Judge treds slowly with redevelopment case

Bill Gang

Thursday, Feb. 29, 1996 | 11:59 a.m.

There is no disputing that the future of redevelopment in Las Vegas is going to be decided through the current court case challenging the city's use of eminent domain powers to clear out land for mega-projects.

So District Judge Don Chairez said Wednesday that he wasn't going to rush his part of the job.

He knows that whatever he decides about the way the city took a chunk of land from the Pappas family for part of the new downtown parking garage is going to be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

The 7,000-square-foot parcel at the corner of Las Vegas Boulevard and Carson Avenue was seized via the city Redevelopment Agency's use of eminent domain powers to complete the one-square-block acquisition.

The Pappas family contested the seizure because the land and bright-red, five-story parking garage ultimately were going to be turned over to the Fremont Street Experience limited liability company, composed of downtown casino owners.

But rather than conduct a hearing and make a decision Wednesday, as originally planned, Chairez postponed the hearing until April or beyond and gave both sides a stack of homework to do.

"It is the court's desire to make a very clear record for both this court and the Supreme Court in terms of the procedure that is used in these redevelopment cases," Chairez stated in his nine-page decision.

He asked how the Redevelopment Agency had determined the Pappas property -- and others parcels in the block -- were "blighted" and thus legally susceptible to being taken over.

The city's redevelopment attorneys have argued that the courts simply must accept the city's determination about what constitutes "blight."

Chairez noted that in California, appeal courts have overturned eminent domain seizures when there have been unsubstantiated declarations of "blight" -- including one case where a golf course was declared blighted.

Mark Wasser, the city's redevelopment attorney from Sacramento, said he is "unconcerned" with the issue of blight.

Elko attorney Grant Gerber who, along with Glade Hall, represent the Pappases, suggested that the family's property couldn't be blighted because it always brought in steady income.

"This case cries out for relief," Hall said. "We have a firm conviction that redevelopment laws are being improperly and oppressively used."

Hall contended that because the privately owned Fremont Street Experience company is the beneficiary of downtown redevelopment, taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill.

In his order, the judge indicated he also is looking at larger issues. He asked how and why the city designated 2,800 acres within city limits -- including prime downtown land -- to be part of the redevelopment plan.

"The court must determine if the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner ... when designating the redevelopment area and plan," he said.

Chairez also asked the city to show that those affected when the city changed the redevelopment plan in 1992 were properly notified.

In addition, the judge questioned whether landowners whose properties were targeted for eminent domain seizure were given realistic opportunities to participate in the redevelopment projects as required by law.

Owners have 30 days after being given notice that their land is targeted for condemnation to come up with a plan that would allow then to participate in the redevelopment project.

Chairez asked whether 30 days is adequate time and whether alternative proposals have ever been accepted.

"The Pappases didn't get a good faith opportunity to come in," Gerber said. "The Pappases would have leased the property to the city."

But he said the family didn't want to sell the land that had been in their family for 40 years.

Although many of the issues seemed to question the way the Redevelopment Agency has been doing business, Wasser said he did not believe the judge was leaning in favor of the Pappases.

"I'm quite happy with the court's decision," Wasser said. "I think the record can only aid in a fair decision."

"All the judge is saying is that it's important to get it right," agreed Hall. "I don't see him favoring one side or the other."

Watching Wednesday's proceedings from the back of the courtroom was former U.S. Sen. and Ambassador Chick Hecht, who has a similar case involving land he owned fronting Fremont Street in the same block.

In a ruling that is now being appealed to the Supreme Court, District Judge John McGroarty ruled that the Redevelopment Agency exceeded its authority when it used eminent domain to condemn the property.

McGroarty decided that because Hecht's retail store was taken and replaced with another retail store that will be owned by the Fremont Street Experience company, the seizure was improper.