The Nevada Commission on Ethics review panel has handed down an opinion against the actions of four current and former Douglas County School Board members for their actions concerning public records requests.
Current board members David Burns, Susan Jansen, and Katherine Dickerson, and former member Doug Englekirk were found to be at fault for failure to fulfill public records requests back in 2023.
Ethics complaints against the four were made on Aug. 19 and Sept. 11, 2024, and the Ethics Commission review panel met on January 16, 2025, to review the ethics violation claims made by members of the public.
“The Review Panel unanimously finds and concludes that sufficient credible evidence supports a determination that just and sufficient cause exists for the Commission to render an opinion in this matter regarding the alleged violations of NRS 281A.420(1) and (3),” stated the ruling.
The Ethics Commission panel said they believe the conduct of the four school board members, “May be appropriately addressed through corrective action under the terms and conditions of a deferral agreement instead of referring these allegations to the Commission for further proceedings at this time.”
The deferral agreement says they must agree to comply with the following:
1. Comply with the Ethics Law for a specified period of one year from the Panel’s approval of the deferral agreement without being the subject of another complaint arising from an alleged violation of the Ethics Law and for which a review panel determines the re is just and sufficient cause for the Commission to render an opinion in the matter;
2. Receive training approved by the Executive Director within 60 days of approval of the deferral agreement;
3. Certify in writing to the Executive Director that they have read and understand the disclosure and abstention chapters of the Ethics Manual.
The Ethics Commission must receive a deferral agreement from the four by March 15, 2025 or face further proceedings by the full commission.
Since Englekirk did not win his seat in November’s election, it is not defined what type of training he requires since no longer on the Douglas County School Board.
Case History
In October 2024 Judge Thomas Gregory of the Ninth Judicial District Court of Nevada ruled to hold the four trustees responsible for paying the legal bills of the men who filed the public records requests.
There were public records requests served on the District on May 17 and July 26, 2023, for information on the DCSD servers and on the personal electronic devices of the four trustees who were sued. DCSD and the trustees said they turned over everything but the petitioners sued on August 7, 2023, alleging not all of the information requested was turned over.
DCSD and the trustees adamantly said they turned over everything until the second witness testified in court during a trial on March 27, 2024. The district, trustees, and their legal counsel stopped the trial, stating they’d settle due to testimony that was produced showing not all records were turned over. A settlement could not be reached.
In July 2024, nearly a year after the public records requests, DCSD, and the trustees turned over 6,600 pages of public records from the district’s servers and trustee’s personal devices according to court documents.
In between the petitioner’s public records requests, the four DCSD trustees involved approved the firing of the District’s longtime counsel, Maupin, Cox & Legoy, and hired Joey Gilbert Law of Reno.
During the trial, former DCSD Superintendent Keith Lewis revealed there were a lot of missing documents from the public records requests that were on the DCSD servers and on the trustees’ devices. Lewis said Gilbert had never given the request for documents. Gilbert provided affidavits for Lewis and the other four to sign, stating they turned over everything. Lewis read his completely and would not sign. The other four said they relied on counsel and didn’t read.
The in-court testimony regarding reliance on the advice of counsel was corroborated by consistent testimony of Trustees Jansen, Burns, Dickerson, and Englekirk regarding the affidavits of counsel, lack of training and understanding as to NPRA (Nevada Public Records Act) and complete reliance on counsel to search, determine what responsive and determine what was privileged. All testified that their attorney forwarded the affidavits without any explanation or discussion. All signed the affidavits without much thought or consideration. The testimony from Trustees is corroborated by similar testimony from former DCSD Superintendent Keith Lewis,” states Judge Gregory on page 15 of the 41-page ruling.
“DCSD’s and Trustees’ conduct after being served with the lawsuit is also telling. Instead of quickly conducting supplemental searches to prove their claim that no further records existed, DCSD and Trustees doubled down and refused to conduct competent searches. Instead, DCSD and Trustees continued to maintain this position until after the second witness testified at trial. Even then, DCSD and Trustees inexplicably delayed conducting the searches for another couple of months,” said Judge Gregory. “The court finds that the lawsuit caused a substantial change in DCSD’s and Trustees’ behavior in the manner sought by Petitioners.”
The Judge also said the lawsuit was not frivolous and “DCSD and Trustees cannot blame Petitioners for the ensuing extraordinary delay in producing responsive public records.”
NPRA requests must be answered within five days of the party receiving the request. Trustees missed several deadlines to produce court-requested documents and completed forms.
