City Council to discuss eligibility of mayoral candidates

By VERNON ROBISON

The Progress

The Mesquite City Council will be holding a full discussion at its Tuesday night meeting on May 12, regarding questions about the eligibility of one of the two candidates who have filed to run for Mayor in the November election. The matter was brought before the council as an agenda item report by Councilwoman Sandra Ramaker at a Technical Review meeting on Tuesday, May 5.

The recommendation on the matter was to place an item on next week’s agenda that would direct the City Manager to engage outside legal counsel to draft a letter to City Attorney Bob Sweetin, notifying him that he is in potential violation of Mesquite Municipal Code in filing as a mayoral candidate.

In the item’s cover letter, Ramaker pointed to a section of Mesquite Municipal Code which states that no employee of the City, excluding City Council members, shall be a candidate for the office of Council member or mayor without first resigning from City employment.

“Mr. Sweetin has not resigned from his office as City Attorney while maintaining his candidacy for Mayor,” the letter read.

Sweetin has contested that the Code in question is dated and should have been removed from the books some time ago. He maintains that this code is in conflict with sections of the more recently passed City Charter as well as with certain sections of Nevada Revised Statute and is, therefore, invalid.

Councilman Brian Wursten, acting as Mayor Pro Tem, led discussion on the item as Mayor Al Litman had recused himself from the discussion.

Wursten said that the request contained some misrepresentations that he wanted to have corrected before it went on to full council discussion next week.

First, he felt it should be clarified that the Council had already sought ouside legal council on the matter. “I think it is important to note that it has already been done,” Wursten said. “They’re already working on this.”

Secondly, Wursten said that the cover letter on the item should be modified to not include the entire City Council as making the request. Instead he preferred that it request continued engagement with legal council only by Councilwoman Sandra Ramaker, and to only include City Council should it be approved.

“I don’t want to have my name in any way associated with spending money on something like this, that is, I think, 100% frivolous,” Wursten said. “Especially when we are talking about laying people off in the city and we’ve got people that are wanting to eat and want to have jobs.”

Wursten also pointed out that a strict reading of the ordinance would also preclude Mayor Litman himself from running for re-election. “The Mayor was not included in this and he has two City jobs,” Wursten said. “And if that is the case it could be, point blank, an ethics violation to pursue this.”

On this score, Wursten cited Nevada Revised Statute that prohibits expenditures of public funds to be used to oppose a candidate for office.

“It seems we are only picking one person in this,” Wursten said. “So I don’t want to be a party to that. I want to be very, very clear that this is not something that I am doing myself.”

Councilman George Rapson agreed with Wursten that he did not want his name on the item either.

“I’ve asked staff to provide an estimate of what the total cost of pursuing this thing is,” Rapson said. “At this point in a financial crisis for the City, we’re kind of pissing away money here. I’d just like to make sure that I’m not part of that. And I’d like to make sure that there is a quantified dollar amount. What is the number and how much are we spending on this? I would like to know that.”

Wursten asked Ramaker what the objective was in pursuing the item. He pointed out that the effect of pursuing this could end up with two mayoral candidates who are deemed ineligible to run for the office. That would cause a need for a special election to be held causing additional expense to the City.

“I’d kind of like to know what the endgame is on this,” Wursten said.

Ramaker responded that she had heard many concerns from the community about the issue which had been far from settled.

“We have state statute, we have an ordinance and we have a charter; and all of them conflict with each other,” Ramaker said. “We have citizens that want to know what is the answer. And no answers have been given to the public. Before we were ever able to bring it to the public and have a discussion we were shut down.”

In a public comment, Wes Boger, who is running as a candidate for City Council Seat #5, stated that he had resigned a City position as a school crossing guard in order to file his candidacy. “I did so because I read the code,” Boger said. “It was black and white. I chose to comply with municipal code because I wanted to make sure, if I did get elected, my qualifications for candidacy weren’t questioned.”

Councilwoman Annie Black asked if the apparent conflict with city code had been brought up at the time that Sweetin had filed as a candidate.

City Clerk Tracy Beck responded that specific questions of this kind are not usually asked by her office. “The candidates take an oath and a declaration of candidacy,” Beck explained. “They are given a pamphlet so they know what to look for.”

In a public comment, Sweetin said that, before he filed as a candidate, he had consulted with a campaign attorney in the state regarding his eligibility to run. The result was a legal opinion which, he felt, gave him the go-ahead to file. It was on the merits of this that he went ahead and filed his candidacy, he said.

“I’m happy to talk more about this on Tuesday night next week,” Sweetin said. “I certainly encourage anyone who has any concerns about this at all, to come to council meeting and speak up on it.”

Beck explained that next week’s meeting will be an open public meeting with certain precautions in place due to COVID-19. Attendees at City Hall will have temperatures taken upon entrance to the meeting. Only 10 people will be allowed as audience in the Council Chamber at a time. The corridor outside the Chamber will be used as overflow and those wishing to make public comment will be allowed in to make their comments and then required to exit afterwards. The meeting can also be viewed live via the City’s website as always.