With election cycles, selfishness shouldn’t trump savings

Today marks the fifth time I’ve urged Nevada officials to combine municipal elections in odd years with county, state and federal elections in even years.

To their shame, they’ve resisted standardizing election dates. But I am nothing if not persistent.

By my count, if legislators had listened to me in 2007 when I started this push, cities in Clark County would have saved at least $6 million, probably more.

The city of Las Vegas might have had enough money to pay a paltry $620,000, which combined with Clark County’s $1.6 million could have funded 13 new police positions.

Southern Nevada legislators and city officials in Clark County have resisted the election date changes, not for noble policy reasons, but for selfishness.

I’ll toss kudos at Reno, which changed the election schedule in 1995, and Mesquite, which took a fiscally conservative approach and has moved to even-year elections.

But for elected officials in Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas and Boulder City, I have nothing but contempt, scorn and disdain for their resistance to saving money for their own benefit.

Las Vegas is expected to discuss changing the election schedule during a meeting in August. Based on what happened before, I’m not optimistic officials will do the right thing.

In 2007, then-County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said the cities had to reimburse the county for $1 million per municipal election cycle. Now the figure has jumped to $2.4 million, according to Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Jamie Munks’ recent story, which raised my ire.

Las Vegas’ cost to pay for municipal primary and general elections in 2017 is now estimated to be $1.47 million. Henderson’s cost is $555,0000, North Las Vegas’ cost is $326,000 and Boulder City’s cost is $66,000.

That money is being wasted. It would cost the cities zip if they would move their elections onto the even years.

If Reno can figure out how to do it, Las Vegas can. Because the opposition to shorter terms would raise incumbents’ wrath, some terms might be extended to get everyone on the same election cycle. I could live with that.

In 2009, syncing election cycles could have extended Oscar Goodman’s mayorship 18 months beyond his 12 years.

Municipal elections begin in April, with the primary, and end in June with general elections. Sometimes elections are resolved in April if a candidate wins 50 percent of the vote, but nothing is more annoying than going to vote for only one unresolved race in June.

Two people have been legislative leaders in seeking this change and they couldn’t be less alike. In 2005 and 2007, when she was a Republican state senator, Barbara Cegavske introduced bills to change the muni elections to even years.

In 2007 and 2009, Democratic Assemblyman Tick Segerblom introduced similar bills, only to see them die in committee.

The opposition came from leaders of both parties. In every case, the reasons are base.

Incumbent protection. Winning without spending as much. Not getting lost in the crowd. Full employment for consultants. Easier fundraising.

In 2007, Assemblywoman Ellen Koivisto, D-Las Vegas, used her power as Assembly Elections Committee chairwoman and never pulled Senate Bill 149 up for a committee vote, even though she said she personally supported the idea.

In 2009, Assembly Bill 256 died without a vote in the Assembly after it became clear it wouldn’t pass. Segerblom himself pulled it.

“The people who profit by the current system were happy that it died,” he said, adding that the opposition was “very behind the scenes.”

Think of the police officers who could have been hired with the savings. But noooooo. Self-preservation prevailed instead.

Jane Ann Morrison’s column runs Thursdays. Leave messages for her at 702-383-0275 or email jmorrison@reviewjournal.com. Find her on Twitter: @janeannmorrison.