Supreme Court clears way for Hardy, other lawmakers, to vote despite conflict claims

CARSON CITY — Sen. Warren Hardy can vote on bills involving public employee pension reforms and other bills of statewide importance because of a unanimous Supreme Court decision late Thursday, a legislative lawyer said.

The court ruled 7-0 that only the Legislature, not the Ethics Commission, can discipline its members on matters involving voting.

Deputy Legislative Counsel Kevin Powers said Hardy, R-Las Vegas, was told by legislative lawyers earlier not to vote on possible changes to the Public Employees Retirement System because of a pending issue affecting him before the Supreme Court.

Because of the court’s decision, Powers said Hardy and other legislators could vote on all matters of statewide importance under a Senate resolution adopted late Thursday.

Just six hours before the Supreme Court decision, Hardy said he would not be voting on Senate Bill 427, a measure calling for public employee retirement reforms because of the court case and the opinion from legislative lawyers that he should abstain.

Hardy told the Senate Finance Committee that Steve Hill, president of the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, is a member of the board of the Associated Builders and Contractors. Hardy is president of that organization.

During hearings before the Legislature, Hill had testified for reforms to reduce benefits to Public Employees Retirement System members.

Because of that association and out of “an abundance of caution,” Hardy said he would abstain from voting.

But in the decision, Supreme Court justices said the Ethics Commission was barred from taking any action against Hardy based on the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers.

“Specifically we hold that the discipline of legislators is a constitutionally committed function of the Legislature and that the power to discipline cannot be delegated” to the Ethics Commission.

The court ruled that only the Legislature can determine whether its members can vote on an issue, or if they must disclose potential conflicts of interest before voting.

Last year, Henderson resident Richard B. Miller filed a complaint with the Ethics Commission alleging Hardy repeatedly broke laws by voting on matters that helped Associated Builders and Contractors.

The Ethics Commission dropped 11 of the 12 charges against Hardy but found sufficient cause to conduct a full hearing on whether he broke laws by voting in 2007 on Senate Bill 509. The bill would have required contractors to pay more money to workers on some projects.

After the bill was defeated, Hardy sent a letter to his group’s Las Vegas members “trumpeting” the bill’s defeat.

When the Ethics Commission tried to conduct a hearing in December, the Legislature filed a lawsuit in District Court that challenged the commission’s authority to punish legislators on voting matters.

During an April hearing before the Supreme Court, Ethics Commission lawyer Adriana Fralick said the commission has issued 19 opinions affecting legislators in the past 24 years. She said that lawmakers in 1985 gave the commission power to punish legislators.

“For 24 years, the Legislature has subjected itself to the Ethics Commission and ethics law, and now it says Sen. Hardy has immunity,” she said at the time.

The court, however, ruled Thursday that the Legislature should not have delegated that authority to the Ethics Commission.

Contact reporter Ed Vogel at evogel@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3901.