Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
By Paul Takahashi (contact) 
Published Tuesday, Aug. 7, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Updated Wednesday, Aug. 8, 2012 | 7:08 p.m.
Archive
- School Board raises concerns about costly, unchecked change orders on construction, renovations (7-11-2012)
- School District to ask voters to OK six-year property tax increase for repairs and renovations (5-2-2012)
- Majority of county voters favor tax hike to fix schools, survey says (4-27-2012)
- $5.3 billion school bond proposal still in works; former first ladies stand ready to give support (4-12-2012)
- District weighs property tax hike to repair, modernize schools (2-10-2012)
- School district finding it harder to put off desperately needed repairs (12-19-2011)
A local libertarian think tank has sued the Clark County School District in what some say is an apparent attempt to derail the district’s ballot initiative to raise taxes for school maintenance.
The Nevada Policy Research Institute filed a complaint with the 8th Judicial District Court on Friday alleging the Clark County Debt Management Commission violated the Nevada Open Meeting Law.
The commission — composed of three Clark County commissioners and representatives from local city governments and the School Board — voted during its June 7 meeting to approve a ballot question that seeks voter approval on a new property tax to fund school construction and rehabilitation projects.
The cash-strapped School District is pursuing a new capital improvement plan to address $5.3 billion in school maintenance needs over the next decade. The School Board — supported by four former first ladies of Nevada — are pushing for a six-year capital levy that is expected to raise property taxes as much as $74 a year on a home with an assessed valuation of $100,000.
NPRI’s lawsuit alleges the debt management commission failed to take public comment prior to approving the ballot measure, thereby violating the open-meeting law and invalidating any action taken during the meeting.
The lawsuit — filed by NPRI and one of its researchers Karen Gray, who attended the June 7 meeting — claims the violation voids the commission’s decision to place the tax hike proposal on the November ballot.
“This action should be declared void by this Court and enjoined from placement on the November 2012 ballot … and/or nullify any elective vote taken,” the lawsuit reads.
If the Attorney General’s Office finds a violation of the open-meeting law, the item may come back for a re-vote, said Barry Smith, president of the Nevada Press Association, who has worked in-depth on open-meeting law issues.
“Often the remedy for an open-meeting law violation is a do-over of the meeting,” Smith said. “You have to follow the rules and the rules say you need to have public comment.”
However, because the deadline to submit and approve ballot initiatives in the November general election has passed, it is unknown whether the lawsuit now jeopardizes the School District’s ballot measure.
Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said the matter will have to be resolved in the courts soon, as the election department is preparing to start printing upwards of 750,000 sample ballots next week to be sent out to voters this fall. Ballots are being prepared this far in advance, because overseas ballots much be sent out before Sept. 21, Lomax said.
The open-meeting law was revised in 2011 to require that public comment be taken before any action. Previously, some boards and commissions took public comments after a decision had been made.
The minutes of the June 7 meeting of the debt management commission were not immediately available online to determine if and when an opportunity for public comment was made available to constituents.
Clark County commissioner, Susan Brager.
However, Clark County Commissioner Susan Brager — who has chaired the debt management commission for at least four years — said she remembers “so emphatically” that she turned to look at Gray during the June 7 meeting and asked her if she had any public comments.
“I’m very religious about doing it,” Brager said, adamant about making it a habit of asking for public comment during her meetings. “I think it’s very important the public should have a voice.”
Gray declined to comment on Tuesday.
County Commissioner Steve Sisolak — who is vice chairman of the debt management commission — also said he remembers Brager asking for public comment during the meeting. The commission usually takes public comments at the beginning and at the end of meetings, Sisolak said.
“My recollection of the meeting is that public comment was called for and there was none so we moved on,” Sisolak said, adding it is rare for members of the public to comment during commission meetings.
Regardless of whether there was a violation of the open-meeting law, some School District officials saw NPRI’s lawsuit as a politically motivated attack on the district’s major initiative to address some of its aging school buildings.
Since the recession, key repairs and renovations have been put off, raising concerns by School Board members about the safety of children in classrooms. At some of the district’s oldest schools, roofs leak, floors flood and air conditioning units regularly break down, officials said.
Joyce Haldeman, the School District’s associate superintendent of community and government relations, had worked on the district’s 1998 bond initiative that built more than 100 schools over the past decade. Haldeman, who is now overseeing the district’s proposed capital improvement plan, questioned NPRI’s motive in filing the lawsuit.
Suspect is the timing of NPRI’s lawsuit, which came just five days shy of the 60-day deadline to file a complaint on open-meeting law violations, Haldeman said. The deadline for filing questions to be placed on the November ballot was July 16, Lomax said.
