Clark County’s cemetery districts are used to doing more with less.
With shoestring budgets and largely volunteer staffs, the small districts are responsible for all maintenance and operations at the county’s cemeteries. But historically, there’s been little interest from the community in running for the elected commissioner seats, leading to vacant seats and uncontested races.
With that in mind, Cemetery Districts Nos. 1, 5 and 6 have requested to be exempt from participating in this year’s voters’ pamphlets. The guides are sent to voters before the Aug. 4 primary election and before the Nov. 3 general election.
Candidates for all elected positions are eligible to insert information in the voters’ pamphlet, unless the jurisdictions in which they’re seeking office ask the council for an exemption due to financial hardship, according to state law. One seat is up for re-election in each of the three districts.
It costs, on average, about $900 to take out a page in the voters’ pamphlet, county Auditor Greg Kimsey said.
“Why spend money on that when there’s no opposition?” said Walter Hanson, the sole member of Cemetery District No. 5. All cemetery districts have three seats.
The issue, however, has prompted unexpected controversy. The council has voted twice — first at its April 21 meeting and again at its April 28 meeting — to deny the request pending more information from the districts about their finances.
The districts have provided no evidence of their finances, Councilor David Madore said Tuesday. The council would only be acting on the districts’ words that participating in the voters’ pamphlet is causing undue financial hardship.
“We certainly can’t find something where we don’t even have the basis to do so,” Madore said.
Councilor Tom Mielke echoed Madore’s concerns.
“In my opinion, we have a lack of information here to make this decision,” Mielke said. “With that, I’m having trouble supporting the measure.”
Councilor Jeanne Stewart, meanwhile, raised a different concern. The cemetery districts collect a portion of property taxes, and therefore information about their representatives should be readily available.
“That’s all the more reason why anyone who files (for election) should be published,” Stewart said.
Kimsey warned the council that allowing jurisdictions exemptions from participating in the voters’ guide may encourage other, larger boards to request the same exemption.
“We are concerned that if were to do that, it would result in a voters’ pamphlet with less information that we currently have in it now,” Kimsey said.
Madore suggested that in cases where an exemption is granted, the elections office could still allow the jurisdictions to post information on the auditor’s website. Currently, the auditor’s office provides contact information for candidates on its website, but Kimsey said the office will consider publishing more information online.
The council will likely vote on the issue later this month.
