An Ethics Commission Recusal When a Political Party Brings a Complaint
While we're in Nevada, there's another interesting case before the
state's ethics commission that has ramifications for local government
ethics. According to <a href="http://www.lvrj.com/news/27047149.html" target="”_blank”">an
article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal</a>, a probable cause hearing
was to be conducted by one Democratic and one Republican commission
member. When it turned out that the case had been brought by the
executive director of the state Democratic party committee (against the
state's Republican governor), the Democratic ethics commission member
recused himself, according to the commission's executive director,
"because of concerns that the hearing process wouldn't appear neutral."<br>
<br>
State law requires one member from each party on the two-person
probable cause panel. This is supposed to make the process look fair.
However, many complaints (such as the one in the most recent blog entry)
are filed by one party member against someone from the other party. If
every party member were to recuse himself because a complaint is
partisan, only independents would be able to sit on commissions. Which
may not be such a bad idea, after all.<br>
<br>
Of course, here the party itself is bringing the complaint, but it
could just as easily have had a party member bring it. The perception
would not be all that different. Party requirements on panels and
commissions should take care of this problem, but the perception
doesn't go away as long as partisan individuals choose the commission
members. If the Democrat on the commission were to have been the
selection of, say, the League of Women Voters, he probably wouldn't
have felt the need to recuse himself. And if partisan requirements are
there to make the commission look fair, why aren't there requirements
for minor parties and, especially, for independents? Because, of
course, members of the two big parties are the ones who decide what the
partisan requirements are, and they're not about to shoot themselves in
the foot in the name of fairness.<br>
<br>
What the Democratic panel member did was, I think, unnecessary under
the circumstances, but it will hopefully make people think why the
selection process and partisan requirements are the way they are, and
why not another way, that would be more fair. The City Ethics Model
Code <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/mc/full#TOC71" target="”_blank”">Section 203(4)</a>
suggests that ethics commission members be selected by nonpartisan
organizations, from which the appointing body makes its appointments.
Perhaps there should also be a rule not only for limits on any one
party, but also for a minimum number of independents or minor party
members.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>