of the common opinion and report concerning him. A person’s fixed
disposition or tendency, as evidenced to others by his habits of life, through
the manifestation of which his general reputation for the possession of a character, good or
otherwise, is obtained.” Op. Nev. Att’y Gen No. 81-A further opined that the word competence
included being “[d]uly qualified; answering all requirements; having sufficient ability or
authority; possessing the natural or legal qualifications; able; adequate; suitable; sufficient;
capable; legally fit.
Closed sessions may be held only to consider the character, alleged misconduct,
professional competence, or physical or mental health of a person. The Open Meeting Law does
not permit taking action in closed session on such matters. This distinction was drawn in McKay
v. Bd. of Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 730 P.2d 438 (1986), where it was held the board did not
violate the Open Meeting Law when it went into closed session to discuss the character, alleged
misconduct, and professional competence of the city manager, but terminating the city manager
in closed session violated the law. See also Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-A (February 23, 1981)
and Op. Nev. Att’y Gen. No. 81-C (June 25, 1981).
The McKay decision has important implications for employment interviews and
performance evaluations. (See § 4.05, infra). While the delineated attributes of individual
employment candidates may be discussed in closed session, the public body may not use the
closed session to narrow down candidates or begin the selection process. See Brown v. East
Baton Rouge Parish School Bd., 405 So. 2d 1148 (La. Ct. App. 1981). Similarly, while the
delineated attributes of existing employees may be discussed in closed session, evaluation forms
may not be filled out during the closed session, nor may the public body form recommendations
or decisions about a rating or an action to take. Those tasks must be done in an open meeting or
delegated to a member to handle. The closed session must be limited to specific discussions
about the specific person. General discussions about general policies or practices may not be
held during a closed session. See Hudson v. Sch. Dist. of Kansas City, 578 S.W.2d 301 (Mo. Ct.
App. 1979).
-77-
While it can be difficult to properly describe an action item relating to a closed personnel
session, because one cannot anticipate the outcome of the closed session, one can describe, on
the agenda, the parameters of allowable action by stating “possible action including, but not
limited to, termination, suspension, demotion, reduction in pay, reprimand, promotion,
endorsement, engagement, retention, or ‘no action’.” See AG File No. 00-007 (June 1, 2000).
The statutes do not authorize closure for general “personnel sessions.” Closed sessions
are authorized only for discussion of the matters specifically listed in NRS 241.030 or in
another specific statute elsewhere in the NRS. See § 4.02, Statutory exemptions infra;
see AG File No. 00-043 (January 24, 2001). It is not adequate to vaguely state that the closed
session is regarding an individual (such as a manager). The agenda description must specifically
state the nature of the business to be considered and the statutory authority authorizing the closed
session. If a person’s character, professional competence, alleged misconduct, or physical
or mental health is the topic of the discussion, the person’s name must appear on the agenda.
NRS 241.020(2)(d)(4); see AG File No. 00-050 (March 28, 2001).
See AG File No. 08-037 (February 26, 2009). Board members and the public engaged in
a discussion of a county employee’s character and professional competence without providing
the employee notice as required under NRS 241.033.
See OMLO 2004-01 (January 13, 2004) where the Office of the Nevada Attorney General
opined that deliberations as defined in §5.01 supra, are not allowed in a closed meeting pursuant
to NRS 241.030.
§ 8.05 The appointment to “public office” closed meeting prohibition
Under NRS 241.030(4)(d), closed sessions may not be held “for the discussion of the
appointment of any person to public office or as a member of a public body.” This prohibition
was discussed in City Council of City of Reno v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d
974 (1989). In that case, the city council conducted employment interviews for the city clerk
position in the open and then held a brief, closed meeting to discuss the character and
professional competence of candidates. The council went back into open session to make the
selection, but it was held that the closed session was still a violation of the Open Meeting Law.
The Nevada Supreme Court construed the prohibited “discussion of the appointment” to include
“all consideration, discussion, deliberation and selection done by a public body in the
appointment of a public officer.” The ruling seems to cover all aspects of the appointment
process.
The Open Meeting Law does not define “public officer,” but the Nevada Supreme Court
(see below) has approved the use of the definition of public officer found in NRS 281.005.
NRS 281A.160 also provides a definition of public officer and it also construes the meaning of
“the exercise of a public power, trust or duty.” In Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 193 (September 3,
1975), the Office of the Attorney General opined that NRS 241.030(4)(d) [formerly
NRS 241.030(3)(e)] encompasses: (1) all elected public officers, and (2) all persons appointed to
positions created by law whose duties are specifically set forth in law and who are made
responsible by law for the direction, supervision, and control of their agencies. See also OMLO
-78-
2004-01 (January 14, 2004). In City Council v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d
974 (1989), NRS 281.005 was used by stipulation of the parties to define public officer.

professional competence, or physical and mental health of a person
For closed sessions under NRS 241.030(1), the following procedures are required or
recommended:
Start with a duly noticed open meeting. Closed meetings are still “meetings” within the
definition and ambit of the Open Meeting Law.
To assure compliance with the spirit of NRS 241.020(2)(d)(1), it is recommended the

matter be indicated on the agenda as a closed session under NRS 241.030(1), and the person’s
name being considered must be included on the agenda pursuant to NRS 241.020(c)(4). An
agenda item of “Executive Session” does not adequately describe a closed session. See AG File
No. 00-021 (September 7, 2000).
The closed session should not be listed as an “action” item on the agenda because action
cannot be taken during the closed session. See discussion in § 9.04.
If action might be taken on the matter, be sure to include a separate item on the agenda
for action to be taken during open session. See discussion in § 9.04.
Give notice to the subject person as required by NRS 241.033(1). See § 6.09.
At the meeting, a motion must be made to go into closed session, and the motion must
specify the business to be considered during the closed session and the statutory authority
pursuant to which the public body is authorized to close the meeting. NRS 241.030(3). See AG
File No. 01-021 (May 14, 2001), which was drafted prior to the 2005 Legislative Session. Only
the business identified in the motion may be discussed. As stated in Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 81-
A (February 23, 1981), the purpose of the motion is two-fold: (1) so members of the public body
understand the parameters of what can be discussed in closed session so as not to deviate from
the strict requirements of the law, and (2) to assure that notice is given to the person being
discussed so he/she can obtain a copy of the minutes.
The public body must permit the person being considered and his/her representative to
attend the closed meeting. NRS 241.033(4). It is up to the chairperson to decide who else shall be
included in the closed session, or the chairperson can determine who may attend through a
majority vote of the public body, which occurs in an open meeting. NRS 241.033(5).
Before proceeding with the discussion, make sure that proof of service of the notice to
the person has been received. If not, the closed session may not proceed, absent waiver. See
NRS 241.033(1) and § 6.09.
-79-
The closed session must be tape-recorded. NRS 241.035(4). As the recordings
of closed sessions are treated differently than those of open sessions, NRS 241.035(2), it is
recommended the closed session be recorded on a separate tape.
The person being considered must be permitted to present written evidence, testimony
and present witnesses relating to his character, alleged misconduct, professional competence or
physical or mental health to the public body. NRS 241.033(4).
If the subject desires to record the closed session, the Office of the Attorney General
recommends that he or she be permitted to do so. NRS 241.035(3).
Minutes must be kept of the closed session, and they must be prepared with the same
detail as minutes of the open session. NRS 241.035(2).
Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 81-A (February 23, 1981) contains a lengthy discussion about
the improper use and conduct of an executive session, and the possible remedy.
-80-
Part 9 WHAT RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AND MADE AVAILABLE
TO THE PUBLIC? (See Sample Form 2)
§ 9.01 General
This part discusses the requirements for preparing, preserving, and disclosing minutes of
meetings.
§ 9.02 Requirement for and content of written minutes (See Sample Form 2)
NRS 241.035 requires that written minutes be kept by all public bodies of each meeting
they hold regardless of whether the meeting was open or closed to the public. The minutes must
include:
a. The date, time, and place of the meeting;
b. The names of the members of the public body who were present, whether in person or
by means of electronic communication, and those who were absent;
c. The substance of all matters proposed, discussed, or decided and, at the request of any
member, a record of each member’s vote on any matter decided by vote;
d. The substance of remarks made by any member of the general public who addresses
the body if he/she requests that the minutes reflect his or her remarks, or if he/she has
prepared written remarks, a copy of his/her written remarks if he/she submits a copy for
inclusion; and
e. Any other information that any member of the body requests be included or reflected
in the minutes.
See OMLO 98-03 (July 7, 1998) for an example of how a public body may violate the
Open Meeting Law by failing to reflect, in its meeting minutes, the substance of the discussion
by the members of the public body of certain relevant matters.
Verbatim minutes are not required by OML. There is no requirement in NRS 241.035(1)
that verbatim remarks be included in the minutes at the request of any person. NRS 241.035(1)
use of the phrase “any other information” does not include the right to have the public body
insert verbatim remarks in the text of the minutes. Appending prepared written remarks to the
minutes is an accommodation which serves the public interest just as efficiently as the insertion
of verbatim remarks into the text of the public body’s minutes and it also furthers the goal of
openness in government. OMLO 2008-03; see AG File No. 08-011 (June 9, 2008)
///
///
-81-
§ 9.03 Retention and disclosure of minutes
Minutes or audio recordings of public meetings are declared by the Open Meeting Law
to be public records and must be available for inspection by the public within 30 working days
after the meeting is adjourned. See NRS 241.035(2) and OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999).
In the case of a public body that meets infrequently, formal approval of the minutes of
a previous meeting may be delayed several months. NRS 241.035(1) states that unless good
cause is shown, a public body shall approve the minutes of a meeting within 45 days after
the meeting or at the next meeting of the public body, whichever occurs later. The
unapproved minutes must be made available within the time specified in
NRS 241.035(2) to any person who requests them, together with a written statement that such
minutes have not yet been approved and are subject to revision at the next meeting.
The minutes are deemed to have permanent value and must be retained by the public
body for at least five years (NRS 241.035(2)), after which they may be transferred for archival
preservation in accordance with NRS 239.080-239.125.
Minutes of meetings closed pursuant to NRS 241.030(1)(a) and (1)(c) become public
records whenever the public body determines that the matters discussed no longer require
confidentiality and the person whose character, conduct, competence, or health was discussed
has consented to their disclosure. NRS 241.035(2)(a)-(c).
Under NRS 241.033(6), the subject person always is entitled to a copy of the minutes of
the closed session upon request, whether or not they ever become public records. In Davis v.
Churchill County Sch. Bd., 616 F. Supp. 1310, 1314 (D. Nev. 1985), remanded, 823 F.2d 554
(9th Cir. 1987), the court suggested that a student who was the subject of closed hearings may
release “any information he or she chooses,” which presumably includes minutes or tapes of
closed sessions.
§ 9.04 Making and retaining audiotapes or video recordings of meetings
It is a requirement of the Open Meeting Law that each public meeting is audio- or
videotaped or transcribed by a reporter who is certified pursuant to Chapter 656 of
NRS. NRS 241.035(4). A public body must make a good faith effort to comply with this
provision, and if the public body makes a good faith effort to comply, but, for some reason
beyond the control of the public body fails to comply, the public body’s failure to comply with
the provision does not result in a violation of the Open Meeting Law. NRS 241.035(7).
See OMLO 99-09 (July 28, 1999) for an example of the pitfalls associated with using a
tape recorder as the sole source for the record of the meeting.
Recordings of closed sessions made by public bodies also must be retained for at least
one year but are given the same protection from public disclosure as minutes of closed sessions
set out in NRS 241.035(2). The tapes must be made available to the subject of the closed session,
-82-
and under NRS 241.035(6), also must be made available to the Office of the Attorney General
upon request.
§ 9.05 Fees for inspecting or copying minutes and tapes
The Open Meeting Law requires that minutes and tapes be made available “for
inspection” once prepared following a public meeting and does not authorize charging a fee for
inspection, since fees for inspection are not authorized by statute. In 2013, the Legislature
amended NRS 241.035 to require that a copy of the minutes or audio recording must be made
available to a member of the public upon request at no charge. NRS 241.035(2). Court reporters,
who report meetings or transcribe recordings of meetings, are exempt from the requirement to
provide a copy of the transcription he/she prepares to a member of the public at no charge; court
reporters also are not prohibited from charging a fee to the public body for any services relating
to the transcription of a meeting. NRS 241.035(5).
-83-
Part 10 WHAT HAPPENS IF A VIOLATION OCCURS?
§ 10.01 General
When a violation of the Open Meeting Law occurs or is alleged, the Office of the
Attorney General recommends that the public body make every effort to immediately correct the
apparent violation. Although it may not completely eliminate a violation, corrective action can
mitigate the severity of the violation and further ensure that the business of government is
accomplished in the open.
The following sections discuss the possible remedies available to the public body for
apparent violations of the Open Meeting Law, and a requirement that public bodies include any
Attorney General opinion finding an OML violation by the public body on the public body’s
next agenda. NRS 241.0395.
§ 10.02 Correcting a violation
Some examples of ways to stop, contain, and take corrective action for apparent
violations follow. Of course, as circumstances vary, so may the remedies.
a. Improper notice given for meeting.
If proper notice has not been given for a meeting, the meeting must be stopped. See
OMLO 99-06 (March 19, 1999). To remedy the violation, the Office of the Attorney
General believes that the meeting may be convened or continued solely for the
purpose of rescheduling a meeting and adjourning. To otherwise continue a meeting
after it is discovered that the meeting was not properly noticed could be viewed as
evidence of a willful violation of the Open Meeting Law. Discussions of any public
significance which were held before the discovery of the improper notice should be
repeated at a later meeting. All actions taken before adjournment are void, but may be
taken again at a subsequent meeting as discussed below.
b. Discussion of items not stated clearly on agenda.
If a public body begins discussion on an item that is not stated clearly on the agenda,
it is recommended that the public body stop the discussion and schedule it for a future
meeting under a more comprehensive agenda. At the subsequent meeting, it would be
advisable to summarize or repeat the conversations that occurred at the previous
meeting.
c. Taking action on items listed as discussion items only.
Remembering the expanded definition of “action” in NRS 241.015(1), if a public

body takes action on an item which has not been identified on the agenda as an action
item, the action is void but may be taken up again at a future duly-noticed meeting,
-84-
where the former action may be rescinded to indicate that the public body
understands that the prior action was void. At the subsequent meeting, the rationale
for the action should be discussed again or at least the record of the previous meeting
be made available.
d. No proof of service on the subject of a meeting to consider character, alleged

misconduct, competence, or health.
If there is no proof of service of notice on a person whose misconduct, character,

professional competence, or mental or physical health is being considered, and the
person is not present, the item must be postponed to another meeting, and the subject
must be notified again about the new meeting. If the person is present, he/she may be
asked if he or she would be willing to waive the notice requirements. The right to
notice must be explained thoroughly to the person, and the person should be given the
opportunity, free of threat or pressure, to postpone consideration of the matter or to
waive the right to notice. As explained in § 6.09 of this manual, any waiver of the
right to notice must be knowing and voluntary. A complete record should be made to
resolve allegations that may arise later.
e. Public body voted to rescind earlier votes on items that had not been agendized.
Multiple matters were rescinded in a public vote.
Since any action taken on an item that is not properly agendized is void as a matter
of law, a public body may vote to rescind the prior vote on an illegal action during
the same meeting or in another future public meeting. Otherwise, the public may be
confused about the legal status of the prior illegal action. See § 11.03 below.
Following rescission items that were the subject of illegal action then may be placed
on a future agenda for lawful consideration and possible action. AG File No. 08-002
(May 12, 2008).
f. Effective corrective action can be taken at a meeting even when a serious but
inadvertent violation occurs.
Our opinion in OMLO 2008-02: AG File No. 07-051 (February 7, 2008) is an

example of how a public body may correct even a serious violation. The Douglas
County Board of County Commissioners quickly corrected a violation of the OML
during its public meeting. A quorum of the Board had gathered in an unscheduled
non-noticed meeting during the Board’s recess while Counsel was absent researching
a legal issue. A member of the public brought the violation to the attention of the
Board at the end of the recess. There had been no recording or minutes taken of this
gathering. Board Counsel immediately asked members to explain what had occurred
during the recess. In response to questions from counsel, it became clear that the
gathering of a quorum to discuss a matter on the agenda was inadvertent. No
promises or decisions had been given or made during the recess. To the extent there
was deliberation among the quorum, it was corrected by immediate disclosure of
what had been discussed during the inadvertent meeting. When the Board reconvened
-85-
and disclosure had been made, the Chairman reopened public comment to allow
anyone to comment about the violation or anything else. Public comment was not
restricted. This prompt action satisfied the legislative mandate found in NRS 241.010.
The Douglas County Planning Commission took effective remedial action to correct
an acknowledged violation.
In 2013, the Nevada Legislature enacted NRS 241.0365 that allows corrective action by
the public body when violations of the OML occur or are alleged. Voluntary corrective action
may be taken prior to adjournment of the meeting at which the apparent violation occurs.
Otherwise, corrective action of an apparent violation may be taken at a future meeting if the
following steps are taken:
1. Notice of corrective action must be included as an agenda item for a subsequent

meeting at which the public body intends to take correction action; and
2. The public body must take corrective action within 30 days of the apparent violation.
If the public body takes corrective action within 30 days after posting notice of the intent
to take corrective action on its agenda, the Attorney General may forego prosecution of the
alleged violation if it appears that forbearance is in the best interests of the public.
If the public body takes corrective action within 30 days of the alleged violation, the
statutory limitations’ period applicable to the time for bring suit by the Attorney General or a
private party, pursuant to NRS 241.037, is tolled for 30 days.
Any corrective action taken by the public body to correct an alleged violation is effective
only prospectively.
Efforts to correct a violation can mitigate the severity of the violation and may reduce the
degree of culpability of the violators. However, even though a violation may have been
mitigated by corrective action, the violation still may be the subject of the sanctions detailed
below. See OMLO 2015-01: AG File No. 13897-141 (January 12, 2016) for an example of how
a public body that voluntarily and unanimously takes prompt corrective action as soon as an
alleged violation becomes apparent can effectively mitigate the severity of the earlier violation.
§ 10.03 Actions taken in violation are void
The action of any public body taken in violation of any provision of the Open Meeting
Law is void, i.e., the action has no legal force or binding effect. NRS 241.036.
However, lawsuits to obtain a judicial declaration that an action is void must be

commenced within 60 days after the offending action occurred. NRS 241.037(3).
It appears that only those actions defined in NRS 241.015(1) (decisions, commitments,
or affirmative votes by a majority of the members) are voided by NRS 241.036.
-86-
§ 10.04 Reconsidering an action that is void
A public body that takes action in violation of the Open Meeting Law, which action is
null and void, is not forever precluded from taking the same action at another legally called
meeting. Valencia v. Cota, 617 P.2d 63 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980); Cooper v. Arizona W. Coll. Dist.
Governing Bd., 610 P.2d 465 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980); Spokane Education Ass’n v. Barnes, 517
P.2d 1362 (Wash. 1974). However, mere perfunctory approval at an open meeting of a decision
made in an illegally closed meeting does not cure any defect of the earlier meeting or relieve any
person from criminal prosecution for the same violation. Scott v. Town of Bloomfield, 229 A.2d
667 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 1967). The matter should be put on an agenda for an open
meeting, and reheard.
The following examples illustrate a few methods used by public bodies to correct OML
violations:
• A public body corrected a violation almost two months following the violation. The
trustee subcommittee had met in private without notice or agenda to summarize the
superintendent’s evaluation and backup materials for formal presentation to the trustees
at a later meeting. At the later meeting, trustees voted to approve the superintendent’s
evaluation. Complainant said that the earlier private non-noticed meeting had constituted
a subcommittee under the OML and should have been subject to public oversight.
Corrective action (despite denial by the chair that a violation had occurred) was taken 55
days later when the subcommittee met for a special meeting prior to the trustee’s regular
meeting, during which the subcommittee formally approved the evaluation materials and
compilation process in a publicly noticed meeting, and it again voted on the
superintendent’s evaluation, so as to remove any conflict with the OML. AG File No.
09-024 (October 13, 2009).
• A private attorney filed a petition on behalf of a public body. The petition had not been
approved or voted on by the public body in open session before it was filed. The public
body then agendized the petition for public meeting and voted to ratify the earlier filing
of the petition. Even if the complainant’s charge that the filing of the petition was an
illegal act on behalf of the public body, the OML does not forbid corrective action to
either ratify the action complained of, or to reject the action. AG File No. 10-038 (August
24, 2010).
• A public body took immediate corrective action prior to an OML complaint when
it redrafted and revised possibly defective agenda items and re-agendized them to a future
meeting agenda. AG File No. 10-045 (November 2, 2010).
• An allegation was made that a city council’s process to fill a vacancy within its own
membership kept the public in the dark as to its deliberations and assessments of the
various candidates and that it violated the letter and spirit of the Open Meeting Law. The
Henderson City Council took corrective action after this office contacted the city
attorney. It released to the public recertified ballots cast by the Council members, each
with the signature of the corresponding voting member. The Council’s selection process
-87-
had been defective because it failed to make known the identity of each member’s ballot
at the time it was cast or at some time during the meeting. But, failure to verbally
deliberate and/or assess the candidates before each ballot was cast was not a violation of
the OML. AG File No. 09-029 (November 4, 2009).
§ 10.05 Any person denied a right under the law may bring a civil suit
Under NRS 241.037(2), any person denied a right conferred by the Open Meeting Law
may bring a civil suit:
a. To have an action taken by the public body declared void;
b. To require compliance with or prevent violations of the Open Meeting Law; or
c. To determine the applicability of the law to discussions or decisions of the public

