Mark Andrew Federal Corruption Investigation Minneapolis Mayor DFL Convention

7/28/2019 Mark Andrew Federal Corruption Investigation Minneapolis Mayor DFL Convention

1/4

Published: December 8, 2002Edition: METROSection: NEWSPage#: 1B

Federal officials could take months to charge Mark Andrew in

connection with the free plumbing case, if they do anything at all.

By Rochelle Olson, Staff Writer

Former Hennepin County Board Chairman Mark Andrew recently was put in an

unenviable spot when a former labor official claimed to have used union money to

underwrite plumbing work at Andrew's house.

Andrew's attorney maintains that his client did nothing wrong, but with federal

prosecutors refusing to indicate whether or not they will seek indictments, Andrew

could be consigned to months or more of waiting for a resolution.

Lawyers who have represented people under investigation by the U.S. Justice

Department say it's not unheard of for clients to be questioned by the FBI, then face

months or years of uncertainty before charges are filed, the case is closed or the

statute of limitations expires.

``People call me and say to me, `How long do I have to go through this with the

sword hanging over me?' '' Minneapolis defense lawyer Joe Friedberg said.

`Ì always say, Ìt's much better than the sword dropping.' ''

The allegations involving Andrew surfaced about two weeks ago in federal court.

That's when Thomas Martin, the former business manager for the Minneapolis

Plumbers Union Local 15, pleaded guilty to two felonies, including one in which he

claimed to have arranged $3,175 in free plumbing for Andrew.

Martin said he also took union money to pay for plumbing at property owned by

Minneapolis City Council Member Joe Biernat in an attempt to buy ``goodwill'' and

`èxposure'' for Local 15. Prosecutors contended that in exchange for the plumbing

work, Biernat supported Martin's appointment to the city's Plumber's Examiner

Board.


2/4

Last month, Biernat was convicted of five felonies connected to the free plumbing

and resigned from his council seat. He was found not guilty of charges that he

extorted money as a public official and that he conspired with a union official. The

plumbers board was abolished last summer.

Andrew mum

Andrew, a 52-year-old public relations executive, isn't talking, but his attorney, Mike

Colich, said Andrew paid for plumbing work at his home in 1998 with a personal

check. The U.S. attorney's office, however, has told Andrew that plumbers

performed more work than Andrew had requested or paid for, Colich said.

Biernat, by contrast, signed a written statement to investigators in which he

acknowledged that he never received a bill and never wrote a check for the

plumbing work.

Whether Andrew will face similar charges to those lodged against Biernat remains

the open question. Federal prosecutors could take months or longer to make a

decision - or one may have been made - but they aren't talking.

All of the lawyers interviewed for this story emphasized that they have no actual

knowledge of what prosecutors are doing, but they described a variety of possible

outcomes.

In one scenario, prosecutors may never charge Andrew.

Federal defense lawyer Marc Kurzman notes that prosecutors have complete

discretion; even if they believe a crime was committed they could choose not to

press charges.

The fact that Andrew - unlike Biernat at the time of his indictment last spring - no

longer has sway over public money could make him a less desirable target for

prosecution. ``They're not going to be as excited about a former officeholder as they

are about a sitting officeholder,'' Kurzman said.

Also, prosecutors could be trying to build a case or Andrew could be working with

investigators to identify other targets.

``It's possible they may be talking with the target, trying to gather more information

so the indictment can be as broad as possible,'' Kurzman said.


3/4

Martin's testimony alone might not be enough evidence for a conviction, in part

because plea bargains tend to be suspect, Kurzman said. `Ìt is very common for

people when facing prison to claim to have knowledge of other people's activities,''

Kurzman said.

If prosecutors do charge Andrew, the case probably would be tougher to prove thanBiernat's. Even with two signed statements from Biernat admitting that he had

accepted the free plumbing, prosecutors were unable to convict him on the two

larger charges of public corruption.

`Ìf Mark Andrew's attorney is right, it appears that Andrew might have something

Joe Biernat did not: a canceled check for plumbing work,'' former U.S. Attorney

David Lillehaug said. ``We don't know what's happening behind the scenes, but that

fact alone might make it more difficult for the government to prove illegal conduct.''

Defense attorney Earl Gray said Andrew's defense that he didn't know aboutadditional work is a good one - `ùnless more work is an extra toilet.''

But Gray found some significance in Martin's plea. Although Martin was charged with

13 counts, he pleaded guilty to only two, including the one involving Andrew. ``That

would tell me they're going to prosecute him, otherwise why would they have

[Martin] plead to it?'' Gray said.

Union role

Federal authorities also have refused to discuss whether the union remains under

investigation or what might have happened to the rest of the $43,000 allegedly taken

from the plumbers local.

Subpoenas served on Hennepin County recently sought property records for

plumbing permits on two more homes, neither of which involved elected officials.

One of those homes is owned by an investment adviser who handles Local 15's

pension fund. The other property owner is related to a close friend of Martin.

Acting on the advice of their international leadership, Local 15 officials also declinedto discuss the case. The local remains under the trusteeship of the United

Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry

of the United States and Canada.

Although Martin contended that the free plumbing was an effort to boost the local's

clout, such action would appear out of character for a union that has not been


4/4

particularly active in politics. The union contributed just $1,800 to candidates this

year and $13,250 over the past six years, $10,000 of which went to the state AFL-

CIO and DFL Central Committee.

``In my experience, I don't remember the plumbers doing much at all,'' said longtime

City Hall observer and consultant Chuck Neerland. ``Tom Martin was a name I hadnot heard before.''

Staff writer David Phelps contributed to this report.

Documents

Mark Andrew Federal Corruption Investigation Minneapolis Mayor DFL Convention