BARBWIRE
by
 If you wanted to stage a madcap political lynching, where would you string
up the rope? If you wanted to place political farce on the perfect stage,
where in Nevada would you go?A good theatrical producer would opt for tradition, someplace with a rep
for underwhelming the public's expectations by never failing to reach new
lows.And so it comes to pass that the theft of the election of University of
Nevada Regent Howard Rosenberg has been scheduled for this Thursday morning
at the only place within his district - hell, the only place in Nevada -
worthy of such a task.Reno...City...Hall.The words trip off the tongue like sardines frozen in molasses. Reno City
Hall, where secret voting instructions have sometimes been conveyed by the
position of a certain coffee cup on the table. Reno City Hall, a physical
metaphor mirroring the town which built it: ready to collapse into the
basement at the slightest tectonic nudge. Reno "what? me worry?" City Hall:
Why enact this morning what we will surely change this afternoon? Let's do
lunch at the Mapes.Reno City Hall, server of the zoning ordinance du jour. Where the best
policy is no policy.Which brings me to the Nevada Commission on Ethics, Grand Inquisitor of
Howard Rosenberg. The law which established it more than a decade ago
ordered the commission to establish rules of operation. That such standards
have never been adopted becomes understandable when you look at the body's
annual budget, which demonstrates the value accorded proper ethics by our
legislature. Suffice it to say that the Congolese Navy and the Bangladeshi
office of child labor rights look well-endowed by comparison.The flouting of its enabling legislation does not stop the commission from
following the Nevada open meeting law. Save when it chooses not to.This, then, is the venue of virtual if not virtuous reality chosen by
university administrators to draw and quarter Rosenberg for the crime of
winning an election he was supposed to lose. Not suprisingly, the public
seems quite confused as to why the power structure is so vigorously
attempting to force Prof. Rosenberg to choose between his beloved students
and the office which he duly won last November.First and foremost, remember that the University and Community College
System of Nevada Board of Regents brought no action against anyone. With
UNR Pres. Joe Crowley skulking with intent to lurk, Las Vegas regent and
board chairman Madison Graves II asked Chancellor Richard Jarvis to file a
complaint. The thick document from system attorney Donald Klasic sheds no
light on the issue of motivation. Mr. Klasic cites provisions of Nevada law
as prohibiting longtime professor Rosenberg from teaching while serving as
an unpaid regent.If the distinguished gentlemen were so concerned about
the law, why did they do nothing about 10-year Sparks regent James Eardley?
The same law which the U-Boat commanders say bars Rosenberg from collecting
his professor's salary also applies to Mr. Eardley's retirement income. "A
member of the Board of Regents shall not be interested, directly or
indirectly, in any contract created by the Board of Regents or in the
profits thereof," reads lawyer Klasic's plastic sarcastic against
Rosenberg. The same language applies to Mr. Eardley, whose longtime pension
as a former community college president certainly qualifies under "any
contract created by the Board of Regents."I asked the ethics commission to look into the Eardley parallel to point
out the discrimination against the outspoken Rosenberg. Regents Eardley and
Rosenberg are reasonable and honorable men who would know a conflict of
interest when they see one. The law which brings both before the star
chamber was originally passed to regulate relationships between the
university and its vendors. It was on the books for a decade before regent
Eardley was elected.So why use it against Rosenberg? I submit that ample reasons can be found
in the plethora of financial improprieties first revealed here and later
confirmed by two major audits of the university system. For instance, if
the University of Nevada continues its pattern of clandestine borrowing and
deficit spending, its unrestricted endowment of $56 million, which took 100
years to build up, will be gone by 2000. In just the 95-96 fiscal year,
$12,783,522 of the seed corn was consumed.Only a more aggressive board of regents, presenting facts to a now-aroused
legislature, can stop the red-ink hemorrhage and long term damage to the
university system. The will of the voters must not be overturned by
administrators wanting to maintain a disastrous status quo.JURASSIC KLASIC: Look for lots of wrangling leading up to Thursday's
hearing over the role of lawyer Klasic, who recently announced his
resignation. In a Feb. 11 letter, Rosenberg asked Klasic to walk away. "A
probable conflict of interest existed when you purported to act against a
regent-elect on behalf of the chancellor and another regent," Rosenberg
wrote. "Now that I have entered office, your continued participation
presents an irreconcilable conflict of interest. You have no apparent
authorization from the board of regents in this matter. The continued
participation by yourself against a sitting regent is unseemly and, in my
opinion, is of itself possibly unethical," Rosenberg concluded.Klasic and Uberegent Graves both gave Rosenberg the finger, hiding behind
a Nevada Supreme Court rule which says lawyers must act in the best
interest of the organization if an officer or employee of same is acting
skulduggerously. Too bad Klasic isn't always such a purist.In April of 1995, Regent Eardley tried to engineer a censure vote against
Las Vegas Regent Nancy Price. Rather than act at a public meeting, Eardley
tried to take a secret vote by fax machine, breaking Nevada's oft-violated
open meeting law. Klasic defended the offending regents in Washoe District
Judge Janet Berry's court and helped them beat the rap, at least so far.
(Outrageously, the inexperienced Berry partly based her decision on Reno
Gazette-Journal editorials advocating closed meetings such as out-of-state
retreats. The case was such a farce that the attorney general is taking it
to the state supreme court. Otherwise, we won't have an open meeting law
anymore.)In June of 1995, Klasic came down on the other side of the fax-your-vote
issue. He advised the UNLV Foundation that arriving at written consensus
outside of an open meeting is flatly illegal. Whom does he serve? Which
advice was in the best interest of the organization? Certainly not both.
Fax ballots cannot be simultaneously legal and illegal.Only one conclusion can be drawn: Klasic acts like a hired gun defense
attorney, not a public employee charged with protecting the taxpayers'
institutional interest. The public is not paying him to be Humpty Dumpty,
who said "when I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean -
neither more, nor less." We pay him to look out for us.In the Rosenberg matter, he purports to act for the good of the
organization when the board he serves gave him permission to do nothing.
Worse, he is moving at the behest of one board member (Graves) against
another (Rosenberg). He is Rosenberg's lawyer, too, since he works for the
board of regents of the university system. That's textbook conflict of
interest.To paraphrase my Tribune colleague in columny Dennis Myers, Klasic is
using public money to prosecute his own client.Klasic's presence in the case may be unethical, but in front of our
raggedy ethics commission at madcap Reno City Hall, who's gonna notice? Be
there or be square this Thursday at 9:00 a.m. And bring a kazoo.Be well. Raise hell.Andrew Barbano is a Reno-based syndicated columnist and 28-year Nevadan.Barbwire by Barbano has appeared in the Sparks Tribune since 1988. This column originally published 2/23/97.Nevada Instant Type in Sparks and both Office Depot Reno locations. |