body.
Additionally, it may be possible for an aggrieved person to seek injunctive relief, as

explained in City Council of City of Reno v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d 974,
976 (1989).
If the plaintiff prevails, the court may award him/her reasonable attorney’s fees and court
costs. NRS 241.037(2).
§ 10.06 The Office of the Attorney General may bring a civil suit
The Office of the Attorney General also may bring suit:
a. To have an action taken by a public body declared void, or
b. To seek injunctive relief against a public body or person to require compliance

with or prevent violations of the Open Meeting Law. The injunction may issue
without proof of actual damage or other irreparable harm sustained by any person.
NRS 241.037(1).
c. To seek a monetary civil fine not to exceed $500.00 in a court of competent

jurisdiction for a violation of the OML where the person(s) participated (took
affirmative action) in a knowing violation of the OML. NRS 241.040.
If an injunction is obtained, it does not relieve any person from criminal prosecution for
the same violation. NRS 241.037(1). See §11.07 for further discussion of the A.G.’s policy of
enforcement of the OML.
///
///
-88-
§ 10.07 Time limits for filing lawsuit; policy for enforcement of complaints
Any suit which seeks to void an action, and/or to require compliance with the provisions
of the Open Meeting Law, and/or to seek injunctive relief must be brought within
the statutory 60/120 day limitations’ periods after the action objected to, is taken.
NRS 241.037(3). There are two limitations periods—60 days and 120 days. They run
concurrently from the date of an alleged OML violation. If the Attorney General has not brought
a suit to void a public body’s action within 60 days of the alleged violation, thereafter, the
Attorney General is barred from seeking to void the action. But the Attorney General still has
jurisdiction under the 120-day limitations’ period which continues to run for 60 more days.
Should a suit be brought during this period of time, the Attorney General may seek injunctive
relief to force compliance with the OML.
Any suit brought to have an action declared void must be commenced within 60
days after the action objected to, is taken by the public body.
NRS 241.037(3). In Kennedy v. Powell, 401 So. 2d 453 (La. Ct. App. 1981), the court observed
that the legislature limited suits to challenge actions of public bodies for violation of the open
meeting law to a short period of 60 days to ensure a degree of certainty in the actions of public
bodies. The 60-day limitation is absolute and is in no way dependent upon knowledge of a
violation. According to the court, running of the 60-day time period destroys the cause of action
completely. A complaint brought in a court of competent jurisdiction beyond the running of the
OML’s concurrent 60/120 day limitations’ periods, as expressed in NRS 241.037, is subject to
dismissal. NRS 11.010.
A suit by the Attorney General seeking monetary civil penalties (NRS 241.040(4)) is
subject to a one-year limitations’ period following the date of the action taken in violation of this
chapter.
The Attorney General’s policy for enforcement of Open Meeting Law complaints is:
• The Attorney General may proceed with an appropriate legal action, issue an Open
Meeting Law Opinion pursuant to its prosecutorial discretion, or choose not to
prosecute an Open Meeting issue prior to the running of the 120-day statute of
limitations.
• The Attorney General will not investigate or act upon a complaint alleging an Open
Meeting Law violation received after the 120-day statute of limitations unless it is
relevant to an existing action or the attorney is commencing a criminal prosecution
• The Attorney General will not issue an Open Meeting Law Opinion pursuant to
his/her prosecutorial discretion after the 120-day statute of limitations.
///
///
-89-
§ 10.08 Jurisdiction and venue for suits
A suit may be brought by an aggrieved citizen in the district court in the district in
which the public body ordinarily holds its meetings or in which the plaintiff resides.
NRS 241.037(2).
A suit brought by the Office of the Attorney General may be brought “in any court of
competent jurisdiction.” NRS 241.037(1).
However, even though a court has jurisdiction, a defendant may raise objections as to
proper venue. Board of County Comm’rs v. Del Papa, 108 Nev. 170, 825 P.2d 1231 (1992).
§ 10.09 Standards for injunctions and enforcing injunctions
For a discussion of the standards for imposing injunctions and enforcing them, see City
Council v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 105 Nev. 886, 784 P.2d 974 (1989).
§ 10.10 Criminal sanctions
Each member of a public body who attends a meeting of that body where action is taken
in violation of any provision of the Open Meeting Law, with knowledge of the fact that the
meeting is in violation thereof, is guilty of a misdemeanor. NRS 241.040(1).
Further, wrongful exclusion of any person or persons from a meeting is a misdemeanor.

NRS 241.040(2).
However, a member of a public body who attends a meeting of that public body at
which action is taken in violation of the Open Meeting Law is not the accomplice of any other
member so attending. NRS 241.040(3).
Upon conviction, punishment may include a jail term of up to six months, a fine not to
exceed $1,000, or both.
General opined there are two requirements before a criminal prosecution may be commenced
under the Open Meeting Law. Those requirements are:
1) Attendance of a member of a public body at a meeting of that public body where

action is taken in violation of any provision of the Open Meeting Law. The opinion
recognized the distinction in the Open Meeting Law between actions and
deliberations and concluded that criminal sanctions may be appropriate when actions
are taken in violation of the Open Meeting Law, but where procedural violations
occur involving a meeting where no action is taken, civil remedies are made available
to compel compliance or prevent such violations in the future.
-90-
2) Knowledge by a member of a public body that the meeting is in violation of the Open
Meeting Law. The opinion held that, when members of a public body rely on advice
of counsel, they should not be held to know that a violation occurred.
While the Open Meeting Law does not require the attorney for the public body to be present
at a meeting (AG File No. 00-013 (April 21, 2000)), the presence of the attorney may allow the
member to receive advice upon which a member can rely as to whether the member knows that
the meeting is in violation of the Open Meeting Law.
§ 10.11 Public officers may be removed from office
Under NRS 283.040(1)(d), a person’s office becomes vacant upon a conviction of a

violation of NRS 241.040, which is discussed in § 10.10 above.
§ 10.12 Filing a complaint; procedure; Attorney General subpoena power; public records
FILING A COMPLAINT: A person alleging that the OML has been violated by a
public body or that his/her public comment right has been denied, may seek redress in the courts
as explained above. That person also may complain to the Office of the Attorney General, but
filing a complaint with the Office of the Attorney General does not toll the time periods for the
person to take his own action
Under NRS 241.040(4), the Office of the Attorney General must investigate and
prosecute alleged violations of the Open Meeting Law. The Office of the Attorney General
believes that any person may file a complaint with the Office of the Attorney General even if that
person is not aggrieved directly by the offense. See §10.07 above, for an explanation of the
Attorney General’s policy regarding enforcement of the OML.
All such complaints must be in writing, signed by the complaining person, and contain a
full description of the facts known to the complainant. The Office of the Attorney General
considers all such complaints to be public records and may release them accordingly. Complaints
must be sent to:
Open Meeting Law Coordinator

Office of the Attorney General
100 North Carson Street
Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717
Complaints may be sent by facsimile to (775) 684-1108.
INVESTIGATION PROCESS: Complaints which allege a cognizable violation of the

OML will be investigated. The complaint is sent to the public body along with any supporting
documents attached to the complaint. The public body is given time to respond to the
allegation(s) by written statements, copies of the agenda, minutes, (even if in draft form), video
or audio recordings of the meeting, and the Attorney General may subpoena additional relevant
documents, records, or materials for purposes of the investigation. After review of the complaint
-91-
and the public body’s response, the Attorney General may issue a written opinion that resolves
the matter, or he/she may initiate a civil or criminal suit seeking compliance with the OML.
Considering the time limits for bringing lawsuits, it is important that complaints be
promptly filed with the Office of the Attorney General to allow sufficient time for investigation
and evaluation. Investigation of an OML complaint must occur within the 60/120 day limitations
periods described in §11.07.
SUBPOENA POWER: The Legislature authorized the Attorney General to issue

subpoenas when conducting an investigation. NRS 241.039(4) and (5) state: “In any
investigation conducted pursuant to subsection 2, the Attorney General may issue subpoenas for
the production of any relevant documents, records, or materials. A person who willfully fails or
refuses to comply with a subpoena issued pursuant to this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.”
Records, relevant documents, or other materials now subject to discovery may include
e-mails among members of a public body; records of their phone calls; and other electronic
communications made by a member of a public body while engaged in the public body’s public
business. NRS 241.039.
It is important to remind a public body of the Open Meeting Law’s prohibition against
“walking quorums” or “constructive quorums” that can be created through conversations with
other members or through electronic communication shared among a quorum of a public body.
NRS 241.015(3)(a)(2). Subpoena of relevant records may reveal e-mails or phone calls among
members which could have to be explained or justified to avoid a violation of the Open Meeting
Law.
PUBLIC RECORDS: While the complaints themselves are considered public records,
investigative files will be held confidential until the investigation is complete, and then the file
will become a public record. NRS 241.039(3). Records of closed sessions which are obtained as
a part of the investigation will remain confidential until made a public record through the process
in NRS 241.035(2)(a)–(c).
§ 10.13 Public notice of Attorney General Opinion finding violation by public body
The 2011 Legislature amended the Open Meeting Law with a new requirement for
public bodies designed to provide information and transparency to all members of the public.
NRS 241.0395(1) requires public notice of an Attorney General opinion if the Attorney
General makes findings of fact and conclusions of law that a public body has taken action in
violation of any provision of NRS 241. The public body must include an item on its next agenda
which acknowledges the Attorney General’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. The opinion
of the Attorney General must be treated as supporting material for the item on the agenda for the
purposes of NRS 241.020.
The inclusion of an item on the agenda for a meeting of a public body pursuant
to subsection 1 is not an admission of wrongdoing for the purposes of a civil action, criminal
prosecution, or injunctive relief. NRS 241.0395(2).
-92-
NRS 241.0395 serves the OML’s central tenet—transparency. Public notice of the
opinion simply is an acknowledgment of a finding by the Attorney General that the public body
has taken an action in violation of the OML. The opinion of the Attorney General must be
included in supporting materials for that agenda item. The item may be an informational item as
there is no statutory requirement that any action be taken. The underlying reason for this change
is to provide notice to the public of the Attorney General’s opinion and to provide a forum for
discussion, if any, between the public and the public body.
§ 10.14 Monetary penalty for willful violation; one-year limitations period
NRS 241.040(4) provides that each member of a public body is subject to a civil penalty
not to exceed $500.00 for participation in a willful violation of the OML. It states:
In addition to any criminal penalty imposed pursuant to this

section, each member of a public body who attends a meeting of
that public body where action is taken in violation of any provision
of this chapter, and who participates in such action with knowledge
of the violation, is subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to
exceed $500. The Attorney General may recover the penalty in a
civil action brought in the name of the State of Nevada in any court
of competent jurisdiction. . . .
Such an action must be commenced within one year after the date of the action taken in
violation of this chapter. A civil penalty is applicable only when a member of a public body, who
attends a meeting of that public body where action is taken in violation of any provision of the
OML, participates in such action with knowledge of the violation.
The key to understanding how this penalty will be enforced depends on an understanding
of the act of “participation,” a requirement of the statute. Enforcement against a member of a
public body based on “participation” only may occur when the member makes a commitment,
promise, or casts an affirmative vote to take action on a matter under the public body’s
jurisdiction or control when the member knew his/her commitment, promise, or vote was taken
in violation of the OML.
The civil penalty requires that a public body take action in order for the civil penalty to
be potentially applicable. “Action” is defined in NRS 241.015(1) as an affirmative act; mere
silence or inaction by members is not sufficient to rise to the level requiring enforcement.
This office would not seek to punish individual members who attempt to comply with the
OML, only those who actually violate it. Even then, enforcement under NRS 241 requires
discretion based on investigation and review of the facts. Evidence in the record that an
individual attempted to comply and/or sought to avoid violating the OML would put them
outside the scope of liability for the civil penalty, even if the other members of their public body
proceeded to knowingly violate the OML.
-93-
Part 11 HOW IS THE OPEN MEETING LAW INTERPRETED AND APPLIED?
§ 11.01 General
As with any statute, courts use many principles of statutory construction to construe the
Open Meeting Law and apply it to circumstances before them. Discussion of those principles is
beyond the scope of this manual, but the Office of the Attorney General has some observations
that may be useful in determining how to comply with the Open Meeting Law.
§ 11.02 Legislative declaration and intent
The Legislature declared in NRS 241.010, “In enacting this chapter, the legislature finds
and declares that all public bodies exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the
intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted
openly.” This spirit was a guiding consideration in several cases. See McKay v. Board of
Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 647, 730 P.2d 438, 441 (1986); McKay v. Board of County Comm’rs,
103 Nev. 490, 493, 746 P.2d 124, 125 (1987); Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 393,
956 P.2d 770, 774 (1998); Sandoval v. Board of Regents, 119 Nev. 148, 67 P.3d 902 (2003);
Dewey v. Redevelopment Agency, 119 Nev. 87, 94, 64 P.3d 1070, 1075 (2003).
§ 11.03 Standards of interpretation
A statute enacted for the public benefit, such as a sunshine or public meeting law,
should be construed liberally in favor of the public, even though it contains a penal provision.
Wolfson v. State, 344 So. 2d 611 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977); City of Miami Beach v. Berns, 245
So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1971); Laman v. McCord, 432 S.W.2d 753 (Ark. 1968). The Open Meeting Law
is entitled to a broad interpretation to promote openness in government, while any exceptions
thereto should be construed strictly. McKay v. Bd. of Supervisors, 102 Nev. 644, 730 P.2d 438
(1986); Wexford County Prosecuting Attorney v. Pranger, 268 N.W.2d 344 (Mich. Ct. App.
1978). A construction which frustrates all evasive devices is preferred for an open meeting law.
Florida Parole & Prob. Comm’n v. Thomas, 364 So. 2d 480 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978). See also
Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 85-19 (December 17, 1985).
§ 11.04 Use of standard of reasonableness
In circumstances where the Open Meeting Law provides no clear standards or

guidelines, public bodies must consider themselves as being governed by a standard of
reasonableness. See Op. Nev. Att'y Gen. No. 79-8 (March 26, 1979).
§ 11.05 Attorney General Opinions
While Attorney General Opinions are intended to be helpful in fashioning compliance

with the Open Meeting Law, they are not binding on the courts even though the Office of the
Attorney General is given the duty of investigating and prosecuting Open Meeting Law
complaints. See Tahoe Reg’l Planning Agency v. McKay, 590 F. Supp. 1071, 1074 (D. Nev.
-94-
1984), aff’d, Tahoe Reg’l Planning Agency v. McKay, 769 F.2d 534, 539 (9th Cir. 1985).
However, the Nevada Supreme Court in Del Papa v. Board of Regents, 114 Nev. 388, 956 P.2d
770 (1998), stated that the opinions of the Office of the Attorney General will receive the same
deference as an administrative body interpreting a law that it is responsible for enforcing. Thus,
where the Legislature has had reasonable time to amend the law to reverse the opinion of the
Attorney General, but does not do so, it is presumed the Legislature has acquiesced to the
opinion of the Attorney General. Hughes Properties, Inc. v. State, 100 Nev. 295, 298, 680 P.2d
970, 972 (1984).
In addition, the Office of the Attorney General has a long-standing policy of

reserving opinions regarding Open Meeting Law complaints that are in litigation, even though
NRS 241.040(4) gives the Office of the Attorney General investigative and prosecutorial powers.
See OMLO 98-05 (September 21, 1998).
-95-
Part 12 WHAT ELSE DO I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE
OPEN MEETING LAW?
§ 12.01 General
This part covers special questions or topics not discussed elsewhere in this manual.

NRS Chapter 233B
The 2009 Legislature made changes to the method of adopting regulations by agencies
that are subject to Nevada’s Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Each workshop and public
hearing must be conducted in accordance with NRS 241. NRS 233B.061(5). In addition,
workshops or hearings may be held only after the Legislative Counsel has returned the proposed
regulation to the agency. NRS 233B.060.
All workshops and public hearings must be conducted in accordance with the OML.
NRS 233B.061 now applies the OML to all executive branch agencies subject to the APA,
whether the agencies adopt regulations by board, commission, or other public body, or by an
individual. Agencies headed by a single person, such as the Insurance Commissioner, are
included.
The notice requirements for both NRS 233B and NRS 241.020 may be met in the same
notice document so that duplication of notices at different times may be avoided. The OML’s
minimum notice requirement is before 9:00 a.m., three working days before the meeting.
The Nevada Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Chapter 233B of NRS, requires some
agencies to give notice and conduct public hearings before adopting rules and regulations. The
2011 Legislature amended the rules of conduct of some bodies which meet or operate under
NRS 233B. NRS 241.016(1) subjects all meetings of public bodies, when meeting as a quasi-
judicial body, to the OML. See § 3.10 above.
If the agency is a “public body” (see Part 3 of this manual), both the Open Meeting
Law and the APA will apply, and it will be necessary to coordinate the proceedings. The Office
of the Attorney General recommends that the APA notice be prepared and distributed as required
by the APA, that a meeting of the public body be noticed and put on the agenda under the Open
Meeting Law, and that the hearings be included as an action item on the agenda.
The APA also governs the hearings of “contested cases” before administrative agencies
and, again, if the agency is a “public body,” the Open Meeting Law also will apply to
the hearings. Public comment must be conducted to satisfy both the OML and the requirement in
NRS 233B. Prior to the commencement and conclusion of a contested case or a quasi-judicial
proceeding that may affect the due process rights of an individual, the public body may refuse to
consider public comment. See NRS 233B.126. Once the board or commission has rendered a
-96-
decision on the contested case, it may entertain public comment on the proceeding at that time.
The specific statute governing the activities of the agency may have to be considered as well.
If the Open Meeting Law applies to a contested case hearing, a question arises whether
a closed session may be held. Absent a specific statute to the contrary, the contested
case must be heard in an open meeting context, and the public body may go into closed session
under NRS 241.030 only to consider the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence,
or mental or physical health of a person, as discussed in Part 9 of this manual. See Op. Nev.
Att'y Gen. No. 81-C (June 25, 1981). If the public body is going to conduct a closed session
under NRS 241.030(1), the notice requirements of NRS 241.033(1) must be met. If the notice of
hearing prepared under NRS Chapter 233B or other relevant statute provides for timing and
notice requirements equivalent to NRS 241.033(1), the notices may be coordinated.
§ 12.03 Relationship of Open Meeting Law to the First Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States
The full panoply of First Amendment rights attaches to the public’s right to speak at a
meeting pursuant to NRS 241.020(2)(d)(3). The public’s freedom of speech during public
meetings is vigorously protected by both the U.S. Constitution and the Nevada Constitution.
Freedom of expression upon public questions is secured by the First Amendment. New York
Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 269 (1964). This constitutional safeguard was fashioned to
assure an unfettered interchange of ideas for bringing about political and social changes desired
by the people. See §§ 8.04 and 8.05 above, for a detailed discussion of the scope of public
comment.
In Sandoval, 119 Nev. at 156, 67 P. 3d at 906-07 (2003), the Board of Regents alleged
that limiting the discussion of the Regents to the topics on the agenda unlawfully limited the
Regents’ right to free speech. The Supreme Court denied this argument and stated that the Open
Meeting Law was not overly burdensome on the Regents’ right to free speech because the
Regents could discuss what they wanted, whenever they wanted, just not at a meeting governed
by the Open Meeting Law at which the issue for discussion was not agendized.
§ 12.04 Relationship of Open Meeting Law and defamation
In 2005, the Legislature amended the OML to provide immunity from an action alleging
defamation to members of a public body for statements made during the meeting and
the Legislature also provided immunity to witnesses testifying before a public body.
NRS 241.0353 states:
1. Any statement which is made by a member of a public body

during the course of a public meeting is absolutely privileged and
does not impose liability for defamation or constitute a ground for
recovery in any civil action.
2. A witness who is testifying before a public body is absolutely
privileged to publish defamatory matter as part of a public
-97-
meeting, except that it is unlawful to misrepresent any fact
knowingly when testifying before a public body.
-98-
SAMPLE FORM 1: Notice and Agenda of Public Meeting (With Comments)
Comments Sample Form

See Parts 6 and 7 of the NEVADA (This only is a sample. Other formats may be used.)
OPEN MEETING LAW MANUAL,
Twelfth Edition, 2015, for details.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
of the
Name of public body COMMISSION FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT
Must state the time, place, and The Commission for Open Government will conduct a
location of meeting. public meeting on November 14, 1997, beginning at
9 a.m. at the following locations:
This shows how a meeting, to be held at its principal office at 1801 North Carson Street,
at multiple locations, may be noticed. Suite 104, Carson City, Nevada, and
Sites should be connected by speaker
phone or other device where all at its Las Vegas office in the Grant Sawyer Building,
persons at all locations may hear all 2501 Washington Street, Suite 401, Las Vegas,
persons at all other locations. Nevada.
The sites will be connected by speaker telephones.

