McDonald’s case called ethics guide

Diana Sahagun

Tuesday, July 24, 2001 | 10:40 a.m.

A written opinion by the Nevada Ethics Commission on a case involving Las Vegas City Councilman Michael McDonald will serve as a reference guide for public officials facing similar situations.

The opinion by Chairman Peter Bernhard was released July 13, more than five months after the commission unanimously ruled McDonald violated the law by crossing a "razor thin" line between participating in and actually advocating the city's purchase of the financially troubled Las Vegas Sportspark.

The commission routinely releases its written opinions months after the actual vote.

The commission noted that McDonald's behavior was "troubling" because of his business relationship with Sportspark investor Larry Scheffler.

But the commission declined to penalize McDonald because it could not prove his behavior was "willful."

Bernhard wrote that there is no evidence the councilman advocated the use of public money for his own personal purposes.

McDonald could not be reached for comment Tuesday morning.

Although the commission voted 3-3 as to whether McDonald's conduct was willful, they wrote "Councilman McDonald has clearly been put on notice that his conduct as a councilman must comport first with his duty to act solely for the public interest."

The commission also ruled McDonald did not violate ethics laws and was not working behind the scenes to block a tavern license for political consultant Sig Rogich. The commission, however, wrote that McDonald's actions reflected poor judgment and violated the city's chain of command. Rather than speak with City Manager Virginia Valentine, McDonald went directly to the city's business licensing division to voice concerns over the proposed tavern.

The commission wrote that, even though McDonald may have used his council position to get staff to perform work related to the tavern, no evidence existed that showed McDonald used his position to grant benefits for himself, a business or any other person.

The councilman did approach staff in the city's business licensing division and made inquiries relating to certain distance separation requirements, as explained in the city code. The commission found there was nothing improper or unusual in the context of planning, zoning and other issues that come before the council.

Bernhard wrote there was no evidence or testimony that supported the theory that, in making such inquiries, McDonald or chief liaison Rick Henry attempted to influence staff or persuade them to veer from their normal duties. There was also no evidence suggesting McDonald or Henry requested any special treatment by the business licensing division relating to the tavern, Bernhard wrote.