HELLER TO APPEAL RULING ON TWO BALLOT INITIATIVES

Court to Be Asked to Weigh in on Questions on Minimum Wage And
Frivolous Lawsuits

CARSON CITY -- In an abrupt about-face, Secretary of State Dean Heller
said Wednesday he will appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court a lower
court decision directing him to place two initiative questions on the
November ballot.

His decision throws into limbo one measure that would raise the
minimum wage by $1 and another that would ban frivolous lawsuits and
prohibit limits on attorneys fees.

Carson City District Judge Bill Maddox had ordered Heller to put the
measures on the ballot after a hearing July 20 when he found
unconstitutional a provision of the state constitution dealing with
the gathering of signatures.

"I had not planned on appealing the judge's decision, but in light of
the fact that another lawsuit has been filed based in part on Judge
Maddox's ruling and the possibility exists that others may follow, I
have no other choice," Heller said.

Heller was referring to a challenge in U.S. District Court filed
Tuesday seeking to put a marijuana legalization proposal on the ballot.

Chief Deputy Secretary of State Renee Parker said the lawsuit, filed
by the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, the Committee to
Regulate and Control Marijuana, the Marijuana Policy Project and
others, raises the same issue addressed in the Maddox ruling in
seeking to get the measure to legalize small amounts of marijuana on
the November ballot. The group raises other legal issues as well in
its appeal.

"We just want the ruling from the Supreme Court, which ever way they
go, but a solid ruling so that it creates the precedent that everybody
has to follow," she said.

There is also a concern that if either of two measures submitted July
20 to ban public employees in the Legislature and to roll back last
year's tax increases are invalidated, the Maddox ruling will be raised
again in yet another lawsuit, Parker said. Those two initiatives are
being verified now by county clerks.

Heller announced two weeks ago that supporters of the marijuana
initiative had failed to secure enough valid signatures to qualify the
measure for the ballot.

After the Maddox ruling, Heller added the signatures back to the
marijuana total that were rejected for the same reason as the minimum
wage and frivolous lawsuits measures, but the marijuana measure still
fell short of the minimum number of signatures, Parker said.

Gail Tuzzolo, a spokeswoman for both the minimum wage and frivolous
lawsuit measures, said that Heller is playing politics and that the
Maddox ruling will be defended before the Supreme Court.

"All of a sudden (Heller) seems to be going out of his way to take off
the ballot two initiatives that are very popular with Nevada voters,"
she said.

"We are on solid ground," Tuzzolo said. "We are dealing with facts and
he is dealing with politics."

"Supporters of the minimum wage and frivolous lawsuit measures will
fight to get them on the ballot right up to (Election Day)," she said.

Heller said there are too many uncertainties that make an appeal
necessary.

"With all of these factors in mind, I believe it is in the best
interest of all Nevadans that I seek a final judgment on the
constitutional requirements for signature gathering on petitions from
the Nevada Supreme Court," he said.

The many uncertainties surrounding some of the ballot questions are
putting pressure on the ability of county clerks and Heller's office
to finalize the general election ballot.

Heller said, "The clock is ticking on county clerks and registrars of
voters to produce sample ballots by the early voting period for the
general election."

That period runs from Oct. 16-29.

Heller had killed the minimum wage and frivolous lawsuits measures
after thousands of signatures were rejected because the petitions did
not have an affidavit from a registered voter in the county. The
petitions had been circulated from people outside the county.

The state constitution requires affidavits from registered voters when
the petitions were circulated by people from outside the county.

Maddox rejected that provision in the state constitution, saying it
served no legitimate government purpose.

But Heller said: "I strongly believe that the Nevada constitution is
not a fast-food menu that you pick and choose which parts you want to
uphold and discard those parts that do not fit your particular agenda.
It's my duty as an elected officer of the state of Nevada to uphold
the Nevada Constitution."