Regents warned about meeting violations

Thursday, Dec. 21, 2000 | 10:58 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- For the third time within one year, the state attorney general's office says the university system's Board of Regents broke Nevada's Open Meeting law.

And regents could face removal from office if they violate the law again.

The regents have been warned twice and on Wednesday Chief Deputy Attorney General Norman Azevedo filed suit in state court in Carson City, seeking an injunction to prohibit the regents from discussing topics not on the agenda in their future meetings.

The current violation, Azevedo said, came during discussion in September by members of the Campus Environment Committee of the report on the raid by 12 UNLV police officers on a dormitory. The officers kicked in two doors, handcuffed six students but found only a small amount of illegal drugs.

The topic on the agenda was a discussion on rules on releasing an investigation into the raid to the public.

Despite the agenda item, the lawsuit said, the regents considered specific findings in the report by the Nevada Division of Investigations. And regents expressed opinions, despite the warning of their counsel Tom Ray.

Regent Doug Hill of Reno said the UNLV police officers acted like "Keystone Cops" and "like a bunch of cowboys," the lawsuit says. Hill was interrupted at one point by Ray who said he should not continue the discussion because this was a personnel document.

The suit said Hill continued, saying he was merely reciting some of the facts and the report shows disrespect for authority, incompetence by the police and a lack of training. And Hill, according to the suit, asked to discuss at a future meeting the possible disarming of police officers.

Regent David Phillips of Las Vegas discussed supporting the UNLV police in their efforts to eradicate drugs from the campus, the lawsuit says. Ray issued another warning about straying from the general discussion about release of the document.

Attempts to reach Hill and Phillips today were not successful.

It will now be up to Ray to defend the regents who ignored his advice. He said he wants to talk to Chancellor Jane Nichols and the regents before deciding on his strategy. He said Wednesday he has not seen the complaint yet. All he would say is that "appropriate action" would be taken.

The attorney general's office said the regents violated the open meeting law on Dec. 1, 1999, in a closed meeting by talking about the appointment of Richard Moore as president of the state college in Henderson. That was not on the agenda.

In February the regents again ignored the open meeting law by discussing in a closed meeting the actions of Regent Steve Sisolak, an item that was not on the agenda.

The regents received a warning letter for the first violation, then a final warning letter for the second violation and now the suit. If the court order is approved and the regents again violate the law, they could be subject to a suit to remove them from office.

A spokesman for the attorney general's office said it agreed with the Ray's advice.

The suit seeks a judgment declaring that the regents violated the law at its Sept. 7 meeting. And it asks for an injunction requiring regents "to include on all future agendas a clear and complete statement of the topics scheduled to be considered during the meeting and prohibiting the committee from considering topics not listed on its agenda."