Thursday, Nov. 3, 2005 | 7:32 a.m.
The jabs keep coming from the cops this week in their bruising contract battle with the county.
The union that represents Metro Police officers has filed an open meeting law complaint with the attorney general's office against the Clark County Commission over its effort to derail a new collective bargaining agreement.
This comes on the heels of a District Court lawsuit against the county seeking an order to enforce the four-year agreement between the cops and the police department.
Lawyers for the Las Vegas Police Protective Association allege in the open meeting law complaint that county commissioners were secretly polled to rally opposition against the contract, which guarantees the cops a sizable pay raise.
The complaint asks the attorney general to obtain a court order voiding last week's Metro Fiscal Affairs Committee vote that rejected, 3-2, the collective bargaining agreement.
It also seeks to overturn the County Commission's 6-1 vote that removed Commissioner Tom Collins, a contract supporter, from the Fiscal Affairs Committee.
Collins was replaced with Commission Chairman Rory Reid, giving the county enough votes on Fiscal Affairs to kill the contract.
"As far as we're concerned the county commissioners, regardless of how they try to justify their actions, cannot ignore the fact that some of the things they did were improper," police union Executive Director Dave Kallas says.
"They're no different than anyone else. They have to work within the same system as we do, and they have to be accountable like everyone else."
County Manager Thom Reilly, however, says the commissioners have done nothing wrong and that no open meeting violations have occurred.
It was well known at two board meetings in September, one closed and one public, Reilly says, that Collins was the only commissioner supporting the position of the cops.
Meanwhile, the union's offensive this week ensures that tempers could be flaring for weeks to come as both sides move to fact-finding and binding arbitration to try to resolve the labor dispute.
Traditional political alliances within law enforcement and county government circles also will be tested.
The growing animosity is making political heavyweights in the trenches very nervous.
Sheriff Bill Young, who urged Fiscal Affairs to approve the contract, worries that the conflict is escalating out of control.
The police department, for example, was named as a defendant in the union's lawsuit against the county -- a development that doesn't make Young happy.
"This is very divisive for the community," Young says. "The best thing would be for the community to tone it down, the union to tone it down, the county to tone it down and the newspapers to tone it town."
Reilly agrees.
"I think it's unfortunate that it's getting down to this," he says. "I would hope that there's a way to come to a resolution."
Despite the distractions, Young says he's determined to keep his department focused on fighting crime.
Young, however, sees nothing good coming out of arbitration.
"I think the county made a huge mistake in steering this toward arbitration," he says. "I knew my organization. I knew this would not be accepted well.
"Cops are thin-skinned when it comes to debating their value to the community."
One guy who isn't thrilled about having to choose sides between the cops and the county is District Attorney David Roger.
By law Roger, who's gearing up for re-election, is the county's legal adviser and obligated to defend it in the legal action brought by the union.
But Roger and his office also work closely with the cops every day to put criminals behind bars.
Then there are the political ramifications for the first-term district attorney.
Listed on the influential host committee of Roger's first campaign fundraiser Nov. 10 is none other than Kallas.
"It's a difficult issue for me," Roger says. "But I have a job to do, and we'll be professional in working toward a resolution."
archive
