Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comment Transparency topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public commenter urges transparency and an end to confidential letters of instruction

5029930 · April 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A member of the public criticized the commission’s use of confidential letters of instruction and raised concerns about repeat recusals by a law firm, urging publication of such determinations and consistent disclosure of officials' benefits.

At the start of the Nevada Commission on Ethics meeting a public commenter, Jeff Church, urged the commission to stop issuing confidential letters of instruction and to increase transparency about official disclosures and conflicts.

Church, who identified himself as the operator of renotaxrevolt.com and watchdogjeff.com, told commissioners he had submitted written comments and wished to present orally. He said some staff attorneys from the law firm Macdonald Carano regularly recuse themselves and that the firm’s representation of many agencies statewide creates a perceived conflict and reduces public oversight.

Church criticized the commission’s practice, in some cases, of issuing confidential letters of instruction instead of public findings, saying those letters “need to go out far and wide.” He argued officials who vote on budgets and receive benefits such as health care should disclose them both to the commission and in annual filings with the Secretary of State.

Executive Director Ross Armstrong confirmed the written public comment had been received and noted the comment would be included in the minutes package. Church later returned during the meeting’s final public comment period to restate his position and suggested asking reporting parties and respondents to waive confidentiality when appropriate to permit public disclosure of investigative material.

The commission did not take formal action on Church’s suggestions during the meeting but later directed staff and counsel to examine confidentiality limits and the process for referring matters that may involve criminal activity to appropriate law‑enforcement offices.