Editorial: The imperious governor

Thursday, May 17, 2007 | 7:08 a.m.

O n Monday Gov. Jim Gibbons vetoed a bill that would have suspended tax breaks the state gives to developers that build environmentally friendly buildings.

The Legislature prudently passed the bill to fix a major problem. The law that created the tax breaks, passed in 2005, had unforeseen consequences that could cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars over the next few years, leaving a gaping hole in the budget. Gibbons vetoed the bill because he said the suspension would hurt developers that have already received approval for tax breaks on environmentally friendly projects.

Because a veto would not get rid of the budget-busting law, however, Gibbons tried a legal sleight of hand. Gibbons signed an executive order instructing state agencies to stop accepting or processing any requests for tax breaks that have not been approved. The order lasts until the end of the Legislature's session next month, by which time the Legislature hopefully will have passed a bill to overhaul the law.

Legal scholars and the Legislative Counsel Bureau have found that Gibbons' act doesn't pass muster. Although flawed, the law was legally passed and signed by the previous governor two years ago. Overriding it by executive order defies the basic concept of the separation of powers, which is at the heart of America's democracy.

Nonetheless, Gibbons' lawyer, Joshua Hicks, had the audacity to suggest that the Legislature "was flirting with a separation of powers problem" by passing a law that gave state government "administrative direction," which he said is the governor's job.

So is following the law, but Gibbons has shrugged that off, citing the Nevada Constitution, which declares the governor to be the "supreme executive power" in the state. To Gibbons, that apparently means "imperious."

His order trod on the state constitution and showed an arrogant contempt for the Legislature. Gibbons should withdraw his order before it sets a dangerous precedent that would allow him, or any future governor, to selectively enforce or totally ignore the law.