Columnist Jon Ralston: Council has chance to send strong messages

Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2001 | 8:59 a.m.

Jon Ralston hosts the public affairs program "Face to Face" on Las Vegas ONE and also publishes the Ralston Report. His column for the Sun appears on Sundays and Wednesdays. Ralston can be reached at 870-7997 or through e-mail at ralston@vegas.com

THE LAS VEGAS City Council will have that rarest of opportunities for a government body today -- to send messages about how it responds to blatant threats and to indicate just how it feels about ethics. And on a third item, the council has a chance to do something that is so unusual that it would have to be upgraded to call it rare -- apologize for its pathetic behavior.

Let's examine each item:

* Lowering itself to the Stratosphere: Maybe the company will do the honorable thing and withdraw. But if not, and if the council approves the resort's bid for a thrill ride that neighbors vehemently oppose, this will not just be the Silly Septet in action; this will be an act of cowardice even beneath these folks. And it will show that the unwritten rule of deferring to the ward councilman's wishes -- as the invertebrates did with the Billy Walters golf course contract -- is a situational sham.

The Stratosphere folks have hired juice attorneys and used intimidation tactics to try to influence the council. And the response from the elected folks is to meekly mouth how they are keeping open minds until the hearing about a rollercoaster that no one except the resort executives thinks is a good idea.

So that is the response that supplicants can expect from the elected folks when they berate, deride and threaten them? Silence? We can only hope that Mayor Oscar Goodman and Councilman Gary Reese, who only recently showed his displeasure with the company's tactics, will let loose. How can they let such behavior go unchallenged and still look at themselves in the morning?

And why wouldn't they honor Reese's wishes, just as they did when Brown fronted for Walters on the golf course award? It's his ward, after all, so why shouldn't he have the final say?

Let's see just how consistent they can be.

* Can they keep their hands off? Goodman actually has raised some doubts about whether he will reappoint ex-Judge Earle White as the chairman of the city Ethics Review Board. He did this in response to a media inquiry at a recent news conference. On the agenda today are White's appointment as well as those of two other members whose terms have expired.

It would, of course, be a travesty to interfere with the composition of the board during the travails of Councilman Michael Mack, who has blatantly violated the city's ethics code in voting on an item while being financially beholden to an interested party. Anyone who has observed the ethics panel knows that White is not just the leader of the ethics tribunal, he is the only one with extensive knowledge of the law and whose legal and analytical mind is invaluable to the process. Without him, the Michael McDonald case would not have moved forward. Without him, the Mack case could wither.

It would be outrageous if Goodman and Co. mucked with the process at this point. You can be sure that because Mack is seen as an ally (read rubber stamp) of the mayor's that any removal of White now would be seen as favoritism for the councilman. I don't believe Goodman or any of the other councilfolk will go so far as to not reappoint White, although why he would want to stay on in such a thankless job is beyond me.

For the Mack case to reach a fair and just resolution, White must be there.

If he's not, the message from the council will be clear: We protect our own.

* Sorry seems to be the hardest word: I can't wait to hear Brown's speech today when the contract comes up for the northwest golf course that he tried to give to Walters without any explanation except that he knew him.

After Walters pulled out when the council failed to give him any political cover with their deaf, dumb and blind act, the company that city staff unanimously recommended, Evergreen Alliance, is now up for the award.

After trying to justify the gift to Walters with a whisper campaign about Evergreen-caused problems in Henderson (false) and how staffers were biased against Walters (equally false), Brown and Co. now have to eat crow and give the award to Evergreen.

I'm sure that Brown and each member of the council will bow their heads in shame and apologize for the shabby treatment given to Evergreen, which only had the temerity to be from Texas and not on any of the council's campaign contributor reports or lunch schedule.

Yes, I'm quite sure that will happen today. More likely: They will say nothing, as they did when Walters won. It's their specialty.