“If (NPRI) were really interested in the open-meeting law, why would they wait until now to file this lawsuit?” Haldeman said. “It sounds to me like a political maneuver.”
Although NPRI spokesman Victor Joecks has publicly questioned the ballot measure in the past, NPRI attorney Joseph Becker maintained the lawsuit was not a political move to erase the tax initiative from the ballot.
"This is about the open meeting law and government transparency," Becker said on Wednesday. "It has nothing to do with the ballot question."
Becker declined to comment on the timing of NPRI's lawsuit, however.
"I'm not going to talk about that," he said. "The statute gives us 60 days to file and we met that deadline."
Brager — who was a School Board member for 12 years — said the commission will hear the ballot initiative again in August to conduct a re-vote “in an abundance of caution.” Both Brager and Haldeman said they were confident the lawsuit would not impact the ballot measure in November.
Lomax was not so sure. The local registrar of voters said it's common for the election department to be hindered by political battles — sometimes over legal technicalities — on ballot questions.
"It's business as usual," Lomax said. "These kinds of things seem to happen every election and we're always trying to scramble at the end (to print ballots)."
School Board President Linda Young, who sits on the debt management commission, said Tuesday that she respects NPRI and its right to challenge the School District on issues of government transparency. (She too said that Brager has been "conscientious" about asking for public comment during commission meetings.)
However — although she wouldn't speculate on NPRI's motive — Young said she was concerned about taxpayer dollars being diverted from the classroom to fight NPRI's lawsuit.
"We don't have those funds for extraneous things that don't benefit students," Young said. "Anything that takes away from education of students is concerning."
Furthermore, Young said the intent of the School District’s ballot initiative is to allow voters to decide whether or not they support a tax increase to fund school upkeep. Although she understands the tough economic times, Young said the capital improvement plan was a worthwhile investment.
"It's absolutely critical," Young said. "We have so many needs. Some of our schools are literally falling apart.
"This isn't whistling in the wind, let's go get some money from people," she continued. "It's a dire emergency. We have to do something or we're going to have to shut down some schools. Let’s present this issue to the public and let the voters decide."
So in a recession, really a depression here, do we want to increase our taxes to pay for "anchor babies" and the like?
They will mostly dropout and handout fliers on the Strip. CC schools are a joke, unless you go to Henderson schools. Sad, but true...
'doogie'...
Seriously?
That's just...so typical of the backwards 'thinking' that is endemic to a large percentage of the local populous, which by extension perpetuates the ongoing lack of support for education in these here parts.
How's Vinnie?
NPRI...
Nuttin' but a front for anti-tax propaganda,
with a 'special' focus on public education.
The Sheldon Adelson-backed front group has NO SCRUPLES, and even less brain-power.
'Think Tank', indeed.
Comment removed by moderator. Name Calling
Comment removed by moderator. Name Calling
NPRI, as usual, is not above lying, cheating and bullying to benefit their ultra wealthy donors. NPRI is NOT a think tank. They are pure 100% propaganda and rhetoric.
Here is what the NPRI says about itself:
"NPRI is a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank that seeks private solutions to public challenges facing Nevada, the West and the nation. An independent organization, the Institute neither seeks nor accepts government subsidies. It exists solely through the generous support of individuals, corporations, foundations and trusts.
Contributions are tax deductible under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code."
I say:
The fact they have been given access to all email addresses of all CCSD district teachers should be grounds for terminating Dwight Jones and the NPRI should immediately lose its tax exempt status. They are as nonpartisan as Rush Limbaugh.
Please read this too:
"Here is what the NPRI website says about itself:
"Judy Cresanta, NPRI Founder
Judy Cresanta founded the Nevada Policy Research Institute in the early 1990s following a life-changing trip to the former Soviet Union to educate pro-democracy leaders about free markets and free elections. Her inspirations included Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation; Jeff Coors of Coors Brewing and the Castle Rock Foundation; Bill Bennett, former secretary of education under President Reagan; and Morton Blackwell of the Council for National Policy. Ms. Cresanta served as the Institute's president until 2001.
NPRI was established as Nevada's first free-market think tank, with the goal of confronting the state's many eroding institutions, including government, the education establishment, the media and academia, with straight-forward, well researched information that would keep the public armed with the truth. The absense of truth, Ms. Cresanta learned while in the former Soviet Union, allows the state to enslave its citizens. Under Ms. Cresanta's leadership, NPRI worked with some of the top individuals and organizations from around Nevada and the nation to perform compelling research and provide it to the Silver State's citizens and policymakers."
