Editor’s note: In July, the Clark County Charter Review Commission passed 10 amendments to be sent to the voter in the November General Election. One of those amendments was adopted by the Clark County Council, leaving nine to be determined by the voters.
Clark County Today wrote about all of the amendments back in July. In this updated series, Clark County Today is reposting highlights from those reports in July as well as noting some arguments for and against each amendment that appear in the Voters’ Pamphlet.
Proposed Charter Amendment No. 22: Concerning a Clarification of Nonpartisan Office Elections
This would require that if there are two or fewer candidates for a nonpartisan county executive or legislative office, they would go directly to the general election ballot, bypassing the primary ballot.
Voters’ Pamphlet Argument for:
“This is how other nonpartisan races already work, like city councilors, fire district commissioners, and school board members. Elections would still happen in even-numbered years, when most voters turn out.”
“State law already skips primaries for nonpartisan races for one or two candidates. This amendment applies the same money-saving rule to county races. Primaries exist to narrow down large fields of candidates to the top two vote-getters. With only one or two candidates, there is nothing left to narrow.”
Voters’ Pamphlet Argument against:
“The purpose of an election is not simply to produce a winner. It is to give voters a fair and informed opportunity to evaluate those asking to represent them.”
If only one or two candidates, the race would not appear on the August primary ballot.
“Voters would lose months of publicly provided information about candidates seeking offices.”
“Eliminating the primary creates a built-in advantage for incumbents while challengers lose months to introduce themselves and build public support.”
“A County Charter should strengthen public participation, not diminish it.”
Here are some of the highlights of what Clark County Today reported in July, when the commission passed the amendment:
“This proposal would reduce the number of offices appearing on Primary ballots and would reduce election costs charged to the county,” according to the charter review’s description.
Cathie Garber, secretary of the commission, was the sponsor of this amendment. The amendment passed the review commission 11-4
“The purpose of a primary is to determine who moves to the general election. If there are only one or two candidates, a primary is not needed,” Garber said. “This charter amendment is one of only a few amendments that will save taxpayers money.”
She noted that if this change would have been in effect for the 2022 election, more than $75,000 would have been saved.
Furthermore, when a primary is not needed but candidates are placed on a ballot, it “amounts to taxpayer-funded campaigning,” Garber said.
“Candidates can begin campaigning and fundraising as soon as they file for office,” she said. “This amendment does not limit their ability to do so.”
From listening to public comment and talking to commissioners on the other side of this issue, some say there are unintended consequences to this amendment. It could give incumbents an unfair advantage. Challengers, for example, use the primary to get their name out to the public long before the general election.
Comments
Loading comments…