Sunday, Nov. 20, 2005 | 7:33 a.m.
Something tells me developer Bill Walters has a motto when it comes to dealing with local governments: "If I can count to four, why pay more?" It's really that simple.
Whether or not the attorney general finds a crime has been committed in Waltersgate, the city's behavior is criminal. Whether or not this literally is a case of public corruption, the process was corrupt. And whether or not there was wrongdoing to cover up, there was a coverup.
How ironic that a mob lawyer, who once attacked the government for unfairly targeting his clients, blithely invited law enforcement to investigate the city and Mayor Oscar Goodman now finds himself and his colleagues' conduct being probed by the attorney general's office.
Attorney General George Chanos may well find that crimes occurred in the 1990s, as Metro has alleged, when Walters first gained control of the land -- although that seems unlikely. Or he may disagree with Metro's conclusion that no crimes could be found in 2005 -- although that, too, seems unlikely.
But what we already know is that at least two high-ranking city officials raised serious questions about the process months before the council, save Lois Tarkanian, eagerly freed Walters from his obligation to maintain a golf course for the paltry price of $7.2 million (the land could be worth eight times that much).
So either Manager Doug Selby and his office suppressed that information -- that is, didn't tell the council -- and he and perhaps others should be fired. Or some or all of the council members knew of the possible improprieties and problems with the deal, kept mum and are guilty of malfeasance in office.
Yes, it's really that simple.
In July memos, Deputy City Attorneys John Redlein and Bill Henry present a devastating picture of a City Hall where Walters' relationship with recently retired Public Works Director Dick Goecke raised serious questions and where city Environmental Officer Lori Wohletz indicated the cost of allowing Walters to build houses on his land could cost the city tens of millions of dollars.
If the attorney general looks for this information when the vote first came before the council on July 6 or afterward, he will not find it. There was almost no backup and no rationale for the deal. So either Selby discounted what Wohletz's concerns were -- and he should have said so when the vote finally occurred Nov. 2 -- or the council knew all about this but didn't want to derail the Walters gravy train. Or both.
It's really that simple.
Goodman, who said before the Nov. 2 vote that the city would be engaging in extortion to ask Walters for more than $7.2 million, said last week that he did ask Walters, his friend and former client, for more money. But His Honor said Walters told him, "That's it." Perhaps the mayor could use some tips on real estate negotiating from his son, Ross Goodman, who is turning the screws to an octogenarian near land Dad once coveted.
But if that negotiation between Walters and the mayor really took place, I'm sure it went something like this:
Goodman, chuckling: "Hey, Billy, how about paying more than $7.2 million?" Walters, laughing: "That's a good one, Oscar. You know what I say: If I can count to four, why pay more?" Goodman, guffawing now: "That's a great motto. But all you really need is me. See you at Cili."
Much of the council has been in thrall to Goodman for some time, intimidated by his popularity and personality. Sometimes when Larry Brown and Gary Reese speak, you can't see the mayor's lips move. It's impressive.
Lawrence Weekly and Steve Ross have been the mute twins during this debate.
Steve Wolfson seems torn between going along to get along and speaking his mind. And Tarkanian is the only purist, raising salient points but being crushed in votes by the Goodman cabal.
It's really that simple: Walters knows getting what you want from this invertebrate council is as simple as tallying votes on one hand -- and you don't even need the thumb.
archive
