Regents didn’t violate Nevada open-meeting law, judge rules

Friday, Nov. 2, 2001 | 10:24 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- A district judge ruled Thursday that university regents did not violate Nevada's Open Meeting Law when they discussed a report that was highly critical of UNLV police in connection with a drug raid on campus.

District Judge Bill Maddox granted a pretrial summary judgment in favor of the regents of the University and Community College System. In his 14 page decision, Maddox was critical of the office of Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa and said that it sought "to take the Open Meeting Law further than it has been taken in the past."

If this was permitted, Maddox said "one can envision a time where preparing the meeting notice would take longer than the meeting itself. Not only does this eventually make our elected bodies ineffective and inefficient, but it defeats the goal of the Open Meeting Law."

The attorney general's office filed suit in December, accusing the Campus Environment Committee of violating the law by discussing details of the report and contending the issue was not properly posted on the agenda.

The agenda of the committee said it was to review the laws, regulations and policies that govern release of materials, documents and reports to the public. But the discussion strayed.

Regent Doug Hill of Reno complained that some of the UNLV police officers acted like "Keystone cops" and said that "on occasion they were acting like a bunch of cowboys." Hill did not identify any of the officers, and he recommended that a third report -- that does not include the names of the police officers -- be released to the public.

Hill said the raid involved 10 to 12 UNLV officers and two Metro police officers, who kicked in two doors and handcuffed six students and the dorm adviser. Only a minor amount of illegal drugs was found.

The suit by the attorney general's office said the agenda failed to state that the specifics of the raid would be discussed and that the board of regents would consider taking action on the matter.

Chief Deputy Attorney General Norman Azevedo, who handled the case, said he is reviewing the Maddox decision to determine whether an appeal will be made to the Nevada Supreme Court. He said he has 30 days to make a decision.

Hill could not be reached for comment.

Maddox said the comments at the meeting "were germane to the topic set forth in the posted agenda." He said that Hill's statements were about how the report could be released to the public.

During the meeting of the regents committee, University General Counsel Tom Ray cautioned the regents not to discuss the specific report because of concerns over confidential personnel information about certain police officers.

Maddox said, "Since no individuals were identified in any of the comments, no personnel rights were violated, and no Open Meeting Law violation occurred."

The judge said, "This is not a case where a public body is acting in secret and trying to hide information from the public." It's just the opposite, he said. Here the committee and the board tried to find an appropriate manner to release more information.

Regents had complained that the suit by Del Papa sought to take away their right to free speech. They argued that the injunction sought by the attorney general would chill and restrain the future speech of every regent.

But Maddox said Del Papa followed the proper legal procedure in filing the suit.