David Uberuaga, real estate whiz

David Uberuaga, then superintendent of Mount Rainier National Park sold his Ashford, Washington home to the owner of Rainier Mountaineering, Inc. for three times the property’s assessed value, while Uberuaga was charged with oversight of the concessionaire. Later, Park Service Director Jon Jarvis, at one time Uberuaga’s immediate boss, saw that Uberuaga was appointed the superintendent of Grand Canyon National Park. This is especially interesting in view of the fact that Jarvis’s older brother, Destry Jarvis, has been a lobbyist on behalf of motorized river runners on the Colorado River, which runs through that park.

Hmmmm.

Do you agree with that? “Hmmmm”? Because in government ethics, “Hmmmm” is enough to indicate that the appearance of impropriety threshold has been crossed. The public isn’t supposed to think, “Hmmmm.” In this case, however, how could they not? To prevent “Hmmmm,” Jarvis needed to remove himself from any decision affecting a National Park that is being lobbied by his brother. To prevent “Hmmmm,” Uberuaga can’t have business transactions, especially mysteriously enriching ones, with a company that seeks contracts with a park that he manages.

Yet Uberuaga, Jarvis, and the National Parks Service all say there’s no problem—really, there isn’t. Even though:

• Uberuaga bought his house in Ashford in 1992 for $84,000; when he sold it in 2002, the property’s assessed value was $122,400; and when Rainier Mountaineering’s Peter Whittaker, at that time the park’s only climbing concessionaire, bought it, he paid $425,000.

• Uberuaga held the purchase note, meaning that while Rainier Mountaineering was operating in the park and bidding for a new contract,  Uberuaga, overseeing the concessions deliberations, was taking monthly payments from the company’s president.

• Uberuaga failed to fully disclose the real estate deal on his Office of Government Ethics form as required. On that form, Mr. Uberuaga said he had no “agreements or arrangements” with any outside entities.

• Uberuaga’s “Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Statement” specifically asked that he “certify that I am not aware of any matter which might reduce my ability to participate in the proposal evaluation proceedings and activities associated with the participating in the evaluation review panel for the Mount Rainier National Park concession opportunity in an objective and unbiased manner or which might place me in a position of conflict, real or apparent, between my responsibilities as an evaluator or advisor and other interests.” He did not mention any conflicts on that form when he signed it in May 2006. He said later that he didn’t fully understand what the document was, that he viewed it simply as a confidentiality agreement.

• There is evidence that Jarvis influenced the deliberations of the body (appointed by him) that chose Uberuaga as the new superintendent of  Grand Canyon National Park.  Since Jarvis’s brother, the lobbyist,  could benefit from a superintendent who 1) was indebted to Jarvis and 2) had already indicated a willingness to be bought by his nifty-keen real estate dealings, Uberuaga’s choice was a promising one.

Hmmmm.

But never mind. The National Park Service released a statement noting that the matter was dealt with three years ago and that Uberuaga had been exonerated of any wrongdoing, saying,

The National Park Service expects – and the American people deserve – that our employees meet the highest ethical standards. Illegal or unethical behavior is not tolerated. Allegations of such actions are fully and completely investigated and those found at fault are subject to the most stringent penalties – from dismissal to criminal action. Even the appearance of a conflict of interest is unacceptable and appropriate administrative action is taken. David Uberuaga is a devoted public servant. Allegations of a conflict of interest regarding a concessioner a Mount Rainier were thoroughly investigated by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Office of Inspector General more than three years ago and resolved.

Jeff Ruch, Executive Director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, reasonably concludes that this is a whitewash, not to mention a crock. He told reporters for the Seattle Times, which investigated the story and interviewed him for its article on these questionable doings:

“It is our perception that ethical standards within the National Park Service are in serious decline during the relatively short tenure of Director Jon Jarvis, and this case fits that pattern. Not surprisingly, Mr. Jarvis declined to speak to the reporters for this article. Instead, he had NPS spokesperson David Barna issue a typically inaccurate and incredible statement: ‘Even the appearance of a conflict of interest is unacceptable.’ It appears that Director Jarvis does not believe that rules apply to him or his inner circle.”

Hmmmm.

And also…yes.