Monday, April 5, 2004 | 11:30 a.m.
Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman's response to the state Ethics Commission review of charges that he used his position to secure an "unwarranted benefit" for his son attempts to dissect the case against him.
His response to three other charges involving his $100,000 endorsement contract with Bombay Sapphire Gin, his use of a Cadillac provided free to the city, and his appearance in a Jane Magazine promotion, is much different.
In a four-page letter dated March 24, he attempts to refocus the issue, to evaluate whether or not Stacy Jennings, the executive director of the Commission on Ethics, is overstepping her authority by even considering those issues.
It is, Goodman writes, "inconceivable that the investigation you (Jennings) are authorized to make has anything to do with Jane Magazine, Bombay Gin or Cadillac of Las Vegas."
Goodman will face eight charges of state ethics violations in front of the Ethics Commission on May 12, the commission announced Friday. If convicted of the charges, he could face fines and possible removal from office.
He is charged with improperly helping a company his son is a partner in, iPolitix, and the commission questions the deals to sponsor Bombay Sapphire Gin, promote Jane Magazine and use a Cadillac.
In his responses, in which he tries to dissuade the commission from seeking charges, he accuses Jennings of breaching confidentiality, charging that it cannot be a coincidence that both she and Sun columnist Jon Ralston, a frequent critic of the mayor, called City Hall March 11 to inquire about the Jane Magazine promotion. That day, Ralston's e-mail newsletter stated that the commission was looking into the Jane promotion.
Jennings responds in her report that "I have no personal knowledge of the sources or resources of Mr. Ralston, except that the source is not me. The sources of information utilized by the Executive Director in the course of the investigation are well documented in this report and its attachments."
Jennings wrote the recommendation that the full commission assess eight charges against Goodman. The recommendation was contained in records released Friday, after a two-person panel forwarded the charges to the full commission.
Goodman contends that the rules that govern the ethics commission forbid Jennings from investigating matters that are not directly related to the original complaint.
In this case, the complaint by Robert Rose alleged that Goodman violated ethics rules by promoting a party for iPolitix, a business partly owned by his son Ross Goodman and Councilman Michael Mack. iPolitix created a computer disc that allows politicians to track peoples' interest in specific issues. The disc features material owned by the city that the mayor provided to iPolitix.
That complaint was passed to the full commission, as well as Goodman's Bombay Gin contract, use of a Cadillac, and Jane Magazine appearance.
"Without either a new complaint (Opinion Request) or Commission action, those matters are beyond your jurisdiction to investigate," Goodman wrote in the letter, dated March 24.
Jennings said that the two-person panel unanimously approved sending the iPolitix complaint to the full commission. She said the commissioners split on how to proceed on the other items.
"The letter from the mayor was gone through paragraph by paragraph," Jennings said. She said the panelists were split on whether to send the other items forward or initiate a separate complaint, not on whether the issues deserved a hearing before the full commission.
She declined to discuss the issues further, referring to the report she filed Friday.
In it, she writes, Goodman's response "appears designed to eviscerate the investigation process and undermine the personal credibility of the Executive Director as a diversionary tactic to the issue at hand -- the potential and alleged ethical misconduct of the public officer in the performance of his duties."
Immediately following the release of the report, Goodman blasted Jennings in a press conference outside City Hall.
He said the charges were politically motivated, although he would not say who was behind them. He warned that "people better not sleep," and said the truth would come out at the commission hearing.
"I'm being told by envious, jealous little people, by journalists who are trying to make a name on my bones that I can't have 'Martinis with the Mayor,' 'Coffee with the Mayor,' " Goodman said. "If there's anything wrong with that, I'm going to keep on doing that and I'm going to have my face in their face as long as I'm the mayor of Las Vegas."
Jennings made reference to those events, where the mayor goes to venues throughout the city before or after normal work hours and is available to Las Vegas residents, but did not make any recommendation about whether they were unethical. She did note that the bars that provide venues for 'Martinis with the Mayor' are licensed by the city and could have to come before the council for various matters including liquor licensing.