The public is invited to attend at either location.
Notification pursuant to NOTICE

NRS 241.020(2)(d)(6) and (7) 1. Items may be taken out of order;
2. Two or more items may be combined;
3. Items may be removed from agenda or delayed at
any time;
4. Any restrictions on public comment must be set
out and this notice must state that comment can’t
be restricted based on viewpoint.
See NRS 241.020(1). Giving the Reasonable efforts will be made to assist and
name and telephone number of a accommodate physically handicapped persons
contact person is not required, but desiring to attend the meeting. Please call number
may avoid time delays or listed in advance so that arrangements for attendance
embarrassment. may be made.
Reasonable restrictions on public Public comment is limited to (set out the allowed
comment must be set out in notice time) minutes per person.
form on the agenda.
-99-
AGENDA
Agenda must consist of a clear Action may be taken only on those items denoted “For
and complete statement of the possible action.”
topics scheduled to be
considered during the meeting.
Agenda must include a list 1. Call to Order and Roll Call.

describing the items on which
action may be taken and clearly
denote “for possible action” on 2. Public comment and discussion. (Discussion)
those items. No action may be taken on a matter raised under this
item of the agenda until the matter itself has been
included specifically on an agenda as an item upon
which action will be taken.
3. Approval of minutes of previous meeting.

(For possible action)
4. Report by Committee on Abuse of Open Meeting

Laws. (Discussion)
See Part 9 of the Nevada Open 5. Closed session to consider the character, alleged
Meeting Law Manual for misconduct, or professional competence of John Doe,
discussion of when closed a staff employee of the Commission. (Discussion).
sessions are authorized and how Before closing a meeting, the public body must
they are to be handled. approve a member’s motion to close the meeting
which specifies the nature of the business to be
considered and the statutory authority on which
the meeting will be closed. If closure is pursuant
to NRS 241.030(3) the name of the person to be
considered must appear on the agenda.
No action may be taken in a 6. Performance Evaluation of Sue Smith including, but

closed session. These are not limited to, termination, suspension, demotion,
examples of how to notice an reduction in pay, reprimand, promotion, endorsement,
item where the public body may engagement, retention, or “no action.” (For possible
go into closed session. Okay to action) (Closed session may be held to consider
list only the attributes before character, alleged misconduct, professional
taking action in open session competence, and physical or mental health pursuant
(i.e., character, professional to NRS 241.030.)
competence, health, etc.) that But see § 6.09: Notice provisions of NRS 241.033 do
will be considered. not apply to applicants for employment with a public
body. NRS 241.033(7)(a) exempts public meetings
held to consider applicants for employment from the
-100-
If action is to be taken, it must be 7. Disciplinary Hearings (For possible action)
in an open session, and the Public Body may take administrative action against the
names of the subject persons following persons which might include employment
should be listed. termination, suspension, demotion, reduction in pay,
reprimand, promotion, retention, or no action.
a. Sam Smith
b. Harry Brown
If there are topics of known 8. Report by Executive Officer (Discussion) including:

public interest upon which the (formal approval of Report: for possible action; all
public body may deliberate, it other matters in this item are informational only)
should be identified. If action
might be taken (including a. Salary of executive director
approval of a report), this should b. Legislative audit of Division
be listed as “for possible action”
and must contain a description of
the items on which action will be
taken.
Multiple periods of public 9. Public comment and discussion. (Discussion) No

comment are mandatory. There action may be taken on a matter raised under this item
are now two alternatives for of the agenda until the matter itself has been
public comment available to a specifically included on an agenda as an item upon
public body. The alternatives which action will be taken.
may be combined for even more
transparency.
NRS 41.020(2)(d)(3).
10. Adjournment. (Action)
Supporting material is available from [name] at [physical

address]. Anyone desiring supporting documentation or
additional information is invited to call [phone number]
or email [address].
Notice and agenda must be This notice and agenda has been posted on or before
posted not later than 9 a.m. on 9 a.m. on the third working day before the meeting at
the third working day before the [website] and at the following locations:
meeting. Do not count the day of
the meeting as one of the three
working days.
Notice and Agenda must be (1) The Commission’s principal office at 1801 North
posted at the principal office of Carson Street, Suite 104, Carson City, Nevada
-101-
the public body, or if it has no
principal office, then at the (2) Grant Sawyer Building, 2501 Washington Street,
building where the meeting will Las Vegas, Nevada
be held, and at least three other
separate, prominent places (3) Las Vegas City Hall, 1401 Main Street,
within the jurisdiction of the Las Vegas, Nevada
public body. Notice also must be
posted on (1) the State’s official (4) Reno City Hall, 490 South Center Street, Reno,
website, https://notice.nv.gov Nevada
and (2) the public body’s
website, if it maintains a website.
-102-
SAMPLE FORM 2: MINUTES
Other formats or styles may be used. This is not intended to be a complete set of minutes, only to
show how certain matters listed on Sample Form 1 might be handled in the minutes in order to
comply with the Open Meeting Law. The public body must take into account other statutory,
procedural, or record keeping requirements.
MINUTES
of the meeting of the
(Date of the Meeting)
The Commission for Open Government held a public meeting on (date), beginning at (time)
a.m. at the following locations:
at its principal office at 1801 North Carson Street, Suite 104, Carson City, Nevada, and at its
Las Vegas office in the Grant Sawyer Building, 2501 Washington Street, Suite 401, Las
Vegas, Nevada.
The sites were connected by speaker telephones.1
1. Call to order, roll call
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Shirley Brown. Present were
commissioners Harry Smith, Peter Knowitall, Roger Dodger, Mike Brown, and Sue Doe.
Absent was Commissioner Henry.
Also present were Executive Director Sue Smith and various staff members of the
commission. Members of the public were asked to sign in, and the sign-in-sheet is attached to
the original minutes as Exhibit A.
2. Public comment (1st period)
However, if the public body chooses the second alternative set forth in NRS 241.020 and
if it allows public comment for each “for possible action” agenda item, it still must allow a
period of general public comment before adjournment for any and all matters within the
jurisdiction or control of the public body, i.e., non-agenda items.
1
The date, time, and place of meeting, as well as the members of the public body who were present and
absent, is required. NRS 241.035(1). Listing others present is not required by the Open Meeting Law but may be
helpful in resolving Open Meeting Law and other complaints regarding the proceeding.
-103-
2. Approval of minutes of previous meeting
The minutes of the October 10 meeting were approved with changes.2
3. Report by the Committee on Abuse of Open Meeting Laws
Mr. Rodgers reported that the Committee had completed its report on abuse of Open
Meeting Laws. A copy of the report is attached to the original minutes as Exhibit B.
Commissioner Dodger asked about the incident involving Mayor Smith in Little Town on
August 17 and wanted the Commission to file litigation. He was reminded that the report was
listed on the agenda as a discussion item, and action may not be taken. Further, Mayor Smith
would have to be notified if the Commission was going to discuss his misconduct.
Commissioner Knowitall thanked the Committee for its fine work.3
4. Closed session to discuss the character, alleged misconduct, and professional

competence of a staff employee of the Commission

misconduct, and professional competence of a staff employee of the Commission. The
Commission received proof that the employee was notified as required by law. Separate
minutes of the session have been prepared.4 No action was taken.
5. Performance Evaluation of Sue Smith
The Commission received proof that Mrs. Smith was notified as required by law.5
Mrs. Smith objected to comments regarding her professional competence, indicating that
she was new on the job and shouldn’t be held to the standards of an experienced employee.
A member of the public addressed the Commission and asked that her remarks be
included in the record. A copy of her remarks is attached to the original of these minutes as
Exhibit C.6
2
3
The substance of the discussion must be reported. NRS 241.035(1)(c).
4
The minutes should reflect that all the procedural requirements and limitations of a closed session have
been followed. See § 9 for a discussion.
5
The agenda suggested that the Commission may go into closed session, but in this instance, it handled the
whole matter in an open session. Even if it does so in an open meeting, the Commission still must receive proof of
service required by NRS 241.033(1).
-104-
with a unanimous vote, the evaluation attached to the original of these minutes as Exhibit D
was approved.
6. Disciplinary Hearing re: Harry Brown
A disciplinary hearing was held regarding alleged misconduct by Harry Brown. Opening
remarks were made by Deputy Attorney General Joe Smith and by counsel for Mr. Brown,
Gerry Spence.
Six witnesses testified and were cross-examined. Fifteen exhibits were received into
evidence. A record of the proceeding was made by a court reporter and a transcript is
available.7

misconduct, and professional competence of Mr. Brown. The Commission received proof
that the employee was notified as required by law. Separate minutes of the session have been
prepared.
Following the closed session, the Commission went back into open session to take action.
On motion by Commissioner Dodger, seconded by Commissioner Doe, and upon a vote of 4-
2, the Commission found that Mr. Brown had violated various provisions of the Open
Meeting Law as alleged in the complaint. Mr. Brown was ordered to pay a $1,000 fine.
Counsel for the Commission was instructed to prepare Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law,
and Order to be approved and signed by Chairman Brown, and it will be filed with the
original of these minutes.
7. 2nd period of Public Comment and Discussion
Mrs. Henrietta Cobb addressed the Commission, indicating there is a serious flaw in the
Open Meeting Law regarding serial communications and asked the Commission to propose
legislation to plug up the gap. She gave an example of Brown County, where the County
Manager approved a contract with Henry’s Construction Company after discussing it with
each Commissioner, one at a time. At the meeting, the County Commission voted to ratify
the contract without any discussion or input from the community. Commissioner Brown said
he would consider having the matter put on an agenda for a future meeting, and Mrs. Cobb
would be invited to participate.
6
See NRS 241.035(1)(d). If the commentator does not have written remarks, then his/her oral remarks must
be reflected.
7
More detail may be required by the law that governs hearings by the body. For Open Meeting Law
purposes, this shows what happened in the open and closed sessions and that a separate record has been made.
-105-
Commissioner Dodge presented to the Commission a report by the Greenpeace
organization regarding the massacre of thousands of people in Uganda. He commented that
something should be done about it and asked that the report and his remarks be included in
the record of this meeting. The report is attached to these minutes but was not read by other
Commissioners, and there was no discussion about his remarks.8
8. Adjournment was unanimously approved at nine p.m.
8
Any other information that is requested to be included or reflected in the minutes by any member of the
body must be included, even if not relevant or discussed. NRS 241.035(1)(e).
-106-
SAMPLE FORM 3: NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER, CHARACTER,
MISCONDUCT, COMPETENCE OR HEALTH OF A PERSON.
NRS 241.033

1801 North Carson Street, Suite 104
Carson City, Nevada 89701
December 10, 2005
Ms. Sue Smith

1102 Center Street
Reno, Nevada 89504
Re: Notice of meeting of the Commission to consider your character,

alleged misconduct, professional competence, or health.
Dear Ms. Smith:
In connection with your performance evaluation, the Commission may consider your
character, alleged misconduct, professional competence or health at its meeting on January 14,
2005.1 The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. at 1801 North Carson Street, Suite 104, in Carson City,
Nevada. The meeting is a public meeting, and you are welcome to attend. The Commission may
go into closed session to consider the following general topics: your performance as
administrative assistant to the executive director, your job description, your job duties, and
matters properly related thereto.2 You are welcome to attend the closed session, have an attorney
or other representative of your choosing present during the closed meeting, present written
evidence, provide testimony, and present witnesses relating to your character, alleged
misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health.3
If the Commission determines it necessary after considering your character, alleged

misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health whether in a closed meeting
1
2
The list of general topics should be as inclusive as possible. NRS 241.033(2)(c).
3
The substance of the discussion must be reported. NRS 241.035(1)(c). The minutes should reflect that all
the procedural requirements and limitations of a closed session have been followed. See §§ 6.09 and 9 for a
discussion. This sentence meets the requirements of NRS 241.033(4).
-107-
or open meeting, it may also take administrative action against you at this meeting.4 This
informational statement is in lieu of any notice that may be required pursuant to NRS 241.034.5
This notice is provided to you under NRS 241.033.6
Very truly yours,
Commission Secretary
4
NRS 241.020 requires agenda statement both for the closed meeting consideration and the administrative
action item, which must occur in an open meeting. See NRS 241.010. For informational statement, see
NRS 241.033(2)(b).
5
See NRS 241.034(3).
6
See NRS 241.035(1)(d). If the commentator does not have written remarks, then his or her oral remarks
must be reflected.
-108-
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, , hereby swear or affirm under penalty of perjury, that in

accordance with NRS 241.033, I served the foregoing Notice of Meeting of the Commission to
consider character, alleged misconduct, competence, or health
By personally serving it on Sue Smith at
By depositing it in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, certified mail

#_________________, addressed to Sue Smith at
on this day of , 1997.
Signature of person making service
State of Nevada )
) ss:
__________ County )
Signed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me by

(name)
on .
(date)
Notary Public
Commission Expires ______________
-------------------------------------------------------Notes-------------------------------------------------------
This only is a sample format. Other formats, styles, or preprinted forms may be used as long as
they contain all the information required by NRS 241.033. This document must be entered into
the record before a public body may proceed with the meeting, pursuant to NRS 241.033(1)(b).
-109-
INDEX
[INDEX IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION]
-A-
Accommodations for physically handicapped
Action
defined
must be in open meeting
Administrative Procedure Act
hearings are open meetings
regulation making
relationship to Open Meeting Law
Advisory bodies
Agency heads
Agency staff meetings
Agenda
clear and complete
closed sessions, agenda items
fees for providing copy
items taken out of order
listing action items
matters brought up during public comment
providing copy on request
Sample Form 1
sticking to
support material, providing on request
Appointment of public officer, closed sessions to consider
Attorney-client privilege
Attorneys’ fees
Attorney General
civil actions
complaints to
opinions
prosecution
venue of actions by
Audiotapes of meetings, see Tapes of meetings
-B-
Board of Architecture
Board of Dental Examiners
Board of Pharmacy, closed sessions
Bodies headed by one person may not be covered by law
-110-
-C-
Certified Court Reporters Board, closed sessions of
Character, defined
Circumventing the law
Civil actions
Closed meetings
court reporters
disclosures of minutes, tapes
how to handle
minutes
motions
no action may be taken during some
preserving confidentiality on agenda and motions
proof of service
recordings of
to consider character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or
mental health of a person
when may be held
when may not be held
when not authorized
Competence, defined
Compliance Checklist, Part 1
Committees
Commissions
Confidential
agenda, preserving confidentiality for closed sessions
attorney-client memorandums
gaming proceedings
information which need not be provided
minutes, tapes
Containing and correcting violations
Complaint to the Attorney General
Conferences
Conventions
Costs
Criminal prosecutions
-D-
Definitions
action
character
competence
deliberate
emergency
-111-
gathering
present
public body
quorum
working days
Defamation, defined
Deliberate, defined
Deliberations must be in open meeting
Deliberation vs. taking action
Disruptive people, removing
-E-
Educational foundations covered
Electronic polling
Elected member of public body, closed sessions for
Emergency meetings or items on agenda
defined
how to handle
Employment interviews
Ethics commissions
Exclusion of persons from meetings
disruptive people
witnesses
Executive sessions, See Closed Meetings
Executive officers not covered
Exemptions
activities exempt
express
Governor
Gaming Control Board and Commission
hearings for suspension or expulsion of pupils
implied by statute
judicial proceedings
medical, dental screening panels
labor negotiations
local ethics committees
Legislature
statutory
strict construction, exemptions
-F-
Facilities
Fees
for providing notice and agenda
for providing support material
-112-
First Amendment
Forms, sample
minutes, Sample Form 2
notice of public meeting, Sample Form 1
notice of intent to consider character, misconduct, competence, or
health of a person and proof of service, Sample Form 3
-G-
Gaming Control Board
Gathering, defined
Governor exemption
-H-
Handicapped, see Accommodations of physically handicapped
Health, consideration in closed session
-I-
Implied exceptions to rule of open meetings
Informal gatherings and discussions
Injunctions
actions by individuals for
actions by Office of the Attorney General for
standards for issuing and enforcing
time limits for bringing actions
Interpretations of Open Meeting Law
attorney general opinions
implied exceptions
standards for
standard of reasonableness
-J-
Judicial exemption
-L-
Labor negotiations
Legislative declaration and intent of Open Meeting Law
Legislative exemptions
License applicants, licensees, consideration of character, allegations of misconduct,
professional competence
Limitations on actions
Local ethics commissions
-M-
Mailing
ballots
-113-
fees
notices
timing
Mail polls
Meetings
defined
closed meetings
held out-of-state
informal gatherings and discussions
seminars, conferences, conventions
social gatherings
which “meetings” must be open
Medical, Dental Screening Panels
Members elect of public bodies
Minimum notice, see Notice Requirements
Minutes
closed session
fees for copying
general
inspection by public
public records
request for copies
required contents
retention and disclosure
Sample Form 2
Misdemeanor
Motion to go into closed session
-N-
Nevada Athletic Commission
Nevada Interscholastic Association
Non-profit entities
Notice Requirements
agenda must be included
calculating 3 working days
fees
improper notice, containing and correcting
mailing
posting
required contents
recommended contents
Sample Form 1 1
to persons whose character, alleged misconduct, professional competence,
physical or mental health is being considered
-114-
Sample Form 3
to persons against whom the public body may take certain administrative
actions or from whom the public body may acquire property through eminent
domain
-O-
Open Meeting
facilities
notice and agenda requirements
Out-of-State meetings
-P-
Performance evaluations
Personnel sessions
PERS (Public Employees Retirement System)
Penalties
Persons whose character, alleged misconduct, professional competence,
physical or mental health is to be considered
Physically handicapped, accommodations
Polling
Posting
locations must be listed on notice
prominent place, posting guidelines
requirements
Present, defined
Private briefings
Privilege, attorney-client
Proof of Service, Sample Form 3
Private non-profit organizations
Public
awards, considering candidates
record, minutes and tapes
recording of meetings
remarks, see Public comment
Public body
bodies headed by one person
definition
examples
must be administrative, advisory, executive or legislative body of state
or local government
must be collegial body
Public comment
allowing members of public to speak
item required on notice and agenda
matters brought up during
-115-
reasonable rules and regulations
remarks to be put in minutes
Public officers
closed meetings not authorized to select
may be removed from office for violating Open Meeting Law
Pupils, closed sessions for expulsion hearings
-Q-
Quasi-judicial functions
Quorum, defined
Quorum, mayor not counted in determining
Quorum, meetings held with another public body
Quorum, walking
-R-
Reasonableness, standard of,
Records
Recordings of meetings
closed sessions
providing copy to members of public
providing copy to subjects of closed sessions
retention
who may record sessions
Removal from office for violating Open Meeting Law
Requests for public notice
Requests for agenda, ordinances, regulations or support materials
-S-
Sample Form 1
Sample Form 2
Sample Form 3
Sanctions
Secret ballots
Seminars
Serial communications
Social gatherings
Standards of interpretation
Staff meetings
Statute of limitations
Strict construction of exceptions to open meeting requirements
Student governments
Subcommittees
Support material, providing on request
-116-
-T-
Tape recordings of meetings
fees for copying
of closed sessions
retention of tapes
Tax revenues, broadly interpreted
Telephonic meeting
Telephonic voting
Time periods
3 working days
30 days for minutes, tapes
60 days to void actions
120 days for injunctive relief
-U-
University foundations are public bodies
University and Community College System, student governments
-V-
Venue of actions
Video tapes, see Tape recordings of meetings
Video conferences
Violations
actions taken in violation are void
attorney general to investigate and prosecute
containing and curing violations
criminal sanctions
right of citizens to bring lawsuits for
time limits for bringing suit
what happens if one occurs
Void actions
Voting
agenda to reflect action items
action items must be denoted on items on agenda
by mail
majority voting requirements
polling
prohibited in closed session
reflected in minutes
secret ballot
telephonic
-117-
-W-
Walking quorums
Waiver of personal notice requirements
Witness exclusion
Working days
Wrongful exclusion of person from meeting
-118-
Subject: ALA Chapter Leaders Digest for Tuesday September 19, 2023
ALA Chapter Leaders

Post New Message
Sep 18, 2023
Discussions
started 9 hours ago, Michael Dowling (0 replies)
Carnegie-Whitney Awards- Up to $5,000 for Guides to Library Resources

1. Carnegie-Whitney Awards up to $5,000 for Guides... Michael Dowling
started yesterday, Jon Martin (1 reply)
ALA will be releasing preliminary book ban data this week, most likely Tuesday
or Wednesday
2. Preliminary book ban data will be posted on ala... Jon Martin
top next
1. Carnegie-Whitney Awards- Up to $5,000 for Guides to Library Resources

Sep 19, 2023 11:04 AM
Michael Dowling
Carnegie-Whitney Awards up to $5,000 for Guides to Library Resources
The American Library Association Publishing Committee provides a grant of up to

$5,000 for the preparation of print or electronic reading lists, indexes or other guides
to library resources that promote reading or the use of library resources at any type
of library.
Funded projects have ranged from "A Resource Guide about Disabilities, Disability
Theory, and Assistive Technologies" to "A Bibliography for Queer Teens" to
"Graphic Novels & the Humanity of Mental Illness" to "Web Accessibility Resources
for Libraries".
Applications must be received by November 3, 2023. Recipients will be

notified by February 2024.
For more information and guidelines, visit

www.ala.org/offices/publishing/sundry/alapubawrds/... or contact Mary Jo Bolduc,
Grant Administrator at mbolduc@ala.org.
------------------------------
Michael Dowling
Director, Chapters and International Relations
------------------------------
top previous
2. Re: ALA will be releasing preliminary book ban data this week, most likely
Tuesday or Wednesday

Sep 19, 2023 12:31 PM

Jon Martin
Preliminary book ban data will be posted on ala.org at 6:30 a.m. ET Wednesday.
------------------------------
Jon Martin
He/Him/His
jmartin@ala.org
------------------------------

Subject: ALA Chapter Leaders Digest for Monday September 18, 2023
ALA Chapter Leaders

Post New Message
Sep 17, 2023
Discussions
ALA will be releasing preliminary book ban data this week, most likely Tuesday
or Wednesday
1. Chapter Leaders, A heads up, ALA will be... Jon Martin
started 7 hours ago, Brianna Hoffman (0 replies)
State Legislation for Fentanyl Crisis

2. Hello, Everyone! I am reaching out to see... Brianna Hoffman
started 8 hours ago, Kristin Pekoll (1 reply)
Chapter Conference Keynote Speakers

3. Hello friends, The Illinois Library... Kristin Pekoll
4. Hi Kristin! We've had a few phenomenal... Brianna Hoffman
top next
1. ALA will be releasing preliminary book ban data this week, most likely Tuesday or
Wednesday

Sep 18, 2023 5:04 PM
Jon Martin
Chapter Leaders,
A heads up, ALA will be releasing preliminary book ban data prior to "Banned Books
Week" this week.
Sincerely,
Jon
------------------------------
Jon Martin
He/Him/His
jmartin@ala.org
------------------------------
top previous next

2. State Legislation for Fentanyl Crisis

Sep 18, 2023 12:59 PM
Brianna Hoffman
Hello, Everyone!
I am reaching out to see if any of your states have (recently, or not) introduced or
implemented legislation that has provided funding and training for public libraries to
administer Naloxone, specifically in response to fentanyl overdoses. I know many
states have libraries who administer narcan, and naloxone is similar, but specifically
for fentanyl.
If you know of any legislation, or if any of your libraries are currently administering
naloxone specifically, please let me know! Please feel free to respond to me off-list
if you prefer: brianna@wla.org.
Thank you!
------------------------------
Brianna Hoffman
Executive Director
Washington Library Association
she/her
------------------------------
top previous next

3. Chapter Conference Keynote Speakers

Sep 18, 2023 11:49 AM
Kristin Pekoll
Hello friends,
The Illinois Library Association 2024 Conference Committee is brainstorming ideas

for keynote speakers. Has anyone had any great speakers they would recommend?
Thanks for your consideration.
------------------------------
Kristin Pekoll, CAE
Conference and Continuing Education Manager
Illinois Library Association
kristinjpekoll@gmail.com
She/Her/Hers
#UniteAgainstBookBans
------------------------------
top previous
4. Re: Chapter Conference Keynote Speakers

Sep 18, 2023 12:55 PM
Brianna Hoffman
Hi Kristin!
We've had a few phenomenal speakers recently...
• Aiden Thomas spoke at our 2023 Conference and was AMAZING. I can't say
enough good things about them.. Great speaker, super generous with their
time, and overall a lovely human.
o "Aiden Thomas is a trans, Latinx, New York Times Bestselling Author
with an MFA in Creative Writing from Mills College. Originally from
Oakland, California, they now make their home in Portland, OR. Aiden
is notorious for not being able to guess the endings of books and
movies, and organizes their bookshelves by color."
• We recently had Mike Jung do the keynote for our Neurodivergence &
Libraries Summit. It was virtual, but Mike rocked it.. literally.. he played the
ukulele!
o "Mike Jung is the author of THE BOYS IN THE BACK ROW, GEEKS,
GIRLS, AND SECRET IDENTITIES, and UNIDENTIFIED SUBURBAN
OBJECT. He is a library professional by day, a writer (and ukelele
player) by night and was a founding member of
#WeNeedDiverseBooks team. Hear from Mike about his own
experience being diagnosed as autistic and the ways his
neurodivergent identity has shaped his writing, his advocacy for
diverse representations in books, and his library work."
• Brittney Morris was really good too.. Another lovely human
o "Brittney Morris is the bestselling author of SLAY, The Cost of
Knowing, Marvel's Spider-Man: Miles Morales - Wings of Fury, and
The Jump. She also writes video games and has contributed to
projects such as The Lost Legends of Redwall, Subnautica: Below
Zero, Spider-Man 2 for PS5, and Wolverine for PS5. Brittney is an
NAACP Image Award nominee, an ALA Black Caucus Youth Literary
Award winner, and an Ignite Award Finalist. She has an economics
degree from Boston University and spends her spare time reading,
playing indie video games, and enjoying the rain from her home in
Philly. She lives with her husband Steven who would rather enjoy the
rain from a campsite in the woods because he hasn't played enough
horror games, and their tiny bundle of love, Atlas."
------------------------------
Brianna Hoffman
Executive Director
she/her
------------------------------

From: Larsen, Pam in Teams [noreply@gcc-email.teams.microsoft.com] on
behalf of Larsen, Pam in Teams <noreply@gcc-email.teams.microsoft.com>
Subject: Pam mentioned everyone in a chat in Microsoft Teams
Attachments: ATT00001.png
Hi,
Your teammates are trying to reach you in Microsoft Teams.
Pam mentioned everyone in a chat with Pam +
Hello Everyone Our Drag Story Hour Presentation team,

Kristen Ryan, Corinne Dickman, Beate Weinert, Judy
Hansen,...
Reply in Teams
Install Microsoft Teams now
iOS Android
This email was sent from an unmonitored mailbox. Update your email preferences in Teams. Activity > Settings (Gear Icon) >
Notifications.
© 2023 Microsoft Corporation, One Microsoft Way, Redmond WA 98052-7329

Read our privacy policy
To: Library - Mgmt & Supervisors [Library-MgmtSupervisors@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: Banned Books Week collateral coming your way!
Good morning,
I'm really looking forward to seeing your displays this year! Please upload any BBW display
photos to this folder: Banned Books Week 2023
We'll use photos for social media and other marketing purposes. If you can, try to get as much
of the subject matter of the photo centrally featured in the pic with extra space around the
subject for cropping purposes. That will make it easy to crop as needed and post.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

To: Library - Mgmt & Supervisors <Library-MgmtSupervisors@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Banned Books Week collateral coming your way!
Good afternoon,
I have some Banned Books Week items in the bins and heading to your branches. Please make
sure these items get to the staff at your locations in charge of displays. BBW isn't until Oct. 1-7,
but feel free to get your displays up early. It's a very hot topic, and a great opportunity to
inform our patrons about what's going on nationally and locally. Check out SO's super cool
display for inspiration: Read a Banned Book!
Here's what's coming your way:

1. Let Freedom Read poster from ALA (laminated)
2. Banned Books Week poster (laminated), but feel free to print out more if you need
them.
2023-BBW poster 11x17.pdf
3. A copy of the Banned Books Week article in the fall Explorer by Debi Stears (please
include the fall Explorer in your displays and let patrons know the article is available on
p. 5!)
4. Top 13 Most Challenged Books of 2022 bookmark

5. Free People Read Freely bookmark
6. And here's a link to the slide for your digital displays: 2023-BBW slide.jpg
Thanks for helping to create these dynamic and eye-catching displays! Please let me know if you
have any questions.
Jamie Hemingway
System
Subject: Scott, Jeff shared "Library Director Update 9/15/23" with you
Here's a News post that Scott, Jeff wants you to see
Library Director Update 9/15/23

washoenv.sharepoint.com
Library Director Update 9/15/23 KOLO Update You can

listen to me give this update in less than 4 minutes. It
includes our new book kiosk in Sun Valley, new
bookmobile on the way, and a sneak preview of our
Freedom to Read/Banned Books Week displays.…
Get the SharePoint Mobile App

From: SHLB Coalition [communications2@shlb.org] on behalf of SHLB Coalition
<communications2@shlb.org>
Subject: BEAD Recommendations for States Five-Year Plans
Dear Jeff,
We hope this message finds you well and filled with the same enthusiasm for equitable
broadband access as we are.
Today, SHLB issued a crucial letter and a set of 12 recommendations to help states
effectively allocate $42 billion in BEAD funding next year.
SHLB recommends including anchor institutions in the broadband planning process,

providing gigabit connections to all anchor institutions in the state, funding open access
networks, resolving pole attachment disputes, and renewing funding for the bipartisan
Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), among other ideas.
The press release can be found below for your reference.
Finally, we invite you to join us for an upcoming webinar, What Can States Do to
Ensure Internet for All” where we'll discuss the critical role of states in ensuring
affordable broadband access. Your participation is invaluable.
Webinar Details:
📍 Zoom
⏰ 3:30-4:30 pm ET
🗓️ September 21, 2023
Register here.
Together, we can bridge the digital divide one anchor institution at a time.
Best Regards,
The SHLB Team
SHLB Submits BEAD Recommendations

to State Broadband Leaders
SHLB provides 12 recommendations that will
help states bridge the digital divide.
Contact: For Immediate Release
Saskya Cabral
Director of Marketing and PR
scabral@shlb.org
Washington, D.C. (September 13, 2023) - Today, the Schools, Health & Libraries
Broadband (SHLB) Coalition issued a set of crucial recommendations to State and U.S.
Territory Broadband Leaders as they shape their BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access, and
Deployment) Five-Year Action Plans and Initial and Final Proposals.
As a prominent advocate for open, affordable, high-quality broadband access for anchor
institutions and their communities, SHLB remains committed to closing the digital divide
nationwide. The SHLB vision centers around ensuring everyone can access affordable
internet services regardless of location.
The SHLB recommendations underscore the importance of including anchor institutions in

broadband planning, infrastructure, and deployment initiatives. They emphasize the need
to broaden the definition of "community anchor institution" to encompass traditional and
non-traditional entities. This step aims to ensure that essential services reach every
corner of the community, including schools, libraries, healthcare clinics, public safety
facilities, multi-tenant dwelling units, institutions of higher education, and more.
"Closing the digital divide is an urgent national priority, and our recommendations serve
as a roadmap for broadband leaders to ensure that no one is left behind,” said John
Windhausen Jr., Executive Director of the SHLB Coalition. “By including anchor
institutions, fostering transparency, resolving pole attachment disputes, and considering
innovative solutions such as open access, we can bridge the connectivity gap and pave
the way for a more equitable and connected future for all."
“The SHLB recommendations provide valuable guidance to states as we finalize BEAD

plans and prepare to receive grant applications to connect homes and anchor institutions
across the state,” said Jade Piros de Carvalho, Director of Broadband
Development of Kansas. “Anchor institutions are vital resources in all our communities.
We are committed to ensuring they have high-quality, affordable broadband and
partnering with them to eliminate the digital divide in Kansas.”
“SHLB has long been an important voice for anchor institutions on broadband policy
issues, and these recommendations are a case in point,” said Philip Neufeld,
Executive Officer of Information Technology, Fresno School District. “All
students need high-quality broadband at school, at home, and across their daily journey.
These recommendations will foster equitable and affordable internet service for all.”
“We commend the SHLB Coalition for developing these recommendations focused on
anchor institutions' role in addressing the digital divide in their communities," said
Lauren Moore, New York State Librarian and Assistant Commissioner of the
New York State Education Department. “Library systems like ours are eager to
contribute to state planning and work in partnership with community organizations to
ensure all citizens have quality broadband, but also the devices and training needed to
take advantage of this service.”
“Community anchor institutions play a crucial role in ensuring open, affordable, high-
performance broadband for everyone in the U.S.,” said Adrianne Furniss, Executive
Director of the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. “These SHLB Coalition
recommendations offer a roadmap to speeding network deployment, ensuring service
affordability, accelerating broadband adoption, and modeling applications that improve
lives through education, healthcare, and civic engagement.”
“We applaud the SHLB Coalition for its proactive approach in creating recommendations
and highlighting public libraries as crucial digital access connection points for our local
communities,” said Nick Fuchs, Director of Technical Services of Sno-Isle
Libraries. “Sno-Isle Libraries ensure high-quality broadband for all library customers
through in-building free Wi-Fi access, providing equipment, education, and the necessary
support to effectively use these services. We are poised to amplify our efforts with local
partnerships to contribute to the statewide and national strategy.”
“Should the States adopt the SHLB recommendations, they will create an environment
conducive to innovative public-private partnerships among Research & Education
networks, other nonprofit broadband providers, and private entities to serve the often-
overlooked smaller and more rural anchor institutions and communities, leaving no one
behind in the pursuit of connectivity,” said Jen Leasure, President of The Quilt.
“SHLB commends the NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information

Administration) for allowing Broadband Leaders the flexibility to creatively identify anchor
institutions, including non-traditional ones,” said Kristen Corra, Policy Counsel of the
SHLB Coalition. “This approach opens avenues for innovative solutions to deliver
affordable broadband services to underserved regions and collect valuable data for future
digital equity efforts.”
The SHLB letter urges broadband leaders to thoroughly assess anchor institutions'
connectivity needs using NTIA's BEAD guidance for accurate data collection. These
institutions possess deep community insights vital for strategic deployment and adoption
projects, reducing middle-mile costs, and promoting open-access networks to boost
competition.
Examples from various states demonstrate the successful inclusion of non-traditional

anchor institutions, such as ranger stations, bar and grills, houses of worship, correctional
facilities, public access television station facilities, public parks, grocery stores, and
religious organizations, in BEAD Five-Year Action Plans, ensuring comprehensive internet
access.
SHLB also recommends including anchor institutions in the broadband planning process,
providing gigabit connections to all anchor institutions in the state, funding open access
networks, resolving pole attachment disputes, and renewing funding for the bipartisan
Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), among other ideas.
Please click here to access the full set of recommendations.
###
About SHLB:
The SHLB Coalition is a nonprofit, 501(c)(3) public interest organization that supports open,
affordable, high-quality broadband connections for anchor institutions and their
surrounding communities. The SHLB Coalition is based in Washington, D.C. and has a
diverse membership of commercial and non-commercial organizations from across the
United States. To learn more, visit www.shlb.org.
Share Tweet Forward Share

Copyright © 2023 SHLB Coalition, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you are part of the SHLB Coalition community or have subscribed
to our emails. If you would like to only receive certain emails please click on "update your preferences,"
or if you would like to stop receiving emails altogether please click "unsubscribe." Thank you, The SHLB
team.

SHLB Coalition
1250 Connecticut Ave NW
Suite 700
Washington, DC 20036

From: Hansen, Judy [JHansen@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Hansen, Judy
To: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Burton, L.J. [LJBurton@washoecounty.gov];
CC: Weinert, Beate [BWeinert@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: YSLE LBOT Report-September 2023
Attachments: YSLE LBOT REPORT SEPTEMBER 2023.pdf
Hello,
Attached is the YSLE LBOT report for September.
Thank you!
Judy
Judy Hansen
Youth Services & Events Librarian | Washoe County Library System
jhansen@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8318
YOUTH SERVICES &
LIBRARY EVENTS
YSLE DEPARTMENT
JUNE-AUGUST 2023
YSLE DEPARTMENT Oversight of the YSLE Team-The YSLE
team supports the YSLE department in
the oversight of the systemwide
services, initiatives, and directives
Develop and implement guidelines,
policies, and procedures
YSLE budget oversight
Event planning
Staff training
Building connections throughout the
community
Community collaborations and
partnerships
Educational initiatives
YSLE Annual Planning Meeting

September 2023
The purpose of our annual planning meeting is to
create an environment that synergizes creativity and
collaboration among colleagues with a focus on team
building, setting goals, and strategic planning.
COMMUNITY
Artown
Arts 4 all Nevada
City of Reno
COLLABORATIONS City of Sparks
Community Foundation of Northern Nevada
& PARTNERS FY 22/23 Community Services Agency

Down Syndrome Network of Northern Nevada
The Discovery
Thank you to all of the organizations that have collaborated Education Renaissance of Nevada Initiative
with us over the past year. Your support has benefited our Facilitate Joy
community through all the resources, knowledge, and Family Navigation Network
experiences that you have brought to the region through your Food Bank of Northern Nevada
Historic Reno Preservation Society
Washoe County Library System.
KUNR
Educational Incentives Nevada Department of Wildlife
Nevada Historical Society
The Children’s Cabinet Nevada Humanities
Nevada Early Childhood Advisory Council Nevada Museum of Art
Head Start Nevada State Parks
Nevada Department of Education Northern Nevada Literacy Council
Northern Nevada Pride
Nevada State Library, Archives and Public Records Our Center
Renown Medical Center Paws 4 Love
Truckee Meadows Community College PBS Reno
Pioneer Center Youth Programs
United Way of Northern Nevada and the Sierra’s Reading
The Radical Cat
Coalition Reno Arts Consortium
University of Nevada Reno Reno Sparks Indian Colony
Washoe County School District Sierra Nevada Watercolor Society
Washoe County
SUMMER READING CHALLENGE
June 1 - July 31, 2023
kindness
friendship
unity
The library is the

perfect place to
COME TOGETHER
and create shared
experiences.
Summer Reading
Challenge Statistics
Ages 0-5
REGISTRATIONS 611
MINUTES READ 143,839
80% EARNED
BADGES 5,935
Summer Reading
Ages 6-11
REGISTRATIONS 1,129
80% EARNED
BADGES 9,845
Summer Reading
Ages 12-18
REGISTRATIONS 233
MINUTES READ 73,427
80% EARNED
BADGES 2,333
Summer Reading
Ages 19+
REGISTRATIONS 480
80% EARNED
BADGES 4,458
Summer Reading
All Ages
REGISTRATIONS 2,453
80% EARNED
BADGES 22,571
EVENTS
Summer Reading Challenge
Kickoff Parties
Duncan/Traner
Downtown Reno Library Gerlach Community Library
Community Library
Summer Reading
Challenge Kickoff
Parties
Incline Village Library Northwest Reno Library

Summer Reading
Challenge Kickoff
Parties
Sierra View Library South Valleys Library Spanish Springs Library

Summer Reading
Challenge Kickoff Parties
Verdi Community
Sparks Library Prize Selection!
Library
EVENTS-Stimulate Imagination
EVENTS
Kindness Cards
Conservation Ambassadors’ Wild Things
COMMUNITY HELPERS
TIME
Schoolbell
Baby Story Time

Billingual Story Time
Family Story Time
Preschool Story Time
SCHOOL
SUPPORT Rainbow Story Time
STEAM Story Time
Toddler Story Time
1,000 Books Before Kindergarten
SCHOOL
SUPPORT
School Outreaches
Educator Outreaches
Baby Library Cards
CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSE COMMUNITY
CELEBRATE OUR DIVERSE COMMUNITY
Event AttendanceTotals
Drag Story Hour Rainbowfest
357 537
CELEBRATE
DIVERSITY
Ballet Folklórico Raíces Del Fuego

Teen Engagement Group
Upcoming
TeenTober
The Holland Project Outreach
Volunteen Program
Teen Survey-Teen Library Spaces
Teen Spaces-Passive Activities

Creative Drawing Prompts & Positive Affirmations
Adult Events
Historic Reno Preservation Society

Karen Burns -Downtown Reno Libary
Upcoming Events
Book Speed Dating
Holiday Crafts for Adults
Pioneer Center for the
Performing Arts -Golden Encore
Series
Senior Bingo
Senior Social Club
UNR Performing Arts Series
Cryptocurrency, Scams, and You
Make & Mingle - Sparks Libary
Galleries
Americans and the Holocaust Exhibition Truckee Meadows Quilters Art Exhibit
Northwest Reno Library Downtown Reno Library
Faith Almasi Art Exhibit-South Valleys Library

Event Statistics
Fiscal Year 2022/2023
Total Events
3,625
Total Attendance
46,614
From: Viss, Denise [DViss@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Viss, Denise
<DViss@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: September 12 is National Encouragement Day
Hi All,
Look what I found at the bottom of a delivery bin.
And the book I read for story time this morning. Super fun day so far.
Everyone in libraryland is awesome.
Have a great day and fabulous week,
Denise
Denise Viss
Library Assistant III| South Valleys Library| Washoe County Library System
dviss@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.851.5190
15650 A Wedge Parkway, Reno, NV 89511
Workweek is Tuesday-Saturday
CC: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: "What are your neighbors hiding from you?" Banned Book display at SS...
Jeff -- the list is active in Aspen and is the featured list on the #WhatToRead tab. It will stay in
that category through BBW but it won't be the highlighted list after today. It can also be found
by searching for it in the catalog ("Censored by your neighbors"). We'll add to it as more titles
are reported.
https://catalog.washoecountylibrary.us/MyAccount/MyList/8444

To: Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
Cc: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: RE: "What are your neighbors hiding from you?" Banned Book display at SS...
Oh great Thank you!.
I should bring one of our new fancy cards for library card sign up month too..
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks Jeff - the list will be live in the catalog later today on the what to read tab. Hopefully very soon!

