Editorial: Proposed ethics rules are strong

Monday, Sept. 8, 2003 | 8:21 a.m.

A task force appointed by Clark County met frequently during 1998 to devise a new set of ethical standards for elected and appointed officials. There was a sense of urgency in the air -- several instances of ethical lapses over the previous few years had eroded the public's faith in county government. The task force presented a number of recommendations, which were adopted by the County Commission in March 1999.

An incident this spring, however, motivated County Manager Thom Reilly to reconvene the task force. Former commissioner Erin Kenny began lobbying the County Commission on behalf of developer Jim Rhodes, who had purchased the gypsum mine overlooking Red Rock Canyon and who wanted the county's approval to convert the mine into a large master-planned community. Kenny, who has since been named as a target in a federal probe of political corruption, had only been off the commission a few weeks. The ethics code was clear -- or was thought to be clear -- in stating that a yearlong "cooling-off" period must elapse before a former commissioner can lobby the county.

A close reading of the ethics code revealed some wiggle room in the wording. Someone wishing to avoid the code's intent could use the language to claim innocence. Another flaw the incident revealed was that no penalties existed for anyone violating the code. As part of the code's upgrading, Reilly wanted ambiguity eliminated and some penalties established.

The task force will release its improved version of the code this week. We have reviewed a draft of the proposed new code and are impressed with the work of the task force. Unlike the previous definition of the cooling-off period, the new one leaves no room for interpretation. The previous code, for example, said there will be no lobbying "for pay" for a year. This one simply states that commissioners "will not" represent private interests before the commission for a 12-month period. The proposed new code also clarifies and improves the procedures for abstaining on a vote and for disclosing conflicts of interest. It contains a strict gift policy and stiff penalties -- including firing, censure and possible fines -- for violations. Additionally, the task force is recommending regular ethics training for county officials.

We anticipate the County Commission will thoroughly review the proposed code and we hope that any changes will be to strengthen it, not to water it down. We also suggest that a reconvening of the task force every three or four years should become standard. Just as the old code revealed some surprising weaknesses, so will this one after some experience.