Columnist Jack McCloskey: Ethics Commission is an ill-fated experiment

Jack McCloskey

Monday, Oct. 4, 1999 | 9:25 a.m.

Finally, it appears the judicial appeal process still is alive in Nevada, and even a politically appointed fourth branch of government has found it necessary to seek "appellate relief." It has indicated it will appeal to the state Supreme Court a lower court opinion that the new "branch" had exceeded its authority in finding against a Clark County official.

This is a creation of recent vintage that bears the high sounding title of Nevada Commission on Ethics. This new branch of government, by its "responsibility and authority," as approved by the legislative and executive branches of government, has become a "hybrid" that accepts complaints (even from anonymous sources), investigates, sits as prosecutor, jury and judge, and even assesses fines.

Probably the most ridiculous among the list of sins that are verboten once a citizen becomes a political official is the disclosure of friendship with any person or persons who might do business with the governmental body. Most people who win election to office are given support by their friends. And the voting public usually is aware of that when they vote for their favored candidate.

Fortunately when the Ethics Commission was given powers usually reserved for the judicial branch of government, the judiciary was not totally replaced, and the right to appeal was not lost. This became evident when a district judge cleared a Clark County official of charges brought against her by the Ethics Commission.

District Judge Jerome Polaha of Reno cleared County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates of charges of awarding contracts to personal friends. The Ethics Commission had found that Atkinson Gates should have disclosed her friendships with a political consultant and a political activist who were among those receiving contracts to operate concessions at McCarran International Airport.

Polaha ruled the state ethics laws do not cover such relationships and that the Ethics Commission exceeded its legal authority when it issued its findings against Atkinson Gates. He emphasized, "If the Legislature wishes to include these relationships in the future, it is the body that will have to specify such relationships more clearly."

Amen we say to that, as we say again that the Ethics Commission is attempting to usurp powers conferred on the Legislature by the state constitution. Just as it does when it imposes fines and other sanctions as though it were a court of law. (A wrongful delegation of authority by the legislative and executive branches; and a gross lack of respect for the separation of powers.)

What is disheartening about the growing controversy resulting from creation (and experimentation) with the Ethics Commission is that those citizens who serve as commission members all are respected, successful, capable women and men with records of commendable public service in other positions.

By now it should be obvious to those good people who are trying to make a silk purse out of a bundle of misguided legislation, they might just as well be riding a camel with one hump in a burro race. Their responsibility and authority never should be permitted to replace a citizen's day in court, regardless of how much a court might agree or disagree with the conclusions reached by the Ethics Commission.