Las Vegas newspaper pushes county to hand over public records

LAS VEGAS (CN) — The judge in the Las Vegas Review-Journal’s case against Clark County over public records has again sided with the newspaper over the release of documents.

Clark County District Judge Bita Yeager had previously ordered the county to hand over documents about its conflict-of-interest investigation into Jimmy Floyd, a former Construction Management Division manager. However, the paper said it never received the records, leading it to file a motion to enforce.

The county argued it had two investigations into Floyd. The newspaper’s suit and Yeager’s earlier order focused on only one of them.

But the second investigation stemmed from the initial probe into Floyd, a distinction Yeager called immaterial as it’s related to the original accusations. That meant her prior order included documents from the separate investigation.

“The prior order make[s] clear that this litigation concerns any investigations regarding the conflict of interest involving Mr. Floyd, and any subsequent investigations stemming from those inquiries,” Yeager wrote in her late Tuesday order.

The county made a handful of other arguments that failed to convince the judge.

The county said its obligation only extended to documents that existed when the paper made its initial Nevada Public Records Act requests, which occurred three times over 2025. The paper should have made an additional request if it wanted documents created afterward.

“The county has delayed producing these documents for more than a year,” Yeager wrote. “Arguing that the time LVRJ spent meeting and conferring with the county to obtain proper responses to the first set of document requests should have been spent issuing additional requests for the same types of documents regarding the same investigations, when LVRJ could not even obtain the county’s compliance with respect to the first set, is not a good faith position.”

The county didn’t provide the number of investigations it had into Floyd, when they started or their timelines. It also didn’t reveal the documents those investigations would create or be created after the paper’s requests, the judge wrote.

Clark County had the onus to help the paper focus its request and receive the documents as quickly as possible.

“Having made no effort to do so, it cannot penalize LVRJ by withholding the documents it reasonably should have disclosed,” Yeager wrote.

Attorneys on both sides stood before Yeager Wednesday afternoon, as the paper has asked for a hearing on civil penalties against the county over the issue. Setting the hearing date for Aug. 31, Yeager said she wanted written argument from the attorneys about the meaning of “willful” in the Nevada Public Records Act.

Saying she’s not necessarily looking for examples in this case, Yeager asked for any case law on the issue.

The act allows for penalties if a judge determines that a government “willfully failed to comply with the provisions of this chapter concerning a request to inspect, copy or receive a copy of a public book or record.” A first violation in 10 years requires a $1,000 fine.

“The willful violations are clearly laid out,” said attorney Colleen McCarty, representing the paper from the firm Ballard Spahr.

The Review-Journal sought the public records as it had reported on the accusations against Floyd.

The paper reported last year that a subcontracting business owned by Floyd’s wife could have gotten at least $1.5 million in county dollars for road construction. Floyd oversaw the bidding process. He’s since been terminated, the Review-Journal has said.

A county representative declined comment, saying it doesn’t speak about pending litigation.

The newspaper couldn’t be reached for comment.