EDITORIAL: Lombardo ethics allegations an overreach

Gov. Joe Lombardo has his hands full with Carson City lawmakers. Now he’s got a high-profile — and dubious — ethics complaint to deal with.

On Tuesday, it was revealed that Ross Armstrong, the executive director of the Nevada Commission on Ethics, is recommending that the board fine the governor $1.67 million and censure him for actions during the 2022 gubernatorial campaign. This would, by a magnitude of 10,000, be the harshest penalty the board has ever meted out. It’s a woeful overreach.

And what did the governor do to warrant such harsh punishment? Gov. Lombardo was serving as Clark County sheriff when he sought the state’s highest office last year. During the election campaign, he appeared at numerous events in full regalia, including gun and badge. This, the complaint alleges, violates a state statute that holds “a public officer or employee shall not use the public officer’s or employee’s position in government to secure or grant unwarranted privileges, preferences, exemptions or advantages for the public officer.”

Under this wide interpretation of the law, sitting lawmakers could be accused of gaining unethical “advantages” by sending out campaign material that featured them sitting at their office desks in the Legislative Building. The law is indeed overly vague, but is intended to prevent public employees or politicians from leveraging the power of their office to gain special dispensation unavailable to mere mortal taxpayers. That hardly seems to be the case here. And let’s not ignore the First Amendment implications of attempting to limit the message that a candidate may send to potential voters.

Had the governor used Metropolitan Police Department staff and treasure to promote his campaign, that would be one thing. But Gov. Lombardo was the sheriff. That was no secret. He was also on 24-hour call, which would necessitate carrying a sidearm and badge at all times. To argue that the governor broke the law by simply campaigning in his work clothes with his taxpayer-funded gun and badge stretches the statute beyond recognition.

The governor’s lawyers accuse the ethics board of “using a sledgehammer to swat a fly.” Indeed, it’s difficult not to conclude that there is politics at play, particularly given that one board member has resigned over the panel’s handling of the Lombardo case.

“I can no longer serve on a commission that has strayed from its original purpose and has been tainted by political interference, whether it be a product of internal members’ political views or external influence,” former commissioner Damian Sheets wrote in his May resignation letter. He called it “preposterous” that a gubernatorial candidate should be prohibited from highlighting his law enforcement service.

Nevada has no shortage of ethically challenged politicians — there are lawmakers serving in Carson City in direct violation of the state constitution’s separation-of-powers clause, for goodness sake. The case against Gov. Lombardo seems flimsy, at best, and an example of misplaced priorities.