fbpx
Nevada Policy

Press

Press Releases

Public Pay Data: $1,000,000 for Southern Nevada Water Authority Trio

For Immediate Release
Contact: Robert Fellner, 702-222-0642

Cashing in unused leave for amounts equal to or greater than a year’s salary helped boost the combined compensation packages for three Southern Nevada Water Authority employees to over $1,000,000 last year, according to just-released salary data posted on TransparentNevada.com.

Today, the Nevada Policy Research Institute updated its public pay database with 2016 data for over 75,000 Nevada state and local government workers. The data provides insight to how, exactly, government agencies are spending taxpayer dollars on compensation.

“Astronomical” unused leave payouts

The Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) had some of the largest unused leave payouts of any agency surveyed, with several employees cashing out unused leave in amounts greater than an entire year’s salary.

“In the private sector, being able to accumulate and cash in such astronomical amounts of unused leave is virtually unheard of,” commented NPRI Transparency Director Robert Fellner.

The data reveals that these unused leave payouts — reported under “other pay” on the Transparent Nevada website — boosted the combined compensation package of three SNWA employees to over $1,000,000 last year.

  • SNWA Engineering director Marcus Jensen collected $276,601 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $449,392.
  • SNWA Engineering director Shawn Mollus collected $272,029 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $309,662.
  • SNWA General Counsel Charles Hauser collected $184,406 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $264,546.

The ability to accumulate and cash in unused leave in excess of a year’s salary wasn’t limited to the SNWA.  

“It’s a pattern we’ve identified throughout local government agencies across the state,” said Fellner.

Employees at the cities of Henderson and North Las Vegas, for example, were also able to cash in on the perk:

  • North Las Vegas Fire Battalion Chief Jay Wittwer collected $214,225 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $478,384.
  • North Las Vegas detective Jesus Prieto collected $183,435 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $252,866.
  • Henderson Fire Chief Steven Goble collected $218,191 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $239,309.
  • Henderson accounting manager Concepcion Kershaw collected $164,996 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $254,132.
  • Henderson systems engineer III Marco Arnhold collected $162,907 in other pay to boost his total compensation to: $220,714.

Henderson Fire Chief pulls in over $400,000 for one week of work

This ability to accumulate and cash-in such large amounts of unused leave has resulted in massive payouts right before retirement — as is evidenced by Henderson Fire Chief Goble. After just 7 days of employment in 2016, Chief Goble collected $239,309 in total compensation, nearly all of which came from cashing in unused leave. Goble then immediately began drawing a $141,000 pension, while continuing to work full-time in the private sector.

Fellner noted that this is yet another example of how the state retirement system has dramatically exceeded the legislatively stated purpose to provide a “reasonable base income” for those no longer able to work.

“Few taxpayers are ever afforded the opportunity to cash in such large amounts of unused leave and begin collecting a six-figure pensions for life — all while still in the prime of their working career!”

To view the entire dataset in a searchable and downloadable format, please visit TransparentNevada.com.

Total compensation is defined as total pay plus the employer-cost of health and retirement benefits. 

For more information or to schedule an interview with NPRI, please contact Robert Fellner at 702-222-0642 or RF@npri.org.

###

NPRI files lawsuit against Senator for separation of powers violation

For Immediate Release
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

CARSON CITY — The Nevada Policy Research Institute’s Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation has filed suit against Republican State Senator Heidi Gansert, for violation of Nevada’s constitutional Separation of Powers clause.

Representing plaintiff Doug French, CJCL filed the suit Tuesday morning, alleging Gansert is in violation of Article 3, Section 1 of Nevada’s State Constitution. Mr. French seeks the position currently held by Ms. Gansert at the Nevada System of Higher Education.

“Gansert’s continued employment in the state’s executive branch, as Executive Director of External Relations for the University of Nevada, Reno, puts her in direct violation of Nevada’s Separation of Powers clause, now that she is also serving in the state senate” explained CJCL Director Joseph Becker.

“As a senator, she can simply not continue her employment in the executive branch without violating this clearly worded constitutional provision.”

