Timing of complaint questioned

Erin Neff

Friday, Jan. 19, 2001 | 11:08 a.m.

An ethics complaint filed Thursday against four Las Vegas City Council members alleges they granted a special favor to political consultant Sig Rogich when they approved a tavern license over staff recommendations.

But since the vote occurred nine months ago, many are questioning why the complaint was filed now -- just weeks before Michael McDonald faces his own ethics complaint related to the same case.

"The timing of it is no coincidence," said City Councilwoman Lynette Boggs McDonald. "The motivation is no coincidence."

The complaint, filed by resident Victor Palermo, alleges Mayor Oscar Goodman, Councilman Larry Brown, Boggs McDonald and Councilman Michael Mack granted special favors to Rogich by approving the item against the wishes of City Attorney Brad Jerbic.

"Who are these anointed few who can do whatever they think they can do?" Palermo said this morning.

Boggs McDonald said clients disagree with their attorneys frequently, and that it's the council's prerogative to make decisions. On Wednesday, for example, she overruled staff's recommendation to deny speed humps in a residential area because she thought the need for the traffic deterrent was great.

"If the case were heard today, I'd vote the same way," Boggs McDonald said. "This is just a fine example of dirty politics at work.

"I know we will beat this transparent, manipulative, phony complaint," she added.

Goodman, who was traveling in Washington, D.C., was reportedly very upset when he learned about the complaint late Thursday. Neither he nor Brown could not be reached for comment.

An aide to Goodman said the complaint was flawed because Goodman has no reason to grant Rogich any special treatment. Rogich has not served as a political adviser to Goodman, the aide said.

Palermo said he filed the complaint Thursday because he grew tired of waiting for someone else to do it.

"I sat there waiting for the other shoe to drop and nothing ever happened," Palermo said.

But Mack said he believes the timing of the complaint is odd, especially given Michael McDonald's recent statements on a radio show.

McDonald said on the show that he thought his own ethics troubles related to the Rogich matter were confusing given the council's actions to approve Rogich's license. McDonald also said he thought someone should file an ethics complaint against the council members who voted to grant the license.

Talking to the Sun this morning, McDonald said of the ethics complaint, "I have nothing to do with it. I wouldn't wish this on anybody."

McDonald left the council meeting prior to the April 5 vote. Councilmen Gary Reese and Lawrence Weekly voted against the item and were not named in Palermo's complaint.

During that meeting, Jerbic warned the council not to approve the item because the building in question was 1,500 feet from existing taverns.

Boggs McDonald said she thought the presentation by Rogich's attorney was better. That attorney, Mark Fiorentino, argued the city had no practice of including taverns outside the city limits, either in Clark County or North Las Vegas, in distance measurements.

Another tavern nearby did not have a valid license the day the council voted. But the owners of that tavern have since sued the city and the four council members who voted for Rogich's license.

"I'm not too concerned about it," Mack said. "It's alleged that it came from (McDonald). I hope it didn't come from him, because someone who's so ethically challenged should mind his own business."