No vote

Can a judge order an elected official not to vote on a matter before him?

Given the separation of powers clause in both the state and U.S. constitutions, we don't see how. Any such directive would not only be highly unusual, but ripe to be tossed on appeal.

That's why County Commissioner Tom Collins did the right thing this week when he sued to overturn a deal the county reached with a local paving company involving a bid to widen the northern Las Vegas Beltway between Tenaya Way and Decatur Boulevard.

The commissioners have twice awarded the contract to Las Vegas Paving even though its bid was higher than the one submitted by competitor Fisher Sand and Gravel.

Both times, Fisher sued.

The first time, a judge sent the matter back to the county for reconsideration. When commissioners once more went with Las Vegas Paving, Fisher sued again, accusing the commission of being biased against nonunion companies.

But before the matter could be settled in court, Fisher and the county reached a deal under which the commission would address the matter one more time -- but Commissioners Tom Collins and Steve Sisolak would not participate in future discussions of the contract and would not vote on the deal.

Federal Judge Robert Jones signed the agreement last month.

But Mr. Collins now says he wants no part of the deal, that it was reached "behind closed doors" without his consent. He has sued to have his name removed from the order issued by Judge Jones.

Good. In fact, the federal court had no business endorsing such a deal in the first place. Although Judge Jones simply rubber-stamped the agreement and didn't issue the no-vote order himself, this comes dangerously close to crossing an obvious constitutional line. A federal judge has no authority to bar a duly elected representative from voting.

It's also a mystery why the county agreed to such terms with Fisher. In doing so, county officials actually invite future litigation from those who might benefit by getting a specific commissioner or two knocked out of the process over vague allegations of bias.

Mr. Collins and Mr. Sisolak have a duty to represent their constituents. As long as they aren't breaking any laws, they have a right to do their jobs -- which includes voting on items before them. If they seek to voluntarily recuse themselves, fine. But such a decision should be up to the commissioners, not a federal court.

Mr. Collins is correct to challenge the agreement. Mr. Sisolak should jump on board, too.