County to proceed with ballot question on utility

Adrienne Packer

Thursday, Aug. 22, 2002 | 9:12 a.m.

Hardly jolted by a lawsuit filed Wednesday by Nevada Power, Clark County vowed to proceed with an advisory ballot question that asks voters whether they would prefer a locally controlled utility.

During an impromptu news conference Wednesday, Clark County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates called the power corporation's unexpected legal action a "desperate move."

"It's unacceptable and a slap in the face to the people who keep them afloat," said Atkinson Gates, who recommended the question be placed on the Nov. 5 general election ballot.

The question approved July 2 asks: "Should the Nevada Legislature take appropriate action to enable the electrical energy provider for Southern Nevada to be a locally controlled, not for profit public utility?"

Attorneys representing Nevada Power and five co-plaintiffs argue that the commission-authorized ballot question is impermissible because the county has no power over who the Las Vegas Valley's energy provider is.

It cites a state statute that says county generated advisory questions must "pertain only to actions that the local governing body has the authority to take."

The lawsuit also claims the ballot question is vaguely worded and misleading.

"The commission drafted the advisory question to appeal to the inherent prejudices of the voters against for-profit, non-local private entities instead of measuring their opinion on the real issue," the lawsuit says.

Commissioners and Mary-Anne Miller, the county's deputy district attorney, were miffed by the lawsuit because Nevada Power representatives never protested the ballot question proposal during board meetings.

They also questioned why the lawsuit was filed in Supreme Court, bypassing the traditional process of first being heard by a District Court judge.

The timing of the filing is also suspect, board members said. Today the Southern Nevada Water Authority -- which would also become the local energy provider -- is expected to give its general manager permission to offer a bid for Nevada Power through its parent company, Sierra Pacific Resources.

Miller said the lawsuit will have no bearing on today's meeting because Sierra Pacific is not expected to immediately respond to the offer.

Nevada Power spokeswoman Andrea Smith did not return phone messages Wednesday.

The county will postpone filing a response to the lawsuit until the Supreme Court decides during the next few days whether it will take the case, Miller said. She is confident the advisory question will appear on the ballot.

Nevada Power's lawsuit cites a 2001 statute that forbids a government from acquiring or expanding facilities that generate, distribute or transmit power without the public utility's permission. The law expires in 2003.

"The cases they cite aren't applicable because the county does have authority under state law to enter the local energy market," Miller said. "Right now there is a provision stopping them from doing that but that sunsets in 2003."

Miller was also surprised the language of the ballot question was labeled misleading because attorneys labored over proper wording that would not be perceived as unfair.

Larry Lomax, the county's registrar of voters, said three citizens are chosen to write pros and cons to an advisory question to ensure both sides of the argument are balanced.

Two of the three authors appointed to write the argument against the question are Jack Leone, vice president of marketing for Sierra Pacific Resources and Robert Tucci, a civil engineer with Nevada Power.

The third volunteer is Carole Vilardo, president of the Nevada Taxpayers Association -- a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit. Other co-plaintiffs include Utility Shareholders Association of Nevada, Inc., International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 396 and Nevada Manufacturers Association.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are embedded in Clark County politics. The law firm of Kummer Kaempfer Bonner & Renshaw appear before the board regularly on land use issues and are generous campaign contributors. Former Clark County Manager Pat Shalmy was named president of Nevada Power last month.

On Wednesday, Commissioner Erin Kenny questioned why Nevada Power representatives never appeared at meetings during which the board discussed residents concerned over skyrocketing energy rates.

She said board members heard no protests from the power giant until late Tuesday night when they learned the 70-page lawsuit was to be filed.

"This wasn't written overnight. It took effort, energy and planning," Kenny said. "They knew exactly what they were going to do, but curiously enough felt there was nothing illegal at the time."

Commissioners blasted Nevada Power for stripping taxpayers of their right to voice their opinion through a question that was simply advisory, not binding. The state Legislature must approve any switch in energy providers.

Timothy Hay, the state consumer advocate who harshly criticized Nevada Power when it initially requested a $922 million rate increase last winter, called the lawsuit "pathetic."

"It is both irresponsible and a rather pathetic attempt to deny Clark County voters the right to express their opinion on what is a substantial public policy issue," Hay said Wednesday.

Miller said a typical Supreme Court briefing process lasts 80 days but she expects this case to be resolved by Sept. 10, the deadline for printing the Nov. 5 Election Day ballots.

archive