Owners of racy news racks get a breather while they sue

By Tony Cook

Sunday, Jan. 6, 2008 | 9:05 p.m.

Operators of news racks stuffed with erotic publications on the Strip made good on their threat to sue Clark County when they filed a lawsuit Dec. 26. Merry Christmas, commissioners!

Two days later, U.S. District Judge James Mahan gave the news rack operators a belated holiday gift of his own a temporary restraining order banning the county from charging higher fees for news rack permits.

What does the lawsuit allege?

News rack operators argue that the county’s decision in November to increase news rack fees from $25 to $100 a year is unconstitutional.

The fee applies only to news racks on the Strip and in other designated resort areas, but is used to pay for policing of news racks everywhere in the unincorporated county, the lawsuit notes. That means 14 permit holders for the 2,770 news racks in resort areas would pay for the policing of 10,000 news racks in other parts of the county, the lawsuit said.

The permit fees, the lawsuit said, also pay for the county’s enforcement against illegal activities by those who don’t have news rack permits. Some, for example, simply stack their cards or brochures atop licensed racks.

The news rack permit holders say this scenario presents several constitutional problems. First, the publications on the Strip mostly advertise erotic entertainment services. The county’s decision to require a permit only for those publications amounts to de facto discrimination based on content, they say.

Moreover, as protected speech under the First Amendment, such publications can be charged only a revenue-neutral fee, meaning that any money the county gets from the fees must be used only on news rack enforcement in the area where they are collected.

By using the fee on Strip news racks to pay for policing of news racks elsewhere and of illegal activities by non-news rack operators, the county has violated that standard, the lawsuit contends.

Finally, the lawsuit says the county failed to follow state law because it did not give news rack permit holders the required 15 business days to submit data in opposition to the proposal.

What happens next?

The county will get a chance at a Jan. 15 hearing to argue that the fee should not be suspended while the case is ongoing. Until then, news rack operators are temporarily off the hook for the new fee.

Any other holiday surprises?

Well, some residents were surprised to find a Republic Services garbage truck pulling up to the curb on Christmas and New Year’s days.

In most places, garbage pickup is pushed back a day during those holidays. Not so in Clark County.

Bob Coyle, area president for the company, said Republic’s exclusive contract with the county is silent on the issue of whether residential trash must be picked up on holidays. So the company has always picked up on those days, he said.

Tough luck for the truck drivers, though there is some consolation. They get holiday pay and regular pay if they work those shifts double their usual $24.89 an hour. It’s Republic, not the ratepayer, that eats that cost.

Anything interesting happen at last week’s commission meeting?

The post-holiday period is pretty dull at the county administration building, but there was one noteworthy item. Commissioners authorized legal action to oppose the merger of Sierra Pacific Health Services with United Health Services.

The decision doesn’t necessarily mean the county will sue, but allows it to do so quickly if the terms of the merger do not satisfy the county’s concerns about the possible effect on University Medical Center.

UMC officials worry the merger will result in reduced revenue at Southern Nevada’s financially struggling public hospital.

The U.S. Department of Justice and the state attorney general’s office are reviewing the merger.