Court upholds state’s halting of Spring Valley casino plan

Kim Smith

Friday, Dec. 1, 2000 | 10:57 a.m.

The state's decision to stop the development of a Spring Valley casino did not violate Nevada's constitution.

In a nine-page decision released late Thursday, District Judge Ron Parraguirre outlined each of the reasons the state's Gaming Policy Committee acted appropriately when it reversed an earlier Clark County Commission vote that would have allowed the development of the casino.

Earlier this year, the county commission voted 3-1 to approve a zoning change so that a neighborhood casino could be built in the Spring Valley neighborhood in southwest Las Vegas.

However, the gaming committee reversed the decision, causing the developers to take the matter to court.

The developers argued that a separation of powers issue exists between the committee, which is part of the executive branch and the county's zoning committee, which is part of the legislative branch.

They further argued that the statute used by the gaming committee in making its decision applies only to counties with populations of 400,000 or above and so it is unconstitutional because special standards are set.

In his decision, Parraguirre writes "The Nevada Supreme Court has consistently held that if a classification, such as one based on population, 'applies prospectively to all counties, which might come within its designated class, it is neither local nor special.' "

As for the separation of powers issue, Parraguirre wrote that the statute used by the committee, Senate Bill 208, was not enacted to remove zoning power from the commissioners.

"The gaming industry has long been regulated at the state administrative level ... thus, the effect of SB 208 on the zoning powers of the Board of County Commissioners, if anything, is merely incidental."

Attorney Stan Hunterton, who represents one of the casino's developers, could not be reached for comment this morning.

Deputy Attorney General Keith Kizer said neither he nor the gaming policy committee were surprised by the judge's decision, which he said was "well written and well thought out."

"We're glad that the citizens of Clark County were able to obtain the protection the legislators set forth for them when they passed SB 208," Kizer said.

The casino in question has generated a great deal of attention in recent months and many believe it was responsible for the downfall of county commissioner Lance Malone.

A citzens group rallied against the new casino, which would be built near Flamingo Road and Grand Canyon Drive and compete directly with Station Casinos.

Malone was one of the three commissioners who voted in favor of the casino, although he had originally said he would vote against it.

The state Gaming Control Board in August filed a six-count complaint against Station Casinos seeking to fine casino executive Mark Brown because he was reportedly behind an anonymous flier that ridiculed Malone for his flip-flop.

Brown has since resigned and Station Casinos paid a $475,000 fine in September.

Malone was beaten in this year's primary election by Chip Maxfield, who went on to beat Lois Tarkanian for the District C commission seat.