GSA event might have crossed a legal line beyond wasteful

M Resort shimmers like a chocolate diamond at the far southern end of Las Vegas Boulevard.

On the Strip in spirit, it remains a place apart from the Boulevard's blare: a short ride from the center of the action, but far enough removed from the megaresort glare to give the impression of privacy.

With its handsome amenities and out-of-the-way location, it isn't hard to see why it was chosen as the site of the General Services Administration's 2010 Western Regions Conference. Although it's safe to say M Resort wasn't exactly a household name, all that changed in early April when the Office of the Inspector General released its 23-page report on the excesses of a GSA conference that ended up costing taxpayers $823,000.

Since then, members of Congress have repeatedly expressed varying degrees of apoplexy, some of it sincere but much of it politically motivated, over the cost of the wild and crazy conference. Forget that 800 grand is barely tip money in a budget riddled with big business subsidies and billions in pork barrel expenditures. Those irresponsible GSA employees did wrong and will pay the price.

So will the convention and conference business. Although Las Vegas wasn't likely on the list, 35 GSA meetings were canceled after the Western Regions' excesses surfaced. (To give you an idea of the spending disparity involved, those 35 conferences were valued at $996,000. The Western Regions party animals spent $687,000 over a long weekend.)

In the wake of the scandal, I've received contacts from readers wanting to share insight and information on the conference caper and the actions of regional GSA commissioner Jeff Neely, who played the host with the most for the 2010 conference and now is ducking the questions of multiple congressional oversight committees. Every legitimate tip is appreciated. My phone is always on, and at times lately it's seemed that the M stands for Mystery.

With some wild rumors circulating, I've spent time chatting with M Resort employees about their workplace, the GSA scandal and some of the story's unanswered elements. A bartender here, gift shop worker there. Parking valets and salon schedulers: All were friendly and professional.

To a person, they seemed sincerely perturbed at the behavior of the GSA officials who were so irresponsible with the government checkbook. Even when it was pointed out that what was bad for the taxpayer was good for the M's bottom line, they still thought it was out of line.

"That was our tax money they were partying with," one M employee said, echoing others' sentiments.

If their recollections of the 2010 conference were sketchy or even nonexistent, it wasn't surprising. But I've started to suspect there's a lot more to learn about Neely's behavior on his "pre-conference" visits to Las Vegas. A guy only comes to Las Vegas for so many reasons, and Neely wasn't known as much of a gambler. According to the Inspector General's Management Deficiency Report, those "dry runs" cost $136,504 for him and others.

Color me curious.

Presuming her memory is good, it might be intriguing to know what GSA conference event planner Lisa Daniels recalls about the professionalism of her colleagues. The official report says Daniels had a private hotel booking firm, Location Solvers, help her produce the four-day event for 300 GSA workers.

"In making its proposal, the M Resort contacted GSA through Location Solvers; Location Solvers also assisted GSA in negotiating pricing and other terms of the agreements for the various trips GSA employees made to the M Resort," the report says. "In exchange for these services, Location Solvers received a $12,601.50 commission from the M Resort. The M Resort's willingness to pay over $12,000 as a finder's fee strongly indicates that further discounts might have been available to GSA if GSA had contacted the hotel directly, rather than working through Location Solvers. Since GSA already employs several full-time event planners, the use of Location Solvers seems redundant and wasteful."

Not to mention potentially illegal.

Now color me even more curious.

John L. Smith's column appears Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. Email him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call 702-383-0295. He also blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/smith.