Complaint against Maxfield dismissed

Thursday, July 28, 2005 | 9:32 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- A panel of the state Ethics Commission on Wednesday dismissed a complaint against Clark County Commissioner Chip Maxfield, who had been accused of voting on a zoning change involving his future in-laws.

The panel of Bill Flangas and Rick Hsu said there was no evidence to require a hearing before the full commission on the allegation that Maxfield voted for a variance for a project involving Jay Bingham, whose daughter was going to marry Maxfield's son.

The complaint was filed by Bill McGinnis and Jody Menendez, who identified themselves as homeowners in the area of the project.

Bingham, a former Clark County commissioner, is a manager and 5 percent owner of Juliet Properties, the company that planned to build a condominium where the zone change was sought.

The investigation by commission Executive Director Stacy Jennings said Maxfield publicly disclosed his son's relationship with the Bingham family. Maxfield also sought and received a legal opinion from the district attorney's office that the commissioner did not have to abstain from the vote.

The ethics panel said it determined Maxfield "did not have a commitment in a private capacity to Mr. Bingham by virtue of the engagement between their children, and thus was not required by NRS281.501 to either disclose the relationship or abstain from voting."

Commitment in a private capacity means a commitment to a person who is a member of his household, related to him by blood, adoption or marriage within the third degree of consanguinity, employs him or a member of his household, has a substantial business relationship with him or any other substantial relationship.

Jennings in her investigation said those who filed the complaint acknowledged Maxfield's disclosure "and credit him with making this disclosure."

The complaint said that Maxfield's son may someday acquire the interest in the condominium if Bingham dies.

Jennings said, "Because there was no direct interest accruing to Commissioner Maxfield's son, it would be presumed the independence of judgment of a reasonable person would not be materially affected under these circumstances.