Home Subscribe Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu

News


SIGNATURE GATHERERS: Initiative petitions rejected

Efforts to divert room taxes, alter vote requirement killed

CARSON CITY -- Initiative petitions seeking to divert room taxes from the Las Vegas convention authority to state needs, including  education, will not be on the November ballot, a Carson City district judge ruled Wednesday

A third petition, requiring a two-thirds vote to approve ballot measures that would raise taxes, was disqualified too.

All three were disqualified by Judge James Todd Russell because of problems with affidavits signed by the signature gatherers.

A spokesman for Las Vegas Sands Corp. Chairman Sheldon Adelson, who bankrolled the three petitions, said a decision has not yet been made on whether to appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court.

In a ruling from the bench, Russell said it is unfortunate that the petition backers, including former state Treasurer Bob Seale and former state Controller Steve Martin, spent so much money and time on gathering the signatures to qualify the three constitutional amendments for the general election ballot.

Russell also chastised Secretary of State Ross Miller for not updating his Web site, which contained outdated information on the requirements for signature gatherers working on initiative petitions. The outdated information was used by Seale and Martin.

Russell said the Nevada Legislature adopted new requirements, which took effect July 1, 2007, for affidavits for signature gatherers. The requirements include a statement that the gatherer personally circulated the document, that the number of signatures on the petition were counted, that the signatures were made in his presence and that each signer had the opportunity to read the full text of the initiative petition.

The requirements that the number of signatures be counted and that the signer have the opportunity to read the initiative were added by the 2007 Legislature and were not included in the affidavits for the three petitions because the circulators relied on the old rules on the secretary of state's Web site.

The requirements were adopted by lawmakers to prevent fraud in the signature-gathering process.

Attorney Scott Scherer, representing the petition sponsors, argued that the petitions substantially complied with the law, but Russell disagreed.

"It is unfortunate here that someone didn't do their homework prior to the circulation of these initiatives," Russell said, "although I think the secretary of state could probably have done a better job in this particular case."

Even so, he said: "The statute is clear. This is a harsh remedy. But I don't think there is any other alternative."

Robert Uithoven, a spokesman for the Las Vegas Sands, said there are several options to consider before deciding whether to appeal.

One option would be to circulate new petitions on the room tax question. If the petitions sought only to change state law rather than amend the state constitution, they could be circulated through November and submitted to the Legislature.

If the Legislature did not act on the proposals, they could go on the November 2010 ballot.

Matt Griffin, deputy secretary of state for elections, called the decision a victory for the office and Miller.

"Our position was upheld," he said.

Responding to the criticism of the out-of-date initiative petition guide, Griffin said the site had a disclaimer noting that the law might have changed. The office updated its rules, but some time passed before the new language was forwarded from the Legislature, he said.

"That's why we had the disclaimer up there," he said.

The three petitions were turned in May 15 with approximately twice the number of signatures required to get them on the November ballot.

But the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority challenged the two room tax petitions over the affidavit issues. The two-thirds vote measure was challenged on the same issue by the Nevada AFL-CIO.

One of the convention authority measures would take most of the new room tax money directed each year to the agency and divert it instead for use by the Legislature for public education. A second measure would do the same but would direct the money instead to state education, transportation and public safety needs in equal amounts.

Contact Review-Journal Capital Bureau reporter Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775- 687-3900.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Most Popular Stories
  • Reid shares Senate ideas
  • NORM: TV journalist fired after ad reported
  • NORM: Wedding upsets Daddy Geldof
  • NORM: Caesars security detains Semel
  • Woman dies in I-15 crash
  • NORM: 40/40 Club buzz may mean a sale
  • No cards ... only computers
  • TRAUMA DEPARTMENT: Doctor challenges UMC
  • GRAND CANYON: Dam fails, scores are evacuated
  • County to open Beltway entrance





  • Leave Your Comment 7 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Ross Miller Victory wrote on July 03, 2008 09:26 AM: Secretary of State Ross Miller considers it a victory to disenfranchise voters?

    His office was taken to task yet this is a victory because he stuck it to a bunch of voters?

    What are the chances that one comes up in his next campaign?


    Helen Weils wrote on July 03, 2008 08:55 AM: If I was Adelson, I'd sue the state and Ross Miller for my losses.


    Casino Shenanigans wrote on July 03, 2008 08:48 AM: Looks like the casinos played good cop/bad cop. The casinos are smarter than you think. When they realized the reality of a possible ballot initiative being approved to take away their profits with an increase in the gaming revenue tax, they negotiate to get that axed and come up with a compromise (or at least pretend to) to increase the room tax instead (so their profits would be saved). Then they get the Las Vegas Convention Authority to protest the room tax initiative to strike it down. Everyone knows the LV Convention Authority is just a tentacle of the casinos. But in appearance it wasn't technically the casinos that protested it, so they come out smelling good. Well played casinos, being the sneaky jerks you are.


    Helon Wheels wrote on July 03, 2008 08:25 AM: Appeal? The court has already decided! Uithoven is just trying to change a court decision that he and the Sands Corporation don't like!

    Uithoven don't you remember what you said this week?

    "Robert Uithoven, representing the Las Vegas Sands Corp., said the company was opposed to the bill because it appeared the Legislature was trying to CHANGE A COURT DECISION IT DID NOT LIKE (emphisis mine). The bill was also retroactive, and would take away refunds owed to a number of hotel-casinos if it became law, he said."
    The Ely Times, July 2, 2008


    Duh wrote on July 03, 2008 06:55 AM: Adelson can afford to pay an attorney to look up the current law on petitions. His so-called reliance (or that of his attorneys) on the SOS website is either a symptom of laziness or malpractice (or both).


    How Long? wrote on July 03, 2008 03:01 AM: If the signature gathering efforts were bankrolled by Sheldon Adelson, knowing what we know about him, I have to assume those efforts were designed to primarily benefit Sheldon Adelson.

    Sheldon's health and mind have not been holding up so well lately (see reports of his recent courtroom debacles and other failures of his "Freedom's Watch" outfit).

    How long before the Sands Board does to Sheldon what the Stratosphere Board did to Bob Stupak?


    Nick wrote on July 03, 2008 02:41 AM: Good for the courts.

    **No 2/3 majority requirement for taxes without a 2/3 majority requirement to approve the amendment!** The initiative should pass with the same margin it would create to show such an margin is even possible.