ACLU steps in to push North Las Vegas petition

Dan Kulin

Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2003 | 9:58 a.m.

As late as last Friday, the legal battle between the loosely organized citizens of the Freedom of Speech Committee and the city of North Las Vegas looked like a mismatch, but Monday the group had the legal equivalent of a cavalry ride to its rescue.

Glen Easter, an apartment manager, had been planning to represent the citizens in court, and would have been arguing the law with North Las Vegas City Attorney Sean McGowan.

But when the court case began in earnest Monday, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer and a private attorney showed up to provide free representation to Easter's group.

"We're involved now because we were asked Friday to become involved in these serious issues, issues of governmental accountability and the citizens' right to speak," Gary Peck, executive director of the Nevada ACLU, said.

Easter acknowledged that in desperation he had asked the organization for help at the last minute but he hadn't known for sure if he was going to get the assistance until the lawyers showed up for Monday's hearing before District Judge Mark Denton.

Easter and about 1,500 petition signers want their ballot question to be part of the next election. The ballot question asks voters if the citizens should be able to have more say at North Las Vegas City Council meetings and whether the council's meeting time should be changed.

McGowan, who was clearly annoyed by the 11th-hour appearance of Easter's reinforcements, argued that the ballot question matters are not for voters to decide. The proposed ballot question deals with administrative issues such as the start time for the council meetings and ballot initiatives are reserved only for legislative matters, McGowan said.

But Denton said some of the language from previous court rulings is "pretty nebulous" as to whether these types of decisions are administrative or legislative.

McGowan also argued that the judge cannot separate the proposed changes within the initiative because it is impossible to know which parts of the question prompted an individual to sign the petition to get the matter on the ballot, McGowan said. So, if one part of the proposition was flawed, the rest of the question should be kept off the ballot as well, McGowan argued.

But the citizens group's new lawyers, Allen Lichtenstein from the Nevada ACLU and Michael Stein, a private attorney who has taken the case pro bono, said the start time is just one part of the ballot question. They argued that when individuals signed the petition they were saying they wanted all parts of the proposed question on the ballot. Therefore, the judge could remove parts of the question from the ballot and what is left of the question could still go on the ballot, he said.

Denton then asked the attorneys to give him written arguments by Thursday about whether he could "tailor" the question for the ballot.

The start time of the council meetings is largely ancillary to the main thrust of the proposed ballot question: adding a public comment time to the beginning of council meetings; a doubling of the amount of time a citizen can speak on a topic, to 10 minutes; and allowing any resident to place items on a council agenda.

Easter drafted the proposed question, formed the committee and led the effort to collect more than 1,500 signatures to get the matter on the ballot.