Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey is well known to be a staunch supporter of this Home Rule Charter nonsense born out of the effort to recall County Commissioners Mielke and Madore over the hiring of Don Benton.
I have respected Greg for many years, even when I disagreed with him. But his words left on Madore’s facebook page leave me questioning is he is even due that respect.
In a post on the 2014 Voters Pamphlet having an additional two pages promoting the charter, when there is not an equal 2 pages provided for those opposing the charter, Kimsey said;
“If voters adopt a home rule charter, voters may subsequently repeal that charter.” (scroll down in comments to see Kimsey’s comment)
“One year following the effective date of the charter there are three methods by which proposed charter amendments may be placed on the ballot (council action, citizen petition, charter review commission which meets five years after the effective date and then every ten years).”
Notice the sleight of hand?
He says “repeal,” but then goes on to discuss “amending,” far different.
In fact, looking at the charter itself we see on page 8;
ARTICLE 7 – INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
Section 7.1 Direct government
The people of Clark County reserve the power to make certain proposals at their option and to approve or reject them at the polls, independent of the council.
Section 7.2 Initiative
The people reserve the power of initiative. An ordinance or amendment to an ordinance, except as limited by state or federal law or court interpretation, may be proposed by filing an initiative petition with the auditor. No ordinance enacted as a result of initiative shall be amended or repealed within two (2) years after enactment, except as a result of a subsequent initiative or referendum or as required by state or federal law.
A. Initiative Limitations.
The following are limited by state or federal law or court interpretations and may not be proposed or adopted by initiative.
1. Ordinances providing for compensation or working conditions of county employees or elected officials.
2. Redistricting council districts.
3. Authorizing or repealing an appropriation of money or any portion of the annual budget.
4. Authorizing or repealing taxes or fees.
5. Authorizing or repealing any provision of a service or program provided by the county.
6. Amending or repealing this charter. (emphasis added)
Under ARTICLE 9 – CHARTER REVIEW AND AMENDMENTS we read an involved method of an elected commission after 5 years and then at least every 10 years thereafter for purpose of “review.”
At the top of page 13 we read;
Section 9.2 Commission responsibility and duty
“The commission is bound by responsibility and duty to review the charter to determine its adequacy and suitability to the needs of the county and propose necessary and appropriate amendments.”
Once again, “repeal” is nowhere mentioned.
See also the October 31, 2014 Letter to the Editor, Charter restricts initiative power where Kimsey also stated in comments under the LTE, “A home rule charter that may be amended by the voters, may be repealed by the voters.” (emphasis added)
So, just where does Kimsey come up with “If voters adopt a home rule charter, voters may subsequently repeal that charter,” if repeal of it is prohibited by the charter itself and there is no written method of repeal contained in it?
As I keep saying, I get that people dislike Madore, Mielke and Benton, I really do. But they can be voted out of office if enough people dislike their execution of their duties.
If passed, this charter is forever and even amendments are watered down. You will be stuck with it and cannot go back once this rushed and flawed charter is passed.
And let us not forget, the only real reason is that the Lazy C and a handful of boorish Liberal Democrats hold an extreme dislike of the current County Commission that displaced their long-held majority.
In fact, they have been the very ones that stood against similar efforts in the past, when they held the majority.
Such a radical transformation of county government is unwarranted and amounts to a gross overreaction to losing the majority and to the perfectly legal hiring of Don Benton.
It is much like trying to drive a tack with a 15 lb sledge hammer.
Shame on Greg Kimsey for making such a disingenuous claim, knowing full well that this charter will be forever.
