Ethics panel’s ruling tossed

Bill Gang

Tuesday, Sept. 7, 1999 | 11:40 a.m.

Clark County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates has won her legal challenge of the Nevada Ethics Commission's decision that she illegally helped two political allies win concession contracts at McCarran International Airport.

The weekend decision by visiting District Judge Jerome Polaha guts the Ethics Commission's ability to pursue public officials who dole out favors based on friendships or cronyism.

It also marks the end of a two-year period in which Atkinson Gates has continually been criticized for violating ethics laws she claims are too vague.

"It has been a trying process. It started two years ago and we finally have a conclusion. For that, I am grateful," Atkinson Gates said today. "I think the way the judge ruled not only helps me, but I think other elected officials will understand a little better."

In his 18-page decision, the Washoe County judge ruled that five sections of the ethics law are unconstitutionally vague.

Polaha also ruled the commission engaged in improper "ad hoc rule-making" by expanding the definition of people that a public employee or official can't assist or favor through their position or vote. But in chiding the Ethics Commission, he noted that Atkinson Gates was not without blame.

Atkinson Gates' actions in recommending friends for airport concessions "do not rise to a level of ethical purity the public would like to see," the judge wrote.

The ethics law prohibits a public official from providing assistance to any family member or person with whom there is a business relationship, but Polaha concluded the Legislature specifically stopped short of expanding that list to include friends.

It does, however, state that favoritism is improper for other people in similar situations.

The Ethics Commission interpreted that part of the law to mean that officials can't use their positions to grant unwarranted privileges to anyone they are close to personally.

That was the basis for the vagueness rulings.

While Polaha indicated there is "some support" in Nevada's ethics laws to "instill confidence in the general public that public employees are not out to line their own pockets or use government to further their own interests," he said he was bound by the law as written.

"While the Legislature may have intended to include friendships and other relationships (in the ethics laws), it has failed to do so in the 22 years since the law was passed," Polaha wrote in his decision.

He noted the ethics laws have been amended in nearly every legislative session -- including the 1999 session that followed the Atkinson Gates ruling -- and never were the laws expanded to cover impermissible favoritism beyond family and business contacts.

The judge ruled the Legislature simply could have stated "that a public officer could not secure an unwarranted privilege for any person," but didn't.

In arguments last month both Atkinson Gates' attorney Daniel Polsenberg and Deputy Attorney General Louis Ling conceded that Nevada is still a small state where it is virtually impossible not to develop friendships such as those at issue.

"If public officers and employees were required to abstain from voting on every issue where a friend was involved, government as we know it would come to a standstill," Polaha wrote.

The judge pointed out that the Ethics Commission's expansion of people who may pose a conflict of interest for an elected official has resulted in some officials abstaining from votes because they were unsure of the breadth of the law.

"This has allowed votes of 1-0 and 3-0 to decide important issues in Southern Nevada," Polaha said, calling those examples of the "severe repercussions in the political climate of Las Vegas" that show the law is vague.

While Atkinson Gates won the legal battle, Polaha did not exonerate the actions that initiated the Ethics Commission findings that she had stepped over the line.

She added the names of Michael Chambliss and Judy Klein to a list of people she would support for Disadvantaged Business Enterprise concession contracts at McCarran's D Gate.

Chambliss has been an acquaintance of hers for 17 years who worked on her campaign for the County Commission and has served as her "eyes and ears" in the Las Vegas community, according to the court decision.

Klein is a Democratic party activist and fund-raiser who helped put hundreds of thousands of dollars in Atkinson Gates' campaign fund, the court document stated.

Atkinson Gates did not disclose her relationships when she voted to approve them as concessionaires.

The public revelation of Atkinson Gates' acts resulted in complaints to the Ethics Commission that eventually resulted in the finding she had violated ethical rules. But since the commission determined the violations were not willful, it imposed no fines or other sanctions.

Atkinson Gates said the fact she was not penalized didn't matter. Her reputation was scarred by the Ethics Commission's improper decision. She believes spending the money to fight the charges was worthwhile.

"Look at the City Council and the actions it took on a number of issues. They had one-person votes because there was no clarity," she said. "This helps other elected officials and it helps the state Legislature when dealing with statutes."

In his ruling, Polaha stated, "It must be understood that this court is in no manner endorsing the actions of Gates ...

"These actions disrupted and bypassed a system for choosing concessionaires that was put in place specifically to eliminate behavior like that of Gates. These actions also brought the entire Clark County Commission, and public employees in general, into disrepute with the public.

"This was the reason the Nevada Ethics in Government Law was enacted in the first place," Polaha said.

SUN REPORTER

Adrienne Packer contributed to this report.