Two members of the public spoke during the Nevada Commission on Ethics meeting on Oct. 16, raising separate concerns about public‑official conduct and judicial administration.
Jeff Church addressed commissioners during the public‑comment period and asked the commission to review "the ethics issue with Trustee Rodriguez," referring to allegations about campaign use of a uniform and raising a question about who paid for that trustee’s legal representation. Church told the commission he had submitted handouts and asked about disclosure of pro bono legal representation or the existence of a legal defense fund. "I believe that even consistent with the ruling from the judge that there are violations of wearing the uniform or using uniform in campaign ads… I also think it's ethically necessary to ask who's paying for his legal representation," Church said.
Later in the final public comment period, Jordan Gino described difficulties he has had with judicial procedures and the Judicial Discipline Commission and raised questions about jury‑fee increases. Gino said he believed the governor had not approved an increase and described what he called inconsistent fee practices between Washoe County and Carson City; he also complained that appellate filings in his matters were mischaracterized. The commission responded that it does not have jurisdiction over judges or the judicial branch. A commissioner advised Gino the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Judicial Discipline Commission would be the appropriate avenues for judicial misconduct or procedure concerns.
Why it matters: public comment allows residents to present concerns to the commission, but the commission noted limits to its jurisdiction. Officials repeated that the commission’s authority covers legislative and executive branch actors under Nevada law and does not extend to core judicial functions.
The commission indicated that written comments submitted by Church were part of the public record and would be uploaded to the meeting page following the meeting.