It’s a violation that was also recognized by now-Governor Brian Sandoval back in 2004, when he wrote in an Attorney General Advisory Opinion that the “Nevada Constitution bars any employee from serving in the executive branch of government and serving as a member of the Nevada State Legislature.” (Emphasis added).

The reason for this Separation of Powers provision is simple, according to Becker. It was designed to preserve the independence and integrity of each branch. Having a legislator make decisions that might directly benefit the position they hold in another branch of government creates a clear conflict of interest.  

In fact, this conflict seems especially demonstrable in the case of Gansert. One headline in the Reno Gazette Journal, for example, described her election to the Senate as a “windfall for higher education.” After Gansert announced her intention to run for the senate, there was no shortage of speculation that her current role at the University would result in her moving forward legislative priorities that would benefit her executive branch employer.

“This is the exact type of scenario the constitutional provision was designed to prevent in the first place,” explained Becker, “where a sitting executive branch employee uses their elected position in the legislative body to lobby for other branches of the government.”

Article 3, Section 1 — the separation-of-powers clause in Nevada's constitution — reads:

The powers of the Government of the State of Nevada shall be divided into three separate departments,—the Legislative,—the Executive and the Judicial; and no persons charged with the exercise of powers properly belonging to one of these departments shall exercise any functions, appertaining to either of the others… [Emphasis added.]

“As Sandoval’s 2004 Attorney General Advisory Opinion demonstrates, this is a longstanding problem in Nevada government,” said Becker. “The provision is an important check on government power and corruption — unfortunately, it has been long ignored by members of both political parties.”

Click here for the filed complaint. 

###

NV PERS files appeal after court orders them to release pension data

For Immediate Release
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

CARSON CITY — The Nevada Policy Research Institute is welcoming the Public Employees’ Retirement System of Nevada’s (PERS) decision to appeal a recent District Court ruling that forced the agency to hand over public retiree payout data to the Institute.

“The truth is, the trial court’s decision could have, and should have, been better for future transparency efforts,” explained Joseph Becker, director of NPRI’s Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation. “Hopefully the Supreme Court will set an even stronger precedent for transparency among government agencies.”

District Judge James Wilson of the First Judicial District in late January ruled that PERS must obey the Nevada Public Records Act and provide the state records NPRI had requested.

When NPRI had made the request in 2015, PERS replied that it was now unable to provide the same information, which included names, because it had changed its internal documents to replace retiree names with Social Security numbers, which are by law redacted from public reports. (Read more about the case here.)

The change had been made by PERS after being ordered by the Nevada Supreme Court in 2013 to release the records in question to the policy institute.

Following last month’s Wilson ruling that the agency provide NPRI with records in the original form, with names, the agency announced it would appeal — stating that reattaching the names to the report would essentially be creating “a new record,” and is therefore not required under Nevada law.

The agency’s decision to appeal, said Becker, presents an opportunity for the state Supreme Court to establish precedent regarding the actual scope of Nevada’s public records law.

“At issue here is whether or not PERS is really ‘creating a new record’ by simply compiling easily accessible data or existing reports that it already has on hand,” he explained.

“In today’s digital age, it seems ridiculous that an agency could avoid compliance with public information laws by simply altering the reports it creates internally,” he added.

The agency’s history of stonewalling on this issue is well documented, according to Nevada Policy Research Institute Transparency Director Robert Fellner

“Unfortunately, such blatant disregard for public oversight has been a recurring theme at PERS,” commented Fellner. “PERS has lost in District Court, then at the Nevada Supreme Court, then unsuccessfully lobbied the legislature, then lost yet again at the District Court — and now it believes it can further delay disclosure by appealing.”

###

At Carson City rally, parents make it clear: They demand educational choice

For Immediate Release
Contact Michael Schaus
702-222-0642; 303-570-8052 (Cell)

CARSON CITY, NV — Hundreds of parents are heading to Nevada’s capitol this week, to dramatize their support for National School Choice Week.

