Mike Nolan was careful to follow the law when he wrote e-mails about a ballot issue in 2006.

The Norfolk city administrator used his personal computer, at home. He wrote the e-mails after work hours.

But one of his e-mails went through the city server, which took a fraction of a second and cost a fraction of a cent, said his attorney, J.L. Spray.

It could cost Nolan $1,000.

The state’s Accountability and Disclosure Commission considered that tiny use of city property — the server — a violation of state law prohibiting the use of public resources to campaign for or against a ballot issue.

Nolan is appealing his $1,000 fine in Lancaster County District Court.

But the commission’s August decision has raised concerns by groups representing elected officials and state and local government workers, and it will likely lead to legislation to clarify state law next year.

“It is absurd. It is astounding,” said Lynn Rex, executive director of the League of Nebraska Municipalities.

Under the old rules, Nolan —  who now works for the League — broke no laws, Rex said. Incidental use of public resource was allowed, they believed.

Local elected officials and employees had been told — by an official Accountability and Disclosure Commission opinion and in workshops for several years —that an occasional, minimal use of government resources would not constitute breaking the law. It was referred to as “incidental or “de minimus” use, Rex said.

The Nolan decision reversed that.

Spray calls this removal of the incidental exception the “Horton effect: A who is a who, no matter how small.”

But Frank Daley, executive director of Accountability and Disclosure, disagrees with the League’s analysis, saying the exception was always narrow, applying only when a public body was considering a resolution on a ballot issue.

Local government leaders are worried this decision — though it related to ballot issues — might cover other areas.

The same law applies to campaigning. And the same language is used in another law about the use of government property for private gain.

“This opinion is going to dramatically affect practices people have adopted and taken for granted,” said Spray, Nolan’s attorney. “And these are not bad practices.”

* Spray gave this example: “So if McCain sends me an e-mail, and I call it up and read it at work, have I violated the act?”

* And Rex offered this: Can a candidate come into the city offices to talk with the budget officer about the city’s budget?

Schools have contracts allowing unions to have mailboxes in schools to distribute literature, and agreements that unions can use school computers to communicate union matters, Spray said.

But if union members send political communications, are they now violating the state law?

Other attorneys for statewide groups have similar questions.

“If a public employee carries a political flier into a building, it seems they are exposed to accountability charges,” said Scott Norby, an attorney for the Nebraska State Education Association .

“The evils (the Accountability and Disclosure Commission) are trying to prevent are absurd. At what point does personal, political expression become outlawed,” Norby said.

Said John Spatz, attorney for the Nebraska School Boards Association: “This has made us a lot more cautious.”

Several groups are looking at proposing state law changes next year to clarify what is legal and what isn’t, Rex said.

That would include allowing incidental use of public resources.

The school boards association staff have supported a commonsense approach, Spatz said.

“An individual with common sense would say that Mike Nolan was not violating any kind of public trust and doesn’t need to be prosecuted,” he said.

Reach Nancy Hicks at 473-7250 or nhicks@journalstar.com.