Two Clark County commissioners are calling for the revival of the Ethics Task Force in the wake of a controversy over conflict claims affecting a proposed development near Red Rock Canyon.
County Commissioners Rory Reid and Bruce Woodbury today announced that they have asked that the ethics committee, which operated in 1998, be reconvened to consider an expansion of the county ethics rules.
The placement of the item on next Tuesday's agenda comes after Commissioner Mark James said his former political ally and former commissioner Erin Kenny attempted to lobby him to oppose proposed development restrictions for private land near Red Rock.
Kenny also lobbied at least one other commissioner, according to county staff. The lobbying is a violation of the 1998 ethics rules, which require a one-year "cooling off" period before ex-commissioners can lobby their former colleagues.
Kenny was not immediately available for comment Wednesday morning.
County officials have noted that the law has no teeth -- no enforcement mechanisms for the ex-commissioner or the sitting commissioners who are lobbied.
The issue arose after developer Jim Rhodes filed the lawsuit in Clark County District Court against James over a plan to limit construction near the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation area.
Rhodes alleges that James, an attorney, has a conflict of interest because he once represented Rhodes and advised him on the acquisition and development of 2,400 acres near scenic Red Rock Canyon. James, in his response, catalogued alleged political threats and lobbying by Kenny.
Reid said today it simply is time to re-examine ethics issues.
"We had a new panel installed in January and our efforts have been to instill public confidence in the process," Reid said. "We've reformed the planning process and we have changed the way we look at the billboard industry. We've done some good things."
Asked whether the James controversy sparked the matter, Reid said, "lately there have been allegations." He said ethics experts would advise the panel about a number of changes that will boost the public's confidence in its officials.
Reid said the task force is not an ethics panel, the type of which the city of Las Vegas disbanded because it conflicted with the state ethics board. Reid said the task force would be an advisory group and not stand in judgement of alleged ethics improprieties.
Woodbury agreed that a review is timely.
"The task force hasn't been convened in five years," he said in a news release issued with Reid. "I think there are certainly some areas where county standards and codes can be enhanced."
Two issues the Ethics Task Force will be asked to focus on are the cooling off period and possible sanctions against those who violate policies. Reid and Woodbury suggest sanctions may be needed to give the ethics policy some teeth.
To better address ethics, the County Commission on Feb. 24, 1998, established a task force to review ethical standards and codes.
On March 2, 1999, the commission adopted a resolution establishing ethics policies for elected and appointed officials based on the task force's recommendations of the task force.
The resolution set county policy for specific ethical issues such as avoiding the appearance of impropriety, cooling-off periods for contracting with former county officials and the timing of disclosure of potential conflicts of interest.
The previous task force's members included members of civic and religious organizations, former elected officials, the County Commission, the university system and the media.
archive