To: McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews, John
Good morning team,
I just wanted to say I may mention our banned books displays on KOLO today. It makes sense since there
is testimony today in the Senator regarding book bans. I shared Jana’s photo of her display with Denise.
Definitely want to make a bigger push closer to the event, but the next time I am on the event will have
passed.
Just wanted to give you a heads up.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Harpers Bazaar has a list of every book banned in the United States in a list organized by state.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/a45012950/banned-book-list/
Guess which state is NOT on this list….
Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>

To: Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
Sounds like a plan!
To: McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
I get really ambitious in my head too 😄
Also I really want to talk to you about blogging. When a few more things are crossed off the list!
John

Oh, for sure!! I am talking really big, like I am gonna actually have time to write up something (it may not
happen!) and I would for sure run it by core team before I send something out to any media or
publications!!
But yes, will for sure wait until we have done our things internally, and will run anything by everyone
before do anything!
Stacy
Stacy, can I request that you wait until we've pushed some photos on our end? Jamie's out this
week but I believe the plan is to push everything a bit closer to BBW. We'll also have a browsing
category featuring these titles in the catalog. We're definitely going early this year, but could
we aim for next week when the rest of the ducks are aligned? We try to get our posts out first
for people to share, but it's not a huge deal if not!
John

To: McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>;
Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews, John
<JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; Prentiss, Timothy <TPrentiss@washoecounty.gov>; Partridge, Aurora
J. <APartridge@washoecounty.gov>
Of course—the more places the merrier. Let freedom ring! 🙂

To: MacMillan, Jana <JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>;
Jana, may I share these images on my local FB page and in a few other places, maybe a blog post or
article submission about your display and why it was created?
Subject: "What are your neighbors hiding from you?" Banned Book display at SS...
BB Display 2023.jpg BB Display Banner 1.jpg BB Display Banner 2.jpg BB Display Banner
3.jpg BB Boxes.jpg BB Inside Boxes (1).jpg BB Inside Boxes (2).jpg BB Inside Boxes with
no books.jpg BB Staff getting a sneak peek at display.jpg
Hello all.
Here are the pics from my banned book display of items that the community out here has been
hiding from view in the library over the past couple of months. Just had two more today. Each
box says "What are your neighbors hiding from you? Open this box to find out." Inside are two
books that people have hidden or challenged out here. Also inside the lid of each box are
pictures of the books (in case they check out) and what was done to stop others from reading
them. In the bottom of the box are comments such as:
• Let freedom Read!
• Free People Read Freely
• The most common reasons books are banned or challenged: sexually explicit, contain
offensive language, unsuited to age group.
• Celebrate your freedom to read!
• Can you guess why your neighbors don't want you to read these items?
The banner tells what has been happening with books here, it has the ALA's 1 st Amendment
statement, and the ALA's explanation of Intellectual Freedom and why it is important.
I also have The Banned Book week book marks on the display.
Ben and Aaron are working on the items for the other side of the display, this one is near our CS
and YPL desks on the way into and out of our branch, so we will have lots of opportunities to
engage about Intellectual Freedom with patrons who ask...and also to stop the books from
being hidden.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Thanks.
To: Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; McKenzie, Stacy L.
Oh great Thank you!.
I should bring one of our new fancy cards for library card sign up month too..
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks Jeff - the list will be live in the catalog later today on the what to read tab. Hopefully very soon!

Good morning team,
passed.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sounds like a plan!

John

publications!!
before do anything!
Stacy

John



Hello all.
being hidden.
Thanks.

Thanks Jeff - the list will be live in the catalog later today on the what to read tab. Hopefully
very soon!

Good morning team,
passed.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott
Sounds like a plan!
John

publications!!
before do anything!
Stacy
John


Hello all.
being hidden.
Thanks.

To: McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]; Andrews, John
Good morning team,
passed.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Thanks
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sounds like a plan!

John

publications!!
before do anything!
Stacy

John


Hello all.
being hidden.
Thanks.


From: Sloan, Tyna [TSloan@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Sloan, Tyna
<TSloan@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Sloan, Tyna shared "Healing the Divide with Tiffany Hammond" with you
Here's a News post that Sloan, Tyna wants you to see
Healing the Divide with Tiffany Hammond

washoenv.sharepoint.com
On Saturday, September 2, 20232, Downtown Reno

Library hosted Healing the Divide with author Autistic
mother, advocate, and storyteller, Tiffany Hammond. 32
participants enjoyed the Story Time, and we had 27
participants for the group discussion. Th…
Get the SharePoint Mobile App

From: Eric Silverstein [esilverstein@e-ratecentral.com] on behalf of Eric Silverstein
<esilverstein@e-ratecentral.com>
Subject: E-Rate Central Weekly Newsletter - 9/11/2023
Attachments: Week 09-11 - Client.pdf
Please see the attached newsletter for articles on:
• Funding Status for E-Rate and ECF

• E-Rate for FY 2023
• ECF for 2021-2023
• Updates and Reminders
• Upcoming Dates
• Senate Approved Anna Gomez as Fifth FCC Commissioner
Mel Van Patten, CEMP

Director, E-Rate Central
516-801-7828 (phone)
Certified E-Rate Management Professional
http://www.e-ratecentral.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
and may contain confidential and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
Weekly Client E-Rate Newsletter
E-Rate Central Weekly News Vol. 17, No. 37 September 11, 2023
• Funding Status for E-Rate and ECF

• E-Rate for FY 2023
• ECF for 2021-2023
• Updates and Reminders
• Upcoming Dates
• Senate Approved Anna Gomez as Fifth FCC Commissioner
Funding Status for E-Rate and ECF
E-Rate for FY 2023:
USAC issued Wave 20 for FY 2023 on Thursday, September 7th, for $5.29 million
including $52 thousand for two E-Rate Central clients. Total funding is now $2.14 billion
including $102 million for E-Rate Central clients. At this point, USAC has funded 93.1% of the
originally submitted applications representing 73.7% of the dollars requested.
ECF for 2021-2023:
Wave 33 for Window 3 was issued on Wednesday, September 6th, for $22.2 million
including $1.22 million for two E-Rate Central clients. Total commitments for all three ECF
windows are now at $6.40 billion including $400 million for E-Rate Central clients.
Updates and Reminders
Upcoming Dates:
September 25 Due date for comments on the FCC’s Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
portion of (FCC 23-56) regarding additional rule changes to simplify E-rate
(see the second half of the article in our newsletter of July 3rd). Reply
comments are due October 23rd.
September 25 Due date for comments on the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(FCC 23-65) on cybersecurity labeling for internet devices (see our newsletter
of August 14th).
October 2 Last day to receive service or to submit a Service Delivery Deadline request
for FY 2022 non-recurring services. (Note: September 30th, the normal
Service Delivery Deadline, falls on a Saturday this year.)
October 13 USAC’s one-day E-rate in-person training in Washington, DC. Limited space
was fully subscribed as soon as the training was announced but training
material should become publicly available shortly before the training date.
© 2023 E-Rate Central Page 1 of 2

October 24 Nominations are due for six positions, including one school representative,
on the USAC Board of Directors (see DA 23-753).
October 30 E-rate invoice deadline for FY 2022 recurring services. (Note: October 28th,
the normal invoice deadline, falls on a Saturday this year.)
October 30 ECF invoice deadline for most Window 1 and Window 2 committed FRNs
with service delivery deadlines of June 30, 2023. For details on other
upcoming invoice deadlines, see USAC’s Emergency Connectivity Fund
Invoice Deadline Tool.
October 30 The first Form 486 deadline for FY 2023, for FCDLs issued on or before
July 1st (i.e., Waves 1-9).
Senate Approves Anna Gomez as Fifth FCC Commissioner:
Last Thursday, the U.S. Senate formerly confirmed the appointment of Anna Gomez as the fifth
FCC Commissioner, a position that had been open for two years. Ms. Gomez is a
telecommunications attorney who had previously worked at the FCC, had served in private
practice, and is currently a communication policy advisor at the U.S. State Department. Her
confirmation will break the 2-2 Democratic/Republican deadlock that had held up certain FCC
actions including, perhaps, the approval of Chairwoman Rosenworcel’s “Learning Without
Limits” proposals to make WiFi on school buses and the loan of hotspots eligible for E-rate and to
initiate a $200 million cybersecurity pilot program for schools and libraries outside of E-rate (see
our newsletter of July 17th).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsletter information and disclaimer: This newsletter may contain unofficial information on prospective E-rate developments and/or may reflect
E-Rate Central’s own interpretations of E-rate practices and regulations. Such information is provided for planning and guidance purposes only.
It is not meant, in any way, to supplant official announcements and instructions provided by USAC, the FCC, or state education departments.
If you have received this newsletter from a colleague and you would like to receive your own copy of the E-Rate Central Weekly News or would
like to be removed from our distribution list, please contact your E-Rate Central representative.
For further information on E-rate, follow and ‘Like’ us on E-Rate Central’s social media pages by clicking on the Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn
icons below. Have something to contribute? Let us know…we’d love to hear from you.
© 2023 E-Rate Central Page 2 of 2

From: Reed, Rebecca [RAReed@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Reed, Rebecca
<RAReed@washoecounty.gov>
CC: Cole, Jennifer [JSCole@washoecounty.gov]; Stears, Debi D
Subject: Re: KUNR November Book News and Literary Reno
Sounds good! I have the calendar updated.
Becca Reed, MLS/MIS

Librarian | Washoe County Library System
rareed@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8330

To: Reed, Rebecca <RAReed@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Cole, Jennifer <JSCole@washoecounty.gov>; Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: RE: KUNR November Book News and Literary Reno
I do have two literary Reno segments (Romantic and Gritty Reno).
I will plan something for 11/6.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Reed, Rebecca <RAReed@washoecounty.gov>

We've got Literary Reno airing on 10/30. I think we got confused and thought you had two
literary Reno segments!
Let's have you do Book News on 11/6. I've got one 11/13. I'll contact Michele with an updated
calendar, so we are all on the same page.
Becca Reed, MLS/MIS
Yes, I wasn’t sure what the plan was when I spoke with Michelle.
Just so I am sure, October is covered since we have someone reading for banned books week.
I have the lit Reno Series which could air around Nevada Day and in November.
I can do a November segment (Native American Heritage Month) unless you have something planned.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Subject: KUNR November Book News and Literary Reno
Hello Jeff,
Jen and I wanted to touch base with you about your November segments. We have you on the
calendar for Book News on November 6th and Literary Reno on November 13th. Were you
planning on doing two segments in November? If not, we do have extra segments that can air
in place of one of those dates.
Best, Becca
Becca Reed, MLS/MIS
To: Reed, Rebecca [RAReed@washoecounty.gov]
I do have two literary Reno segments (Romantic and Gritty Reno).
I will plan something for 11/6.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Becca Reed, MLS/MIS

Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hello Jeff,
Best, Becca
Becca Reed, MLS/MIS


From: Reed, Rebecca [RAReed@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Reed, Rebecca
<RAReed@washoecounty.gov>
Becca Reed, MLS/MIS


Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hello Jeff,
Best, Becca
Becca Reed, MLS/MIS
To: Reed, Rebecca [RAReed@washoecounty.gov]
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Hello Jeff,
Best, Becca
Becca Reed, MLS/MIS


Subject: Re: Story Time vs. Brave Books...
Oooohh nice!!!
Jeff Scott

Ok...they DID start at 11am and here's the tally:
Library Story Time 27 vs. Brave Books 7 kids and 4 adults (which includes
the presenter)!


Subject: Story Time vs. Brave Books...
Library Story Time = 27 vs. Brave Books Story Time = 0

(so far just the presenter--but they are in the room until 11:30am).
Doesn't appear to be in direct "mano a mano" with us after all.

Ok...they DID start at 11am and here's the tally:
Library Story Time 27 vs. Brave Books 7 kids and 4 adults (which includes
the presenter)!






Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2023 8:47 PM
To: Barbara Hyatt [bhyatt126@gmail.com]
Subject: Re: Book challenges
Good evening Barbara,
Thank you for your email. We appreciate your concern. If you would direct your comments to
the Board of County Commissioners who decide who sits on the library board, that would be
very helpful.
You can reach out to your local Commissioner or use the Speak Up application for public
comment.
https://washoe-
nv.granicusideas.com/#:~:text=Residents%20have%20two%20options%20to,placed%20in%20t
he%20public%20record.
Thank you,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Barbara Hyatt <bhyatt126@gmail.com>

Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2023 8:27:04 PM
To: Library Board <LibraryBoard@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Book challenges
Dear Washoe County Library Board Members,
I do not envy you your positions in this current climate. I realize that, like library board
members, administrators, and librarians all around the country, you are likely being harassed and
threatened by the minority of lunatics who want everything their way without regard for what the
majority wants. I'm so very sorry that you must tolerate this in order to serve our community, and
I am deeply appreciative of your willingness to serve.
Also of concern is a debate currently going on on the Nextdoor website where Reva Crump, who
is aiming to fill one of the two open seats on your board, and Bruce Parks, who has some type of
relationship with her, are encouraging the removal of books they are labeling as inappropriate for
children under 18, going so far as to imply or directly state that they are pornographic. While up
to this weekend, I have never heard of her, he frequently attends school board meetings where he
spreads misinformation and makes accusations against teachers, administrators, librarians, and
board members, so I would be quite surprised if he doesn't do that same kind of thing at any open
meetings you have. They've decided to try to get support for their agenda of removing books
from both public and school library shelves (apparently they have either never heard of the Rico
case or have no regard for it), claiming that they have read or are currently in the process of
reading them. I live in a fairly conservative area, Spanish Springs, as do they. To my great relief,
they are experiencing quite a backlash from people who don't think Ms. Crump and Mr. Parks
have the right to decide for them what their children can and can't read, and have received very
minimal support. They seem shocked by that as well.
I know that Ms. Crump has probably collected some letters of recommendation from people
who, like her, want to ban books that she and Mr. Parks find objectionable. I just want to submit
my own recommendation. She, along with anyone like her, has no business representing the
people of Washoe County on the library board. The majority of people don't attend board
meetings to complain (or worse). That is probably because we are satisfied with the libraries
being run as they are. I certainly don't like or necessarily approve of every book that's available
to patrons, but it's not my job to police what others read or impose my moral standards on
anyone else any more than it is yours. She should not have that opportunity, either.
I hope that you take my thoughts and concerns into consideration as you are making your
choices. I know I'm only one person, but I don't think I'm alone in wanting our libraries to be
places where we can expand our minds and attitudes. I believe that was their original purpose.
Respectfully,
Barbara Hyatt, MA
WCSD Teacher
SEPTEMBER 8, 2023

Among the week's headlines: Alabama Governor Kay Ivey questions the
work of public libraries in her state; the political attacks on the ALA
continue; the Senate finally confirms a fifth FCC commissioner, breaking a
years-long partisan deadlock; and paying tribute to the first Black librarian
in the school district of Philadelphia. more
ALA Seeks Member Input on Freedom to

Read Statement Revision
In the midst of a historic attack on the freedom to read, the American
Library Association has announced a series of "listening sessions" which could lead to the
first revision of the landmark Freedom to Read statement since 2004. more
Texas Argues Parts of New 'Book Rating'
Law Should Be Allowed to Take Effect
In a September 1 filing, attorneys for the state renewed their broader bid to
stay the court's August 31 preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of HB 900, but also
argued that parts of the law are outside the scope of the plaintiffs' claims and should be
allowed to take effect. more
Budgeting for Digital Books is Easier than

You May Think
Help foster a love for reading among your school-aged patrons with new
titles that, starting today through September 30, are 20-50% off! It’s the
perfect excuse to update your juvenile and young adult collection or add
some read-alongs to the mix. (Sponsored) more

Hot Springs Drive
Lindsay Hunter. Grove/Gay, $27 (228p) ISBN 978-0-8021-6145-1
Read the Review »
We Are the Crisis

Cadwell Turnbull. Blackstone, $26.99 (322p) ISBN 978-1-982603-75-5
Read the Review »
Mothtown
Caroline Hardaker. Angry Robot, $17.99 trade paper (300p) ISBN 978-1-
915202-73-4
Read the Review »
Money Kings: The Epic Story of the Jewish Immigrants Who

Transformed Wall Street and Shaped Modern America
Daniel Schulman. Knopf, $35 (592p) ISBN 978-0-451-49354-5
Read the Review »

Gator Country: Deception, Danger, and Alligators in the Everglades
Rebecca Renner. Flatiron, $29.99 (288p) ISBN 978-1-250-84257-2
Read the Review »
A Death in Malta: An Assassination and a Family’s Quest for Justice

Paul Caruana Galizia. Riverhead, $29 (304p) ISBN 978-0-593543-73-3
Read the Review »
Comedy Book: How Comedy Conquered Culture—And the Magic

That Makes It Work
Jesse David Fox. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $29 (368p) ISBN 978-0-374-
60471-4
Read the Review »

America’s Black Capital: How African Americans Remade Atlanta
in the Shadow of the Confederacy
Jeffrey O. G. Ogbar. Basic, $35 (544p) ISBN 978-1-541-60199-4
Read the Review »
A City on Mars: Can We Settle Space, Should We Settle Space, and

Have We Really Thought This Through?
Kelly Weinersmith and Zach Weinersmith. Penguin Press, $30 (448p) ISBN
978-1-984881-72-4
Read the Review »
Putting Ourselves Back in the Equation: Why Physicists Are

Studying Human Consciousness and AI to Unravel the Mysteries of the
Universe
George Musser. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $30 (320p) ISBN 978-0-374-
23876-6
Read the Review »
CHILDREN'S BOOKS
The Tailor Shop at the Intersection

Ahn Jaesun, trans. from the Korean by Sora Kim-Russell. Transit, $18.95
(48p) ISBN 978-1-945492-76-1
Read the Review »
A Stone Is a Story
Leslie Barnard Booth, illus. by Marc Martin. McElderry, $18.99 (40p)
ISBN 978-1-5344-9694-1
Read the Review »
The Little Books of the Little Brontës

Sara O’Leary, illus. by Briony May Smith. Tundra, $18.99 (40p) ISBN 978-
0-7352-6369-7
Read the Review »
New Books and More

September 11, 2023
Among the books hitting shelves next week are a picture book about
navigating grief, illustrated by a late Caldecott Medalist and completed by
his son, a middle grade adventure following a rescue mission that leads into
another realm, a YA dystopian tale about a girl fighting against gender
norms, and more. more
'I'm a Survivor': Black Final Girls Are
(Literally) Killing It
The exclusive club of Final Girls in horror fiction has had a major problem across books and
films: race. We spoke with several Black YA authors who are working to diversify the genre
by creating the Black Final Girls they’ve always hoped to see. more
Multi-Author Series Spotlights the Fun and

Foibles of Third Grade
Eighteen books by 18 authors, 18 different protagonists, and one third-grade
classroom helmed by one unflappable teacher. The numbers add up to The
Kids in Mrs. Z's Class, an upcoming chapter-book series from Algonquin
Young Readers. more
EBSCO Helps Librarians Build Spanish

Collections
The academic database platform's NoveList's Core Collection offers
librarians a database of 7,000 Spanish-language titles. more
Programming Announced for PW's New AI

Conference
The full schedule for Artificial Intelligence: Revolution and Opportunity in
Trade Publishing, an online conference to be hosted by Publishers Weekly
on September 27, has been announced. more
Amazon Issues New AI Guidelines for Its

KDP Platform
With concerns mounting over the impact AI-generated books are having on
the e-book market, Amazon will now require KDP users to inform it if AI-
generated content was used "when you publish a new book or make edits to
and republish an existing book through KDP.” more

• Hachette Book Group is seeking a new Production Manager
• Bloomsbury Publishing is seeking a new Academic Marketing Manager
• Oregon State University Libraries and Press is seeking a new Marketing
Manager
Top 10 Bestsellers
1
The Brothers Hawthorne
Jennifer Lynn Barnes, Author
2
Assistant to the Villain
Hannah Nicole Maehrer, Author
3
Fourth Wing
4
Tom Lake
Ann Patchett, Author
5
Too Late: Definitive Edition
Colleen Hoover, Author
6
The Coworker
Freida McFadden, Author
7
James Clear, Author
8
The Housemaid
9
A Court of Thorns and Roses
Sarah J Maas, Author
10
It Ends with Us


