City will get more info about developer partners

Erin Neff

Thursday, Aug. 5, 1999 | 11:26 a.m.

Developers who want the city to chip in funds for their projects will now have to disclose all partners in their proposal thanks to a resolution approved Wednesday by the Las Vegas City Council.

Councilwoman Lynette Boggs McDonald's proposal to require all but routine public works contracts to come under such scrutiny was approved unanimously.

"If there is an expectation of public support, then there should be an expectation of public scrutiny," Boggs McDonald said.

The resolution, which takes effect Oct. 1, will apply to any franchise agreements, contracts for exclusive services, consultant services or land transfers.

Public works projects, such as street or drainage improvements, are not subject to such disclosures because they are considered routine.

City Attorney Brad Jerbic said he believed any project that fails to disclose all partners holding at least 1 percent interest would be considered null and void.

"Failure to provide that language or disclose all partners would constitute a breach," Jerbic said.

Boggs McDonald said she first discovered what she called a "loophole" in city disclosure requirements when she was an assistant city manager from 1994 to 1997.

Her job duties, at that time, included reviewing contracts, land deals and franchise agreements. Boggs McDonald said she had cause for concern several times because she did not know entirely with whom the city was doing business.

"I have an overarching belief that citizens have a right to know," she said.

Prior to Wednesday's council meeting, local developer Ken Templeton expressed some concern about the proposed change in disclosure.

While he said he did not object to the proposal, he cautioned that it could slow down redevelopment efforts.

"What I don't want to do as a real estate developer is make the process longer or harder," said Templeton, who volunteers as a board member of the City Centre Development Corp.

Templeton said most developers initially make a small investment in a particular site, enabling them to determine whether other partners are interested and whether the city will approve such a project.

As a result, he said, partners often change hands, leading him to question whether the city will require updated disclosures.

"I just don't want to see it slowed down," Templeton said. He did not attend Wednesday's meeting.

Templeton will likely voice his concerns Aug. 18 when the measure comes before the council when it meets as the Redevelopment Agency. The agency must sign off on the resolution as it pertains to downtown redevelopment projects.

Boggs McDonald said she expected the same results -- unanimous approval -- at the meeting.

She said she didn't believe the resolution would "bring a screeching halt to development."

Jerbic determined a resolution, and not an ordinance, was the better method for achieving the disclosure Boggs McDonald sought in her proposal.

An ordinance applies to the public and is enforced by law, he said, while a resolution is binding on the council.

Mayor Oscar Goodman said he fully supported the resolution as, "One in a series of steps to ensure accountability on our part."