Robert Rose, who filed the initial complaint on the iPolitix party, said of Goodman's comments Friday, "I think he just got carried away. Instead of being humble in addressing the issue he just went overboard. You have to think before you speak sometimes, and I don't think he did."
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, ethics professor Craig Walton said Goodman's attack on Jennings constituted bullying.
"I'm ashamed for him. This is terrible," Walton said. "This would be the best time for him to say if I did anything wrong I'll go up there and apologize and make it right. Instead, he attacks a person who is charged with this responsibility."
Walton said: "It's what you'd expect from a bully in a school yard."
Walton also said that Goodman is trying to squelch the charges before they can be addressed.
"By acknowledging it he's giving it standing, and he does not want to give it standing," Walton said.
Walton also said he thought that the iPolitix violation was clear.
"The best evidence ... is Mayor Goodman's testimony at his press conferences," Walton said. "It isn't as if someone were alleging something, and he's coming out with an alternative version. So it's not a question of whether he did what he did, it's whether it's within the law."
Rose said he thought Goodman's actions in regards to iPolitix was a clear violation of state ethics laws, and when asked if he felt vindicated by the panel's actions, he said, "of course."
Goodman's defense of the iPolitix party is based on the argument that a violation of the ethics law can only take place if he is in a position of power over the people who were invited. Since they were other mayors, and not under his jurisdiction, there cannot be a violation, he argues.
However, Jennings contention is that Goodman's son would not have been in a position to have the party if not for the mayor's involvement, thus Goodman secured for his son an "unwarranted privilege or advantage."
If the full commission decides Goodman did nothing wrong, Rose said, "that's their problem if they rule that way." Rose said he was not familiar with the issues involving the Cadillac, the gin contract and Jane Magazine.
Goodman sent Jennings information she requested about those items, but sent it under seal, challenging her to open it. The material was given back to Goodman under seal.
The mayor acts as a spokesman for Bombay Sapphire Gin, through Southern Wines & Spirits. In exchange, the liquor distributor paid $100,000 -- $50,000 went to the Meadows School, which was co-founded by his wife, and $50,000 went to the city for the homeless. The city funds had not been released as of earlier this month to help the homeless.
Jennings asked Goodman for copies of his contract with Bombay, copies of checks he had been given and to whom they were payable.
"The Executive Director concludes the existence of the contract for endorsement of Bombay Sapphire gin, the question of to whom the endorsement funds were payable (whether to Mayor Goodman, the city, or the Meadows School), and the confusion as to the disposition of the funds ... constitutes sufficient credible evidence to further explore the Mayor's involvement in the contract," Jennings wrote.
In the case of the Cadillac, Jennings asked Goodman about use of a $55,600 vehicle provided to the city in 2002. She requested "evidence which clarifies the agreement, whether written or oral, between either the City of Las Vegas or yourself and John Tomaras/Cadillac of Las Vegas for the use of a 2003 Cadillac Seville STS; the stipulated use for the vehicle; the value of the vehicle; and the terms for its return, if any."
In the Jane Magazine deal, the mayor appeared in a promotion that gives one subscriber a trip to Las Vegas and a street in the city named after them. In exchange, the city was to get $2,000 and the free publicity from appearing in the magazine.
Jennings writes that she requested a clear accounting of where the money went, and whether it went directly to a charity instead of to the city first, but did not receive it.
Instead, she said, City Attorney Brad Jerbic and Deputy City Attorney John Redlein called her office March 11 and engaged in a conversation with her and Commission Counsel Nancy Lee Varnum. She said they made "baseless, inflammatory and patently false accusations that Mr. Ralston somehow influences the investigative process."
She wrote that their conduct was "entirely inappropriate."
City Attorney Brad Jerbic said that "I disagree with the comments in the report.
"This office understands its obligations under Nevada's code of ethics. Now that there is a hearing scheduled in this matter it is not appropriate for me to comment except to say that we will give our full cooperation to the ethics commission."
archive
