RE:
OUR TOWN ADVISORY BOARD AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
(December 1st, 2009)
I recently read Mr. Frank Pilz’s letter to the Editor and your response. I concur with the majority of the items discussed; however, I feel I must comment on a couple of points.
First of all, we never had a “right to vote” to elect the Laughlin Town Advisory Board (LTAB). In Ordinance 490, which was signed in February, 1976 and formed the unincorporated town of Laughlin, it states that the LTAB will be appointed by the Clark County Commissioners. At that time, the citizens did not push to have the LTAB elected, which was an option as provided in NRS 269.576. Had they done so, we would have the “right to vote” today for the LTAB. It is my belief that we are the victim of our own negligence.
In NRS 269.576 it states specifically that persons who want to submit an application must do so in accordance with the announcement made by the town advisory board, and that the application must be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners. Three members of the LTAB appointed in January 2009 did not submit their application per the statute requirement. They were submitted after the deadline published by the Town Advisory Board. It should also be noted; Mr. Sisolak did not become a member of the County Commissioners until the first week of January; so any applications submitted to him prior to this date was not in compliance with the Nevada Revised Statutes as he was not a member of the county commissioners.
It is also my opinion that the LTAB does represent the citizens of Laughlin. They were appointed by the county commissioners as the town advisory board; consequently, they are a voice from within the community to the county commissioners. However, how the LTAB performs this function is another matter.
Now, the basic premise of Frank’s letter is that the LTAB should get the opinion of the citizens of this town. I concur wholeheartedly with this opinion. I firmly believe that the LTAB’s action should have been to established a special committee (or assigned it to the Community Development Committee) to get inputs from the town residences, generate a factual report, and then submit it to our County Commissioner for consideration. As the LTAB can only advise, their advice must be based on fact and not their limited opinion. By doing so, their ultimate recommendation to the County Commissioners would have been more substantial and hopefully carry more weight when the recycling program was presented to the Board of County Commissioners for concurrence or rejection.
However, in fairness to the LTAB, the recycling program was placed on the LTAB agenda. This agenda was publicized in accordance with the Nevada Revised Statutes. The recycling program was discussed by the town residences in attendance. Those in attendance that spoke were all in favor of the new recycling proposal. There were no negative comments from anyone at the LTAB meeting. This leaves to conjecture how well the LTAB letter will be received by our county commissioner. Now the attendance to the LTAB monthly meetings is another point of concern.
I have been to all by three of the LTAB regular meetings this year. Except for the January meeting I do not recall ever seeing more that 35 people in attendance. Excluding the fourth estate and scheduled presenters who are town residences, I don’t believe 75 percent of those at these meetings were actually full time residences of the town. For a town with approximately 8000 citizens I don’t feel there is much interest in what the LTAB does or doesn’t do. I should note, I saw the same type attendance at the previous Board’s meetings. So, whether they are appointed via a straw poll or appointed specifically by the district commissioner, it is my contention that attendance to LTAB meetings and/or recommendations from this board would not be much different.
Frank’s letter and your response bring to mind a more important activity that is presently on-going within this community and this is the Big Bend Water District (BBWD) Service Rules. For the past several months the Las Vegas Valley Water District (LVVWD) has been actively working on a new set of service rules for our community. They, via Mr. Bronson Mack, have set up a series of briefings, workshops and meetings to get comments from the local citizens. Attendance to the workshops has been abysmal. Last month the total in attendance to three separate workshops, scheduled over three days to meet work schedules of town citizens, was approximately 13 citizens. Add to this fact, there is strong evidence that the members of the LTAB have not read or analyzed the proposed rules. Yet the LTAB will provide an opinion and transmit it to Commissioner Sisolak. Commissioner Sisolak, in turn, will make an assessment without the proper input from the citizens of Laughlin. This assessment will go before the BBWD Board of Trustees for vote and we may get a new Service Rules document that we might regret later. I find this process unacceptable; but then, that is how we are running this country.
In fairness, I must state that the members of the LTAB are people just like you and me. They have jobs, family and personal interests that take up their time. However, saying this, individuals who seek this job must be willing to sacrifice their personal life for the good of the citizens of Laughlin. There are very few that can or are willing to meet this kind of commitment.
Without the proper commitment, training and mentoring the LTAB will fail in their duties. As an example, the present board has been in office for 11 months. In accordance with both the Nevada Revised Statutes and the Clark County Codes, training is to be conducted annually to prepare the LTAB to function in accordance to the laws of the County and State. Yet, here we are at the end of November and no training has been provided. This means that the LTAB is functioning without the benefits of any external assistance or guidance. And, we wonder why they are not doing their job as we perceive it should be done.
In closing, I will make the statement that Jim Vincent has done a remarkable job considering the hostile environment he was subjected to. Whether we agree with Commissioner Sisolak decisions or not, we, as citizens, have not stepped up to the plate and provided the support Jim needed and deserves. And we wonder why our community, County, State and Country are going to hell.
Frederick S. Doten
(Editors Note: Mr. Doten is an active member of the Laughlin civic community. A member of the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the Laughlin Economic Development Corporation, he is a graduate of the United States Military Academy who served as an active duty officer for many years with the united States Army. He is also a skilled and experienced engineer who brings considerable technical expertise to public works issues in our township.
Mr. Doten I appreciate your taking the time to write and criticize.
Without getting bogged down in too many technical details, I don’t think there’s much issue in Laughlin since the Occupation that any laws were broken. There have been a few issues raised as you pointed out, but I personally pursued those possibilities and was unable to find any professional legal opinion with a viewpoint that any of them would stand judicial scrutiny. This includes the annual training issue, which in any event is marginal at best, since all it really does is cover some procedural issues, primarily related to open meeting laws and other ethical topics. The annual training has nothing to do with actual policy issues.
The lack of legitimacy of the Laughlin Town Advisory board, it must always be remembered, is one of moral and political legitimacy, or rather, the lack thereof. Anyone who says the Board is not a political body is either grossly naïve or disingenuous. The Harry Reid Democratic Machine politicos were the ones who went nuclear and made Town Advisory Boards an instrument of left wing political patronage.
I’m of a mixed opinion of James Vincent. I certainly agree with you Fred, he’s made the best of a bad situation and even I’ve been willing to work with both he and our Town Manager Jackie Brady on some issues. But there is always the uncomfortable 800 pound gorilla in the room. Novelt Mack, when faced with this dilemma, chose to not be part of something immoral and illegitimate. It’s a dark shadow that always hovers over each and every member of this Board, despite their best intentions.
Perhaps the most important issue you bring up Fred, is the poor participation on the part of residents. We should all remember that this was one of the excuses that Steve Sisolak used in terminating our voting rights, that the straw poll had poor participation.
