Whether motivated by guilt or revenge, Sisolak’s actions suspicious

Steve Sisolak explained he injected himself into the increasingly nasty lawsuit between former County Commissioner Mark James and businessman Steve Kalish because his own experience with being falsely accused of inappropriate behavior with his ex-girlfriend's teenage daughter made him feel guilty for not standing up for James.

"I can be as innocent as the day is long, but some people will always remember that," the county commissioner said Wednesday. A Catholic, he recalled how at his church, during the offering of peace, "there was a woman who looked away from me."

"I'm now a firm believer in standing up when I see a wrong," Sisolak said.

But County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani and towing company executive Jerry Corcoran filed affidavits suggesting Sisolak's bashing of Kalish was because Kalish helped defeat two towing ordinances Sisolak sought on May 1.

Whether motivated by guilt or revenge, on May 29 and June 1, Sisolak signed two affidavits describing what Kalish allegedly told him on three occasions in 2011.

According to Sisolak, Kalish said things impugning James, a former county commissioner and state senator who now runs the Frias cab and limousine companies. Sisolak's affidavit said that Kalish said "he had information that would devastate not only Mark, but his wife and children as well."

The information related to James' trysts with hookers and drug abuse. It's the same thing Kalish's lawyers routinely say in court.

Sisolak told me, "The main thing for me to say would have been: I don't want to hear this gossip." He was careful to add, "I have no idea if James owes anybody any money." Nor does he know if what Kalish said was true or false.

Yet he decided he had to tell James about it, then submit two affidavits, the second much more detailed and lurid than the first.

Todd Bice, representing Kalish, said Sisolak's two affidavits don't have a lot to do with a pending motion to remove sexually explicit materials from the court file. "Mr. James made it pretty clear he wants to spin a certain public image about himself, and now he's trying to resurrect it by trying to bloody up Mr. Kalish."

James, through a series of lawyers who have come and gone, contends this is a breach of contract case and allegations involving his sex life are irrelevant.

Kalish, an executive in trash businesses, became a paid consultant for James after the attorney asked him for help running the cab and limousine companies owned by Phyllis Frias. Kalish contends James was obsessed with sex with prostitutes and Kalish was actually running the company.

The legal question is whether James owes Kalish millions more because they once had a contract where James would pay Kalish 20 percent of whatever he made above $4 million working for Frias. After the widow later made James a partner in Frias Holding Co. and gave him 48 percent of the stock, Kalish sued saying he deserved 20 percent of that stock, then worth about $29 million.

District Judge Mark Denton, who has already heard a lot of trash talking in this case, will decide if the jury will hear the sex and drug abuse allegations against James. The trial is set for September.

Meanwhile, Kalish's lawyers filed those two affidavits critical of Sisolak, so he's not unscathed.

Giunchigliani and Corcoran, head of the parent company of Quality Towing, both suggested they believed Sisolak's sudden revulsion with Kalish was tied to two failed towing ordinances Sisolak wanted.

Giunchigliani implied she thought Sisolak was trying to help James because he was upset that Kalish represented Quality Towing Co., and the commissioner failed to pass two ordinances "which, in my view and that of others, were designed to benefit a particular constituent."

She was referring to Bobby Ellis, owner of a tow yard in Henderson, who wanted a piece of the Las Vegas police contract. She argued vehemently and successfully against Kalish's proposed ordinances.

Kalish was representing Quality Towing, which, along with two other towing companies, holds contracts to handle towing from police scenes. Sisolak wanted insurance companies to decide where cars should be towed.

Corcoran also submitted an affidavit saying he met with Sisolak and Kalish in November 2011, and that Kalish didn't say what Sisolak said he said. (Sisolak first said Corcoran was late to the meeting, then said Corcoran's memory was poor.)

The towing vote was May 1. Sisolak's affidavits were signed a month later.

On one side you have Corcoran and Giunchigliani suggesting Sisolak was trying to hurt Kalish because of the towing issue, and on the other side you have Sisolak saying he was prompted by guilt to disclose Kalish's conversations.

Believe who you will, but the entrance of two county commissioners into the fray draws more attention to lurid allegations in this lawsuit.

For James, that's not desirable. Sisolak's belated entrance into the case doesn't benefit him either.

Jane Ann Morrison's column appears Monday, Thursday and Saturday. Email her at Jane@reviewjournal.com or call her at (702) 383-0275. She also blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/Morrison.