Malicious gossip, heresay, work of ww

"Malicious gossip, and hearsay"

COLUMN: Steve Miller

Las Vegas Tribune

July 22, 2000

Last Thursday, criminal defense attorney Louis Palazzo described written evidence I presented against his client Councilman Michael J. McDonald as "Malicious gossip," "hearsay," and "manipulated news stories."

Mr. Palazzo was referring to forty-three newspaper and magazine articles I submitted for consideration by the Nevada Commission on Ethics. Each article pointed to the ethical transgressions of his client in the special treatment of Republic Silver State Disposal.

Now the Ethics Commission, in agreement with Palazzo, wants to ban future newspaper and magazine articles from being entered into evidence in ethics cases.

When the two member committee of the Commission met last January behind closed doors to determine whether there was enough evidence to proceed with my complaint, they concluded that the news articles I presented were credible enough that they recommend that the taxpayers shell out $7,500 to hire a Reno private investigator, and credible enough to fly half a dozen state workers and Commissioners to Las Vegas and house them and feed them for several days.

My evidence consisted of the work of writers and educators. Newspaper reporters such as Mike Zapler, Steve Sebelius, and Vin Suprynowicz of the Las Vegas Review Journal, along with Erin Neff, and Jon Ralston of the Las Vegas Sun, and Robb Batt of the Las Vegas Weekly. Educators such as Professor Craig Walton of UNLV, Dr. Michael McDonald of the University of British Columbia, and W.W. Anderson.

Such writers and educators certainly do not deal in "malicious gossip, and hearsay," as Mr. Palazzo and his client Councilman McDonald want us to believe.

It is even more ridiculous that Palazzo stated on McDonald's behalf that such writers and educators could be "manipulated!"

Erin Neff wrote the following on July 21, in the Las Vegas Sun: "McDonald . . .. said if his case were heard a few days into the future, he would likely have won outright. That's because the commission today will consider banning the use of newspaper articles as evidence in cases -- a practice Miller has relied upon."

Now, the Nevada Legislature is being asked by unknown parties to create what Steve Sebelius described on last week's KLVX TV Nevada Week in Review as the "Steve Miller Law;" a law to prevent any further newspaper and magazine articles being entered as evidence in future Ethics Commission actions.

Since Mr. Palazzo accused me of inappropriately entering the written statements of others into evidence, I wish to continue that course to make my point even more succinctly.

Viola Garrison-Cota writes: "Stop the presses! Burn the books! Crash the computers! Get rid of all written protests about the marauding hordes. The state Ethics Commission yesterday may well have stunted the worldwide growth of democracy by apparently inferring that such journalistic evidence, long considered as a matter of record legally admissible, is unreliable and inconsequential when presented to this appointed body and -- perhaps soon to follow -- to elected judges in a court of law. But who are these ethicists to debase that historical profession"?

I entered the Review Journal Editorial of November 28, 1999, into evidence in the McDonald case. Maybe I should have withheld it because this one Editorial may have offended some Ethics Commissioners and public officials so much that it inspired their latest action to ban inclusion of any more such evidence.

The Editorial stated "If Mr. McDonald had no discernible conflicts of interest at the time of his Silver State vote, then we may as well start recruiting fellow street gang members to serve as jurors in our murder trials, and tell the Ethics Commission to fold its tents and end this sham."

The laws that originally empowered the Commission were abolished by the Legislature in 1999. The Commission also injured itself by wimping out and dismissing their challenge of a Judge's decision that additionally gutted their authority.

When his motion to fine Councilman McDonald $5,000 failed last Thursday for lack of a second, it then must have been out of complete frustration that Ethics Commissioner Bill Flangas said "You can skate on the edge of legality, remain marginally legal and overwhelmingly unethical."

Flangas said this knowing that there were no laws he could apply to punish McDonald or set an example for other politicians requiring they disclose their personal interests prior to voting.

Now the Commission's power has diminished to the point that their only useful purpose is the ability to generate news stories following the filing of ethics complaints.

These reports have told the public what they needed to know about alleged corruption in Nevada government. These reports have allowed the public to be the judge of those who must be held to higher standards, however such follow up reports may also soon cease if the most useful tool - the ability to submit news articles as evidence - is taken away from Nevada citizens.

Corrupt public officials shun media attention and the Ethics Commission has so far provided a giant spotlight to illuminate their failings, but this may soon come to an end.

If the Commissioners are soon prohibited from considering submitted evidence in the form of news stories about alleged corrupt politicians, the original mission of the Nevada Commission on Ethics will be over.

If that occurs, then I will have no other choice than to join with the others who are calling for the abolition of the Ethics Commission.

------------------------------------

Steve Miller is a former Las Vegas City Councilman and Clark County Regional Transportation Commissioner. He was also the author and sponsor of the original City of Las Vegas Ethics in Government Law. Visit his website at: http://www.SteveMiller4LasVegas.com