In Nevada, at least 13 legislators have affiliations with organizations that received over $33 million in funding from the state during this legislative session, sparking concerns about ethical practices. The funds allocated through Assembly Bill 525 and Senate Bill 341, often called “Christmas tree bills,” give state cash to various programs or initiatives.
While some legislators offered their services voluntarily, others received compensation. Some assert that they have not held positions in these organizations for several years or even decades, while others maintain they adequately disclosed their roles. Nevertheless, this involvement, though legally permissible, has prompted inquiries into the vetting process for nonprofits and the functioning of ethics laws in Nevada.
The Nevada Legislature operates part-time, meaning legislators return to their regular occupations after the biennial 120-day session. This dynamic often results in potential conflicts of interest, according to political science experts.
The Legislative Counsel Bureau, responsible for providing legal advice and conducting background research for legislators, informed the lawmakers that they were free to vote on these bills. The stance of the Bureau was that legislators were not obliged to make on-record disclosures or abstain from voting, as the legislation affected most citizens in the state and didn’t meet the criteria for a disqualifying conflict of interest.
Stephanie Justice, spokesperson for the Nevada State Democratic Party, emphasized that these bipartisan bills garnered broad support from legislative Republicans and Democrats. She also highlighted the critical work performed by these nonprofit organizations, such as aiding the homeless, advocating for children with disabilities, and supporting minority-owned small businesses.
However, despite their legality, such actions may still be perceived as unethical by the public, warns Carolyn Warner, Chair and Professor of Political Science at the University of Nevada, Reno. She points to Supreme Court justices accepting gifts and lavish vacations, which, while not technically violating rules, can be seen as ethically questionable.
Determining which groups receive funding and how much is a routine aspect of nearly every legislative session. This session stood out due to the surplus funds available post-pandemic. Assemblywoman Daniele Monroe-Moreno, D-North Las Vegas, who chairs the powerful Assembly Ways and Means Committee, played a pivotal role in developing these “Christmas tree bills.”
Lobbyists and representatives from various organizations presented their cases to Assemblywoman Monroe-Moreno throughout the legislative session. However, not every organization secured funding despite their efforts. Monroe-Moreno, along with Sen. Marilyn Dondero Loop, chair of the corresponding Senate Finance Committee, collaborated to decide which organizations would receive funding. Their assessment considered the organizations’ community impact and potential for further progress with added financial support.
To qualify, organizations must register with the secretary of state’s office. Those not already registered or in the process of doing so were ineligible for funding.
Monroe-Moreno previously served as an executive board member at Gentlemen by Choice, which received $25,000 through AB 525. However, she clarified that she had not held this position since sometime between 2020 and 2021.
While this funding process is legal, some actions may still be viewed as ethically ambiguous by the public. For instance, Assemblywoman Michelle Gorelow joined a nonprofit organization a month after legislators approved $250,000 in state funding, as Assemblyman Cameron “C.H.” Miller voted to allocate $100,000 to the Urban Chamber of Commerce, an organization he leads as president and CEO. Although Miller disclosed his affiliation during an early committee hearing, he voted anyway. Miller is also a board member of the Economic Opportunity Board of Clark County, which received $100,000.
Several legislators assert that they have not associated with the organizations receiving funding for many years. For instance, Sen. Skip Daly, D-Sparks, served on the board of the United Way of Northern Nevada and the Sierra, which received $1.2 million, but he has not been part of the organization since 2000.
Sen. Carrie Buck, R-Henderson, held an unpaid position on the advisory board for the children’s literacy nonprofit Spread the Word — which received $500,000 — but she has not been part of the organization since.
Buck voted against both bills.
Assemblywoman Erica Mosca, D-Las Vegas, clarified that she has not held a paid position at Leaders in Training, a nonprofit supporting first-generation college students, since July 2022. Mosca, a founder and former executive director of the nonprofit, stated that she left the board of directors in early 2023 and disclosed this affiliation on her financial disclosure.
Mosca is also an alumna of Teach for America — which received $25,000 through AB 525 — and compensated for projects supporting teachers and students in the past. However, she emphasized that she was not engaged in any paid program for the organization at the time of the vote.
Assemblywoman Selena Torres, D-Las Vegas, mentioned that she is a “proud alumna” of Teach for America but hasn’t been affiliated with the organization since 2019 and has never been a paid employee.
Other lawmakers confirmed that they don’t receive any financial benefit from their roles in these organizations. Assemblywoman Shea Backus, D-Las Vegas, stated that she provides pro bono work for the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, offering legal services free of charge to multiple programs.
Legislators employed by organizations receiving funding maintain that they appropriately disclose their potential conflicts. Assemblywoman Venicia Considine, D-Las Vegas, is the director of development and community relations at the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada. She affirmed that she properly disclosed her connection to the center in her financial disclosure and had no involvement in advocating for funding in the bills.
