A guilty verdict might not end Mack in politics

Diana Sahagun

Tuesday, Aug. 20, 2002 | 11:10 a.m.

As Las Vegas Councilman Michael Mack awaits a verdict in his ethics trial this week, he can take comfort in the fact that despite widespread allegations of unethical conduct faced by Southern Nevada officials, it's rare for anyone to be removed from office.

In recent years, several officials on both the Clark County Commission and the Las Vegas City Council have been accused of unethical conduct and have had to face city and state ethics boards.

Some of those officials, even after receiving a guilty verdict from the Nevada State Ethics Commission or the Las Vegas Ethics Review Board, have kept the support of constituents and dodged a negative result at the polls.

Most recently, in 2000, Las Vegas Councilman Michael McDonald was found guilty of breaking the city's ethics laws twice -- once when he lobbied the city to buy the Las Vegas Sportspark to help his boss out of a bad investment and again when he worked to stop a tavern license request by political consultant Sig Rogich.

But calls for a recall have all but faded, as McDonald continues pushing neighborhood preservation in some of the mature areas of town. He is up for re-election in 2003.

But others haven't been so lucky. Former Las Vegas Councilman Frank Hawkins lost his bid for re-election after the commission ruled he broke ethics laws associated with two business loans and a for-profit golf tournament he organized in 1995.

While the Legislature and local officials have attempted to give more teeth to ethics boards, a majority of elected officials accused of ethical misconduct receive little more than a slap on the wrist.

Craig Walton, director of the Institute for Ethics and Policy Studies at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said the city's ethics board has taken a tough approach to unethical behavior. But the state commission has shied away from removing officials from office.

"I think that the attitude at the state level was that it's not our job to kick people out of (office)," Walton said. "Those are local issues and they ought to be done locally."

A lack of "civic spirit" often leads to the possibility that an elected official who could be derelict in his or her responsibilities could be re-elected, Walton added.

Ted Jelen, a professor of political science at UNLV, said Nevada has enacted tough ethics codes, but applying them is an entirely different matter.

"Nobody really wants to come out against ethics in government," Jelen said. "But putting them into action, or applying them, is a different matter. It costs money, and it's not clear who's advantaged by it."

In the Mack case, the prosecution must prove that the councilman knew he had an outstanding $60,000 loan from a car dealer when he voted four times in 2000 and 2001 to postpone and ultimately deny a car dealership proposed by rival car dealer John Staluppi Jr.

It's a standard that Mack's attorney says has not been reached.

Attorney John Graves Jr., who is prosecuting Mack on behalf of the city's ethics board, says he is confident that his case shows the councilman "willfully" violated the city's ethics code by voting against Staluppi's car dealership application without disclosing he owed $60,000 to Courtesy Automotive Dealer Joseph Scala.

Hattie Baker, who works at Mack's First Class Pawn & Jewelry, testified during last week's ethics trial that Mack signed one $1,000 check to Scala between January and March of 2001.

On Wednesday, Las Vegas Municipal Judge Bert Brown will have to decide who is telling the truth. Mack did not take the stand during the ethics trial, but testified before the ethics board that he had not signed any checks during that time.

Mack's attorney, Rick Wright, questioned why Graves didn't present evidence supporting Baker's claims.

Graves said he had considered issuing a subpoena for the bank records, but felt Baker's testimony stood on its own. And her statements were not rebutted by Wright.

"There's no evidence saying (Baker's) testimony is not true," Graves said.

Graves was also unable to locate a witness who could provide information on whether Mack knew about the loan before he voted. Scala and Mack met days before the final June 6, 2001 vote to deny the project, but Scala never took the stand.

Graves said he tried to locate Scala for two to three months before the trial and could not find him to put him under subpoena. Graves, though, said Scala was not a critical witness.

Walton said he doesn't accept Mack's defense that he was a "naive" councilman who was busy running his first campaign and left the handling of his finances to others.

"It's possible that Michael Mack really is ignorant of all these things but we can't let that be an excuse," Walton said. "Because if it's an excuse for him it's going to be an excuse for everyone."

Walton said the prosecution doesn't have to prove that Mack set out to deceive anyone by not disclosing the loan, but that he should have known the loan was outstanding.

"With Mack it doesn't matter whether he met with Scala two days before the vote ... The point is that this was a part of his responsibility and you have to at least ask yourself, how does this look?" he said.

Robert Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies based in Los Angeles, said most cities nationwide fail to bring criminal action against elected officials.

California's ethics laws are misdemeanors, but very rarely do district attorneys or city attorneys bring action against elected officials, he said.

"The feeling is that just having the (ethics board) declare the official had a conflict of interest was a pretty severe penalty," Stern said. "For officials, when you get bad press that's not good."

In most cities, it's a city attorney or a district attorney who brings charges against an elected official. Local ethics boards can only take civil action, such as fines.

Stern said Las Vegas may be breaking ground by having an ethics board that -- if it finds a violation occurred -- can direct an attorney to prosecute criminally.

California in 1996 considered a proposition that would have given local ethics boards the authority to bring misdemeanor charges against public officials, but it was thrown out.

"I've never heard of an ethics agency being allowed to file criminal charges. This may be unique," Stern said.

Stern said giving the local board power to recommend prosecution isn't a bad thing.

"It's good that they have that power," he said. "Other officials may be more reluctant to prosecute."com

archive