Ballot initiative on city contracts hangs in balance

Wednesday, April 27, 2005 | 9:25 a.m.

North Las Vegas argued in federal court Tuesday that a group of residents wanting an initiative on the June 7 general election ballot waited too long to seek a legal solution.

U.S. District Judge Philip Pro is expected to rule this week on whether North Las Vegas voters will decide the fate of city union contracts. He said only that his ruling would be prompt.

Chief Deputy City Attorney Leslie Nielsen told Pro that sample ballots were printed Friday and will be mailed this week to North Las Vegas residents. Absentee ballots for out-of-state residents are also slated to go out soon, she said.

The group of residents is seeking an injunction to get the measure on the ballot because the City Council on March 2 sided with city Clerk Karen Storms. She said the petition drive was invalid under state law because one of five people behind it wasn't a registered voter in North Las Vegas.

Pro told Jonathan Hansen, the attorney for the residents, that he was "troubled" the group waited until April 11 to file a lawsuit when the timetable was already short to get the measure on the ballot.

Getting an injunction requires a higher standard of proof as it is, Pro said in questioning the six-week delay.

Hansen told Pro the case could have been heard a week earlier in state District Court if the city hadn't petitioned it be moved to federal court. He said his firm is handling the case on a pro bono basis and that it took time to do research.

"The city's reason is nonsense because they delayed it for a week," said George Harris, chairman of Nevadans for Sound Government, a North Las Vegas property owner backing the ballot initiative.

Absentee voting doesn't start until May 21, and Harris said after the hearing that there's plenty of time for the city to prepare for the election. He said he remains optimistic but is uncertain on what the judge will rule.

"I don't know because he was cryptic," Harris said. "I am confident we will prevail on the constitutional issues, and if we do, it should be put on the ballot."

Nielsen declined to speculate on the outcome but said the city has a strong case. When rejecting the ballot petition in March, the city focused on the group not having all five members live in North Las Vegas.

In her arguments on Tuesday, Nielsen delved into several other reasons on why the court should reject the ballot measure, including the close timeline of the election.

The group incorrectly portrayed the ballot measure to voters as a change in the city's municipal codes rather than a change in the city's Charter, Nielsen said. They also misled voters by calling it a tax restraint initiative when that is not the case, she said.

In court, Nielsen also brought up an issue that would likely surface if such a measure got on the ballot and were approved by voters.

She said the Legislature gives local government exclusive control over collective bargaining with employees. Giving the approval of contracts to voters is "unworkable and absurd." An election wouldn't given any feedback on what type of contract to negotiate, she said.

Hansen argued that the state Constitution gives power to the registered voters over local government through ballot initiatives. He said there can be no limit on what is proposed.

Harris said after the hearing that voters should have a say in the contracts because council members are beholden to unions; otherwise, employees would work to defeat them in the next election if they opposed pay raises.

He said North Las Vegas employees are overpaid.

In court, Hansen argued the state requirement that five people submit a ballot measure is unconstitutional because only one person is needed on a petition for a vote to change the state's Constitution.

Hansen called the group's reference to a change in the municipal code over Charter is a technical error that shouldn't affect the ballot measure. He also said the petition didn't mislead voters. It deals with restraining taxes by limiting the power of the City Council.

Some 1,585 people signed the petition for the ballot measure. The group needed 961 signatures.