Board appointments ignite political storm in Laughlin

If you had asked folks in Laughlin to give an opinion about the town advisory board a week ago, many -- if not most -- would have shrugged.

But in a single moment, the five-member board was turned upside down, igniting a political firestorm that had local pundits ranting and residents talking.

Shortly after being sworn in, Clark County Commissioner Steve Sisolak, with the support of the commission, appointed town board members in what seemed a routine action.

In reality, what Sisolak did was ignore the four town board nominees who drew the most votes in a November straw poll and name individuals he had handpicked. Three of the top vote-getters he rejected were incumbents.

The backlash was immediate.

Political commentators, mostly conservative, tagged Sisolak as an urban Democrat who was imposing his will on a rural town he seldom visited and where he lost soundly in the election. They accused Sisolak of loading the board with liberal Democrats who backed him in the race and don't reflect the town's conservative bent.

Disregarding voters' wishes, they say, will give momentum to those pushing to incorporate Laughlin into a city independent of the county, even if the bad economy would make it difficult for the town of 8,600 residents to splinter off.

"It will fuel that fire," said Cheryl Crow, an eight-year board member ousted by Sisolak. "We have nothing to lose if Sisolak is going to treat Laughlin like this."

Commissioners have the authority to appoint town board members to two-year terms. Some unincorporated towns use informal surveys, known as straw polls, to indicate whom residents prefer. The straw poll was available all day on Election Day and 1 p.m. to closing on one pre-election day.

Sisolak's predecessor, Bruce Woodbury, almost always went with the straw poll's top winners, believing that reflected popular sentiment, Crow said.

Sisolak said he overrode the straw polls in Laughlin, and to a lesser degree those conducted in Moapa and Moapa Valley, because they discouraged voters from participating.

"I'm not putting much faith in the straw poll," he said.

Only 20 percent of residents who participated in the election voted in the straw poll, about 500 of the 2,600 voters, Sisolak said.

Candidates on the straw-poll list didn't campaign, debate or discuss issues in front of a sizable audience, Sisolak said. Voters tend to go with the familiar names of incumbents or those endorsed by the local TV station and newspaper, which makes it nearly impossible for newcomers to break in, especially Democrats, he said.

"It was just a popularity contest," Sisolak said.

Sisolak said sources, whom he declined to disclose, told him that a small group with entrenched interests use the board to control Laughlin.

The board is limited to making recommendations that the commission can accept or reject, Sisolak said. However, deciding which proposals to place before the commission gives the board a fair amount of influence.

One patron at a Laughlin bar said he wanted to take part in the pre-election straw poll but couldn't because he arrived at the voting site a couple of hours before the poll opened.

Still, Don Wasmund, 66, an avowed independent, said participating in the poll would've been moot, given that Sisolak discounted it and picked people who weren't on the roster.

"If he's going to appoint them, it doesn't matter what we do," Wasmund said. "Maybe he doesn't know us. Maybe he should come down here and talk to us more."

Sisolak's critics lambasted him not only for shaking up the board but for choosing three staunch Democrats: Michael Bekoff, Yoko Allen and John Geremia, who were active in Barack Obama's campaign.

Bekoff and Allen were Democratic precinct captains in Laughlin.

However, Sisolak also picked James Vincent, a Republican, and reappointed state trooper Novelt Mack, a Republican who ranked high in the straw poll.

He rejected incumbents Kathy Ochs, Ed Cooper and Crow as well as Jennifer Ursini, the local postmaster's daughter who fared well in the poll.

Bekoff said that, to his knowledge, this will be the first town board to have any Democrats.

The town is not the Republican stronghold that some conservative leaders make it out to be, Bekoff said. Roughly 45 percent of voters are Republicans, 35 percent are Democrats and 20 percent are independents, he said.

With that many Democrats, Laughlin should've had at least one on the board over the years, Bekoff said. Meanwhile, the Republicans running the board have let much of the infrastructure fall into neglect, he said.

"This is not strictly a power grab," Bekoff said. "We're trying to set things right."

Sisolak's decision to include two Republicans on the board did little to placate his critics.

"It was definitely politically motivated," said Robert Bilbray, an area developer and resident. "The town board has never been partisan. This definitely has made it partisan."

Bilbray predicted that Sisolak's choices would lead people to resign from the town board's subcommittees and intensify the drive to incorporate.

"I just don't see this board having any credibility," said Bilbray, who described himself as a moderate Democrat.

Jackie Brady, the town manager, said she received a few resignations from committee volunteers by Thursday, including Bilbray.

Brady said she will work with the new board and believes it deserves a chance.

Although the Clark County Commission is nonpartisan in most matters such as fixing roads, a shift in party politics often will show up in appointments, said David Damore, political science professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

"It's not unexpected," he said. "You want people serving you who will be loyal to you and support your vision."

Bilbray and Crow questioned whether Sisolak owed political favors to the trio of Democrats he chose.

Sisolak insists that party affiliation did not weigh into his choices. He selected the members because they were active in the community and brimming with the energy and ideas needed to revitalize a stagnant board, he said.

None of the top five vote-getters in the straw poll called to express interest in the job or in working with him, Sisolak said. They assumed incorrectly that the poll sealed the deal for them.

Getting some Democrats onto a body that has been a Republican bastion is a bonus, he said.

"I'm accused of being partisan because I'm putting Democrats on there, and Woodbury is not partisan, and he put Republicans on there," Sisolak said. "What does that say?"

State Assemblyman Joe Hardy, R-Boulder City, said he initially sided with Sisolak when the commissioner described the straw-poll problems.

But the public outcry has led him to question the wisdom of alienating Laughlin's civic-minded volunteers for the sake of "changing things and shaking things up and breaking the mold."

At an area senior center, two people playing cards talked about the uproar they had been hearing.

Tom Bump, 62, a Laughlin resident, said Sisolak misstepped when he rebuffed the nominees who won in the straw polls. The board is advisory, giving it limited power, he said, so Sisolak did the most harm by going against voters' wishes.

"I think it's pretty rotten how it happened, but I don't think it makes a difference," Bump said, other than getting more people fired up about incorporating.

Joyce Moser, 68, who voted for Sisolak, said maybe he reshaped the board to improve it, the way Obama is picking new Cabinet members.

"The town board needs to be filled with professional, educated people who are not just after notoriety," Moser said. "The main thing is to fix everything that's broken."

Contact reporter Scott Wyland at swyland@reviewjournal.com or 702-455-4519.