More time for tax cap petitions

CARSON CITY -- An initiative petition pushed by state Senate candidate Sharron Angle to cap property taxes was given new life Wednesday by the Nevada Supreme Court.

The court granted a petition requesting more time to gather signatures for the constitutional amendment styled after California's Proposition 13, ordering county clerks to accept signatures turned in late in Clark County on May 20 and others turned in on June 17 in Washoe and Clark counties.

The court also ordered Secretary of State Ross Miller to move forward with the signature verification process to determine whether the petition has enough names of registered voters to qualify for the November ballot.

Angle's proposed constitutional amendment would limit property tax increases to 2 percent per year, rather than the current cap of 3 percent for homeowners passed by the Legislature in 2005, until a property is sold.

Angle, a former member of the Assembly and a candidate for Congress in 2006, is running in the Republican primary against Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno.

Angle could not be reached for comment. But when she turned in the petitions in May, Angle said she had the minimum number of signatures required. The additional signatures turned in June 17 would add to that total.

The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, agreed that the Legislature violated Article 19 of the state constitution when it set a date of May 20 to turn in initiative petitions because the deadline was earlier than allowed. Justice Nancy Saitta did not participate in the case.

"Although the Legislature may enact procedures to facilitate the initiative process, those procedures may not directly inhibit or restrict the powers reserved to the people under Article 19," the court said.

Because the earlier date was invalid, the court said a previous deadline set by the Legislature of June 17 for submitting initiative petitions would be used instead.

The court said the order granting Angle's petition was issued to notify county clerks and other elections officials as quickly as possible so they could move forward with checking signatures. A formal opinion will be issued, because the issue has statewide implications, the court said.

Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said he would start the verification process immediately.

"Our job is to go through the signatures and see if they have enough," he said. "I have no idea if they do or not."

The ruling doesn't leave much time, Lomax said.

"We have to have everything done, and I mean everything, the ballot arguments for and against and a translation into Spanish, by the date of the primary. People don't realize how early we have to get the ballots to print."

The primary election is Aug. 12.

But the petition could also still see a legal challenge by opponents.

Gail Tuzzolo, a spokeswoman for the AFL-CIO-backed group Nevadans for Nevada, which had previously challenged Angle's petition in court, said there is concern about the validity of the signatures.

"There is some belief there was fraud in the collection process," Tuzzolo said.

The group may conduct its own review of the petitions to look for questionable signatures, she said.

Angle filed her lawsuit in May, arguing the 2007 Legislature moved back the deadline to turn in signatures to a date earlier than the state constitution allows.

Angle's petition ran into serious problems because signatures were not accepted in Clark County by the now-invalid May 20 deadline when they came in after 5 p.m.

But the court's ruling makes those signatures, as well as additional petitions turned in on June 17, valid for purposes of counting.

Angle must have 58,836 valid signatures collected in all 17 counties to qualify for the ballot. If the measure is on the ballot and voters approve it, it would have to pass again in 2010 before it could take effect.

Angle has been pursuing such a constitutional amendment for several years without success.

The Legislature has put a 3 percent cap on increases to property tax bills for most homeowners in state law, but Angle said the cap could be changed at will by lawmakers.

A constitutionally-imposed property tax cap would ensure that it could never be reversed without a vote of the people, Angle said.

Contact Review-Journal capital bureau reporter Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3900.