Publishers Weekly,
49 West 23rd Street
Ninth Floor
New York, NY 10010 Phone 212-377-5500
unsubscribe.
SEPTEMBER 8, 2023

Among the week's headlines: Alabama Governor Kay Ivey questions the
work of public libraries in her state; the political attacks on the ALA
continue; the Senate finally confirms a fifth FCC commissioner, breaking a
years-long partisan deadlock; and paying tribute to the first Black librarian
in the school district of Philadelphia. more
ALA Seeks Member Input on Freedom to

Read Statement Revision
In the midst of a historic attack on the freedom to read, the American
Library Association has announced a series of "listening sessions" which could lead to the
first revision of the landmark Freedom to Read statement since 2004. more
Texas Argues Parts of New 'Book Rating'
Law Should Be Allowed to Take Effect
In a September 1 filing, attorneys for the state renewed their broader bid to
stay the court's August 31 preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of HB 900, but also
argued that parts of the law are outside the scope of the plaintiffs' claims and should be
allowed to take effect. more
Budgeting for Digital Books is Easier than

You May Think
Help foster a love for reading among your school-aged patrons with new
titles that, starting today through September 30, are 20-50% off! It’s the
perfect excuse to update your juvenile and young adult collection or add
some read-alongs to the mix. (Sponsored) more

Hot Springs Drive
Lindsay Hunter. Grove/Gay, $27 (228p) ISBN 978-0-8021-6145-1
Read the Review »
We Are the Crisis

Cadwell Turnbull. Blackstone, $26.99 (322p) ISBN 978-1-982603-75-5
Read the Review »
Mothtown
Caroline Hardaker. Angry Robot, $17.99 trade paper (300p) ISBN 978-1-
915202-73-4
Read the Review »
Money Kings: The Epic Story of the Jewish Immigrants Who

Transformed Wall Street and Shaped Modern America
Daniel Schulman. Knopf, $35 (592p) ISBN 978-0-451-49354-5
Read the Review »

Gator Country: Deception, Danger, and Alligators in the Everglades
Rebecca Renner. Flatiron, $29.99 (288p) ISBN 978-1-250-84257-2
Read the Review »
A Death in Malta: An Assassination and a Family’s Quest for Justice

Paul Caruana Galizia. Riverhead, $29 (304p) ISBN 978-0-593543-73-3
Read the Review »
Comedy Book: How Comedy Conquered Culture—And the Magic

That Makes It Work
Jesse David Fox. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $29 (368p) ISBN 978-0-374-
60471-4
Read the Review »

America’s Black Capital: How African Americans Remade Atlanta
in the Shadow of the Confederacy
Jeffrey O. G. Ogbar. Basic, $35 (544p) ISBN 978-1-541-60199-4
Read the Review »
A City on Mars: Can We Settle Space, Should We Settle Space, and

Have We Really Thought This Through?
Kelly Weinersmith and Zach Weinersmith. Penguin Press, $30 (448p) ISBN
978-1-984881-72-4
Read the Review »
Putting Ourselves Back in the Equation: Why Physicists Are

Studying Human Consciousness and AI to Unravel the Mysteries of the
Universe
George Musser. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $30 (320p) ISBN 978-0-374-
23876-6
Read the Review »
CHILDREN'S BOOKS
The Tailor Shop at the Intersection

Ahn Jaesun, trans. from the Korean by Sora Kim-Russell. Transit, $18.95
(48p) ISBN 978-1-945492-76-1
Read the Review »
A Stone Is a Story
Leslie Barnard Booth, illus. by Marc Martin. McElderry, $18.99 (40p)
ISBN 978-1-5344-9694-1
Read the Review »
The Little Books of the Little Brontës

Sara O’Leary, illus. by Briony May Smith. Tundra, $18.99 (40p) ISBN 978-
0-7352-6369-7
Read the Review »
New Books and More

September 11, 2023
Among the books hitting shelves next week are a picture book about
navigating grief, illustrated by a late Caldecott Medalist and completed by
his son, a middle grade adventure following a rescue mission that leads into
another realm, a YA dystopian tale about a girl fighting against gender
norms, and more. more
'I'm a Survivor': Black Final Girls Are
(Literally) Killing It
The exclusive club of Final Girls in horror fiction has had a major problem across books and
films: race. We spoke with several Black YA authors who are working to diversify the genre
by creating the Black Final Girls they’ve always hoped to see. more
Multi-Author Series Spotlights the Fun and

Foibles of Third Grade
Eighteen books by 18 authors, 18 different protagonists, and one third-grade
classroom helmed by one unflappable teacher. The numbers add up to The
Kids in Mrs. Z's Class, an upcoming chapter-book series from Algonquin
Young Readers. more
EBSCO Helps Librarians Build Spanish

Collections
The academic database platform's NoveList's Core Collection offers
librarians a database of 7,000 Spanish-language titles. more
Programming Announced for PW's New AI

Conference
The full schedule for Artificial Intelligence: Revolution and Opportunity in
Trade Publishing, an online conference to be hosted by Publishers Weekly
on September 27, has been announced. more
Amazon Issues New AI Guidelines for Its

KDP Platform
With concerns mounting over the impact AI-generated books are having on
the e-book market, Amazon will now require KDP users to inform it if AI-
generated content was used "when you publish a new book or make edits to
and republish an existing book through KDP.” more

• Hachette Book Group is seeking a new Production Manager
• Bloomsbury Publishing is seeking a new Academic Marketing Manager
• Oregon State University Libraries and Press is seeking a new Marketing
Manager
Top 10 Bestsellers
1
The Brothers Hawthorne
Jennifer Lynn Barnes, Author
2
Assistant to the Villain
Hannah Nicole Maehrer, Author
3
Fourth Wing
4
Tom Lake
Ann Patchett, Author
5
Too Late: Definitive Edition
6
The Coworker
7
James Clear, Author
8
The Housemaid
9
A Court of Thorns and Roses
Sarah J Maas, Author
10
It Ends with Us


Publishers Weekly,
49 West 23rd Street
Ninth Floor
New York, NY 10010 Phone 212-377-5500
unsubscribe.
From: David Kriso [dkriso@dessk.net] on behalf of David Kriso <dkriso@dessk.net>
To: Monica M. Martinez [martinezm@mdpls.org]
Subject: Travel programs-September update
Attachments: WriterLecturerBio2023.pdf; DEKTravelJournalLectureList2023.pdf;
TheTravelersCompanionSeptember2023.pdf
Hi everyone!
September greetings! I hope everything is going well, and that all of you had a pleasant summer.
School is back in, but traveling never stops.
With summer un-offically behind us, it's time to look forward to the Fall and Winter months.
Whether cruising it's cruising, riding the rails, visiting Mickey and Minnie Mouse in Disney
World, jammin' in the the Caribbean, or enjoying fine seafood in New England, traveling is the
greatest investment we make with our time.
I wish to share with you that my travel presentation, "New York, NY: Never asleep...forever
alive!", via Zoom for HI USA, on August 15th was a smash hit success. More than 90 attended.
There were plentiful positives taken from it. I certainly look forward to other venues booking it.
As a reminder, schedule-wise, I am off from work on Sunday and Monday. I am flexible, and I
am open to presenting virtually and hybrid.
Visit my website, DEKTravelJournal.com, to read more about my background and material.
Attached are my updated bio, updated list of lecture topics and descriptions, and the September
2023 issue of my newsletter "The Traveler's Companion".
Thank you, and I look forward to speaking with you soon.
Sincerely,
David E. Kriso-Writer/Lecturer Bio
David Kriso has been a travel writer since 2011. David has been a travel lecturer
since January 2015. David resides in northern New Jersey, outside New York City. His
material mainly focuses on railroad and cruise travel. His web site is
DEKTravelJournal.com. His web site features stories on past traveling experiences
(including cruising), and cruising tips.
Since 2011, David’s work has been published in his hometown’s newspaper, The
Gazette. Other publications include Silver Sage Magazine, ASN Lifestyle, Passenger
Train Journal, Cruise Travel Magazine, Porthole Cruise Magazine, Tourist Attractions
and Parks Magazine; Souvenirs, Gifts, & Novelties Magazine, and The Beer Connoisseur.
In Spring 2017, he was published in “Report from Newport”, the official magazine of his
college alma mater, Salve Regina University. David has also been a guest on Cruise
Radio, based in Jacksonville, Florida.
David’s travel presentations have been a proven success. He has created a series of
twenty-one presentations including cruising, Amtrak travel, budget travel, Walt Disney
World, Washington, DC, Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Newport, RI. David has
lectured at libraries all across New Jersey and in New York. David has also lectured in
Alexandria, VA, Silver Spring, MD, Buffalo, NY, and Boston, MA.
Besides being a prolific writer and travel expert, David is a veteran cruise line
shore-side services agent in the New York area. In addition, he has worked at the ports of
Boston, Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, and New Orleans. David is a life-long Disney traveler, a
cruise traveler since age sixteen, and a railroad traveler since age four.
Besides his passion for traveling, David is a clerk with the U.S. Postal Service in
Rutherford, NJ, an active member of the Knights of Columbus, and an active alumnus of
Salve Regina University.
“Barbados: A modern pirate’s treasure”: A deeply informative tribute to the great highlights and
icons that make Barbados among the great jewels of the Caribbean. Topics include key historical facts,
tourism hot spots, and natural wonders.
“Boston: History beyond freedom’s trail”: An in-depth journey through Boston, discovering the
undiscovered highlights of America’s town. Little-known geographical facts, sports history, and
transportation history will be featured. City trivial facts will be shared.
“The Bahamas: Islands of Curiosity”: A colorful, descriptive, and informative presentation about the
western hemisphere’s most famous chain of islands. Eye-opening facts will be shared, as well as trivial
information to spark every traveler’s curiosity.
“Bar Harbor, ME: New England’s biggest little wonder”: An informative and eye-opening
presentation pinpointing the hard facts, impressions, and perspectives of New England’s jewel by the
Atlantic Ocean. Key topics will include trivial facts, the city’s historical profile, and natural wonders.
“Pittsburgh, PA: Forever steel-ing the show”: Ever dreamed of visiting the great American city where
steel is in its blood, and Steelers football is in its soul? Pittsburgh is the ultimate weekend family
getaway. Key topics will include trivial facts, the city’s steel industry, Pittsburgh’s iconic sports culture,
Bicycle Heaven Museum, the legacy of Mr. Fred Rogers, the Senator John Heinz History Center, and the
historic Heinz Company.
“St. Kitts and Nevis: Limin’ it up in paradise”: A well-detailed, picturesque, and inviting presentation
on one of the Caribbean’s most colorful destinations. Key topics will include: Trivial information about
both islands, island culture, recreational activities, and popular attractions (i.e. St. Kitts Scenic Railway).
“New York, NY: Never asleep; forever alive!”: If you know the words to the legendary Frank Sinatra
song, this presentation cannot be passed up. The presentation includes trivial facts, tourist hot spots,
iconic attractions, legendary landmarks, well-known activities, fine dining options, and travel tips for
navigating the greatest city in the world. The presentation is dedicated in memory of the 45,169 New
Yorkers who lost their lives during the pandemic.
“Savannah, GA: Making history; raising spirits”: COMING SOON! A detailed and compelling
presentation on the southern town nicknamed the “Hostess City”. Not only is Savannah is a friendly and
welcoming city, it is known as the most haunted city in America. Talking points will include trivial facts,
well-known attractions, notable points of interest, notable haunted stories, favorite city hangouts,
highlights of the city’s nightlife, and traveling tips.
September 2023 Imagination+Exploration=Inspiration
The Traveler’s Companion
Cruising tip of the month: 3) Malt Shop Memories Cruise (10/28/23-

11/4/23): Relive the phenomenal era of the
Proper behavior on board ship is imperative! late '50s and early '60s aboard the Holland
On sailing day, all guests are encouraged to America Nieuw Amsterdam on the Malt Shop
read their ship’s code of conduct. The reason Memories Cruise. In addition to the nightly
of the code of conduct isn’t for stating what performances from Rock 'n' Roll legends and
behavior is prohibited. Primarily, it is for exotic ports of call, the days and nights are
encouraging the good behavior that ensures a filled with artist Q&As, panel discussions, game
memorable experience for all. shows, rock 'n' roll vow renewals and so much
more.
Feature story:
2) Soul Train Cruise (3/27/24-2/3/24):
Supply and demand mean everything! This Guests get to relive their favorite moments and
Fall, the Disney Dream will be sailing out of create new memories aboard the Holland
New York City to Bermuda and Canada. America Nieuw Amsterdam as they dance
The Disney Dream will be doing 9 voyages, down the Soul Train Line with original Soul
starting September 26th, with the Train Dancers at Club Soul Train each night,
repositioning sailing on November 4th. see artists during the nightly performances,
attend Q&As, partake in meet and greets and
Top five time! nightly themed parties.
The top 5 upcoming theme 1) The Big Nude Boat (2/25/24-3/3/24):

charter cruises: Leave the cold weather and inhibitions behind
and join Bare-Necessities for a one-week warm
5) Bliss Cruise (11/5/23-11/11/23): The water adventure aboard the Carnival Pride in
Western Caribbean is calling and Bliss February to our favorite ports in the Caribbean.
Cruise is answering with a full ship clothing We have wonderful beaches to visit in Costa
optional charter scheduled for November Maya and Cozumel, Mexico.
2023 on the Celebrity Equinox departing
from Fort Lauderdale, Florida. There will be Where to next?
sea days packed with daytime pool activities,
seminars and workshops, meet & greets,
clothing optional pool and open deck areas, Demarest, NJ; Demarest Free Public Library;
plus, afternoon playtime fun. November 16th @ 6 pm
4) Rhythm & Blues Cruise (10/28/23- “Cruising: Making waves and sense”:
11/4/23: A wildly life changing experience September 21st @ 7 pm; Montvale Public
for thousands of musicians and blues Library; Montvale, NJ
cruisers. The Holland America Koningsdam
will be a “Blues Village” with multiple “Amtrak: Staying on ‘track’ with America’s
performances, jam with one another, network railroad”; March 25th @ 7 pm; Mahwah Public
and simply relax for an entire week at sea. Library; Mahwah, NJ
Subject: ALA Chapter Leaders Digest for Thursday September 7, 2023
ALA Chapter Leaders

Post New Message
Sep 6, 2023
Discussions
For Awareness: US Senate Hearing on Banned Books (Tuesday, September

12th, 10:00am)
1. Senate Judiciary Hearing: Jon Martin
started 7 hours ago, Brianna Hoffman (0 replies)
Follow-Up from Large Chapter Meeting on Affiliation and Next Steps/Meeting

2. Hello ALA Chapter Leaders! Following large... Brianna Hoffman
started yesterday, Michael Dowling (1 reply)
Nominate a Stellar Librarian for 2024 I Love My Librarian Award

3. I wish ALA would consider adjusting the... Wynter Giddings
top next
1. For Awareness: US Senate Hearing on Banned Books (Tuesday, September
12th, 10:00am)

Sep 7, 2023 4:16 PM
Jon Martin
Senate Judiciary Hearing: www.judiciary.senate.gov/committee-activity/hearings/...
------------------------------
Jon Martin
He/Him/His
jmartin@ala.org
------------------------------
top previous next

2. Follow-Up from Large Chapter Meeting on Affiliation and Next Steps/Meeting

Sep 7, 2023 12:39 PM

Brianna Hoffman
Hello ALA Chapter Leaders!
Following large chapter leaders meeting on affiliation that took place last month, a
couple of action items were identified as things that would be helpful in keeping this
c
1. ALA Chapter Affiliation Survey
• Please complete the ALA Chapter Affiliation Survey so that we can track and
quantify the challenges. The results will be shared at our upcoming CRC
meeting.
• Please note that we are tracking targeting of ALA and chapters.
• You may take this survey more than once. Please re-take the survey as
things change and evolve in your chapter.
2. Upcoming Chapter Relations Committee (CRC) Meeting
• Our next Chapter Relations Committee meeting is Tuesday, September 26,

11:30am-1:00pm PT/2:30pm-4:00pm ET. Chapter leaders (Executive
Directors, Presidents, Councilors, or their designees) are welcome to join in
addition to the Chapter Relations Committee.
Date: Tuesday, September 26, 2023
Time: 11:30am-1:00pm PT/2:30pm-4:00pm ET
Zoom: ala-events.zoom.us/j/96115517259
Agenda Highlights:
• Affiliation discussion around the survey and strategy

• 2024 Legislative Session
• LLX and Annual Conference Programming
3. File System: Tracking Affiliation Documents
• We understand the importance of a well-organized file system for tracking

affiliation documents. To make things easier, we've put together step-by-step
instructions on how to use our file system effectively in ALA Connect.
• To Upload File:
• Email to Jon Martin at jmartin@ala.org
• Or upload yourself using the view instructions then by clicking
on create entry
• To View the Files:
• Log into ALA Connect
• Navigate to the ALA Chapter Leaders Community
• On the bar, click on library
• In the folder system, select ALA Affiliation Statements
• Select the most appropriate sub-folder
• Public Statements from Chapters
• Internal Statements from Chapters (ie. Message to
members or talking points)
• Calls to Disaffiliate (ie. Letters, op-eds calling for
disaffiliation or defunding)
It is our hope that both the survey and a clearer filing system will lead us to a more
"real-time" snapshot of what's happening with chapters and make it easier for
chapters to find existing statements that may help them craft their own.
Thank you for your ongoing commitment and contributions! I look forward to our
continued work together!
------------------------------
Brianna Hoffman
Executive Director
she/her
------------------------------
top previous
3. Re: Nominate a Stellar Librarian for 2024 I Love My Librarian Award

Sep 7, 2023 11:15 AM

Wynter Giddings
I wish ALA would consider adjusting the eligibility criteria for this award. There are
many amazing librarians and library workers who either have a master's in an
adjacent field, or don't have one at all. Many of the public library directors in the
state of Maine don't have an MLIS and do amazing work in their communites every
day, some running a library almost single-handedly. Awards should be equitable!
------------------------------
Wynter Giddings
Manager of Technology & Training
Curtis Memorial Library
------------------------------

To: Bri Schmidt [bri@silverstateequality.org]
CC: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Jessica Munger [jessica@silverstateequality.org];
Hailey Lindsley [hailey_lindsley@ppmarmonte.org]
Subject: Re: BCC Meeting Agenda
Hello,
I like your idea to just continue on with tomorrow's booking. We should be absolutely good to
go for the new appointment date of September 19.
Unfortunately the applicant info isn't posted yet. The only one I know of that has gone public is
Willie Puchert: Willie Puchert Puts Hat in Library Board Ring, Stresses Importance of Access —
Our Town Reno
Willie Puchert Puts Hat in

Library Board Ring, Stresses
Importance of Access — Our
Town Reno
Willie Puchert is a local graphic designer
and former journalist who has lived in
northern Nevada for almost 40 years.
While he has never been interested in
running for office, Puchert has been
active in progressive politics for decades,
working and volunteering with city,
county, and statewide camp
www.ourtownreno.com
I'm guessing that the agenda and applicant info should be available on the SpeakUp platform by
the end of next week. I will be out on vacation that week, but I'm happy to answer any
questions once I get back.
Thanks,
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System
From: Bri Schmidt <bri@silverstateequality.org>

To: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Jessica Munger <jessica@silverstateequality.org>; Hailey
Lindsley <hailey_lindsley@ppmarmonte.org>
Hi Jamie!
We'll keep the room booking, I figure it's good to get people signed up anyways and then we can
have training materials to distribute even if we don't have a specific agenda item yet.
Thank you for the information! I recall that tomorrow we should be able to look through the
applicants, do you know where I can go to find that information once it's available?
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 12:21 PM Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>

wrote:
Hi Bri,
I can provide more info. A couple of questions for you-- would you like to cancel the meeting
room registration for tomorrow at the Northwest Reno Library? We can use the same location
but change the reservation date.
As for what the agenda item will look like, it will be an appointment item on the September 19
agenda. There will be a recommendation to appoint two candidates from a pool of applicants.
We expect around 50 applicants to be in that pool.
As Library staff, I can't advise on which candidate to select. However, in alignment with the
mission of your organization, it's probably good to know that candidate Reva Crump is
affiliated with Washoe Republican Chair Bruce Parks, who has expressed opposition to drag
story hour events at several Library Board meetings.
Let me know if you have any additional questions, and would like to re-book your meeting
room.
Thanks so much for the support!
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
Public Information and Development Officer | Washoe County Library System

Cc: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Jessica Munger
<jessica@silverstateequality.org>; Hailey Lindsley <hailey_lindsley@ppmarmonte.org>
Oh okay! Thank you for the clarification. We will re-organize around that date, although we
may have more of an online presence instead due to the 19th being National Voter Registration
Day. Do you guys know what the agenda item might look like so we can inform our people
about what to look out for? And additionally, are there any specific candidates that are either a
hard "no" or a hard "yes" for you all? We'd love to give specific direction to our volunteers and
members.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:33 AM Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov> wrote:

Good morning Bri,
Sorry for the confusion. We learned yesterday that the LBOT appointment will be moved to
the September 19th BCC meeting.
Thank you for your support!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

