State Supreme Court rejects petitions on tax proposals - News

PRINT THIS Popular

Sep. 05, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

State Supreme Court rejects petitions on tax proposals

By ED VOGEL
REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU

CARSON CITY -- Three petitions signed by an estimated 130,000 registered voters and backed by Las Vegas Sands Inc. cannot appear on the November election ballot because their circulators did not follow the signature collection law, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The 7-0 decision kills two petitions that would have given voters a chance to decide whether to divert some room tax money from the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority to state education, transportation and public safety programs.

Most Popular Stories

Obama dings Las Vegas — again

'YOU DON'T BLOW A BUNCH OF CASH IN VEGAS ...': Obama remark reopens wound

LAUGHLIN EDGEWATER: Two dead in casino car crash

NORM: Ad's Strip scenes raised eyebrows

Tourist describes chaos as car plows into Laughlin casino, killing two

Shutting down the Ritz

NORM: $1 million wager on Super Bowl approved

Former commander of USS Cole considers run against Reid

IMAGES FROM 1860S: Photos show historic Nevada

Fighter battles rare disease that shatters mixed martial arts dream

The third petition would have let voters decide whether to require a two-thirds vote requirement for ballot questions that seek to raise taxes.

The petition gathering effort was bankrolled by Sands Chairman Sheldon Adelson whose convention operations compete with the publicly funded convention authority.

Former state Controller Steve Martin, who led the effort to put the room tax petitions on the ballot, said the real losers are the voters.

"There were mistakes made on all sides, from the secretary of state on down, but the real losers are the Nevada voters," he said. "We had 130,000 voters sign the petitions. We are disenfranchising 130,000 voters."

While the new law was designed to prevent fraud, Martin said he and his circulators never were accused of fraud.

Martin hopes to circulate the same petitions in 2010 if he can find financial backing.

Justices said petition circulators failed to follow a 2007 law that requires them to sign affidavits that they personally circulated the petitions and counted the signatures on their petitions, witnessed people sign in their presence and gave them an opportunity to read each petition in its entirety.

The court ruled that the Legislature added the requirements to prevent fraud and they were an essential part of the petition gathering process.

Justices said legislators were concerned about possible petition parties where circulators themselves would sign the names of registered voters.

The court said petition circulators complained the petitions should go on the ballot because they relied on rules found in an initiative petition guide on Secretary of State Ross Miller's Web site. That guide had not been amended to include the 2007 law.

Justices said that was not a valid excuse. The secretary of state included a disclaimer that the guide did not include the most recent petition law and circulators should check with the Legislature for revisions.

But Allen Lichtenstein, a Las Vegas lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, said he was disappointed in the decision. It was not the first time the secretary of state's office has given wrong information about a petition, Lichtenstein said.

"People should be able to rely on information given by a government agency on the initiative process," he said.

The high court decision means none of about a dozen petitions circulated in fall 2007 and this spring has qualified for the November ballot.

A petition circulated by former Assemblywoman Sharron Angle, R-Reno, that would limit property tax increases to 2 percent a year still has a chance. But Angle's petition also has been challenged on the grounds circulators did not follow the law and a district court hearing on that challenge will be conducted Monday in Virginia City.

Miller hailed Thursday's high court decision.

"They affirmed the fact that the laws governing the petition process to amend our constitution must be followed," he said.

Miller said he was grateful the court made a swift decision because county clerks and election registrars have time to amend their ballots before the November election.

The secretary of state, who serves as the state's chief election officer, issued the original opinion that petitions were not valid because circulators failed to follow the new requirements.

His decision was upheld by District Judge James Todd Russell of Carson City, who chastised Miller for not updating his Web site, but said circulators were bound to follow the new law.

AFL-CIO state Secretary-Treasurer Danny Thompson, whose organization opposed the petitions, said the decision was right.

"The two-thirds petition would in effect have put a minority in charge of the majority," said Thompson, who was part of the Nevada for Nevada coalition representing firefighters, police, teachers, nurses, seniors, local governments and others opposing the petition. "That flies in the face of what this country was founded on."

Thompson said the room tax petition would have hurt the Las Vegas economy because its revenues are used to promote the tourism industry.

"When the gaming and tourism industry has a downturn, it affects us all," he said.

Vince Alberta, a spokesman for the convention authority, said his organization obviously was pleased by the decision.

"We also understand we must remain focused on our mission -- to attract visitors to Las Vegas," he said.

Contact Capital Bureau Chief Ed Vogel at evogel@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3901. Capital Bureau reporter Sean Whaley contributed to this report.

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	12 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.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. what do you expect wrote on September 05, 2008 09:14 PM: Second generation good ol' boy Ross Miller did not do his job. Replace him next election. Autumn wrote on September 05, 2008 02:21 PM: It would have killed them to ask a librarian to help them research to make certain they had up-to-date instructions for the petition? TimeToTalk wrote on September 05, 2008 10:39 AM: What about the judges running for re-election only to qualify for the $30,000 salary increase. Soon after the election they can retire. We the taxpayers will pay their salaries for the rest of their lives. Isn't that correct, Judge Mosley? Michael Green wrote on September 05, 2008 08:44 AM: It's funny how some people think the law has to be followed to the letter until it doesn't work in favor of what they want done, and then the law is bad and the people who interpret and enforce it are worse. If Adelson and his little bobos had just obeyed the law, they'd have their precious question on the ballot. ET wrote on September 05, 2008 07:59 AM: The people should go after the corporations,the latest investigations uncovered corporations in America ,are laughing all the way to the bank, 75 % pay no taxes. In Nevada all gaming revenue must be taxed an additional 10 % for education,a surtax for doing business in the Great State of Nevada. Genius wrote on September 05, 2008 07:49 AM: You can't fault the judges here, they simply followed the law. If the petitioners had done the same then the result would have been different. While Miller was clearly lazy in failing to update his website, it falls on the petitioner to check the rules. Relying on a website and not the actual statutes for this is just stupid. If anyone was disenfranchised, the blame for that falls on the petitioner and his staff, not the judges who simply followed the law. If you want to be angry, put your anger in the right place. br wrote on September 05, 2008 07:37 AM: "The court said petition circulators complained the petitions should go on the ballot because they relied on rules found in an initiative petition guide on Secretary of State Ross Miller's Web site. That guide had not been amended to include the 2007 law." *************************************** Naturally the Supremes found a way to disenfranchise 130,000 peasants. Ross Miller failed to do an important part of his job. That makes him and his staff lazy, corrupt, or incompetent. Probably all the above. No matter how we feel about any of the initiatives, we should be outraged by being deprived of our right to petition the government. I don't care about Adelson, but at least he put his money where his mouth is to finance the petition process. Union bosses used their members money and a different orfice. This is another reason to vote against all incumbents, especially judges. Ben Dover wrote on September 05, 2008 06:00 AM: Remember the old days in school when the teacher told you "don't take the test until you've read all the instructions"?! This shouldn't be interpreted to be anything other than incompetence on the part of Adelson's lawyers. any first year law student would fail for making the mistake they made. It's also worth noting that the "voice of the people" has been usurped and turned into some kind of ventriloquist routine. The initiative process was created by populists to give the people a voice, but the wealthy like Adelson try to reinvent themselves as populists through the process. Miller did the right thing...he followed the law. Rudy wrote on September 05, 2008 04:19 AM: The voice of the people has been gagged again. b wrote on September 05, 2008 03:23 AM: Vic and Tom you are both right. But don't forget the money and power the convention authority has. Plus the fact that we have the most coruppt judges in all the USA. Our only recourse is to recall, or at least vote out, all incumbent judges Read All Comments