Editor's Note: Has Goodman jumped the shark?

Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman has hit a rough patch, arguably his first in the job. A slew of ethics charges has been leveled against him. None of them is particularly earth-shattering, but it's clear the allegations have rattled Goodman, so much so that his trademark "happiest mayor" demeanor has lost some of its luster. On April 2, Goodman went off on a tirade against the state Ethics Commission, wildly proclaiming that "as the mayor of the city of Las Vegas, I'm going to run the city the way I want to run the city." Usually charming in dealing with the press, Goodman stormed out of his April 8 news conference when reporters started asking pointed questions about the ethics probe.

Naturally, Goodman, a legendary flame-throwing attorney, has fiercely defended his actions, blasted the Ethics Commission and is preparing for battle when the panel considers the case against him May 12. And while some of the allegations may have merit, Goodman would not be the first local politician to beat an ethics rap. His predecessor, Jan Jones, was brought before the Ethics Commission eight times and was never found guilty of a violation.

Still, you have to wonder whether Goodman has peaked as the city's chief executive. Like Fonzie jumping his motorcycle over a pool of sharks on "Happy Days," the press conference blowups could be a signal that Goodman's glory days at City Hall are behind him.

If that's true, it's a sad day for the city. Goodman's charisma, persistence and vision have had a huge impact on downtown redevelopment over the past six years. Almost single-handedly, Goodman has convinced a skeptical business community that revitalizing downtown is important and doable. Goodman has met with innumerable property owners, developers, bankers and other private sector players, convincing them that their risks will be rewarded. Without his tireless efforts, downtown surely would be in dismal shape.

Goodman will go down in history as the person who sparked what looks to be a massive reinvention of downtown Las Vegas over the next five to 10 years. The outlet mall is already in place and steadily busy. A giant furniture marketplace is under construction. The IRS building is under construction. Fremont Street is exploding with enthusiasm and new investment, from the Plaza to the Golden Nugget to Binion's. The Fremont Street Experience light show is getting a major technology upgrade that will draw a new wave of tourists. Plans are in place for a monorail extension that will deliver another tourist infusion to downtown. Attendance at the burgeoning arts district's premier event, First Friday, is growing every month. Historic neighborhoods are getting facelifts. Plans have been announced for several loft-style condo developments downtown.

With all this progress, Goodman can feel proud and confident about downtown's prospects. Much remains to be done, most notably development of the city's 61 vacant acres behind the Plaza. While the 61 acres don't yet have bulldozers kicking up dirt, the important preparatory work has been accomplished. The city's master plan for the acreage is well sketched, and plans are moving forward for a state-of-the-art performing arts center that will be the property's centerpiece.

Goodman would like to see this project through, but in the current political climate, you have to wonder whether he might be more detrimental than helpful from here on out. What nobody--and nobody more than Goodman--wants is for this ethics controversy to somehow hamper the downtown redevelopment effort. The charges distract from the important work the city needs to do, and they could scare some investors away from downtown projects.

Las Vegas' new marketing theme is "What happens here, stays here," and Goodman has embraced and embodied this philosophy. When he appears on national television, his brash demeanor and sharp sense of humor contrast nicely with other politicians who stick to the script and try to bore us into submission. It's a breath of fresh air for viewers to see someone in a position of authority who isn't afraid to speak his mind and say provocative things.

But one reason Goodman has succeeded with this approach is that nobody wondered what was in it for him. He was squeaky clean. You got the sense that Goodman was an earnest champion of all things Las Vegas, and that he had made more than enough money and received enough attention in his previous life that he wasn't using his mayoral position for personal gain.

The recent ethics charges, from helping his son's business to his gin company endorsement deal to videotaping publicity events at taxpayer expense, call all that into question. In proper context, they don't seem to amount to a whole lot--a few bad decisions amid hundreds of good ones--but they nevertheless open a door of doubt that previously had been locked shut in an adoring public's mind.

If Goodman were to step down now, he could leave confident that downtown redevelopment will continue apace. He has done the groundwork, and, considering all economic factors, it seems certain that redevelopment would progress without Goodman having to provide daily inspiration.

Goodman will not step down, of course. He will aggressively fight the ethics charges and work to clear his name. He isn't the sort to back down from a fight. But no matter how the Ethics Commission rules, it's clear that Goodman has done some things that make his constituents uneasy, and it's surprising that he didn't see the pitfalls.

Nevertheless, Goodman has essentially accomplished what he set out to do at City Hall. If he has jumped the shark, his legacy remains intact.

--GEOFF SCHUMACHER