To: Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff
Cc: Jessica Munger <jessica@silverstateequality.org>; Hailey Lindsley
<hailey_lindsley@ppmarmonte.org>
Subject: BCC Meeting Agenda
Happy Thursday!
I'm reaching out to get some clarity on the agenda for the upcoming meeting on Tuesday. Do
y'all know which agenda item will be addressing the trustee candidates? I can't seem to find
anything oriented towards the library board. Will it just be under general public comment?
Thank you!
--
Until the work is done!
Bri Schmidt | Program Associate
Silver State Equality
|
Institute
www.silverstateequality.org
@silverstateeq
:: Pronouns: They/Them/Theirs
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
:: Email: bri@silverstateequality.org
|Reno, NV|
--
|
Institute
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
--
|
Institute
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
To: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
CC: McKenzie, Stacy L. [SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: FW: Provide a public comment to save Drag Story Hour»
From Julie Ullman. Tough since we have been telling everyone Sept 12…
Should have a good showing either way for September 19th.
Thanks,
Jeff
Jeff Scott
From: Ullman, Julie <JLUllman@washoecounty.gov>

Subject: Fw: Provide a public comment to save Drag Story Hour»
Just FYI
Julie Ullman
Managing Librarian | South Valleys Library | Washoe County Library

System
jlullman@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.851-5190

From: Justin Kinney <jkennedyk@yahoo.com>
To: Ullman, Julie <JLUllman@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Provide a public comment to save Drag Story Hour»
Just got another email from Silver State Equality re Drag Story Hour.
Sent from my iPad
From: Bri Schmidt <email@silverstateequality.org>

To: Justin Kinney <jkennedyk@yahoo.com>
Subject: Provide a public comment to save Drag Story Hour»
Reply-To: email@silverstateequality.org
We have a second chance.
Hi Justin!
Help us save Drag Story Hour in Washoe County!
You still have time to submit public comments to the Washoe County
Commissioner's Office — as right-wing extremists are seeking to ban Drag Story

Hour from Washoe County Libraries. Drag Story Hour stands as a visible
representation of inclusion for the LGBTQ+ community. Don’t let them erase us!
WHEN: Tuesday, 9/12 at 10am
WHERE: 1001 E 9th St Building A
WHO: Any resident in Washoe County
***Please refrain from applauding, cheering, booing, or jeering, as well as
engaging in any personal attacks if attending in person.
Can’t make it in-person? Submit your support in advance:
1. Visit SpeakUp, Washoe County’s e-comment system
2. Create an account
3. Submit a virtual public comment from now through Monday, 9/11 at 4 pm.
Learn how by visiting: https://linktr.ee/protectfreespeech
Thank you for your commitment to equality.
- Bri
Bri Schmidt
Program Associate
Pronouns: they/them/theirs
This message was sent to: jkennedyk@yahoo.com

Click here to unsubscribe or to update your email preferences.
Silver State Equality Institute | silverstateequality.org
4780 West Ann Road #5357
North Las Vegas, NV 89031
As Nevada’s statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, Silver State Equality brings the voices of
LGBTQ+ people and allies to institutions of power in Nevada and across the United States, striving to
create a world that is healthy, just and fully equal for all LGBTQ+ people. To learn more, click here.
From: Ullman, Julie [JLUllman@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Ullman, Julie
<JLUllman@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Fw: Provide a public comment to save Drag Story Hour»
Just FYI
Julie Ullman
Managing Librarian | South Valleys Library | Washoe County Library System
jlullman@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.851-5190
From: Justin Kinney <jkennedyk@yahoo.com>

To: Ullman, Julie <JLUllman@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Provide a public comment to save Drag Story Hour»
Just got another email from Silver State Equality re Drag Story Hour.
Sent from my iPad
From: Bri Schmidt <email@silverstateequality.org>

To: Justin Kinney <jkennedyk@yahoo.com>
Subject: Provide a public comment to save Drag Story Hour»
Reply-To: email@silverstateequality.org
We have a second chance.
Hi Justin!
Help us save Drag Story Hour in Washoe County!
You still have time to submit public comments to the Washoe County
Commissioner's Office — as right-wing extremists are seeking to ban Drag Story
Hour from Washoe County Libraries. Drag Story Hour stands as a visible
representation of inclusion for the LGBTQ+ community. Don’t let them erase us!
WHEN: Tuesday, 9/12 at 10am
WHERE: 1001 E 9th St Building A
WHO: Any resident in Washoe County
***Please refrain from applauding, cheering, booing, or jeering, as well as
engaging in any personal attacks if attending in person.
Can’t make it in-person? Submit your support in advance:
1. Visit SpeakUp, Washoe County’s e-comment system
2. Create an account
3. Submit a virtual public comment from now through Monday, 9/11 at 4 pm.
Learn how by visiting: https://linktr.ee/protectfreespeech

Thank you for your commitment to equality.
- Bri
Bri Schmidt
Program Associate
Pronouns: they/them/theirs
This message was sent to: jkennedyk@yahoo.com

Click here to unsubscribe or to update your email preferences.
Silver State Equality Institute | silverstateequality.org
4780 West Ann Road #5357
North Las Vegas, NV 89031
As Nevada’s statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, Silver State Equality brings the voices of
LGBTQ+ people and allies to institutions of power in Nevada and across the United States, striving to
create a world that is healthy, just and fully equal for all LGBTQ+ people. To learn more, click here.
From: Bri Schmidt [bri@silverstateequality.org] on behalf of Bri Schmidt
<bri@silverstateequality.org>
To: Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]; Jessica Munger [jessica@silverstateequality.org];
Hailey Lindsley [hailey_lindsley@ppmarmonte.org]
Hi Jamie!
We'll keep the room booking, I figure it's good to get people signed up anyways and then we can
have training materials to distribute even if we don't have a specific agenda item yet.
Thank you for the information! I recall that tomorrow we should be able to look through the
applicants, do you know where I can go to find that information once it's available?
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 12:21 PM Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>

wrote:
Hi Bri,
mission of your organization, it's probably good to know that candidate Reva Crump is
affiliated with Washoe Republican Chair Bruce Parks, who has expressed opposition to drag
story hour events at several Library Board meetings.
room.
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
Public Information and Development Officer | Washoe County Library System

Oh okay! Thank you for the clarification. We will re-organize around that date, although we
may have more of an online presence instead due to the 19th being National Voter Registration
Day. Do you guys know what the agenda item might look like so we can inform our people
about what to look out for? And additionally, are there any specific candidates that are either a
hard "no" or a hard "yes" for you all? We'd love to give specific direction to our volunteers and
members.
Good morning Bri,
Sorry for the confusion. We learned yesterday that the LBOT appointment will be moved to
the September 19th BCC meeting.
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Happy Thursday!
Thank you!
--
Institute
@silverstateeq
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
|Reno, NV|
--
|
Institute
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
--
|
Institute
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
To: Bri Schmidt [bri@silverstateequality.org]; Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Jessica Munger [jessica@silverstateequality.org]; Hailey Lindsley
[hailey_lindsley@ppmarmonte.org]
Hi Bri,
mission of your organization, it's probably good to know that candidate Reva Crump is affiliated
with Washoe Republican Chair Bruce Parks, who has expressed opposition to drag story hour
events at several Library Board meetings.
room.
Jamie
Jamie Hemingway
System

Oh okay! Thank you for the clarification. We will re-organize around that date, although we may
have more of an online presence instead due to the 19th being National Voter Registration Day.
Do you guys know what the agenda item might look like so we can inform our people about
what to look out for? And additionally, are there any specific candidates that are either a hard
"no" or a hard "yes" for you all? We'd love to give specific direction to our volunteers and
members.

Good morning Bri,
Sorry for the confusion. We learned yesterday that the LBOT appointment will be moved to the
September 19th BCC meeting.
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Happy Thursday!
Thank you!
--
|
Institute
@silverstateeq
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
|Reno, NV|
--
|
Institute
:: Cell: (702) 835-6419
:: Office: (702) 755-6288 xt 6419
From: Burton, Leah J. [LJBurton@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Burton, Leah J.
<LJBurton@washoecounty.gov>
To: Library - Branch Managers [LibBranchManagers@washoecounty.gov]; Library - Mgmt &
Supervisors [Library-MgmtSupervisors@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: FW: Human Resources Newsletter- September 2023
Hello everyone,
Please see below the Human Resources newsletter for September. HR would appreciate if you could
print this out and place a copy or two in a location where employees can read at their convenience, such
as in a break room. HR newsletters are also available on Inside Washoe.
Thank you!
Leah
From: Washoe County <communications@washoecounty.gov>

To: Burton, Leah J. <LJBurton@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Human Resources Newsletter- September 2023
Human Resources Newsletter

September 2023
What's happening this month?
Monday, September 4: Labor Day
Wednesday, September 6: Substance Recovery Month Lunch & Learn with

Sheriff Balaam, Manager Brown, Specialty Courts Manager Brooke Howard,
and Sheriff's Office PIO Bryan Samudio. Get enrolled Here or join live Here.
Monday, September 11: Patriot Day is observed on September 11 to

commemorate the lives lost in the 2001 attacks. We ask staff to wear red,
white, and blue for this holiday and will host food trucks at 9th Street and the
Downtown Employee Lot to encourage participation. Download the Reminder.
Wednesday, September 13: Opioids: Understanding the Dangers and Ways

to Help Webinar at 12:00 pm. Get enrolled Here.
Friday, September 15: We will kick off Hispanic Heritage Month with a Ballet
Folklorico performance and paletas downtown in front of the DA's Office from
4:00-5:00 pm! Download the Calendar Reminder.
Wednesday, September 20: Resume Writing and Interview Skills Training will
take place in HR 9:00-11:00 am. This training was designed to help our
employees become the best candidates for our jobs! Sign up Here.
Thursday, September 21: Art Show Reception in Lobby A at the 9th Street
Complex. We have been working with Sierra Arts to bring an art exhibit to our
Administrative Complex. The exhibit reception will take place on September 21
from 4:00-5:00 pm. The featured artist is Susan Kay Handau with an exhibit
titled "My Tribe: In our Aging World," which will be up through November.
Friday, September 22: Join UMR at 12:00 pm for an informative webinar on

finding a mental health provider within the United Healthcare Choice Plus
Network. Register Here.
Wednesday, September 27: Join Voya representative Tom Verducci at 12:00

pm for a Deferred Compensation- Early Career Webinar. Register Here.
Visit Inside Washoe to see more events
Employee Benefits
September Calm Calendar: This Need assistance finding a mental
September, the theme is “Create”. health provider within the United
We invite you to explore what life Healthcare Choice Plus Network?
you want to create for yourself, one Join UMR on September 22 at 12:00
small step at a time. Access the pm for an informative webinar on
calendar. navigating the directory. Get
registered here.
Join Tom Verducci, our local Voya Schedule your FREE annual
representative, on September 27 at Wellness Screening, appointments
12:00 pm for Deferred available October 2 through
Compensation - Early Career November 30. Learn more here.
Webinar. Get registered here.
Visit the Health Benefits page
Courses of the Month
September DEIB Trainings:
Substance Abuse Recovery Month

Lunch & Learn: Join Sheriff Balaam,
Manager Brown, Brooke Howard,
and Bryan Samudio Wednesday,
9/6, 12:00-12:30 pm to discuss
opioid use in our community during
Substance Abuse Recovery Month.
Opioids: Understanding the Dangers

and Ways to Help: This webinar on
Wednesday, 9/13, 12:00-1:00 pm will
address the nature and impact of
opioid addiction and options for
treatment, as well as ways family
and friends may offer support.
Leadership Course of the Month:
Dare to Lead: This 15-minute book

summary of Dare to Lead explores
how you can find the inner courage
to lead a great team. Drawing on her
own experiences as a leadership
coach, as well as recent research,
these blinks explore how you can
harness your emotions, quash your
fear of failure and become a daring
leader in an increasingly competitive
world.
Coming Next Month:
• October 18th: In-Depth Lunch & Learn with Awaken, 12:00-1:00 pm.
• October 19th: LGBTQIA+ 101 Training, 2:00-4:00 pm.
Visit the Organizational Effectiveness page
Talent Management Updates
Human Resources recruited and

completed testing for our new
clerical series, Office Assistant,
Office Specialist, and Senior Office
Specialist. Through this process,
Human Resources screened over
1,000 applications and administered
16 exam sessions!
Applying for an internal position?

You need to know this!
Pursuant to section 5.183 of the
Washoe County Personnel
Handbook, if a candidate fails to
respond to an interview notification
within the required timeframe, they
may be removed from the eligible
list. If you are not interested in
interviewing, please make sure to
get back to the hiring department as
this is considered waiving the
interview vs. failing to respond.
We recommend using your personal email when applying for job opportunities,
as you may not check your work email while on vacation. If you use your work
email for job applications, please make sure you check your email for any
notifications from hiring departments or Human Resources.
Defensible Hiring Training: Upcoming Recruitments:
• DA - Investigator II
Our team administered several
• District Park Manager
sessions of our new Defensible
• GIS Specialist
Hiring class throughout the summer.
• Maintenance Worker - Parks
The class covered topics such as
(3/4 position - .75 hours)
recruitment, behavioral based
• Medium Equipment Operator
interviewing, providing the proper
(Incline)*
training to interview panel members,
• Mental Health Counselor I
and so much more! If your
• Office Supervisor
department would like more
• Roads Supervisor
information on Defensible Hiring,
• Senior Accountant
please contact your assigned HR
Analyst.
Visit the Talent Management page

Employee Services Updates
Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study - Effective 08/14/23 (PP# 18/23)
The Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study implementation has been completed for
the 08/14/23 effective date. All departments have been processed. Any
applicable changes to an employee’s pay rate will be reflected in the PP# 18/23
paycheck dated 09/01/23.
With all of the recent changes to the pay structure (listed below), employees
are encouraged to review their pay rates for accuracy. Any questions or
discrepancies regarding pay should be addressed directly with your
Department HR Representative immediately.
• 07/01/23: 3.5% COLA

• 07/17/23: PERS Contribution Rate Adjustment (-1.875% for Regular
PERS Members or -3.00% for Early Retirement Members)
• 08/14/23: Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study Implementation
The new ALPHABETIC LIST OF SALARIES effective 07/01/23, 07/17/23, and

08/14/23 can be found on the Inside Washoe HR Department page.
For general information regarding
the Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study
implementation, including a Korn
Ferry Salary Calculator (save a copy
and then edit the yellow boxes) to
assist employees with calculating
their 08/14/23 pay rate, please visit
HR's Korn Ferry Classification and
Compensation Study page.
For general questions regarding the study, please contact the HR-KF Class &
Comp Study inbox hrkfclasscompstudy@washoecounty.gov. This inbox will be
available for general Korn Ferry questions through Friday, 09/15/23. After that,
HR kindly requests that Korn Ferry inquires be addressed with your Department
HR Representative or by contacting Human Resources.
Visit the Employee Services page
Upcoming Holidays
Labor Day: September 4
Nevada Day: Friday, October 27
Veterans Day (Observed): Friday, November 10
Thanksgiving Day: Thursday, November 23
Family Day: Friday, November 24
Christmas: Monday, December 25
New Year’s Day: Monday, January 1
Other Ways to Get Involved
Support our Partner in Education School:

Glenn Duncan needs prize items for Q1
recognitions and indoor recess items like puzzles
and card games. Please bring donations to HR
by 9/22. Monetary donations towards items can
be sent via Venmo to @Elizabeth-Jourdin
(verification: 4229) by 9/14. More detail about
donations here and our partnership here.
Veterans Day Parade:

This year, Washoe County will be
participating in Reno's Veterans Day
Parade for the first time! We are
excited to recognize and honor our
veteran staff and the veterans in our
community. Let us know you are
interested in participating by
completing this Form.
Volunteer Opportunities:
Thank you to everyone who served
at the Senior Center Breakfast on
August 21! We are looking to start
hosting these quarterly with a holiday
breakfast in early December.
We are also setting up quarterly volunteer opportunities for staff through the
Food Bank of Northern Nevada starting in 2024. Our first staff opportunity will
be Saturday, January 6, 9:00-11:00 am with room for 15 volunteers ages 10
and older. Email HR-DEIB@washoecounty.gov for more information.
Building Belonging Book Club:

We are moving into our third and final book club
selection of 2023: The Five Wounds by Kirstin Valdez
Quade, which will be discussed in November 2023. Let
us know you are interested in participating by
completing this Form. You can access this title through
the Washoe County library here.
Do you have a Rockstar co-worker who recently went above and beyond?
Let's recognize them!
Nominate a Washoe Star here!
Leaving Washoe County? Transferring Departments? Retiring? We want
to hear from you!
Complete the anonymous Employee Exit Survey.
Washoe County, Department of Human Resources

1001 E. 9th St. Reno, NV 89512
This email was sent to LJBURTON@WASHOECOUNTY.GOV
From: McBride, Kelly [KMcBride@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of McBride, Kelly
<KMcBride@washoecounty.gov>
To: Burton, L.J. [LJBurton@washoecounty.gov]; Grasso, Lorna [LGrasso@washoecounty.gov]
CC: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Library August Washoe Stars
Hello!
Here are your August Washoe Star nominees.
As a reminder, HR does not individually email each person who is nominated for a Washoe Star to
inform them of their nomination so we ask that you do this at the department level. What we do from
the HR side includes:
-We post nominations on our Washoe Stars page, share the post on Yammer (Viva Exchange)
and Inside HR, and post names outside of the Human Resources office.
-We hold a monthly raffle with all Washoe Star nominees and draw 10 names. We post those
names on Yammer, email the winners directly, and send them swag.
-We invite all employees who are nominated as Washoe Stars to a quarterly event with
Manager Brown (food, activities, raffle). The Q3 event for all July, August, and September
nominees will be held Friday, October 13th with a Haunted Courthouse theme!
Nominee Category Department Details
Washoe County Library System sup

to help them succeed. Storytime in
Garden is a popular and well loved
planning and executing a water the
60 patrons! One little participant as
Emily Giles & Kerry Stendell Quality Public Service Library dirty toys for them to wash.
Jenn always thinks on her feet to gi

