The New York Times, David Lapin, and the Mariana Islands

On May 14, 2005, the New York Times acknowledged, in print, that its articles on SBE on April 29th and May 5th were handled unprofessionally. A correction appearing in the May 14th edition of the paper concedes that, "a headline on April 29 about a $1.2 million contract awarded by the Northern Mariana Islands to a rabbi for training government ethics misstates a key point of the article" (emphasis added). The Times correction goes on to state that, "in a subsequent comment to The Times, [Lapin] said his fees were standard for the work he did. But that comment was erroneously omitted during the editing of an article on the subject that was published on May 6" (emphasis again added).

The New York Times April 29, 2005 article by Kate Zernike about SBE and its work in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) during 1996/1997 was published without interviewing David Lapin or his company. The Times also neglected to interview the Governor of the CNMI at that time, Governor Tenorio, who commissioned the project. Neither the CNMI's Public Auditor, who audited the SBE contract and was satisfied with its deliverables and cost, nor any members of the Tenorio administration were interviewed. In fact, it appears that the New York Times reporter wrote her article without speaking with anyone who had first-hand knowledge of the dedicated and successful work SBE accomplished in the CNMI. It needs to be stated that, until the Times' factually inaccurate article, SBE had never received any negative feedback nor insinuations of impropriety about its work in the CNMI government. On the contrary, SBE received many positive reports and, in fact, was offered additional CNMI contracts, perhaps the best gauge of client satisfaction.

The Times article did quote Pam Brown, Attorney General of the CNMI as saying that, "the government had been unable to determine what work David Lapin had done."

Ms. Brown subsequently assured David Lapin of SBE that she had implied nothing of the sort. What she had said was that there have been two administration changes since the SBE projects and that, not having reviewed the files, she was unable to comment on the deliverables of SBE's work. The following is a quote from Ms. Brown's e-mail to SBE on May 1, 2005:

"While I did say [to the Times reporter], 'I had not figured out what the deliverables were,' you are correct in also stating that I did indicate that I had not reviewed the files. I have now reviewed the files and spoken with attorneys familiar with your contract work and simply think that if OPA (Office of the Public Attorney) reviewed it and found it passed scrutiny, then I will not get involved."

The deliverables of the project, conducted over 19 months, included:

The restructuring and reorganization of the Department of Labor and Immigration (DLI).
Clarification of roles and responsibilities for every position in the DLI.
New and pioneering Labor Law Legislation drafted by a team headed by David Lapin in collaboration with Administration lawyers and Labor and Immigration professionals. The CNMI Legislature adopted this draft legislation with minor modifications.
The introduction of performance measurement into the department and the restructuring of salaries to reflect contribution, rather than tenure and family connection.
Improved efficiency in the processing of work permits by the DLI. Whereas permit applications were taking six to 12 months prior to the project and were often lost in the process, the processing time was reduced to a maximum of 30 days. This eliminated abuse and corruption, which had plagued the department for years.
Documented improvements in DLI morale and public service standards.
An improved work ethic in the DLI, including innovative ways to eliminate the then widespread practice of nepotism.
A series of reports and recommendations, many of which the government adopted. Some were implemented before the change in the Tenorio Administration; others were not adopted before the election and were never implemented by the succeeding administration.

In the mid-1990's, the government of the CNMI needed help to eliminate certain practices in its Department of Labor and Immigration that were undermining the confidence of the US Federal Government in its standards of ethic and efficiency. They approached their lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, who referred them to SBE. After conducting research and a lengthy period of discussions, the CNMI engaged SBE to assist. Governor Tenorio said, "I chose Applied Business Ethics International [as SBE was then known] to help me formulate a philosophy of government in the CNMI. I believed that their experience during the cultural transition in South Africa positioned them to understand the specific conflicts which characterize our relationship with the federal government. Applied Business Ethics International highlighted the need to change the civil service ethos from one of power exertion to one of public service. Additionally, they focused us on the need to shift community perceptions away from entitlement and toward contribution." After the project, he commented, "The energy and enthusiasm [in the Department] became tangible and infectious. Soon, everyone on the island wanted to be part of the workshops, and we exposed as many people as we could to the new thinking."

The "contract" to which the New York Times refers was not one single project. As in the cases of all of SBE's client relationships, both in the public and private sectors, each phase is a separate contract. At the end of each phase, the client receives a report and, where necessary, recommendations for future steps to take the outcomes to new levels of sustainability. After evaluating the benefits of that phase, the client makes its own decision as to whether to continue to use the services of SBE. The CNMI "contract," a series of smaller projects over 19 months, was no exception.

After the initial introduction of SBE to the CNMI, Jack Abramoff had no further direct involvement in this project. SBE has never, at any time, been involved in any financial transaction or business relationship with Mr. Abramoff. David Lapin has no relationship with Mr. Tom DeLay, nor is he in any way involved in his brother Daniel's organization, Toward Tradition. David Lapin is not politically involved in any way, and the work of SBE is completely apolitical.