Nevada ballot questions summary
 

1,2,5,6, and 8 passed, 4,7,9,10 and 11 failed. That's how I personally voted, except I also voted for 4 (hedging my bet so to speak) and 7. Yes, I voted for legalized marijuana... toking up is a retarded thing to do, but frankly I don't think it's criminal and the resources wasted on enforcing drug laws are ridiculous.
Question one was kindergarten funding... no brainer there.
Question 2 was a state-level restriction on the Eminent Domain can of worms the Supreme Court opened up earlier in the year, another no-brainer.
3 was removed (what was it anyway? I don't recall hearing about it, but then again I wasn't listening very hard).
Question 4 and 5 were smoking bans. The stronger of the two passed.
Question 6 raised minimum wage to a whopping $6.18 when you aren't getting employee paid benefits, and $5.18 if you are.
Question 8 was the sales tax credit on vehicle trade-ins- yeah, the voting public would love to pay the state government a few hundred (sometimes thousands) extra every time we buy a car from a dealer. :lol:
Question 9 was about the choosing of the Board of Regents for the University system. I voted no because I don't generally agree with term limits, and those are not really political postions. Plus I didn't like some of the details the measure would implement.
And Questions 10 and 11 were just silly- the State Legislature wants power to call itself into special sessions, AND get paid extra when they do so? Roffle!

but most importantly for SECCS... Bully's is going to be a hell of a lot more pleasant place to be on nights where we don't get our reserved room! :banana:

Oh, question 3 was budget shenanigans by tax activists. If Nevadans don't like the state's budget, they should just elect people who will reduce it...

Considering that the voting public in NV will soon be mostly comprised of retired Californians that are fleeing the mess they created, I am not crossing my fingers...

Eh, California's mess isn't entirely the legislature or administration's fault. They didn't pass any tax laws that created billions and billions of dollars in extra income, and they were actually spending it pretty decently, mostly on roads and infrastructure and education. You can't blame politicians for not seeing the dotcom crash coming when it took the financial industry mostly by surprise too.

Besides, I could have said "Americans" instead of "Nevadans" but that doesn't really raise any hopes for other reasons. Americans suck.

Does the minimum wage increase take effect immediately? I'll have a bunch of part-timers that I have to update. . .

Maybe, but I would think first of the year is more likely.

You have 2 weeks (I believe) to make the change. But that is only after it officially passes (which is not when the polls close) I forget the exact date.

So the "if you're a smoker you are THE DEVIL and we want you outcast from the public's eye so we can take our kids into bars and casinos with us and not have to worry about them inhaling second hand smoke" law passed? Nice.

It's gonna be like Mesa AZ soon, where they were basically trying to make it illegal to smoke anywhere other than in your basement, with a wet blanket over your head and the lights out...

Isn't it only a ban on smoking in establishments that serve prepared food? Or is it casinos too?

Honestly as a non-smoker from CA, the only time 2nd hand smoke bugs me is if sombody is smoking next to me while I'm eating or in a confined area...or when I'm dancing. It seems most places I frequent have decent ventilation.

Most of the people/initiatives I voted for passed as well. I voted no on 1 though. I'm all for putting money into schools, but the R&R said it wasn't going to help kids. I also voted yes on 7 and the last one; that advisory one to put more money into funding the police.

The smoking ban is only for restaurants and bars that serve hot prepared food, like Bully's. Casinos and gaming areas are unaffected.

You know if they just made cigarettes more lethal this wouldn't even have been an issue ;)

So when does this smoking ban kick in?

I heard it starts the Jan. 1.

I'm gonna smoke TWICE AS MUCH in restuarants/sports bars between now and then... :twisted:

Not soon enough!

Yeah, that'll show us what's up. :p

DAMN STRAIGHT!!!!!

no, really, I don't want to be one of those people who put their foot in their mouth by making tons of proclaimations and not following through, but I really do need to quit, and soon...

That's how i voted also. except i voted no on both of the smoking bans, and I'm an Ex-smoker. I don't like it when people smoke around me , esp when I'm eating. how ever i dislike even more the government telling business owners that they have to run it a certain way (I.E. no smoking) . But apparently some 53%+ see it differently. :)

I love the concept of "bans" in the context of businesses--- as if market forces and natural selection don't work.

"We're too chicken to ask that person in the booth next to us to stop, and we refuse to stop patronizing the restaurant, so we'll just strong-arm our current fad into law"

I voted no on 4 yes on 5. I smoked a lot of pot as a kid yes on 7, but cigarettes never did it for me. I worked at a cigarette distribution center for a week, on a trial basis, and ended up not being asked back. I guess telling the group of owners at a company birthday party that everyone should quit smoking wasnt a good idea. My mom smoked like a chimney for 40+ years maybe thats why I can't stand smoking.

I have been in places that allow a smoking section that is not separated from the non smoking, and it might as well have been totally smoking. Every time I go in a place like that I think of that ole Harlan Williams line about a greasy pork chop sandwhich served in a dirty ash tray.

Kevin, what was your reasoning for voting the way you did. Especially on 1, 2, 6, and 7?

And how many resources have been wasted on minor drug busts of an ounce or less of marijuana?

Question 1: Either some politician was trying to score brownie poitns for getting the kiddies better learnin' or there was a genuine need for early education funding to be improved. Either way I'm okay with it.

Question 2: Earlier in the year, the US Supreme Court ruled that state and local governments can use Eminent domain to take land from private parties, and then give it to other private parties for the purpose of development. Supposedly, the "greater good" of boosting the local economy via increased business and sales tax revenue overshadows the fact that private companies can now get politicians in their pocket to take your apartment building away so they can build a strip mall. This Question is intended to make that MUCH harder for Nevada and local governments to do; basically, if Nevada wants to force someone to give up land for private development use, they have to pay a LOT more money than they would for "public use" projects, plus if the project isn't started in 5 years (I think) the original owner can have the land back by refunding what they were paid for it less expenses. I wholeheartedly agree; the government, be it state or local, should only be able to exercise Eminent Domain when it needs to. If they need more tax revenue, don't be a bitch, just raise taxes, so we can vote your ass out next term if we don't like it. I do believe it's okay for E.D. to be exercised for things like freeway right-of-way, street widenings, flood control, etc. I also think it's okay to re-zone property, which means that everything stays how it is until it's sold, then the existing land has to be used for what the new zoning says it needs to be. That's how you see businesses in buildings that clearly used to be homes- usually the city won't kick anybody out, they just say "by the way, if you sell this house, it can't be a residence, it has to be a business." Which is hunky-dory, because business-use land is worth more.

Question 6: I think minimum wage needs to be raised at regular intervals. $6.18 is still chump change. Nevada is one of the last states to be sitting still at the Federal Minimum Wage.

Question 7: The government can't stop people from being stupid, and that's all pot smoking is. It's not really dangerous in and of itself, the war on drugs is a waste of billions (I've said before, I don't mind the current level of taxaition, I just wish the money was spent better in a lot of ways) and marijuana has no more business being prohibited than cigarettes or alcohol. I don't condone or approve of drug use of any kind, but I also don't think pot should be prohibited, only regulated like other similar controlled substances.