Silence deafening on Dann’s ‘anniversary’

By David Skolnick

“No comment.”

It’s a phrase reporters often hear.

If someone doesn’t say those exact words, you can figure out what they mean.

For example, if someone hangs up on me after the mere mention of my name, I get the hint — that person doesn’t want to comment.

When I began calling people last week for Sunday’s package on the one-year anniversary of Marc Dann’s resignation as attorney general I expected some to decline to comment.

On the flip side, I was surprised at how open Dann was to talk about what led to his resignation a year ago, what he’s been doing since and his thoughts on what happened during his time as attorney general.

While the interview took up a lot of space in Sunday’s edition it made for some very compelling reading.

As part of the package, I contacted a number of people associated with Dann including family members, his friends, his former friends, and those who worked with him.

That’s where the “no comment” issue raised its head.

One of the first people I called was Mahoning County Democratic Chairman David Betras, Dann’s former law partner and a longtime friend.

Typically, it’s a challenge to get Betras not to talk.

Maybe that’s why he declined to comment on Dann.

When I called on May 2, 2008, the day a damning report was released about how Dann ran the attorney general’s office, Betras had a lot to say.

“He didn’t have a person telling him, ‘Don’t do this,’” Betras said a year ago. “He needed someone like me — I could control him — to tell him no.”

This time, Betras said, “No comment,” when I asked about Dann.

Betras is now the county Democratic Party chairman and is re-establishing relationships with the state party and top Democratic elected officials statewide. I can understand that talking about Dann is a no-win situation for him.

Anthony Gutierrez, Dann’s former friend and his director of general services at the attorney general’s office, also declined to comment.

It was Gutierrez’s behavior that led to the investigation that led to the calls for Dann to step down that led to Dann resigning.

Gutierrez said he’d “love” to comment, but because of his legal problems he couldn’t do so.

Ted Hart, one of Dann’s spokesmen at the attorney general’s office, also decided talking about his ex-boss wasn’t a good idea. Hart is one of the few Dann hires still employed at the AG’s office now run by Richard Cordray.

Hart said no one at the office told him not to talk to me about Dann. He just decided it was best not to comment. That’s fine. Besides, Jim Gravelle, who was also a Dann spokesman at the time of the controversy and now employed at another state agency, was willing to talk. How many spokesmen did I really need?

The two most amusing “no comments” came from Alyssa Lenhoff, Dann’s wife, and her father, Bentley Lenhoff.

Alyssa, a former journalist, kept thanking me for the opportunity to comment and politely declined. She made it sound like I was bestowing her with a great honor, but she wasn’t worthy.

Her father, known for being blunt, certainly didn’t disappoint.

I told him I wanted to talk about the anniversary of Dann’s resignation. He asked, “Why?” I explained that it was to commemorate a rather important political story in the Mahoning Valley. He didn’t see it that way.

He said a few things, including something that could have easily been misconstrued. He quickly followed that statement with “that’s off the record” and our conversation ended.

At least these people got back to me.

Attempts to reach Leo Jennings III, Dann’s former adviser and communications director, were unsuccessful.

His old cell phone number is disconnected and he didn’t respond to an e-mail I sent to him.

But it really doesn’t matter. If I got Jennings on the phone, I’m sure he would have said, “No comment.”