Ethics complaint targets Assemblywoman Spiegel

CARSON CITY — Attorneys involved in lawsuits against several hundred homeowners associations across the Las Vegas Valley said Tuesday that Assemblywoman Ellen Spiegel has improperly used her position to influence a neutral arbitrator in the dispute, a charge the lawmaker denies.

Las Vegas attorneys Pouy Premsrirut and James Adams have submitted a complaint to the state Ethics Commission arguing that a letter the Henderson Democrat sent to arbitrator Leonard Gang on Feb. 12 was an effort to get him to rule in favor of the homeowners associations.

The dispute is over what fees and assessments can be collected from liens placed by the associations on homes when they go through foreclosure. The attorneys represent a group of investors seeking to avoid paying what they argue are unauthorized and excessive assessments and collection costs sought by the associations.

Spiegel is a member of the Green Valley Ranch Community Association board, a position she disclosed in her letter to Gang. The association is one of those involved in the legal dispute.

“We fear her letter to the arbitrator, who is supposed to be neutral, is an attempt to unduly influence him in making a decision in this matter,” Adams said. “We believe her actions were a misuse of her government authority.”

Spiegel, who wrote the letter on her Assembly District 20 stationery, said it was an effort to clarify the intent of legislation she sponsored in the 2009 session. She consulted the Legislature’s legal counsel before sending the letter and was told her disclosure was adequate, she said.

“I thought it was entirely appropriate,” Spiegel said. “I was very factual. I thought it was important (that) the other side of the story be told.”

Spiegel said her bill had clear intent but was being interpreted differently in an advisory opinion by the state Real Estate Division.

The advisory opinion prompted her letter after she read about it in a Feb. 2 article by Barbara Holland in the real estate promotional section of the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

“I didn’t talk to anybody on my homeowners association board when I was working on this letter,” Spiegel said. “I didn’t contact anybody who I knew of who had any ties to this matter.”

Spiegel’s measure, Assembly Bill 204 from the 2009 session, increased the amount of assessments that could be collected by an association in such cases from six months to nine months.

Premsrirut, Adams and their clients argue that any additional assessments and collection costs sought by the associations cannot be recovered under state law.

In his initial ruling, Gang sided with the homeowners associations in support of the additional collections. But days later, the Nevada Real Estate Division issued an advisory opinion saying penalties, interest and other charges are not allowed.

Gang decided to reconsider his decision, which prompted Spiegel’s letter, in which she said the interpretation by the Real Estate Division “did not accurately characterize my legislative intent in 2009’s AB204.”

In her letter, Spiegel said: “The ability to recover collection costs is paramount to association viability, as most associations are nonprofit corporations that are not allowed to have ‘rainy day funds’ but must collect enough in assessments to meet their contractual obligations.”

The complaint to the Ethics Commission was sent Friday by mail. The process for such complaints is to have a panel of the commission evaluate the concerns and determine whether to dismiss them or forward them to the full commission for hearings.

Until the panel makes its decision, the complaint remains confidential.

Premsrirut said the dispute will proceed to Clark County District Court regardless of how the arbitrator rules. The Nevada Supreme Court probably will decide the issue.

Contact Capital Bureau reporter Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3900.