Regent’s comments called violation of open meeting law

Friday, March 23, 2001 | 11:02 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- The state attorney general's office argued Thursday that Regent Doug Hill violated the open meeting law when he called UNLV police "Keystone Cops" and "cowboys" for their conduct on a campus drug raid.

Chief Deputy Attorney General Norman Azevedo told District Judge Bill Maddox that Hill's comments strayed from the posted agenda. He asked the judge to issue an injunction to stop the regents from further open meeting violations.

But Brooke Nielsen, assistant general counsel for the University and Community College System, said there was no violation. She said the attorney general's interpretation of the law would infringe on the right of free speech.

The attorney general's office, Nielsen said, "has gone too far in this case."

Maddox said he would rule later. He indicated he will first make a decision on whether the open meeting law was violated and then will hold a hearing to determine the penalty.

"My impression is we will be taking the open meeting law one step further," Maddox told the attorneys.

Last September, the Board of Regents' campus environment committee met in Las Vegas to discuss the release of documents and investigative reports pertaining to the drug raid. At that session, Hill, of Reno, sharply criticized the action by the UNLV police and referred to a report by the state Division of Investigation, which had not been made public.

Nielsen said it was "ironic" that the attorney general's office filed a civil complaint for violating the open meeting law when Hill was seeking ways to open up parts of the investigative report on the conduct of UNLV police.

She said Hill, by his remarks, did not go afield from the topic on the published agenda and did not release information about specific individuals. She suggested the position of the attorney general would violate First Amendment rights.

Azevedo said citizens were not given notice by the agenda that Hill was going to talk about the specific report and make his comments."This discussion was not on the agenda," he said.

Part of the dispute centers on the complaint by the attorney general that lists two prior warning letters to the regents in the last 12 months, advising them to avoid violating the open meeting law.

Azevedo said those two warnings display a "course of conduct" that supports the argument that an injunction should be issued.

"Without an injunction, this will continue," Azevedo said.

Hill, given special permission from the judge to speak, complained these two prior warning letters have damaged the reputation of the regents and the attorney general's office was trying its case "in the court of public opinion."

He called "ridiculous" the allegation that the law was violated in these two incidents. The inclusion of this language in the complaint, Hill said was "inflammatory and scandalous," and it gives the impression the regents are law breakers.

Hill also said regents have the same right as private citizens to freedom of speech and urged the judge to include that in his decision.