Possible breaches of open meeting law rise

By Timothy Pratt (contact)

Monday, June 7, 2004 | 11:35 a.m.

The state attorney general's office this year has received nearly twice as many complaints as it did last year about possible violations of Nevada's open meeting law, one of the top officials from that office says.

While the attorney general sees the jump in open-meeting complaints as a sign of the public's increasing awareness of rules requiring government in the sunshine, others said the surge could mean the public isn't satisfied with the existing law.

The law, passed in 1960, mandates that the decisions and actions of public agencies be made openly and also defines how the public should be advised of meetings.

But 37 complaints questioning whether the law is being followed have been filed with the attorney general's office so far this year, on pace to reach a total of about 90 by the end of the year, Keith Marcher, senior deputy attorney general, said.

The total number of open-record law complaints for all of last year was 49, he said.

Attorney General Brian Sandoval said the trend is "very positive -- it shows that people are concerned about open government."

Sandoval also said the rise in cases has shown his office that there are some issues the law may need to address with more clarity, and he plans to request a bill in the 2005 Legislature to do so -- including what exactly constitutes a public agency.

"It begs the question, for example, if it's a nonprofit that receives public money, is it a public entity? This is a question that has to be resolved in the Legislature, not in the executive branch," Sandoval said.

That question has been raised about the Economic Opportunity Board, the Las Vegas Valley's largest nonprofit, which has a $60 million budget, most of which is public money, yet refuses to abide by the state's open meetings and open records laws. The result is the public can't keep tabs on how millions of dollars of its money is being spent.

The EOB's refusal to comply with the law was covered by the Sun and other media, and Marcher said the increase in open meetings complaints, at least in part, may have been prompted by media coverage during the past year of several high-profile cases dealing with the law.

"The fact that the open meetings law has been in the news may lead people to say, 'Hey, I'm going to go to a city council meeting and see what they're doing.' And more people going may be leading to more people complaining, as a thing of numbers," he said.

It makes sense that the increased number of complaints, while indicating a greater public awareness and interest in the law, could also lead to changes in the law, said David Fott, associate professor of political science at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

"It's impossible to write a law that will be good until the end of time," Fott said.

"The increase in complaints raises a red flag: Is there a theme behind these complaints that could lead to improvements in the law?" he said.

Marcher said that the issues raised in the complaints include "what can and can't a board do in a closed session ... and what entities are covered."

"You can always go back to a statute and tighten it up according to what's going on in today's world," Marcher said.

Kent Lauer, executive director of the Nevada Press Association, said tightening the law "wouldn't be necessary if board members would recognize the presumption of openness.

"Some officials and their lawyers seem to have a cavalier attitude about the law and, more importantly, about the importance of open government," Lauer said.

"Secrecy has become almost an automatic reaction in controversial public issues that deserve an open and robust debate," he said.

The rise in cases dealing with the law has come at a difficult time for the office, said Tom Sargent, spokesman for the attorney general, since two lead attorneys on the law have left the agency in recent months.

The first to go, Tina Leiss, went to another state agency in February. Then Bob Bryant, who is a member of the National Guard, was called up for military service in April, Sargent said.

Sargent said 12 open meetings cases have already been closed this year and 25 are still being investigated.

Of the 12 cases, one was withdrawn. All the remaining cases found no violations of the law, although one case was really a query about whether the subcommittees of the Commission on Homeland Security are subject to the law. The A.G.'s opinion was that they are.

There are nine cases still open from 2003, some of which are being held up by lawsuits, Sargent said. The open cases are being divided among remaining staff attorneys until a new lead attorney is chosen, he said.

Sandoval said his office has created internal deadlines to make sure the increased caseload is dealt with efficiently.

"We want to provide certainty for folks that file complaints," he said.

The cases are coming from all over the state and concern a variety of agencies, from local school boards to nonprofit organizations that get public funding. They are also better documented than in the past, Sargent said, which shows that people understand the law more.

"We can't complain" about the number of cases, Sargent said. "The law is there for a very good reason and ... it's a sign the system is working."