A member of the public told the Nevada Commission on Ethics on the morning of the commission’s meeting that the agency currently acts like a “toothless tiger” and urged the commission to impose stiffer penalties and greater enforcement to protect public trust in government. “Protect the public trust. Stop being an insignificant cost of doing business. It's time to grow some teeth,” the speaker said.

The commission discussed results of a staff- and commissioner-facing reputational survey prepared by Commission Counsel Bassett that assessed how the commission is perceived and what reputation it should pursue. The survey found respondents view the commission as not well known and weak on enforcement; respondents ranked issuing more advisory opinions, improving timeliness and clarity of advisory opinions, and expanding outreach and training among the top priorities.

Why it matters: Commissioners said public perception and transparently exercised authority affect confidence in government. Several commissioners and staff described the need to balance outreach and education with credible enforcement tools so the public feels the commission’s actions lead to behavioral change among public officers.

Commission Counsel Bassett summarized survey findings, saying respondents most often preferred using enforcement to educate rather than solely to punish and that advisory opinions should be written in plain language and be narrowly tailored and timely. Bassett said the survey also showed support for considering previous resolutions when resolving new complaints so the commission can maintain parity and predictability.

Commissioners emphasized seeking public input beyond the internal survey. Chair Wallen and other members asked staff to explore ways to survey the general public and the commission’s customer base (public officers and employees), including posting a survey on the commission website and using press releases or media partners to publicize it. Outreach and Education Officer Harvey noted most of the commission’s social-media followers are public officers and employees rather than the general public, and said staff will work with executive director Armstrong and others to design outreach that reaches a broader cross-section of Nevadans.

Several commissioners, including Commissioner Lowery and others, raised enforcement questions: whether statutory limits, historical penalty levels, or the commission’s past decisions constrain the ability to raise fines now and how to document reasons for larger penalties to avoid arbitrariness. Executive Director Armstrong said the commission can evolve enforcement over time but must build a clear record when departing from prior practice.

The meeting produced direction to staff to continue implementing the adopted strategic plan, to present more public-survey options at the commission’s April meeting, and to use outreach tools to assess whether the public perceives the commission as sufficiently independent and effective. No formal change to enforcement policy or penalties was made at this meeting.