STATE OF NEVADA

BEFORE THE NEVADA COMMISSION ON ETHICS

In the Matter of the Third-Party Request
for Opinion Concerning the Conduct of
John J. Lee, Mayor, City of North Las
Vegas, State of Nevada,

Request for Opinion No. 15-13C

Request for Opinion No. 15-17C
Consolidated

Public Employee. /
PANEL DETERMINATION
NRS 281A.440(5); NAC 281A.440
The Nevada Commission on Ethics received Third-Party Requests for Opinion
(RFO) Nos. 15-13C and 15-17C regarding the alleged conduct of John J. Lee (Subject)
in violations of the Ethics in Government Law set forth in NRS Chapter 281A (Ethics
Law), specifically, alleged violations of NRS 281A.020, NRS 281A.400(2) and (9), and
NRS 281A.420(1) and (3).
At the time of the alleged conduct, Subject served as Mayor for the City of North
Las Vegas, a public officer as defined in NRS 281A.160. The Commission has jurisdiction
over the conduct of public officers pursuant to NRS 281A.280. These matters were
consolidated pursuant to the Consolidated Hearing on Jurisdictional Appeal noticed on
May 5, 2015.
On March 16, 2016, pursuant to NRS 281A.440(5), an Investigatory Panel
consisting of Vice-Chair Keith A. Weaver, Esq. and Commissioner Dan H. Stewart
reviewed the following:
1) RFO;
2) First and Second Supplemental Emails of the RFO by Requesters;
3) Letters to Requesters Denying Jurisdiction in RFOs 15-13C and 15-17C;
4) Requesters Appeal of Jurisdictional Determination in RFOs 15-13 and 15-17C;
5) Notice of Request for Opinion and Jurisdictional Appeal;
6) Subjects Response to Jurisdictional Appeal;
7) Order on Jurisdiction;
8) Consolidated Notice to Subject of Requests for Opinion Nos. 15-13C and 15-17C;
9) Notice of Appearance of Matthew Griffin, Esq.;
10) Consolidated Notice to Subject of Additional Issues and Facts;
11) Subjects Second Supplemental Response to Appeal;
12) Notice of Appearance of Peter C. Bernhard, Esq. (as Co-Counsel);
13) Supplemental Materials Submitted on behalf of John J. Lee;
14) Investigators Report to the Executive Director; and
15) Executive Directors Recommendation to the Investigatory Panel.
Despite sufficient credible evidence regarding the Subjects conduct outside the
parameters of the City Charter to make referrals and otherwise influence the Citys hiring
decisions of certain employees with whom he may have shared personal friendships,
former business relationships and religious affiliations, the Ethics Law does not define
Panel Determination
Requests for Opinion Nos. 15-13C and 17C
Page 1 of 3

these types of relationships as conflicts of interest to establish the jurisdiction of the

Commission. The investigation did not produce credible evidence of relationships beyond
these friendships or religious affiliations for these allegations.
In particular, no evidence was provided to support a substantial and continuing
business relationship between Subject and Darren Adair at the time of Subjects alleged
conduct. Further, insufficient evidence was established to confirm a business relationship
between Subject and Ryann Juden at the time that Juden was hired by the City.
Nevertheless, the Commission is mindful of the potential for conflicts when newly elected
or appointed public officers use their position to hire persons with whom they have private
commitments and cautions that such conduct may have implications to or serve as
evidence to support a violation of the Ethics Law.
Therefore, based upon the Panels review of the record, the allegations implicating
NRS 281A.020, NRS 281A.400(2) and (9), and 281A.420(1) and (3) are dismissed for
lack of sufficient credible evidence demonstrating a violation within the scope of the Ethics
Law.

Dated: March 22, 2016

By: /s/ Tracy L. Chase

Tracy L. Chase, Esq.
Commission Counsel

Panel Determination
Requests for Opinion Nos. 15-13C and 17C
Page 2 of 3