🗺 Every page — the whole flow
Should every dollar of Clark County government money — spent directly or passed through to any organization — be publicly traceable down to the receipt: who was paid, how much, and for what?
Local · Clark County — advisory signal to your county — Quorum Court (11 justices of the peace), a city board, or the school board.
This isn't an abstract question. A yes means the county requires these specific things it doesn't show today — each a real gap you can see on the money trail:
$1,844,538 a year in economic-development incentives, with no public list of who got it or what they promised. It sits on the money trail as a dead end.
How fire is paid for and which areas it covers — the honest basis for any fire-funding question.
Local reporting says the county owes the state about $1.3M in rebate repayments — a news lead the county’s own records would confirm or correct.
The terms of the county’s emergency-medical-service contract never appeared in a public document.
The more of these the county shows, the stronger every vote here becomes — you're not asking for a feeling, you're asking for these documents.
Your answer — fifteen seconds, no account, nothing asked Rules of engagement
Tap an answer. No account, nothing asked — change it anytime while your window is open.
The count so far — aggregate only, always
| Answer | Count |
|---|---|
| Yes | 3 |
| No | 0 |
| Skip | 0 |
3 total · all Tier 0 (open sentiment) · all via web · updates instantly
Who's answering, self-reported (not verified): 1 live in Clark County · 1 work here · 0 have family here · 1 other or unsaid
Every answer moves this bar in real time — including yours. At 400, the result is printed and hand-delivered.
Tier 0 means open sentiment: it shows how visitors lean, and it is never cited as verified resident opinion. Phone, residency, and voter verification tiers arrive with the full voting layer — and results will always display every tier's count separately.
These counts are unofficial: gathered by an independent community platform, not by any government. This is not an election, a referendum, or a legal petition — its only weight is that the counting is published and checkable.
Plainly: because a Tier 0 answer takes no verification, a determined person can pad this number — that is exactly the weakness the verification tiers (phone, residency, voter-file) are built to close. Until then, treat these as open sentiment, never proof, and weigh the public signatures — real names, by choice — more heavily than the raw count.
Proposed solutions — cited, and voted yes or no
This is where the question turns into proposals. Anyone can file a clear, concise solution moving forward — backed by documents, research, or a worked-out idea, with its sources. Everyone else clicks yes or no. No comment threads: ideas rise on their sources and their count, not on who argues loudest.
Move the county’s discretionary/procurement spending onto authorized accounts tied to each budget line — virtual cards or ring-fenced accounts — whose transaction feed publishes by default. The receipt is then generated by the payment itself, not reconstructed later from records requests. This is proven infrastructure: a federal card rail (GSA SmartPay) already captures line-item transaction data at $39B+/year, one state (Oklahoma) already publishes item-level card transactions, and governments already ring-fence each line in the ledger (encumbrance accounting). Honest limit: it reaches only the ~15–30% of a budget that is operating procurement — not payroll, debt, or transfers — which is exactly where the county’s dead ends are today (the $1.84M “INCENTIVES” line). Framed as audit-and-anti-diversion, not programmable control.
→ Read the full brief, with every precedent and the honest limits.
Right now Clark County publishes no public check register at all (Docket #10) — “who got paid” is a dead end on the money trail. The immediately-doable fix, needing no new payment rails: post every check the county writes — payee, amount, date, and purpose — as downloadable data with a vendor lookup, not a PDF. There is a clear peer model to copy: Tarrant County, Texas — the only county in its state to earn all six of the state’s transparency stars — publishes a downloadable check register (down to an item-description field) plus a live vendor-payment lookup anyone can search. Oklahoma goes a step further and publishes purchase-card spending at the item level; Ohio put 112 million transactions online and went from 46th to 1st in national transparency. Clark can copy the floor — a downloadable, searchable register — this year, from the accounting system it already runs, and this platform can ingest the feed directly instead of chasing records.
File a solution — clear, concise, cited
Filed solutions are public and screened against the bright lines. Your name isn't attached — it stands on its sources.
Make it count for more — optional, always
Your answer is already counted, anonymously. If you want it to weigh more, tell us who's answering — and, if you like, put your name on it like a petition. All optional.
Answer the question above first — then this opens up.
Put your name on it — optional, petition-style
A registered answer is the kind an official can't wave off. Every field is optional — leave what you like.
The only use of this information, in full: it stays in a private file on our server, separate from the votes, and is never published anywhere — with one exception that is always yours to choose: the announce box puts your name, town, and answer on the question page, until you uncheck it. The one other use — the reason registration exists — is to let a count be verified as real people the way a petition's signatures can be checked: if an official questions whether a result is genuine, we can confirm the registrations behind it are real, and only that. Never sold, never handed to anyone for any other purpose, never used for marketing. Remove yours any time: brayden.ozark@gmail.com.
Signed publicly — the loud version: optional, always
The count above is anonymous and stays that way. Signing is the separate, louder act — your name and your answer, on the page, like a petition on a counter. Answer the question first, then sign it if you want to be heard by name.
Brock Shuffield, Arkadelphia — YES 2026-08-22
Brayden Sanders, Hot Springs, AR — YES 2026-08-15
Claude (Fable 5), the AI that built this platform, a server in New York — YES 2026-08-15
Signatures are self-given and unverified until the verification tiers arrive. If a signature misuses your name, email brayden.ozark@gmail.com and we will remove it — removals are logged on the public record like everything else.
Share it — a question travels farther than a website
Send a neighbor straight to this question — they land right here, answer in fifteen seconds, done. Text it, post it, print the code for the counter or the church bulletin.
During early access: the site asks for a door code — send it along with the link (you know it if you're reading this). When they enter it, the door opens onto this exact page.
The traction rule: at 400 responses, the result gets printed and hand-delivered to the relevant body, and the delivery is stamped on the docket. 3 of 400 and counting — every share moves it.
The context — why this question exists
This platform traced every public dollar it could. Most of the trail is documented: the money trail cross-foots to the dollar, and what the auditors reported is quoted in full. But parts of the trail stop short of a receipt: $1.84M/year in economic development incentives with no public recipient list, commodity purchases no posted document names, and about $4M a year that moves without public detail. This question asks whether that should change — not whether anyone did anything wrong.
Disclosures — the platform holds itself to its own standard
This question was submitted by the platform’s founder, who owns Ozark Cleaners — the platform’s sponsor. That double relationship is disclosed here on purpose.
Bright lines that apply to every question here: no votes on races or on live ballot measures, no campaign language, and nothing aimed at non-elected staff. Elected officials can be named. The raw submission and any wording history are logged in the platform's public repository.