The Nevada County Quorum Court met on a rainy Tuesday night, passing a motion to place on the November ballot the question of whether the Sheriff and Tax Collector roles should be separated and the Nevada County Treasurer take over the collector functions. In the absence of County Judge Mike Otwell, Justice of the Peace Herbert Coleman presided. 

Toward the end of the April regular meeting, County Treasurer Ricky Reyenga presented a study that concluded that the proposal to separate the sheriff from the tax collector office would not cost the county any extra funds, has been done by other Arkansas counties and would suit Sheriff Danny Martin’s preference.  It would also be logical, considering what the county treasurer’s duties entail.  

The only financial consideration would involve a transfer of the $2,000 a year paid to the sheriff for being a tax collector to the county treasurer. The Quorum Court voted to place the question of whether this will be the county’s policy starting in 2026 on the November ballot. 

In the same meeting, the Quorum Court heard from the county’s Office of Emergency Services Director David Gummeson. He requested the court to fund the use of the TANGO system for volunteer fire departments. It offers, said Gummeson, because of its use of cellular communication a greater ability to communicate with other emergency personnel as well as sustained communication through the walls of metal and heavily concreted buildings at a cost of $3,000 per year. The court voted to lease the system. Reyenga said an ordinance would be necessary to make the decision official, however, by adding a line item to the county budget. 

On another subject, the court heard a proposal to trade in a sanitation truck and buy a newer one. To do this would take paying off the older truck’s remaining balance on its lease of $47,500 and take out a five percent interest loan from the Bank of Delight for $244,900.  This was not voted on but was presented for informational purposes by Reyenga.

After a comment from former candidate for Justice of the Peace Shane Horn, in which he raised questions of whether the court followed state law in voting on proposals in the same meeting in which they were presented, thereby, in his opinion, skipping opportunities for public comment, the court voted to adjourn.