NCPE Town Hall Meeting

Join us on June 28, 2008 for the Third NCPE Town Hall Meeting.

NCPE in the News: 2008

"Court Hopeful Says Consultant Pitched Deal" (Las Vegas Review Journal)

"Given $50,000 He Decides to Run" (Las Vegas Sun)

Acting President Julie Tousa on Jon Ralston's "Face to Face: Ethics Complaint"

Meet the Acting President of NCPE, Julie Tousa

"New Watchdog of Public Ethics Continues Enforcing Vital Unwritten Law" (Las Vegas Review Journal)

"Partying Away As Taxpayers Pay and Pay" (Las Vegas Sun)

Ethics Legislation 2007

NCPE at the 2007 Nevada State Legislature: Summary and Details

"Article 6 Commission" to study and recommend improvements in the Nevada judiciary
See Dr. Craig Walton's summary of May Meeting

NCPE statement about the danger of big donors contributing to Supreme Court justice election campaigns.

Judicial Ethics & the Complaint Processes

Craig Walton's letter, to the Las Vegas Business Journal in favor of the new plan for judicial selection

Candidate Pledge

Email NCPE Treasurer

NCPE at NV Legislature - 2007 Proposals

NCPE 2007 Ethics Legislation Proposals

NRS 281.551 (6) & NRS 281.4375:  
Replace definition of willful: Use wording from the original 2005 AB 530, as below, because the 2005 change by the amended AB 530, concerning NRS 281.551 (6),  is vulnerable to constitutional challenge because its 3rd pillar cannot be accomplished.
 
                  Rationale:
This was originally proposed by Clark County and by the NCPE in 2005. It was deleted and replaced with the current provision, so that under the current NRS 281.551 (6), it reads
A6. An action taken by a public officer or employee or former
public officer or employee relating to NRS 281.481, 281.491,
281.501 or 281.505 is not a willful violation of a provision of those
sections if the public officer or employee [:
(a) Relied] establishes by sufficient evidence that he satisfied
all of the following requirements:
(a) He relied in good faith upon the advice of the legal counsel
retained by the public body which the public officer represents or by
the employer of the public employee or upon the manual published
by the Commission pursuant to NRS 281.471;
(b) [Was] He was unable, through no fault of his own, to obtain
an opinion from the Commission before the action was taken; and
(c) [Took] He took action that was not contrary to a prior
published opinion issued by the Commission.@

However, this wording can be challenged and declared unconstitutional because, regarding condition [c], there is no digest of the Commission=s published opinions.  Each person would have to create such a digest on his own.  There is no defined way to decide that that person’s digest of all published opinions as consistent with each other,  - or as inconsistent on the issue in question -- is sound or unsound in all relevant points.  Two people could make two different digests. This flaw makes condition [c] unworkable for practical purposes. If it is unworkable, and a court rules accordingly, then there will be no provision in the statute to ascertain responsibility for one=s actions.

We urge that all passages referring to the murky notion of >willful= (which has no standard NRS definition) be deleted at NRS 281.551 (6), and that, as the best alternative, the first use of ‘willful’ at NRS 281.4375 be amended to use the normal ethical and legal idea of responsibility  B namely, that a person is responsible when he or she knew or should have known the consequences of the action, and that that person was not coerced.  

This change avoids efforts at defining what really was or really was not a person’s inward intention, and so it closes a moral loophole.  Yet at the same time it still leaves completely untouched the authority of the NCOE to consider all kinds of mitigation, including degrees of intent, when deliberating about penalties, if and when a violation has already been determined. Let the NCOE determine that issue first, without reference to >willful= but only to the person=s responsibility plus the facts in the case.  When that determination is made, mitigation is relevant if there is a penalty phase.

BDR:
1 Section [?]. NRS 281.4375 is hereby amended to read as
2 follows:                                            
3 281.4375 AWillful @[violation@] means the public officer or
4 employee knew or reasonably should have known [that] the
5 consequences of his conduct [violated this chapter.] and his
6 conduct was not the result of coercion

Continue reading 2007 proposals

NRS 218.900-944:
(1) Add Requirement that LLCs (limited liability corporations) list their partners
(2). Lobbyist Disclosure Changes

NRS 281.421 and 281.501: Remove the proportionality exception to Conflict of Interest Disclosure:

NRS 281.465 : Allow a county to have an ethics law which is more restrictive

NRS 281.481:
(1) Public Officials Reporting of Gifts
(2) Close the loophole in NRS 281.481.1:

NRS 281.501
(1) What comes after abstaining.
(2) Editorial Revision
(3) Failure of consistency in the language about seeking gifts

NRS 281.551 (6) & NRS 281.4375:
Replace definition of willful

NRS 281.559 and 281.561:
(1) Public Officials Disclosure (Appointed: NRS 281.559; Campaigning and Elected, 281.561)

NRS 281.561
(2) Campaign contribution Reporting: