Coalition proposes referendum to reverse Nevada’s big tax boost

You have to give it to anti-tax crusader Chuck Muth. He never throws in the towel.

Muth, president of Nevada-based Citizen Outreach and backer of Grover Norquist’s taxpayer protection pledge to oppose new tax revenue, said in a newspaper column Friday that a group called the WeDecideCoalition.com has been formed to put Gov. Brian Sandoval’s revenue plan on the 2016 ballot as a voter referendum.

“Unless I’m reading it wrong, it certainly appears our Constitution allows we, the people, to gather enough signatures to put Gov. Sandoval’s tax hike — including the creation of the new gross receipts tax — on the ballot in 2016 for an up-or-down vote,” Muth said.

Since voter turnout was so low in the 2014 general election, Muth said it won’t be that difficult to gather enough signatures to put the tax plan on the ballot. Ten percent of those who voted last year would have to sign the petition, which is about 55,000 signatures, he said.

“And unless Nevada’s business community wants to pay the millions of dollars this new gross receipts tax is going to steal from their bottom lines, they should not only join the WeDecideCoalition.com, but pony up the couple hundred thousand dollars needed to obtain the number of signatures required to put this referendum on the 2016 ballot,” Muth said.

Seven referendums have qualified for the Nevada ballot, and six were approved by voters since the process was authorized in 1908. The last time it was used was in 1990 to maintain Nevada’s current laws regarding abortion. It passed.

— Sean Whaley

HIGH COURT SEATS RETAINED

The Nevada Supreme Court won’t have to make a case to the 2017 Legislature to keep it at its current seven-member size after all.

A 1997 law that increased the size of the Supreme Court from five to seven justices also included a provision that would have returned it to a five-member court “on the date on which the voters approve a constitutional amendment establishing an intermediate court of appeals.”

That occurred in November when voters approved a Court of Appeals by passing Question 1, a constitutional amendment, to help clear a large backlog of cases.

Without a change in the 1997 law, the seats of Justices Michael Douglas and Nancy Saitta would be eliminated at the end of their terms in 2019. Their seats were the two most recently added to the court.

The court would have then returned to its five-member size, unless the 2017 Legislature changed the law.

But it won’t be necessary now.

Tucked away in Section 86 of Senate Bill 514, the appropriations act funding state government for the next two years, is wording to repeal the requirement that the court return to five justices. If Gov. Brian Sandoval signs the budget bill into law, as he is expected to do, the court will be able to remain at its current size in perpetuity.

The section of the budget bill was not singled out for any debate or discussion.

It’s just politics as usual at the Nevada Legislature.

— Sean Whaley

VEGAS LEADERS FEELING CHARITABLE

Las Vegas City Council members now can spend taxpayer funds on a nonprofit of their choice, so long as they spend a maximum of $5,000 per transaction, no more than seven times a year.

A much-discussed item from Wednesday’s consent agenda saw Councilman Ricki Barlow successfully push for a council member’s right to pull up to $35,000 in cash from their office’s discretionary fund in order to make grants or donations to support nonprofit organizations.

Barlow said the move was needed to allow him to pay for buses to take schoolchildren to an “Education Day” event at the Las Vegas Natural History Museum. He said his office’s inability to pay for those buses scuttled one past event.

Questions surrounding the move sparked a rare moment of accord between Councilman Bob Beers and Mayor Carolyn Goodman, who waged a months-long standoff over a now-abandoned plan to spend millions of public dollars on a $200 million, 24,000-seat downtown soccer stadium.

“I asked for this item to be pulled off the consent agenda so I could vote against it,” Beers said. “I have a philosophical problem with government making charitable contributions rather than government charging taxpayers less and having taxpayers make charitable contributions.”

Goodman agreed:

“I’m going to stand with you on that because I don’t know how you select one charitable institution over another.”

Councilwoman Lois Tarkanian, like Goodman, wondered why Barlow couldn’t just pay for the buses out of pocket.

Barlow, perhaps feeling a little cornered, said he was just trying to play by nonprofit donation rules brought to his attention by City Manager Betsy Fretwell.

“I wanted to pay for the buses out of my Ward 5 budget, and I was instructed that I had to go through a specific process or procedure in order to do that,” Barlow said.

“I personally don’t see why I can’t use my ward budget to support schoolchildren in my district.”

Fretwell said under the city’s charter, any funding going directly to a 501(c)3 — as opposed to a vendor contracted by that nonprofit — has to go up for a council vote.

Barlow’s proposed changes to those restrictions passed 4-2, with Beers and Goodman opposed and Councilman Stavros Anthony absent.

— James DeHaven

ISN’T THAT IRONIC?

The chairman — like everyone else assembled — had just heard a presentation on the state’s open meeting law and the importance of public input.

Then he tried to close the meeting before anyone in the audience could speak.

“What about public comment?” came a cry from several people watching Wednesday’s meeting of the Independent Laboratory Advisory Committee.

The citizen panel helps set the rules for how labs test medical marijuana. Chairman Ed Alexander presides over the meetings in Carson City and is viewable via video hookup at a Las Vegas meeting site.

At the meeting, Deputy Attorney General Linda Anderson gave the committee a thorough presentation on open meetings, stressing that public comment is “critical.”

When Anderson was done, Alexander said: “Unless we have anything else to discuss, the meeting is adjourned.”

After the audience reaction, Alexander quickly realized the oversight and opened public comment. Four people stood to ask questions or offer comments.

In case Alexander hadn’t heard the open meeting presentation, it was right there on the agenda, too:

Item 5 — public comment.

— Eric Hartley

Contact Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3900. Find him on Twitter: @seanw801. Contact James DeHaven at jdehaven@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3839. Find him on Twitter: @JamesDeHaven. Contact Eric Hartley at ehartley@reviewjournal.com or 702-550-9229. Find him on Twitter: @ethartley.