Tao levels new charges at Maxfield

Friday, Oct. 15, 2004 | 10:52 a.m.

Clark County Commission candidate Jerry Tao fired back at his opponent, Commission Chairman Chip Maxfield, Thursday, arguing that the incumbent is the target of a "federal racketeering investigation."

Tao, a Clark County deputy district attorney, distributed a written release cited an unnamed attorney "representing a local business and several individuals announced he will file a federal lawsuit against Mr. Maxfield which will include a number of very serious allegations, including violations of federal civil rights laws, abuse of office and a series of ethics violations."

Also Thursday, Maxfield's lawyer promised a defamation lawsuit against Tao for the charges he has made over the last several weeks of the campaign.

Tao, who did not return phone calls asking for comment on the release, demanded that Maxfield withdraw "his frivolous allegations of campaign violations."

Maxfield forwarded to the Clark County District Attorney's office nine sworn affidavits from constituents Wednesday, which included telephone messages from Las Vegas' Rolling Thunder Communications and potentially other groups. Two recorded messages, which were verified by the Las Vegas Sun, accuse Maxfield of opposing continued benefits for county employees serving in the military overseas and of using "his public office to coerce, intimidate and harass a local businessman who refused to give him money."

Other affidavits say that callers told constituents that Maxfield blocked installation of a stop light where a 10-year-old girl was hit and killed by a car, was being investigated by the federal government for fraud and racketeering charges and by the FBI for bribery and used his county staff for campaign purposes.

The affidavits said the callers for those charges did not identify themselves,

All the charges were vehemently denied by Maxfield, who asked the Clark County District Attorney's office to investigate what he called "illegal" campaign practices.

Tao, however, said in the release that the specific allegation of a federal racketeering investigation "has now proven to be true."

Tao said the unidentified attorney has "been investigating Mr. Maxfield for violations of the federal racketeering statute." He did not identify the attorney who would file the federal charges.

However, Sergio Salzano, an attorney representing Las Vegas businessman Brent Lovett, said Thursday that he intended to file civil charges against Maxfield in federal court today.

"The complaint is going to name substantive due process issues," Salzano said. Salzano filed a complaint with the Nevada Ethics Commission last month charging that Maxfield, in retribution for Lovett's testimony affecting Maxfield's former engineering company, cut off business opportunities for Lovett.

Maxfield, Salzano said, interfered with routine zoning matters affecting Lovett.

In 2001, Lovett applied for business zoning on about 2 acres in the northwest Las Vegas Valley surrounded by residential neighborhoods. Neighbors, the city of Las Vegas and Clark County planning staff opposed the request, which the county commission, including Maxfield, rejected.

However, the county has said that Lovett continued to operate or leased space to numerous business out of a residence on that property, ultimately generating numerous complaints from the neighbors. Lovett charged in the ethics complaint that Maxfield used the Clark County Public Response Office to harass him and his businesses.

"Mr. Maxfield clearly had a vendetta against Mr. Lovett," Salzano said. "Whether any agency of the government is going to assert a claim of racketeering against Mr. Maxfield, I don't know... This issue between Tao and Maxfield doesn't involve me."

Salzano said he is considering including a racketeering claim in his lawsuit. Even if the claim is not included in the initial lawsuit, it could be included later, he said.

Tao, in his release, also charged Maxfield with using similar tactics in his own campaign. Tao said a caller asked a co-worker if her opinion of Tao would change if he were under investigation for campaign finance violations.

"Clearly, someone supporting Mr. Maxfield's campaign (or acting under his direction) is employing precisely the same kinds of tactics that he now hypocritically complains about," Tao said. "Accordingly, I ask that Mr. Maxfield either immediately -- and publicly -- withdraw his frivolous and hypocritical complaint or that he immediately file a similar complaint against the party that acted on his behalf."

Maxfield said he could not respond in detail to the demand, the threatened lawsuit or the charges leveled Wednesday by Tao. His next step is to meet with his campaign advisers and an attorney, he said.

"This is an extremely serious matter with personal ramification," Maxfield said. "However, there's no truth to these. These are the most ridiculous allegations and I will be discussing it with my attorney."

Don Campbell, Maxfield's attorney, called Tao's accusation of similar campaign tactics "absolutely false."

"Please consider the source," Campbell said. "It is my opinion that what is transpiring is an 11th hour attempt by political activists in concert with those opposing Mr. Maxfield's re-election to come up with a defense for what they know is coming, which is a defamation action that is going to be brought to vindicate my client's good name."

Campbell said that using a format which uses questions to make accusations, as some of the affidavits have sworn, is considered "false light" defamation.

"The courts have dealt with those questions before," he said. "You intended to place the person in a false light, a defamatory light, inferring that this is true."

Campbell, a former federal chief organized crime prosecutor, said using a civil lawsuit to justify the use of the phrase "federal racketeering investigation" is also not valid.

"If that is his (Tao's) position, it is obvious that he didn't pay attention when they talked about the tort of defamation and false light in the first year of law school," Campbell said. "It also tells me that he is about to learn a very, very expensive lesson in the law and he better bring his checkbook."