In anticipation of the rally being held on Wednesday in Carson City, Nevada Policy Research Institute Communications Director Michael Schaus issued the following statement:

The support parents have shown for these Silver State events — not to mention the overwhelming support we’ve seen demonstrated by the more than 8,000 parents who’ve signed up for Education Savings Accounts — should send a clear signal to lawmakers ahead of the 2017 legislative session:

Parents want real choice.

For decades, politicians have used the public education system to pander to its special interests and, with that support, get themselves re-elected. But these political games have come at a great cost to all Nevadans: parents, taxpayers and — most importantly — our youth.

It’s time we empower families, rather than a chronically underperforming system, to pursue the best education possible for our future generations. It’s time Nevada’s Legislature keeps the promise it made to Nevada families in 2015, when it passed the most sweeping and inclusive educational choice program in nation: Education Savings Accounts.

However, these rallies aren’t only about Nevada’s appetite for ESAs. They speak about all choice — including charter schools, homeschooling and tax scholarships. After all, for parents, school choice isn’t really about state budgets, political infighting or the horse-trading done by lobbyists in Carson City. Parents care about one thing: Their child’s future.

That’s what school choice, of any kind, is all about.

###

ESA funding a good start, but not enough

 

For Immediate Release
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

LAS VEGAS — Nevada Policy Research Institute Communication Director Michael Schaus responded to the proposed funding solution for Education Savings Accounts announced in Governor Sandoval’s State of the State address:

We are pleased to see the Governor has kept his word to include an ESA funding mechanism in his proposed budget.

It is important to note, however, that his proposed $60 million isn’t even enough to cover the roughly 8,000 hopeful students who have already applied for the program.

Ultimately, the most promising aspect of universal school choice is the innovation and opportunity it promises to usher into Nevada — and, indeed, national — public education.

Under universal ESAs, community groups would have the freedom to begin their own schools custom-designed to serve the students in their own neighborhoods.

Parents would no longer be trapped by income or geography in a system operated by adults who often have no real commitment to meeting their child’s individual learning needs.

Under universal ESAs, a tide of educational innovation would enter the state, as new organizations and groups recognize it as the nation’s educational laboratory.

All these possibilities are profoundly needed, and limiting the Education Savings Accounts program is to significantly constrict what instead should flourish.

So while we are pleased to see that ESAs continue to be at least a nominal priority for the administration, it is imperative that Nevadans demand more than a token gesture to keep this highly promising reform alive and healthy.

Opportunity in education is a growing — but long overdue — trend nationwide. The reason is that the existing, coercion-based public-school district model is not working.

Thus, while most of the rest of the country each year is expanding students’ and parents’ educational-choice options, to see Nevada so drastically cut back on the single most inclusive, promising and expansive choice program in the nation would be disappointing, to say the least.

We hope the Legislature’s Democratic leadership recognizes that the state’s ailing public-education system is in dire need of this new and innovative approach.

If they do, Gov. Sandoval’s proposed $60 million for ESAs would be merely a starting point.

 

###

 

Solid Rock Ministry defeats federal government attempt to get takings claims lawsuit dismissed

For Immediate Rlease
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

LAS VEGAS — A small Hispanic church in rural Nevada won a major victory over the federal government Tuesday.

Six years ago the U.S. Government’s Fish & Wildlife Service illegally and deliberately diverted a spring-fed stream to which the Solid Rock Ministry in Nye County — in Spanish, Ministerio Roca Solida — had long-vested water rights.

That stream, since at least as early as the late 1800s, had traversed the private property the church had purchased years before and on which it had built its Little Patch of Heaven Church Camp.

But the federal land agency — ignoring not only the ministry’s vested water rights, the federal government’s own requirements for Clean Water Act permits, Federal Emergency Management Act requirements, and the Ministry’s religious use of the water for baptisms — essentially destroyed the church camp facility.

Because of the federal agency’s dangerously negligent construction of the diversion channel — never competently engineered to accommodate rain or runoff waters — “a mini-grand-canyon now cuts through what was once lush wetlands,” says Joseph Becker, director of NPRI’s Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation.

