The Clark County Republican Party’s complaints against County Auditor Greg Kimsey, also a Republican, are being sent to the state Office of the Attorney General for review.
County Prosecutor Tony Golik said Thursday he would not investigate the GOP’s complaints about Kimsey due to a conflict of interest. Golik, a Democrat, noted he has a professional working relationship with Kimsey, as do many of the employees in the prosecutor’s office.
“Our civil division routinely communicates with and advises the auditor … In this latest letter from the Republican Party they are alleging criminal violations and asking for an analysis of crimes and asking this office to file criminal charges against Kimsey. It’s very standard procedure to avoid a conflict,” Golik said.
“It would at the very least have the appearance of conflict to do a criminal review of Mr. Kimsey,” Golik added.
Clark County Republican Party Chairman Kenny Smith initially accused Kimsey of using his office to advocate for the passage of the home-rule charter by placing a two-page explanation of the charter in the general election voters’ pamphlet.
On Wednesday, Smith added to his list of concerns and alleged criminal violations, including creating a false report and a false certificate, both gross misdemeanors.
During the campaign season, Kimsey and former Democratic County Commissioner Steve Stuart formed a pro-charter political action committee, Clark Forward.
The local Republican Party opposed the charter. Smith said the goal of the complaint is not to lay the groundwork for a repeal of the home-rule charter, but added it is a possible outcome of the investigation.
“One of the remedies available if they were to say ‘the vote wasn’t fairly conducted,’ they would have to hold another election,” Smith said in an earlier interview. “So that does seem to be a potential remedy if certain allegations were found to be true and accurate.”
Smith said he believes Golik’s decision to refer the case to the Attorney General’s Office makes sense.
Golik wrote that his decision not to investigate does not offer any insight into what he thinks about the merits of the complaints.
“The fact that this office is referring the complaints you allege in both your Nov. 4, 2014 letter and your Dec. 1, 2014, letter to the Attorney General’s Office for review should not be taken as an indication that this office does or does not agree with your allegations against Mr. Kimsey,” Golik wrote in a letter addressed to Smith.
The referral of complaints should be taken only as “a finding that the Clark County Prosecutor’s Office has a conflict in reviewing your complaints and that to avoid any potential conflict it is appropriate to refer your complaints to the Attorney General’s Office for review,” Golik wrote.
Golik’s letter notes that a citizen may initiate a legal action in the “name of the state if, after providing written notice to both the Prosecutor and the Attorney General, neither initiates an action.”
The attorney general’s office said it had not formally received a complaint from the Clark County Republican Party or the prosecutor’s office.
“We will review necessary documents upon receipt and determine next steps,” Attorney General spokeswoman Alison Dempsey-Hall wrote in an email.