Assemblywoman Tracy Brown-May, D-Las Vegas, serves as a board member at the Arc of Nevada and is employed at Opportunity Village as its chief administrative officer says she didn’t lobby for any appropriations for her organizations, which focus on providing resources for people with disabilities. She also disclosed her potential conflict during a June 1 hearing on AB 525.
In mid-September, Dondero Loop, D-Las Vegas, listed her affiliation with the United Way of Southern Nevada as “current” on her bio on the Legislature website. This line disappeared later as questions arose.
Assemblywoman Bea Duran, D-Las Vegas, has worked for the Culinary Union for over two decades. The Culinary Academy — a hospitality training institute in partnership with the Culinary Union, Bartenders Unions, and nearly 30 Strip properties — received $25 million.
Sen. Dina Neal, D-North Las Vegas, is listed as an advisory board member of the Uplift Foundation of Nevada, a nonprofit that received $10,000.
Legislators voting for bills that directly allocate funds to their organizations without requiring abstention have raised concerns about the ethics process in Nevada and who, if anyone, is responsible for holding legislators accountable.
Notably, the legislative branch is exempt from public records law, and lawmaker calendars, emails, and communications remain shielded from public records requests. Legislators are mandated to submit financial disclosure statements to the secretary of state, but these pertain only to interests from the previous year.
For instance, Miller assumed the roles of president and CEO of the Urban Chamber of Commerce in January 2023. On Jan. 17, he submitted his disclosure without including this most recent job title, as he was not obligated to do so but would have been about seven months after voting for AB 525.
While citizens can file an ethics complaint against a legislator with the Nevada Commission on Ethics, such complaints are unlikely to yield significant outcomes. The Nevada Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that a legislator’s conduct and any associated discipline falls under the sole jurisdiction of each house of the Legislature.
A separate legislative ethics commission existed until 1985 when it merged with an ethics commission intended for executive branch officials. In the Assembly, the Assembly Select Committee on Ethics holds jurisdiction over specific complaints regarding alleged breaches of ethics and conflicts of interest, but it’s uncertain how frequently the committee addresses such complaints.
Speaker Steve Yeager, who serves as the committee’s vice chair, did not respond to multiple requests for comment regarding the committee’s process and its frequency in investigating complaints.
Brown-May emphasized, “The Nevada laws are robust and take into account the fact that we are, indeed, a citizen legislative body.”
However, other states have distinct procedures. Like Nevada, Colorado’s legislature operates part-time, so most lawmakers have primary occupations outside their elected roles. In Colorado, a legislator with a personal or private interest in any pending measure must disclose that conflict and cannot vote on the bill.
In Utah and Idaho, lawmakers must declare a potential conflict of interest but can still vote on a bill. In Utah, a lawmaker who fails to disclose a conflict could face a Class B misdemeanor and be subject to the Legislative Ethics Commission.
California legislators adhere to the Fair Political Practices Act, which mandates that public officials avoid any actual or perceived conflicts of private or financial interests. If any state legislator has an interest in a piece of legislation, they must recuse themselves from voting.
Citizens can file complaints with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission which then investigates and has the authority to issue decisions and penalties. However, regardless of whether a violation of state ethics law has occurred, the appearance of impropriety can erode public trust.
Accountability is ultimately exercised at the voting booth, where the public can remove elected officials. But, by the time legislators are up for re-election, ethical issues may not be a central focus.
Warner highlights that “Ethics and corruption are seldom the reason politicians do not get re-elected.”
One of the challenges is that legislatures establish the rules governing themselves. A ballot initiative to amend Nevada’s ethics regulations could address this, but Warner notes that starting a public movement that gains sufficient traction for effective rule changes can be challenging.
Meanwhile, Governor Joe Lombardo has urged the Legislature to enhance transparency and accessibility for the public, emphasizing the importance of holding themselves to the same standards they expect from others.
In its 2023 annual report, the Nevada Commission on Ethics indicated that it was considering alternative policy measures for the 2025 legislative session to effect improvements, potentially working with legislators on bills related to ethics jurisdiction.
Yet, a delicate balance must be struck when determining how to ensure transparency. Stephanie Witt, a professor at the Boise State University School of Public Service, emphasizes that overly burdensome reporting requirements for potential conflicts may discourage some from even running for office.
Every state must grapple with finding the right balance and approach to achieving transparency, Witt asserts. Making information about a lawmaker’s connections and financial interests easily accessible to the public can be part of the solution.
In Utah, legislators have their conflict of interest forms readily accessible via their legislative biographies.
Nonetheless, even if a violation of state ethics law has not transpired, the mere appearance of impropriety can erode public trust. Witt points out, “In the public sector, we have to live with the damage that can come from the appearance of impropriety.”
If it looks bad, it is bad, and citizens continue to lose trust in our governmental institutions.
The Old Blog in the Desert 