To remind you of Paul Weyrich's street cred, here is his thoughts on enabling citizens to vote: Here's what Paul Weyrich told a meeting of the religious right in Dallas in 1980 about the power of suppressing voter turnouts:
"Many of our Christians have what I call the Goo Goo Syndrome: Good Government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been, from the beginning of our country, and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections goes up as the voting populace goes down."
"Bill Bennett is a republican hack who has spent too much time in Vegas, and Blackwell has been a member since 1984 of the Council for National Policy, a group of politically active conservatives. Founders included Richard Viguerie, the Virginia direct-mail specialist, Paul Weyrich, Howard Phillips of the Constitution Party, and Phyllis Schlafly, a St. Louis activist who led the opposition to the proposed Equal Rights Amendment. Another founder was Tim LaHaye, author of the Left Behind novels. The council does not make its proceedings public. When he first ran for president, George W. Bush addressed the Council for National Policy. His remarks from 2000 have never been unveiled."
The people at NPRI are trying to do to the American way of life what Timothy McVeigh did to the federal building in Oklahoma City.
They are a a self centered, evil organization.
does filing suit in a case like this jeopardize npri's tax exempt status???
i can't image the statute that created these organizations had increased litigation as a positive policy consideration...
the time to squash npri...
is right frickin now!!!
hey jeff...
didn't mean to step on your toes...
didn't read your post before i made mine...
but...
great minds do think alike!!!
I love NPRI. Somebody has to stand up to the political bullies.
Let's review. NPRI has worked this summer encouraging teachers to leave CCEA. Anti-union, anti-education.
Filing suit to prevent a bond issue to repair aging schools. Anti-education.
Wants to get rid of "old, bad" teachers and replace them with younger teachers. Have never defined "bad teacher". I'm thinking more expensive is bad. Anti education again.
Do we see a pattern here?
NPRI, I raise the question, who supports you all? Show your true colors.
According to this article: "The lawsuit -- filed by NPRI and one of its researchers Karen Gray, who attended the June 7 meeting -- claims the violation voids the commission's decision to place the tax hike proposal on the November ballot."
IF she was at the meeting, why for Heaven's sake did she not raise a concern at the time? She did not know then? If she didn't, she has no business holding that position. It appears that NPRI is simply waiting for an opening to pounce. I suggest Ms. Gray and Mr. Joecks find another cause with which to spend their time because apparently they have too much of it. I certainly did not appreciate receiving an unsolicited email. It was an abuse of internet privileges much like those spam artists.
NPRI's mission is supposedly to 'solve' problems in society's and governmental structures and processes.
NPRI, with its wealthy donors, can certainly help education by becoming a partner of the school district in designing solutions for its myriad challenges.
Is filing a suit a solution? If you cannot offer solutions, then you are part of THE problem.
CCSD has no cash problems. We do have a problem with EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURES for compensation.
Who can ignore their history of planting relentless trolls on this forum? Obviously NPRI is more than a mere local think-tank. Along with their like-minded compatriots at the chamber of commerce, they function as a lobbying group and political action committee intent on starving public education until it is too weak to fend off privatization.
If NPRI and the chamber are free-market fanatics, they are surely inconsistent in their embrace of free-market philosophies. While they seek to damage education and eliminate collective bargaining, they do nothing about businesses' growing reliance on public subsidies, other than spout the predictable mumbo-jumbo about government picking winners and losers. Did anyone at NPRI happen to notice the State of Nevada's deal with Apple? It doesn't appear so. They're too busy trying to get their hands on education dollars.
This lawsuit by NPRI is reprehensible, and it is a problem for more than the schoolchildren of Clark County. NPRI has recently announced its expansion into Reno, where it will be just as hostile to Washoe County's public institutions.
Why is NPRI only anti teacher's union. They were silent on the Firefighter's overtime issues. They have been silent on the issues with unions and budgets in North Las Vegas.
@Roslenda. Would that be excessive compensation for administrators?
According to the CCSD school phone book, there are currently 310 principals listed, 342 assistant principals, and 131 deans. This is a link to that phone book.
http://ccsd.net/district/directory/resou...
According to NPRI in Transparent Nevada, the total salary and benefits for those people in 2011, the last year data is available is $90,603,092.43. That averages out to $115,712.76 per person.
This is a link to Transparent Nevada.
http://transparentnevada.com/salaries/cl...
There are approximately 38000 employees for CCSD. Those 783 school administrators make up less than 2% of the employees. Based on the projected budget for 2012-2013 of 1.7 Billion, the 2011 salaries make up approximately 5.3% of the personnel budget.
