Police contract approval runs afoul of open-meeting law

Laws work best when they're followed:

Metro Police’s Fiscal Affairs Committee signed off Monday on a one-year contract for police officers. In doing so it appears to have broken a new state law that requires a public hearing before public-employee contracts are approved.

“We screwed up,” said Steve Sisolak, one of two Clark County commissioners on the board that oversees the police department’s budget. “I think we have to bring it back for a vote.”

I'm inclined to agree with the Chamber of Commerce that this was just a simple oversight, especially since Steve Sisolak has been a consistent champion of transparency in union negotiations.

It should serve though as a reminder to always be on the lookout for open meeting violations. You can be sure Metro wasn't going to bring it up.

Ethics complaints dismissed for Miller, filed for Lowden

Finding the evidence "thin," the Nevada Ethics Commission has dismissed charges filed against Secretary of State Ross Miller alleging he used public resources to help his re-election campaign.

Interestingly, the report notes that it was the Secretary of State's own Elections Department that caused the complaint to be filed in the first place. On the candidate listing page they apparently drew the contact information from the candidate's "Declaration of Candidacy" form instead of the more appropriate "Candidate Media" form. However, because this mistake affected all candidates on the page it was not found to benefit Miller.

On the other side of the aisle, Republican Sue Lowden is facing charges that her campaign RV is an in-kind campaign donation that exceeds federal limits. The Nevada State Democratic Party claims the RV could be considered a campaign contribution of as much as $142,500 — far above the $2,400 federal limit.

We'll be sure to let you know how this plays out.

Is the Stakeholder Group violating the open meeting law?

At least one member of the group is concerned:

A member of the citizen’s panel appointed by lawmakers to chart Nevada’s future for the next 20 years expressed concern today about whether the process to be followed to complete the effort conforms to meet the requirements of the state Open Meeting Law.

Doug Busselman, executive vice president of the Nevada Farm Bureau Federation, said he would like guidance from the Legislative Counsel Bureau on the decision to have the consultant preparing the final Nevada Vision Stakeholder Group report confer with members individually as part of the process of completing the panel’s charge.

Busselman also notes that the final report could be impugned if the process that created it does not meet open meeting standards.

Kudos to Busselman for his willingness to speak up and make his objections known. Compared to the education task-force that met behind closed doors until they were called out on it, Busselman is downright radical.

Amazing how such a simple and commonsense law — public things should be open by default — seems to trip a lot of people up.

You've got to be kidding me

Sometimes the headline says it all: Obama doesn't take questions at Freedom of Press Act signing.

After the signing of the Freedom of Press Act on Monday, President Obama declined to take any questions from the press.

During a pooled press event in the Oval Office, President Obama was asked if he would take a couple questions.

"You're certainly free to ask the question," Obama told the reporters in the room. "I won't be answering, I'm not doing a press conference today, but we'll be seeing you in the course of the week."

After just signing the "Freedom of Press Act" that is an incredibly tone-deaf thing to say. At least have the courage to admit — Freedom of Press Act or not — you don't want to give information to the press.

Guest Post: Mike Montandon's Transparency Plan

An open and transparent government is a non-partisan goal every office seeker should make a priority. In Nevada, a number of improvements should be made to give citizens easier access to the work of their state and local officials and to root out government waste.

Budget crunch aside, in 2010 Nevadans should expect their legislature to have live streaming video feeds. If a student in Henderson can submit their science project by giving their teacher a YouTube URL, there is no reason within my first year in office we cannot implement a live streaming video system.

If you have ever tried to research political donations in Nevada, you will be sorely disappointed in the system our Secretary of State has in place. The tedious, antiquated website must be replaced with a user-friendly system that allows citizens to easily track political contributions. With sunlight comes accountability. As governor, I will work with the Secretary of State to implement a new system.

Tim Kaine, the Democratic National Committee Chair and former Virginia Governor, found himself in hot water last year for jet setting across the country while still officially on the job as governor. This kind of behavior is unacceptable and with proper transparency it would likely not have occurred. Kaine did not make it a habit of releasing his official schedule. Under my administration, I will release a weekly schedule that keeps the public informed of where their governor is.

To learn more about my campaign, please visit www.MikeMontandon.com. If you have questions or feedback, please email me at MMontandon@MikeMontandon.com.

— Mike Montandon for Governor

---

Editor's Note: In an effort to educate voters, TransparentNevada occasionally hosts guest blog posts which focus on transparency and accountability. A guest blog post by a candidate for office does not constitute an endorsement of that candidate or his or her policy proposals by either TransparentNevada or the Nevada Policy Research Institute.

Bringing sunshine to union negotiations

Gov. Gibbons launched a petition drive yesterday that would force public employee union negotiations to be conducted in public. While the timing appears politically motivated, the petition still has merit. Collective bargaining negotiations are one of the few areas that deal with taxpayer money and are not subject to Nevada's open meeting laws.

The proposal, which conservatives have pushed for as public employee salaries have come under the spotlight, would go to the Legislature in 2011 if Gibbons and the Open Public Employee Negotiations Government Initiative collect 97,000 signatures by Nov. 9. If the Legislature doesn't pass the law, it would go in front of voters in 2012.

Gibbons said current local government budget shortfalls and the prospect of layoffs because some unions have refused to make concessions made the issue timely.

"Negotiations should be open to the public," Gibbons said. "This is about adding sunshine to the negotiation process."

Critics allege that opening up negotiations will lead to politicians grandstanding and would derail the sensitive process. But using that logic, everything that involves politicians should be hidden from the public because it might lead to grandstanding and posturing. And yet nobody proposes moving county commission or school board meetings to behind closed doors.

It should be self-evident that meetings involving the spending of taxpayer money should be open to the public. Unfortunately, that idea is lost on some.

You can read the Governor's press release here.

Democracy is a contact sport

Good editorial in last Thursday's Review-Journal on the importance of making sure petition signatures remain public record:

The urge to push public proceedings into the shadows is too great for some to resist. Plenty of people claim to be in favor of open government, then seek secrecy to protect themselves from the unpleasantries of the political process.

In arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, justices were rightly skeptical of the latest, incremental attempt at making transparent government opaque.

In the case before the Court, gay rights advocates sought the names of all the people who signed a petition to repeal Washington state's domestic partnership law. "Protect Marriage Washington" fought the request by arguing that signers would be harassed if their names were made public.

While nobody wants to see petition signers harassed or harmed, petitions are not secret ballots. Signing a petition is a voluntary step that potentially injects you into the middle of a politicized issue. If you're not comfortable with that, you shouldn't sign the petition.

Legal means exist to deal with people who might harass the petition signers. Blocking public records requests, however, is not and should not be one of them.

Campaign contributions should be transparent

It has been said that "money is the mother's milk of politics" and that is just as true in Nevada as anywhere else.

For that reason, an open and transparent system for reviewing campaign contributions is vital to the health of our democratic system.

Unfortunately, Nevada's system comes up short:

Nevadans who intend to vote early in the primary and general elections this year will likely find themselves in the dark on the question of who has contributed to the campaigns of the candidates.

Despite efforts in past legislative sessions to improve the transparency of campaign contributions received by candidates, lawmakers have failed to make meaningful reforms to the reporting process.

While most of the politicians quoted in the story claim to be for more transparency in campaign contributions, they don't want to act unilaterally and give their opponents any advantage.

Nonsense.

If this is their view of transparency, they really don't support it in the first place. Transparency isn't a campaign tactic. Candidates who profess support of transparency should be transparent regardless of what their opponent might do.