Opinion No. 98-43

BEFORE THE NEVADA COMMISSION ON ETHICS

In the Matter of the Opinion Request Regarding JAMES NAKADA, et al.

ORDER REGARDING APPLICATION FOR SANCTIONS

This matter came before the Commission on April 16, 1999 in Reno regarding an Application for Sanctions submitted by James Nakada against Mr. George Toto. Mr. Toto originally submitted a third party opinion request concerning Mr. Nakada and other IVGID members on August 26, 1998. The present Application contends that Mr. Toto violated NRS 281.551 by filing the initial opinion request. A Just and Sufficient Cause hearing concerning Mr. Toto's Opinion Request was conducted by the Commission on September 17, 1998, At the conclusion of that Just and Sufficient Cause hearing, Mr. Toto's opinion request was dismissed.

Mr. Nakada appeared and represented himself. After having been properly noticed via first class mail, Mr. Toto did not attend. Testimony was received by the Commission from Mr. Kidwell that he personally spoke with Mr. Toto about the sanctions hearing scheduled for April 16, 1999. Mr. Toto informed Mr. Kidwell that he had not received a notice of the hearing in the mail and therefore, he was not going to attend. Mr. Kinsman, a current IVGID trustee, testified that Mr. Toto faxed a letter to the IVGID board of trustees on April 14, 1999 at approximately three o'clock in the afternoon. That letter asked for forgiveness regarding his ethics opinion request and the sanctions that were sought against him.

After hearing the testimony and considering the evidence from the parties present and evaluating Mr. Toto's absence in conjunction with NAC 281.111(6), the Commission determined that Mr. Toto did violate NRS 281.551 when he filed his initial opinion request. As such, the Commission unanimously voted to sanction Mr. Toto $500.   This amount must be made payable to "State of Nevada, Office of the Treasurer," and must be received by the Commission no later than 5:00 p.m. P.S.T. on July 15, 2000.

It must again be stated that this Commission will not be used as a weapon to strong-arm or threaten public officials or public employees. We are not a forum for speculation or innuendo. Any intentional misuse of this Commission's processes exposes the subjects of the request to undeserved public scrutiny, harassment and financial hardships, and treats this Commission's salutary public mandate with contempt.

COMMENT

The foregoing opinion applies only to the specific facts and circumstances defined herein. Facts and circumstances which differ from those in this opinion may result in an Opinion contrary to this Opinion. No inferences regarding the provisions of Nevada Revised Statutes quoted and discussed I this Opinion may be drawn to apply generally to any other facts and circumstances.

DATED:  May 8, 2000.

NEVADA COMMISSION ON ETHICS

By:  MARIO RECANZONE, Vice Chairman