Yvonne Nevarez-Goodson, deputy general counsel for the Nevada System of Higher Education, is shown during the special meeting of the Nevada Board of Regents on Thursday, Feb. 17, 2022. Nevarez-Goodson had cautioned seven regents to abstain from voting on a motion to end an investigation into allegations against them lodged by Chancellor Melody Rose. Those seven regents declined to take the advice.
Friday, Feb. 18, 2022 | 2 a.m.
Seven members of the Nevada Board of Regents disregarded the advice of the board’s counsel and joined a 9-3 majority Thursday voting to acknowledge the conclusion of a special investigation into hostile-workplace claims lodged by Chancellor Melody Rose.
The vote during a special meeting also served to reinstate Regents Cathy McAdoo and Patrick Carter as the board’s chair and vice chair.
The investigation stemmed from accusations Rose made in October that McAdoo and Carter subjected Rose to gender discrimination and retaliation in an orchestrated effort to oust her. She also alleged that McAdoo and Carter had committed a host of ethics breaches, code-of-conduct infractions and possibly violations of Nevada’s open meetings law. A follow-up complaint by Rose named Regents Joseph Arrascada, Patrick Boylan, Byron Brooks, Jason Geddes and Laura Perkins.
McAdoo and Carter had stepped down from their leadership posts last fall (but retained their seats) for the duration of the probe.
Las Vegas law firm Kamer Zucker Abbott, after a four month investigation, found a lack of evidence for the claim of sex-based discrimination, but it did find instances of a “challenging” and “inappropriate” work environment as well as possible ethics violations.
McAdoo, Carter, Perkins, Geddes, Arrascada, Boylan and Brooks joined Regents Mark Doubrava, and Lois Tarkanian in the majority. Regents Carol Del Carlo and Amy Carvalho, who served as temporary chair and vice chair during the investigation, and Donald Sylvantee McMichael Sr. voted against the motion. Regent John T. Moran had dropped off the call during the vote but had expressed opposition to making any changes to the leadership.
Yvonne Nevarez-Goodson, deputy general counsel for the Nevada System of Higher Education, had advised the seven members of the board named in Rose’s complaint to abstain from voting on the motion.
Geddes and Brooks said they did not understand why they were advised to abstain simply because they were named in the report. Geddes said the only reasons to abstain from voting would be if the public officer accepted a gift or a loan, had significant pecuniary (financial) interests in an issue or had a commitment in a private capacity to the interests of another person.
“There is nothing that I have done that violates any of those three provisions,” Geddes said. “And that’s why I’m not abstaining. And I’m going to vote.”
Nevarez-Goodson, who was previously the executive director and general counsel for the Nevada Commission on Ethics, said that when a person was named in an investigation, it did affect their personal interest and their pecuniary interest.
“It would be presumably self-serving to vote to conclude an investigation in which one is personally named, and that was the basis of my original advice,” Nevarez-Goodson said, adding she also wanted to avoid the possibility of an ethics complaint being filed.
Jennifer Hostetler, Rose’s attorney, said the investigation merely focused on gender discrimination and did not fully vet the chancellor’s other claims, including her contract, violations of the regents’ handbook and potential ethics violations.
“Those violations have not been thoroughly investigated and driven to a solution,” Hostetler said. “Instead they went unresolved.”
She also added that if Rose were retaliated against in any manner for filing the complaint, there could be “significant legal consequences.”
“Chancellor Rose simply wants to be able to do her job,” Hostetler said. “She remains committed to focusing on Nevada students and taking steps to improving transparency and accountability and student outcomes in the Nevada System of Higher Education, and I hope she will be given the opportunity to fairly do so.”
Carvalho said that while it was true the investigation had concluded, she couldn’t support tying it to returning McAdoo and Carter to their leadership positions.
“The Board of Regents has been the focus of a lot of scrutiny from many constituents just during the three years that I have been on the board,” Carvalho said. “To most, these instances of bad behavior have been essentially swept under the rug. Issues have not been addressed or resolved in a transparent way. This does not foster a culture of continuous improvement.”
Carvalho also mentioned the letter that several business and labor organizations sent to the Nevada Commission on Ethics calling for an external investigation into the possible ethics violations, as well as Gov. Steve Sisolak’s letter sent Wednesday calling on the regents to work with Rose and the NSHE team.
“Dr. Rose has fought to expand access to higher education for students of all backgrounds and has focused on identifying innovative data-driven student orientated solutions to improve student access and success,” Sisolak wrote. “Her leadership experience matches NSHE’s strategic goals and core values. She has cemented herself as a team-builder and I look forward to continuing to work with her to improve the lives of Nevadans.”
McAdoo and Carter did not return requests for comment on their goals now that they have been reinstated, nor did they comment about how they would improve communication and cooperation within the board.
Del Carlo said in an interview after the meeting that the board’s whole structure was broken. She said the regents needed to hold retreats, conduct self-evaluations and do better onboarding of its members, since many who run for the office do not realize how much time, work and effort it takes to do it right.
“Wouldn’t it be better if we can just find some collegiality?” Del Carlo said. “This is about the students and our employees. They’re depending on us to do the right job.”
“There’s so many good things that we do,” Del Carlo said. “We don’t get credit for it because we get distracted.”