1. Roslenda: Bond money for capital improvements is separate from general operating funds used to pay school district employees' salaries, though I suppose it's possible that some bond money is allocated to pay the salaries of those individuals whose jobs are directly related to capital improvement projects. This would certainly be prudent and reasonable.
2. CCSD Trustees: There are sometimes consequences for turning a blind eye when your union-busting, top man has been hopping into bed with the enemy.
3. NPRI: Dumb move! I should think you'd want those old buildings repaired, even at taxpayer expense, before embarking on your plan to have facilities turned over to your private sector buddies. Once again, your "think tank" logic defies logic.
@Roslenda. Or would that be the excessive compensation for Administrative Secretaries?
There are 174 names on that list. The two highest work for the Superintendent. The highest paid is Elizabeth Carerro who made $144,720.44 in pay and benefits for 2011. That includes overtime of $44487.69. The next highest paid is Debra Eloi who was paid $98,583.43 in 2011 pay and benefits. Her total includes $17,736.94 in overtime. That overtime total is more than the remaining 172 names on the list made in overtime. This is a link to that listing.
http://transparentnevada.com/salaries/se...
A teacher with a bachelors degree and maximum experience makes $57,563 including pay and benefits. There are 151 names on that list that made more than that in 2011. A teacher with a masters degree and maximum experience makes $71,919 in pay and benefits. There are 62 names on the list that make more than that amount.
This is a link to the CCSD salary schedule. Teachers have been on the same salary schedule since the 2008-2009 school year.
http://ccsd.net/employees/resources/pdf/...
No real need to "derail" any proposed property tax increase since that has less than ZERO chance of passing anyway.
Clark county has a lot of work to do gutting the fat and inefficiency from ALL government offices, and trimming the outlandish compensation of the CCFD before even THINKING of robbing more from tax payers.
Better get to work on that now pols...the longer you wait the harder it will be.
NO NEW TAXES
@stopthebs. Only problem is that you are confusing two different governments. CCFD is part of Clark County and is controlled by the County Commissioners.
CCSD is controlled by the Trustees and has a completely different budget. Funds from CCSD can NOT be used by Clark County and funds from Clark County can NOT be used by CCSD.
To Thomas Delahunty: Why do you need someone to stand up against the "political bullies" FOR you? Too busy, perhaps? Just wondering.
Having read the article, all the comments and who the posters are I think I will side with NPRI. The typical libs hate them so they must be doing the right thing.
$6.17/month for a tax increase on a $100,000 house to pay for school maintenance? Man O'Live.
Brad Truax, because this is nothing more than a union slush fund to be used however the unions decide.
Also, I am quite busy. I own 3 businesses that according to Barack Obama somebody else built.....but I get taxed as though I built them. I wish he would find the people responsible for building my businesses and tax them accordingly instead of me.
All meeting have minutes taken. It should be very easy to document whether there was a call for public comment or not. If there was a public comment call, that should just about put this issue to bed.
awe...
did did npri go running to the sun editors...
and cry...
boo hoo hoo...
wah wah wah...
npri needs to be attacked on every legal front possible...
including but not limited to...
ending it's tax exempt status...
Can we get NPRI to file suit against CCSD and WCSD for using taxpayer funding to LOBBY THE LEGISLATURE. Certainly a violation for the federal grant money they receive as the OMBC's that contain the cost principles REQUIRED for grant recipients, you CANNOT lobby anyone.
@noindex. If this bond issue is approved, the money CAN NOT be used for operating budget, but must be used for capital projects. Since the trustees control that budget and none of the the funds can be used to pay salaries, please explain to me how it is a "union slush fund."
@Roslenda. Then you will also have to file suit against any county, city, and school district that sent representatives to talk to the legislature. I believe that the only requirement with federal grant money is that money may not be used for lobbying. You didn't answer my question about which high expenses you were against.
1. There is probably a set of Minutes for this meeting. What do they say as to public comments being asked for?
2. The meeting proceedings were probably recorded and/or transcribed.
3. If the Commission Chair had the habit of always asking for public comment -- and the claim of this habit is not contradicted by a recording or transcript -- this becomes a matter of invited (or induced) error, which precludes NPRI from taking advantage of its own failure to make comments when comments were requested. It is a long established principle that one may not benefit from one's own wrong. One cannot stay silent when given the opportunity to comment -- and then turn around and complain that one has been prejudiced because one stayed silent.
One side or the other has a problem in this case.
Doogie, Noindex, you guys are hilarious. CCSD grads going on to jobs as card-flippers, and construction funds going into the union slush fund. And stoptheb--you're spot on. Who cares if the ballot measure to hike prop taxes is stopped? It never would have passed anyway--and it's really another tax to fund the pension tsunami. www.pensiontsunami.com