That’s because the scofflaw water-diversion not only stripped the Ministry of its access to its “river baptism” waters. It also resulted in repeated flooding and serious erosion of the church property, carving away large swaths of the once pristine 40-acre property.

Such results had been warned about years ago by the Ministry’s expert hydrologist but the Fish and Wildlife Service never heeded the warnings.

Now a ruling from America’s trial court for “takings” issues under the Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights has rejected arguments central to the federal government’s case.

In an opinion and order filed Tuesday, November 29, U.S. Court of Claims Judge Elaine D. Kaplan denied a U.S. government motion to dismiss the Ministry’s takings claims, stating that the government’s arguments for dismissal “lack merit.”

The U.S. government had previously argued that it bears no liability for the flooding and that the church had no rights to the water that had beneficially traversed its property for decades.

Recently, however, the Nevada Department of Water Resources verified that the Ministry did, in fact, have vested rights to the water.

Moreover, the state has ordered the Fish and Wildlife Service to return the water to its “historic path” traversing the church property within 90 days or face administrative fines of up to $10,000 per day until corrective action is taken.

“Judge Kaplan’s decision is a very large step forward for the Patch of Heaven Church Camp in what has now become a five-year-plus court battle between the church and the federal government,” said Becker, representing the Ministry.

While the order from state Department of Water Resources verifies the Institute’s claim that the Ministry’s vested water rights were violated, significant damage and constitutional violations continue to be suffered by the Ministry.

The United States must now file an Answer to the Ministry’s Complaint within 14 days.

Case History:

Because the United States violated multiple constitutional rights in one fell swoop in August of 2010, the SOLID ROCK MINISTRY filed a Complaint for the tort and due process and free-exercise claims in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The Ministry also in 2012 filed a takings claim in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims — along with a motion to stay proceedings in that court pending the outcome of the injunctive relief sought in the District Court. 

The UNITED STATES however, argued before the Court of Federal Claims that, pursuant to United States v. Tohono O'Odham Nation and that case’s re-interpretation of a longstanding jurisdictional statute as to what constitutes the “same claim,” Plaintiff could not pursue all its claims. The Claims Court held that the Church could not bring a takings claim in the Federal Court of Claims whilst seeking relief for other government transgressions in U.S. District Court — despite the fact that no single federal court had jurisdiction over all the claims, or could make the Plaintiff constitutionally whole for each of the government’s constitutional violations.

Because justice demands that a jurisdictional statute cannot be interpreted to force a Plaintiff to forgo one constitutional right to remedy another and armed with a sympathetic concurrence from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the church, pastored by Victor Fuentes, filed a Petition for Certiorari before the U.S. Supreme Court which, despite amicus briefs filed on the Church’s behalf by both the State of Nevada and CATO Institute, was denied.

Meanwhile, because the U.S. Federal District Court moved so slowly on the Church’s remaining claims and despite surviving motions for summary judgment against it by the feds, Pastor Fuentes was left with no choice but to voluntarily dismiss claims at the District Court, simply so it could vindicate its constitutional right to be free of an uncompensated taking — a takings claim which, due to three more floods at the hands of government, has now become the legal claim by which the church can be made closest to whole.

Sadly, the damage done by this repeated flooding is now so severe that no choice is left but to hold the federal government accountable for at least a temporary taking of not only the vested water rights, but the entire property for more than five years, without the availability of the tort remedy or the injunctive relief originally sought to restore the property to its pre-diversion-project condition.

View the images of the erosion and flooding on the property. 

Read Judge Kaplan’s Opinion in the United States Court of Claims here.

###

 

 

Media Mentions

Opinion piece by Nevada Policy president, John Tsarpalas

Nevada Policy article on business regulations in the state of Nevada

Quote from Outreach and Coalition Director, Marcos Lopez.

Nevada Policy

Media Inquiries

Please put “Media” in the subject line and include your questions, deadline, and contact information, and we will respond as soon as possible.

Join the fight to save Nevada.

Sign up for Nevada Policy’s weekly emails to stay up to date on the most pressing issues facing Nevada today.

Media Inquiries

Name(Required)