Police-themed cause still hosing folks in Las Vegas

Posted on by January 17, 2020
Reply

Police-themed causeThe previous telephone call to the New To Las Vegas world headquarters came from Eddie. The latest a few days ago came from Andrew. But the message was the same. Police Officers Support Association, part of something called Law Enforcement for a Safer America PAC, needed my money for law and order and wanted me to pledge a specific amount before mailing me any literature.

I couldn’t pin down Andrew on whether I legally could back out of a purported pledge if I found problems with the mailing. So I asked to speak with his supervisor. Here was Andrew’s complete response:

“I understand.” Pause. “Goodbye.” Click.

Andrew, of course, was not a real person but a computer-controlled voice imperfectly using artificial intelligence to simulate a meaningful conversation with me. I got the impression that Andrew was used to abruptly hanging up on people who asked too many questions. But maybe not often enough.

According to federal filings I just consulted, in its latest six-month reporting period, Law Enforcement for a Safer America, or LEFASA, raised nearly $3½ million from folks like you and me. And how much was spent on the stated mission of supporting law enforcement?

Zero. Nothing. Zip. Nada.

I wrote about this in detail last spring after Eddie called and also hung up on me. And because of that, I’m nominating LEFASA and its d/b/a, Police Officers Support Association, for my list of  America’s Stupidest Charities. The criteria is pretty simple: nonprofits that call asking for money despite a previous critical post by me. I mean, can it get any dumber that that? You can find the list nearby. Now, strictly speaking, LEFASA is not a charity but a political action committee intended to support or oppose causes and candidates for public office. But in its pitches LEFASA sounds like a charity as it portrayed itself as acting in the public interest. Continue reading →

It Didn’t Stay Here: East Coast municipal manager allegedly used stolen loot for Las Vegas travel

Posted on by January 14, 2020
Reply
It Didn't Stay Here

Lisa M. Moore (courtesy Chester County PA District Attorney’s Office)

Ah, the lure of Las Vegas. The gambling. The entertainment. The allegedly embezzled loot.

The latest drawn-to-that-bug-light-known-as-Sin-City tale is that of Lisa M. Moore, 46. She was the appointed manager of Kennett Township, a rural municipality of 8,000 people 40 miles west of Philadelphia where she worked for more than 20 years. If the Chester County District Attorney’s Office is to be believed, despite Kennett Township’s small population, Moore embezzled $3.2 million over six years. Some of that was spent, in the words of the official press release issued last month, “on travel to Las Vegas.”

Her lawyer has told reporters he will be “fully defending” against the charges. Moore was fired last year after the supposed fraud was discovered. She is out on $500,000 bail facing a preliminary hearing next month on 140 counts of theft, forgery, computer offenses and tampering with public records.

While I have no idea where the criminal case will go, the charges alone are more than enough to make Moore a candidate for my list, It Didn’t Stay Here. This is a roster of folks who have gotten into trouble somewhere else for something that happened in Las Vegas. My list is a direct rebuff of “What Happens Here, Stays Here,” the celebrated marketing slogan of the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. You can see all the names elsewhere on this page. Continue reading →

Las Vegas injured-cop charity still spends way more on overhead than police

Posted on by December 26, 2019
3

Las Vegas injured-cop charityOnce again, the less-than-transparent Injured Police Officers Fund spent far more on overhead than the charity’s sole stated mission of aiding southern Nevada law enforcement families in the event of line-of-duty injury or death.

In its recently filed tax return for calendar year 2018, the 37-year-old Las Vegas-based IPOF said it made grants of $67,886 to 15 individual cases, while spending another $9,269 in office expense classified as in direct furtherance of the charitable mission, for a total of $77,155.  But the nonprofit spent nearly double that–$121,699–in management and general expenses. These included accounting, payroll, travel, promotion, rent and insurance.

Under normal charity evaluation metrics, this would generate a charitable commitment ratio–the proportion of expenses in direct mission support to total expenses–of 39%. That’s way under the 65% minimum set for reputable charities by such charity watchdogs as the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance. A low charitable commitment ratio has been characteristic of the IPOF since its beginning. Continue reading →

Dueling newspaper stories prove worth of Las Vegas JOA

Posted on by December 16, 2019
Reply

Las Vegas JOALas Vegas JOANeed evidence the news-consuming public needs more than one source to help sort out the truth in a given contentious matter? Look no further than the December 5 editions of Las Vegas’s two suing-each-other daily newspapers, the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Las Vegas Sun.

The papers were reporting on a hearing the day before in state court on litigation concerning contract issues arising from the 30-year-old joint operating agreement under which the Sun is published as an ad-free section of the RJ.  In the RJ, the headline was “RJ-Sun JOA lawsuit stayed.” The Sun‘s headline was, “Judge affirms arbitrator’s decision favoring Sun in dispute with R-J.”

Were they even covering the same hearing?

The answer is yes–sort of.

In my view the Sun‘s headline and story far better captured the main news element–the RJ got caught in an arbitration cooking the books on miscalculating how cash flow is divided between the two papers under the JOA and is going to have to pay up big-time. But the RJ headline and story weren’t incorrect. District Judge Timothy Williams did halt the other parts of the litigation pending resolution of a somewhat similar lawsuit the Sun filed in federal court, which arguably has jurisdiction because JOAs operate under an exemption from federal antitrust laws. That lawsuit contends the RJ is unfairly trying to put the Sun out of business and silence a opposite viewpoint.

The RJ disclaims such motivation, saying that JOAs are obsolete and the Sun would be free to publish on its own–if it could. In effect, the RJ is arguing greed–not editorial differences–drives it. Not a good look.

Of course, the RJ story didn’t mention the arbitration matter until the sixth paragraph and never got around to fully explaining it. This is not surprising, since it also is not a terribly good look for the conservatively inclined paper owned since 2015 by conservative casino billionaire mogul Sheldon Adelson. The liberal-leaning Sun has been owned since its founding in 1950 by the Greenspun family.

Indeed, the sharp contrast in how the two papers covered the same hearing may well cut against the RJ and in favor of the Sun, which argues that the purpose of the federal law granting JOAs antitrust exemption was precisely to allow competing editorial voices. Were I a lawyer for the Sun, I would put both articles into the court record and say “See what I mean?” Continue reading →