Today, Jenn's Story Time had two n
a 3 year old. This was the first time
the children were very wiggly. Jenn
by choosing some books that were
made sure to let families know that
comfortable during story time and t
nothing to be embarrassed about. S
Jennifer Jefry Quality Public Service Library welcomed. Great job Jenn!
Jerome Gunderman, Nicole Baby Storytime was recently added
Mortimer, and Robyn Reno Library. It was amazing to see
Rassuchine Quality Public Service Library together on this program, singing in
Jonnica went above and beyond to
crises this week. Displaying kindnes
people in need. She stayed after ho
Jonnica Bowen Quality Public Service Library to the resources and services they n
WCLS Strategic plan aims to provide
community and ensure they are usi
Kerry noticed a need to engage our
tables on the lower level of the libra
Kerry Stendell Quality Public Service Library avid puzzlers amongst us. Way to go
Krystina has enthusiastically particip

training program. The activities in th
employee engagement with and kn
available throughout the branches.
Service for our community visiting t
the Libby app for downloadable ebo
couriers on a ride-along, assisting w
holds, and supplies to all the branch
Krystina Stigman Quality Public Service Library the Challenge, completing 10 activit
Lisa is dedicated to her work and fu
continues to work on the problem u
help, but often works beyond the o
have even forgotten mentioning so
a resolution or suggestion. She is an
Lisa Felix Integrity Library and thorough.
It is due to Lysa’s efforts that our ne

successful and fun! This is a new sto
month Lysa, along with another sta
rhymes and songs (often with ukele
caregivers and babies. It is so great
knowing that we are helping to buil
Lysa Lee Quality Public Service Library enjoy their chance to visit with each
Nathanie consistently plans outstan

co-presents monthly Maker Weeke
design their own mugs, tote bags an
Story Times for the little ones are b
literacy for Washoe County families
the South Valleys Library to plan an
scientists, Time Out Tuesday events
provides one-on-one technology as
library resources. She is a bright exa
Nathanie Clancy Quality Public Service Library co-workers and library patrons alike
Our library system offers a Book a L

assistance to patrons with various t
services provided is helping with un
difficult and confusing process. I ha
and beyond to support patrons with
Robyn Rassuchine Quality Public Service Library professionalism and dedication to h
Seth kept a calm and steadying pres
crisis. As first contact with the perso
listening skills that helped calm the
Seth Welman Quality Public Service Library services that were needed.
Tyna did a phenomenal job commu
potential electrical issue. She was c
Tyna Sloan Effective Communication Library Thank you for always keeping a leve
Regards,
Kelly McBride
Program Assistant | Department of Human Resources
kmcbride@washoecounty.gov | : (775) 328-2091
1001 E Ninth Street Bldg A Room 220, Reno, NV 89512
Office Hours: Mon-Thurs 8:00am-5:00pm, Fri 8:00am-12:00pm
CC: Library - Circulation Team [circulation@washoecounty.gov]; Library - Book Team
[Library-BookTeam@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: list of items our patrons censored through misplacement and defacement
Attachments: Censored Books from WCLS Collection.xlsx
Hi All,
I’ve gone back through my emails to compile a list of items where we’ve had attempts by the public to
restrict access to materials in our collection. Thanks for alerting me anytime you find books hidden or
defaced. Please let me know if I’ve missed any titles.
Thanks!
Debi
Debi Stears
Collection Development Manager | Washoe County Library System
ddstears@washoecounty.gov| Office: 775.327.8349
Censorship in the Stacks: Books Hidden or Defaced
Date Title Author Barcode Branch collection
9/5/2023 Big Questions Book of Sex & Consent Freitas, Donna 31235401403089 SS JNF turned around backwards
8/29/2023 Rainbow Parade Neilson, Emily 31235401186585 RN JE damaged book - pages and cover bent
8/29/2023 All Boys Aren't Blue Johnson, George M. 31235401133678 SS Bio patron returned book with bible verses stuffed inside pages
8/28/2023 Welcome to Consent: How to Say no, When to Say Yes, and How to be the Boss of Your Body Stynes, Yumi 31235401358275 SS JNF hidden behind board and tiny book display
8/22/2023 Transgender Children and Youth Nealy, Elijah 31235400079245 NV ANF book was eventually w/d as lost because it had been hidden behind other books
8/21/2023 Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America Haberman, Maggie 31235401252478 SS ANF removed from display and hidden behind other books
8/12/2023 Pronoun Book Ayala-Kronos, Chris 31235401345017 NV JE hidden on shelf behind JF books
7/20/2023 Nightmare Scenario: Inside the Trump Administations Response to the Pandemic that Changed History Abutaleb, Yasmeen 31235401010512 SS ANF hidden in wrong location
7/16/2023 When You Can Seim Wong, Jack 31235401415638 SS JE hidden in romance stacks
7/14/2023 Forever Blume, Judy 31235037393019 IV YA hidden behind adult non-fiction books
7/7/2023 Picture of Freedom: The Diary of Clotee, a Slave Girl McKissack, Pat 31235013114116 SS JF tucked behind books in the stacks
7/7/2023 Santa's Husband Kibblesmith, Daniel 31235400152885 SS JE tucked behind books in the stacks
7/7/2023 Nobody is Protected: How the Border Patrol Became the Most Dangerous Police Force in the United States Jones, Reece 31235401202747 NW ANF Hate speech written inside book (anti-Mexican)
7/7/2023 An American Geoncide: The United States and the California Indian Catastrophe Madley, Benjamin 31235037819997 NW ANF Hate speech written inside book (anti-Jewish)
6/28/2023 Big Gay Ice Cream Petrof, Bryan 31235037712010 SS ANF tucked in corner on wrong shelf
5/4/2023 Why the Germans? Why the Jews? Envy, Race Hatred, and the Prehisotry of the Holocaust Aly, Gotz 31235037111817 SO ANF Hate speech written inside book (anti-Jewish)
8/1/2022 Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America McWhorter, John 31235401081471 SP ANF Hate speech written inside book (anti-African-American)
From: Washoe County [communications@washoecounty.gov] on behalf of Washoe County
<communications@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Human Resources Newsletter- September 2023
Human Resources Newsletter

September 2023
What's happening this month?
Monday, September 4: Labor Day
Wednesday, September 6: Substance Recovery Month Lunch & Learn with

Sheriff Balaam, Manager Brown, Specialty Courts Manager Brooke Howard,
and Sheriff's Office PIO Bryan Samudio. Get enrolled Here or join live Here.
Monday, September 11: Patriot Day is observed on September 11 to

commemorate the lives lost in the 2001 attacks. We ask staff to wear red, white,
and blue for this holiday and will host food trucks at 9th Street and the
Downtown Employee Lot to encourage participation. Download the Reminder.
Wednesday, September 13: Opioids: Understanding the Dangers and Ways to

Help Webinar at 12:00 pm. Get enrolled Here.
Friday, September 15: We will kick off Hispanic Heritage Month with a Ballet
Folklorico performance and paletas downtown in front of the DA's Office from
4:00-5:00 pm! Download the Calendar Reminder.
Wednesday, September 20: Resume Writing and Interview Skills Training will
take place in HR 9:00-11:00 am. This training was designed to help our
employees become the best candidates for our jobs! Sign up Here.
Thursday, September 21: Art Show Reception in Lobby A at the 9th Street
Complex. We have been working with Sierra Arts to bring an art exhibit to our
Administrative Complex. The exhibit reception will take place on September 21
from 4:00-5:00 pm. The featured artist is Susan Kay Handau with an exhibit
titled "My Tribe: In our Aging World," which will be up through November.
Friday, September 22: Join UMR at 12:00 pm for an informative webinar on
finding a mental health provider within the United Healthcare Choice Plus
Network. Register Here.
Wednesday, September 27: Join Voya representative Tom Verducci at 12:00

pm for a Deferred Compensation- Early Career Webinar. Register Here.
Visit Inside Washoe to see more events
Employee Benefits
September Calm Calendar: This
September, the theme is “Create”.
We invite you to explore what life
you want to create for yourself, one
small step at a time. Access the
calendar.
Need assistance finding a mental

health provider within the United
Healthcare Choice Plus Network?
Join UMR on September 22 at 12:00
pm for an informative webinar on
navigating the directory. Get
registered here.
Join Tom Verducci, our local Voya

representative, on September 27 at
12:00 pm for Deferred Compensation
- Early Career Webinar. Get
registered here.
Schedule your FREE annual
Wellness Screening, appointments
available October 2 through
November 30. Learn more here.
Visit the Health Benefits page
Courses of the Month
September DEIB Trainings:
Substance Abuse Recovery Month

Lunch & Learn: Join Sheriff Balaam,
Manager Brown, Brooke Howard, and
Bryan Samudio Wednesday, 9/6,
12:00-12:30 pm to discuss opioid use
in our community during Substance
Abuse Recovery Month.
Opioids: Understanding the Dangers

and Ways to Help: This webinar on
Wednesday, 9/13, 12:00-1:00 pm will
address the nature and impact of
opioid addiction and options for
treatment, as well as ways family and
friends may offer support.
Leadership Course of the Month:
Dare to Lead: This 15-minute book

summary of Dare to Lead explores
how you can find the inner courage to
lead a great team. Drawing on her
own experiences as a leadership
coach, as well as recent research,
these blinks explore how you can
harness your emotions, quash your
fear of failure and become a daring
leader in an increasingly competitive
world.
Coming Next Month:
• October 18th: In-Depth Lunch & Learn with Awaken, 12:00-1:00 pm.
• October 19th: LGBTQIA+ 101 Training, 2:00-4:00 pm.
Visit the Organizational Effectiveness page
Talent Management Updates
Human Resources recruited and

completed testing for our new
clerical series, Office Assistant,
Office Specialist, and Senior Office
Specialist. Through this process,
Human Resources screened over
1,000 applications and administered
16 exam sessions!
Applying for an internal position?
You need to know this!
Pursuant to section 5.183 of the
Washoe County Personnel
Handbook, if a candidate fails to
respond to an interview notification
within the required timeframe, they
may be removed from the eligible
list. If you are not interested in
interviewing, please make sure to
get back to the hiring department as
this is considered waiving the
interview vs. failing to respond.
We recommend using your personal email when applying for job opportunities,
as you may not check your work email while on vacation. If you use your work
email for job applications, please make sure you check your email for any
notifications from hiring departments or Human Resources.
Defensible Hiring Training: Upcoming Recruitments:
• DA - Investigator II
Our team administered several
• District Park Manager
sessions of our new Defensible
• GIS Specialist
Hiring class throughout the summer.
• Maintenance Worker - Parks
The class covered topics such as
(3/4 position - .75 hours)
recruitment, behavioral based
• Medium Equipment Operator
interviewing, providing the proper
(Incline)*
training to interview panel members,
• Mental Health Counselor I
and so much more! If your
• Office Supervisor
department would like more
• Roads Supervisor
information on Defensible Hiring,
please contact your assigned HR • Senior Accountant
Analyst.
Visit the Talent Management page
Employee Services Updates
Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study - Effective 08/14/23 (PP# 18/23)
The Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study implementation has been completed for
the 08/14/23 effective date. All departments have been processed. Any
applicable changes to an employee’s pay rate will be reflected in the PP# 18/23
paycheck dated 09/01/23.
With all of the recent changes to the pay structure (listed below), employees are
encouraged to review their pay rates for accuracy. Any questions or
discrepancies regarding pay should be addressed directly with your Department
HR Representative immediately.
• 07/01/23: 3.5% COLA

• 07/17/23: PERS Contribution Rate Adjustment (-1.875% for Regular
PERS Members or -3.00% for Early Retirement Members)
• 08/14/23: Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study Implementation
The new ALPHABETIC LIST OF SALARIES effective 07/01/23, 07/17/23, and
08/14/23 can be found on the Inside Washoe HR Department page.
For general information regarding

the Korn Ferry Class & Comp. Study
implementation, including a Korn
Ferry Salary Calculator (save a copy
and then edit the yellow boxes) to
assist employees with calculating
their 08/14/23 pay rate, please visit
HR's Korn Ferry Classification and
Compensation Study page.
For general questions regarding the study, please contact the HR-KF Class &
Comp Study inbox hrkfclasscompstudy@washoecounty.gov. This inbox will be
available for general Korn Ferry questions through Friday, 09/15/23. After that,
HR kindly requests that Korn Ferry inquires be addressed with your Department
HR Representative or by contacting Human Resources.
Visit the Employee Services page

Upcoming Holidays
Labor Day: September 4
Nevada Day: Friday, October 27
Veterans Day (Observed): Friday, November 10
Thanksgiving Day: Thursday, November 23
Family Day: Friday, November 24
Christmas: Monday, December 25
New Year’s Day: Monday, January 1
Other Ways to Get Involved
Support our Partner in Education School:
Glenn Duncan needs prize items for Q1
recognitions and indoor recess items like puzzles
and card games. Please bring donations to HR
by 9/22. Monetary donations towards items can
be sent via Venmo to @Elizabeth-Jourdin
(verification: 4229) by 9/14. More detail about
donations here and our partnership here.
Veterans Day Parade:
This year, Washoe County will be
participating in Reno's Veterans Day
Parade for the first time! We are
excited to recognize and honor our
veteran staff and the veterans in our
community. Let us know you are
interested in participating by
completing this Form.
Volunteer Opportunities:
Thank you to everyone who served
at the Senior Center Breakfast on
August 21! We are looking to start
hosting these quarterly with a holiday
breakfast in early December.
We are also setting up quarterly volunteer opportunities for staff through the
Food Bank of Northern Nevada starting in 2024. Our first staff opportunity will
be Saturday, January 6, 9:00-11:00 am with room for 15 volunteers ages 10
and older. Email HR-DEIB@washoecounty.gov for more information.
Building Belonging Book Club:
We are moving into our third and final book club
selection of 2023: The Five Wounds by Kirstin Valdez
Quade, which will be discussed in November 2023. Let
us know you are interested in participating by
completing this Form. You can access this title through
the Washoe County library here.
Do you have a Rockstar co-worker who recently went above and beyond?
Let's recognize them!
Nominate a Washoe Star here!
Leaving Washoe County? Transferring Departments? Retiring? We want

to hear from you!
Complete the anonymous Employee Exit Survey.
Washoe County, Department of Human Resources
1001 E. 9th St. Reno, NV 89512
This email was sent to JSCOTT@WASHOECOUNTY.GOV

From: Washoe County Library [noreply@libraryaware.com] on behalf of Washoe County
Library <noreply@libraryaware.com>
Subject: Library News & Events
View Online
LIBRARY CARD SIGN-UP MONTH
September is Library Card Sign-up Month, a time when Washoe County Library
System joins the American Library Association and libraries nationwide to
remind everyone about the valuable resources available with a library card.
Since 1987, Library Card Sign-up Month has been held each September to
mark the beginning of the school year. During the month, the ALA and
libraries work together in a national effort to ensure every child signs up for
their own library card. This year Washoe County Library System is releasing
our newly redesigned library cards in conjunction with Library Card Sign-up
Month.
There’s something for everyone at the library, and signing up for a library card
is the first step on the path to academic achievement and lifelong learning for
students. It's elemental, really—everyone should have one!
Sign up for a card
UPCOMING EVENTS
College and Career

Senior Social Club Readines for Teens
Tuesday, September 5, 2-3 pm Thursday, September 7, 3-4 pm
Sparks Library Northwest Reno Library
This week at Senior Social Club: Need to apply for a job? Want to
Travel the world using our Oculus apply to college but need some help
Quest virtual reality headsets. getting started? Is completing your
FAFSA making you want to cry? Let a
librarian help you figure it out.

Senior Social Club
Tuesday, September 5, 2-3 pm College and Career
Sparks Library
Readines for Teens
This week at Senior Social Club: Thursday, September 7, 3-4 pm
Travel the world using our Oculus Northwest Reno Library
Quest virtual reality headsets.
Need to apply for a job? Want to
apply to college but need some help
getting started? Is completing your
Sign up now FAFSA making you want to cry? Let a
librarian help you figure it out.
Learn more
Author Talk English Conversation

Lidia Bastianich Practice
Thursday, September 7, 4-5 pm Friday, September 8, 5-6 pm
Online event Sierra View Library
You’re invited to an intimate evening Every Friday we offer informal and

with award-winning television host relaxed language practice for teen
and bestselling author Lidia and adult English language learners.
Bastianich as she talks about her
memoir My American Dream: A Life
of Love, Family, and Food.
Visit the calendar to see all upcoming events.

English Conversation
Practice
Friday, September 8, 5-6 pm
Sierra View Library
Every Friday we offer informal and

relaxed language practice for teen and
adult English language learners.
Learn more
Author Talk
Lidia Bastianich
Thursday, September 7, 4-5 pm
Online event
You’re invited to an intimate evening
with award-winning television host
and bestselling author Lidia
Bastianich as she talks about her
memoir My American Dream: A Life
of Love, Family, and Food.
Sign up now
Visit the calendar to see all upcoming events.
MOVIE SCREENINGS
Visit the calendar to see all movie screenings.
WHAT TO READ NEXT

Explore National Parks
See full list
Holiday Closure
See full list
Holiday Closure
All Washoe County Libraries will be closed
Monday, September 4, in honor of Labor Day.
You can see all library hours and upcoming

closures here.
The Explorer

comprehensive events guide. New issues are
released seasonally and cover three months of
library programs and events.




5522.


5522.
Locations & Hours Digital Library Calendar of Events
Washoe County Library System 301 S. Center St. Reno, NV 89501 775-327-8300
Manage Subscriptions or Unsubscribe | Subscribe via RSS or ATOM Feeds | View Online
If you are having trouble unsubscribing from this email, please contact:
Washoe County Library at (775) 327-8300, 301 South Center Street, Reno, Nevada 89501
library@washoecounty.us
To: MacMillan, Jana [JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov]; Andrews, John
[JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: Re: Banned Books Week Concept
Ha yes!!!
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott

Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 11:51:08 AM
To: Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews, John <JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>;
Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
Cc: McKenzie, Stacy L. <SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>
I am SO comfortable with this you can't even picture it! 🙂


To: MacMillan, Jana <JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews, John
<JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Banned Books Week Concept
Jana,
John let me know you want clarification on a Banned Books Week Display. If you are comfortable, I
would like you to highlight the hidden, damaged, or vandalized books over the last few months with
pictures of the incidents. We plan to share these on social media to raise awareness of attempted book
banning in our community.
Let me know if you have questions or concerns.
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
I am SO comfortable with this you can't even picture it! 🙂


To: MacMillan, Jana <JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov>; Andrews, John
<JAndrews@washoecounty.gov>; Hemingway, Jamie <JHemingway@washoecounty.gov>
Jana,
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
To: MacMillan, Jana [JMacMillan@washoecounty.gov]; Andrews, John
[JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; Hemingway, Jamie [JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
Jana,
Thank you!
Jeff
Jeff Scott
To: Andrews, John [JAndrews@washoecounty.gov]; Hemingway, Jamie
[JHemingway@washoecounty.gov]
Subject: FW: Hidden book
Attachments: 20230628_105300.jpg; 20230628_105306.jpg
Jeff Scott
From: Church, Stephanie <SChurch@washoecounty.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:11 AM
To: Stears, Debi D <DDStears@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>; Library -
Spanish Springs Staff <Library-SpanishSprings@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Hidden book
Hi All,
When I was shifting the cookbooks, I found another hidden item. "Big Gay Ice Cream" had been moved
from the correct shelf to a bottom shelf and shoved flat all the way to the back corner.
Please keep an eye out for hidden items.
Thank you,
Stephanie
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

Get Outlook for Android
Subject: FW: Withdrawn book found with subject of Transgender Identity
Attachments: WIN_20230822_10_55_03_Pro.jpg; WIN_20230822_10_55_15_Pro.jpg;
WIN_20230822_10_15_03_Pro.jpg; WIN_20230822_10_15_07_Pro.jpg;
WIN_20230822_10_15_15_Pro.jpg
Jeff Scott
From: Welman, Seth <SWelman@washoecounty.gov>

Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 10:57 AM
Cc: Bowen, Jonnica L. <JBowen@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Re: Withdrawn book found with subject of Transgender Identity
HI Again,
I found another book that has been withdrawn called, "Health Care Reform by Jonathan Gruber
(31235035937288)" in the same place as the last book. I am sending it to TS for consideration
to be put back into the catalog. Due to the subject matter and where I found it, I think this book
was intentionally hidden. I have attached pictures of both books.
Sincerely,
Seth Welman
Seth Welman | Washoe County Library System

SWelman@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.972.0281
1075 North Hills Blvd. STE 340, Reno, NV 89506x
From: Welman, Seth

Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 10:27 AM
Cc: Bowen, Jonnica L. <JBowen@washoecounty.gov>; McKenzie, Stacy L.
<SMcKenzie@washoecounty.gov>; Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov>
Subject: Withdrawn book found with subject of Transgender Identity
Hello,
Today I found a book called, "Transgender Children and Youth by Elijah Nealy
(31235400079245)" that was not near its shelving location and was far behind a bookshelf
wedged between the shelf and wall. When I scanned the book, it was withdrawn from the
system. As the book may have been intentionally hidden due to its subject matter, I am
reporting this now and sending the book to TS for consideration to be put back into circulation.
Have a great day!
Seth Welman | Washoe County Library System
SWelman@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.972.0281
1075 North Hills Blvd. STE 340, Reno, NV 89506x

Sept 2023 Emails

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Sept 2023 Emails

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Sept 2023 Emails

Uploaded by

Copyright:

From: Scott, Jeff [jscott@washoecounty.

gov] on behalf of Scott, Jeff

Thank you Mr Foster. See you then.

From: BRUCE FOSTER <grtdad53@sbcglobal.net>

I wish to meet on Tuesday at 11am. I will be having

Library Director | Washoe County Library System

jscott@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8340

301 S. Center Street, Reno, NV 89501

From: BRUCE FOSTER <grtdad53@sbcglobal.net>

I wish to meet on Tuesday at 11am. I will be having

Library Director | Washoe County Library System

jscott@washoecounty.gov | Office: 775.327.8340

From: BRUCE FOSTER <grtdad53@sbcglobal.net>

Yay! Thank you!!

From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

On Sep 29, 2023, at 6:06 PM, Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov> wrote:

Thank you enjoy your trip!

From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT CLICK on

Dear Jeff and Carla,

On Sep 29, 2023, at 3:35 PM, Scott, Jeff

From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO

Dear Jeff and Carla,

On Sep 21, 2023, at 8:07 PM, Scott, Jeff

Awesome!! Thank you!

From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe

I’ll definitely have you something by October 1! I’ll be in

That would be great. I think if it’s 500

From: James R McSpadden

[NOTICE: This message originated

On Sep 21, 2023, at

Thank you, Dr.

From: Trounson, Carla

Library Assistant II | Washoe County Library System

<image006.png> ctrounson@washoecounty.gov |775.787.4100

2325 Robb Drive, Reno, NV 89523

[NOTICE: This message

This email originated

This email originated outside of the

This email originated outside of the University of

This email originated outside of the University of Nevada, Reno. Do

<McSpadden Essay for Library Edited.docx>

On Sep 29, 2023, at 6:06 PM, Scott, Jeff <jscott@washoecounty.gov> wrote:

Can we submit these to the RGJ as an op Ed on your behalf?

Thank you enjoy your trip!

From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO NOT CLICK on

Dear Jeff and Carla,

On Sep 29, 2023, at 3:35 PM, Scott, Jeff

From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe County -- DO

Dear Jeff and Carla,

On Sep 21, 2023, at 8:07 PM, Scott, Jeff

Awesome!! Thank you!

From: James R McSpadden <jmcspadden@unr.edu>

[NOTICE: This message originated outside of Washoe

I’ll definitely have you something by October 1! I’ll be in

On Sep 21, 2023, at 8:04 PM, Scott, Jeff

That would be great. I think if it’s 500

From: James R McSpadden

[NOTICE: This message originated