Las Vegas, Nevada
July 5, 2024
Victoria Seaman has publicly stated that she “never took any money from the City of Las Vegas.” However, evidence and sources suggest otherwise, casting doubt on her claim. Victoria Seaman, a candidate for mayor of Las Vegas, has been accused of being dishonest about her involvement in lawsuits against the city. This situation raises serious questions about her integrity and transparency as a public servant.
The complaints filed by Victoria Seaman and her husband, John Seaman, were eventually combined under John Seaman’s case number. This strategic move appears to have been made to obscure Victoria’s direct involvement in the lawsuit, making it more difficult for the public to find detailed information about her actions. The case docket, which is primarily under John Seaman’s name, includes a “Stipulated Protective Order,” identified as “A-17-753515-C (1).” This document outlines the terms agreed upon by the parties regarding the scope of the depositions and the questions that could be asked.
The protective order and the court minutes from October 19, 2018, provide insight into the case’s complexities. The protective order stipulates that certain personal and potentially embarrassing information about the Seamans was off-limits during the depositions. The court minutes detail specific redactions in John Seaman’s deposition, suggesting that these redacted portions contain sensitive information that the Seamans preferred to keep private. The redactions include various passages, indicating a concerted effort to keep specific details away from public scrutiny.
The case was ultimately settled, with sources indicating that Victoria Seaman received $350,000. Interestingly, the settlement was not paid in a lump sum but in increments of $100,000, allowing the payments to bypass a City Council vote. This method of payment raises significant concerns about transparency and accountability. If true, this arrangement would be a considerable scandal, highlighting a potential manipulation of the city’s financial oversight processes.
Victoria Seaman’s current lawsuit against the city, case number A-22-858925-C, is also under scrutiny. Critics describe this lawsuit as another attempt by Seaman to secure a financial payout from the city. This ongoing legal battle further complicates her public image and raises questions about her motivations and priorities.
An apparent conflict of interest emerges from these cases. Victoria Seaman’s City Councilwoman role is representing and serving the city’s residents. However, her lawsuits against the city taxpayers place her in a position where she is both a plaintiff and a defendant in matters involving the city. This dual role raises ethical concerns and questions about her ability to fulfill her duties impartially.
The former chair of the Republican Party has voiced concerns about Seaman’s mayoral bid, citing the controversies surrounding her lawsuits against the City of Las Vegas. These concerns are compounded by the perception that Seaman’s legal actions and the settlement arrangements lack transparency and accountability. Suing the city, which equates to suing the taxpayers and her constituents, can be seen as a betrayal of public trust.
The deliberate attempt to combine the complaints under John Seaman’s case number, coupled with the protective order and the redactions, suggests a lack of transparency and a willingness to manipulate the legal process. Voters might view these actions as indicative of a public servant prioritizing personal gain over public service. The financial aspect of the settlement, if true, further undermines confidence in Seaman’s integrity. The lack of a public vote on the settlement payments is particularly troubling, as it suggests an attempt to circumvent public oversight.
The ongoing lawsuit adds to the perception that Seaman is more interested in personal financial gain than serving her community.
Critics argue that her actions poorly reflect her ethical standards and raise serious doubts about her suitability for public office. Public officials are expected to act with integrity and prioritize the welfare of their constituents. The legal maneuvers, the redactions, and the financial settlements all point to a pattern of behavior that undermines public trust.
Considering these controversies, voters should carefully consider the implications of electing Victoria Seaman as the next mayor of Las Vegas. The lawsuit, combined with the lack of transparency, the financial settlements, and the ongoing legal disputes, all suggest behavior inconsistent with the ethical standards expected of a public servant. Voters deserve transparent and accountable representatives who prioritize the public good.
Seaman’s actions raise serious doubts about her ability to fulfill these expectations, making a solid case for voters to seek another choice for Mayor who can better uphold the integrity and trust essential for effective public service.
A-17-753515-C (1) Stipulated Protective Order
A-17-753515-C – Complaint John Seaman
A-17-753516-C Victoria Complaint
a-22-858925-c-complaint-seaman-v-fiore
Case No. A-17-753515-C 10-19-18 MINUTES
