Spring Valley casino OK’d

Thursday, Jan. 20, 2000 | 11:07 a.m.

Clark County Commissioners approved a controversial zoning change Wednesday to allow a casino in Spring Valley -- one vehemently opposed by nearby residents.

Opponents of the casino to be developed by the Triple Five Nevada Development Corp. billed the commissioners' action as a failed test for a new state law designed to limit the number of new "neighborhood" casinos opening in the Las Vegas Valley.

More than four hours of debate on the issue brought dozens of speakers, about evenly divided between supporters and opponents of the casino. Hundreds of people attended the public hearing on the casino issue. Triple Five's forces, bolstered by dozens of carpenters' union members, outnumbered opponents by about 2-1.

In the end, the decision to approve the casino came down to Commissioner Lance Malone, who told the audience he had originally told opponents that he would vote against the issue.

"I committed early on this, and this has just been plaguing me over the weekend," Malone said following hours of back and forth testimony on the issue. "It's not right to the people I committed to."

Nevertheless, Malone said he was swayed by arguments for the economic benefits of the casino and voted for the zoning change. Joining him were Commissioners Erin Kenny and Mary Kincaid.

Three of the seven commissioners received campaign contributions from the developers during the last three months. Kincaid collected the most with $15,000.

Commissioners Bruce Woodbury, Yvonne Atkinson Gates and Myrna Williams abstained on the issue. Woodbury, the commission chairman, said he and Williams had a financial interest in First Security Bank, which works with Triple Five.

Gates said she has a family member who lives close to the Triple Five property and had lobbied her on the issue.

The sole vote against the casino came from Commissioner Dario Herrera, who noted he was a member of the State Legislature in 1997 when Senate Bill 208 was drafted -- the bill designed to limit neighborhood casinos.

"There's no question that gaming is important," Herrera said. "But does that mean we have to compromise neighborhood values?"

But Kenny and Kincaid said they didn't believe that the quickly developing area in Spring Valley surrounding Triple Five's real estate even qualified to be called a "neighborhood."

Senate Bill 208 requires the commissioners to find "clear and convincing" evidence that a new casino will not negatively affect the quality of life surrounding residential communities. The law also says the commissioners will make the decision on whether to allow the casinos into residential areas.

But the law also provides a multi-step appeals process, and opponents to the casino promised that they will appeal the county commissioners' decision.

The bill allows people to appeal the local decision to a Gaming Policy Committee appointed by the Legislature and the governor; however, it wasn't immediately clear if that committee has ever met.

State Sen. Mark James, a Las Vegas Republican who co-sponsored SB 208, said following the vote that he didn't know if the committee is active.

While noting that it isn't his role to second-guess county commissioners, James said he was "fairly disappointed in the result."

"I worry if you can get these (neighborhood casinos) approved over the strong objection of people who live around them, then that indicates more can be approved," James said.

The issue pitted residents within about two miles of the Triple Five property against one of the world's wealthiest families. The Ghermezian family owns a number of other commercial developments in the Las Vegas Valley, including Boca Park, Colonnade Square and Village Center Square.

The family also developed the world's largest mall in Edmonton, Canada, and the largest mall in the United States, the Mall of the Americas outside Minneapolis.

At least one family member, Eskander Ghermezian, attended the often rancorous debate.

James said that he hasn't talked to representatives from Triple Five, only to opponents of the casino. He will likely do so again: Opponents said Wednesday night that they will meet with James again as they draft their appeal strategy.

"If we don't win here, will go somewhere else until we do win," vowed Charles Richardson, an Army veteran who lives about a mile away from the Triple Five property.

The proposed casino would be the heart of a commercial mall near the Beltway extension and the intersection of Grand Canyon Drive and Flamingo Road. Along with a bowling alley, movie theaters, shops and restaurants, the casino would anchor an eight-story hotel.

The surrounding mall already has received the go-ahead from the county, and nearby residents said throughout their testimony that they have no issue with the commercial development -- only the casino.

But Greg Borgel, a real estate consultant representing Triple Five, said the "gaming component is what gives economic viability to the entire project."

Most of the objections voiced Wednesday centered on gambling and the negative effects of gambling that nearby residents fear will come into the area with the casino.

"I gamble, I go down to the casino, but I don't want it in my backyard," Richardson told commissioners.

Richardson and other residents complained that the county hadn't adequately informed them that the casino was proposed for the area. They also spoke against what they fear will be an infusion of traffic, drinkers and other problems into the area.

The opponents had allies on their side, including Station Casinos, which already runs a string of neighborhood casinos in the valley. The company had lobbied several of the commissioners against approval for their would-be competitors, including Kincaid.

Kincaid, who said Station Casinos held a fund-raising dinner for her re-election a night earlier, said she still couldn't vote against the Triple Five casino.

Also opposing the new casino were Clark County's professional planning staff, who found the location "inappropriate" and "strongly recommended denial of this request," based in part in fear that approval will set a precedent for "spreading casinos farther into neighborhoods."

Those speaking in support of the casino said it was a matter of choice -- having the right to gamble -- and that the tax dollars generated by the casino will help children and others in the valley.

Attorney Mark Fiorentino, representing Triple Five, said the casino alone will provide 400 new jobs and $10 million in taxes and fees.

He said the notice probably was received by few people because there are few residents within 2,000 feet of the casino -- a little less than a half-mile -- that SB 208 requires be notified.

Ron Madson, an attorney representing the citizens opposed to the casino, countered that the spirit and letter of SB 208 required the commissioners to deny the zoning request.

Madson, who is working against the casino pro bono, portrayed the battle against the casino as a David and Goliath fight. He criticized the gambling industry in general.

"Nevada works because we bring in people from other states, suck the life out of them, then throw the carcasses back," he said. Now, "we're cannibalizing our own people. ... They want to go right in our backyards."