Unless and until the Las Vegas Sun does an independent study saying its business partner Bill Walters did absolutely nothing wrong when he acquired the Royal Links golf course back in 1999, documents released by the city of Las Vegas paint the deal as a sure-fire loser for taxpayers.

Memos from Deputy City Attorneys John Redlein and Tom Green portray the 1997 lease and the 1999 purchase of the property as one sweetheart deal after another for Walters, who is pushing the city to lift a “permanent” deed restriction so he can build homes on the property.

One thing that emerges from the documents, which were previously not disclosed under a dubious claim of “attorney-client privilege,” was that ex-Mayor Jan Jones allegedly wanted to halt an investigation of suspicious circumstances surrounding the initial lease. (Walters had received a copy of a soils report on the property from ex-Public Works Director Richard Goecke before bidding started, which allowed him to make a better bid than the competitors.)

According to one memo, a then-deputy city manager reportedly feared for her job and ex-Councilman Michael McDonald was “shaken” after finding himself on the business end of a Jones tirade over the probe.

One of the questions that has been raised since the Walters matter came to light was why Goecke would do things including giving Walters a copy of the city-financed soils report. Although Goecke’s admitted accepting some freebies from Walters, one theory of the case is that the Walters deal was favored by people higher up in City Hall, and Goecke was carrying out those explicit or implicit wishes.

If Jones yelled at a councilman and a deputy city manager, it could easily be deduced that staffers thought she was in favor of the project. (Jones, for her part, has denied ever doing anything wrong with respect to Walters and Royal Links. She’s said the golf course was good for taxpayers, because it was built on city-owned land that was vacant and producing no revenue whatsoever for taxpayers.)

And, in fact, Jones eventually followed Redlein’s advice and sending the lease of the course out to bid a second time, after everyone had a copy of the soils report. (Goecke was never fired, nor does it appear he was disciplined in any way for acts that Metro Police investigators would later call criminal. Walters eventually won the lease, after a key competitor dropped out, complaining of city favoritism.)

The documents, in fine detail, go on to explain why Walters’ later purchase of the property was not in taxpayers’ best interests, either. They suggest such a sale might violate state law, a doctrine known as the “public purpose doctrine.” That says city property must be held, used and disposed “for the common benefit” of taxpayers. There’s a similar requirement in state law.

And that has interesting applications for the present dilemma: Walters is offering $7.2 million for clear title to his land. But city appraisals estimate that the land with clear title is really worth between $35.6 million to $55.7 million, which means a windfall for Walters of between $28.2 million and $48.5 million.

Mayor Oscar Goodman, who seems bent on consummating the deal, has said he’s asked Walters to pay more and was refused. But the public purpose doctrine could be read to mean the mayor and City Council are obligated to get more. After all, the city holds all the cards in the matter, and is under no obligation to lift the restriction. Even if homes are never developed at Royal Links, the land would still serve as a buffer between existing homes and the city’s nearby sewage treatment plant.

Disposing of public land “for the common benefit” of taxpayers. That sounds like an idea city and county leaders could stand to hear again.