County to decide fate of northwest

Tuesday, Dec. 4, 2001 | 9:35 a.m.

The Clark County Commission -- and particularly Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates -- will play the critical role today in deciding the fate of a long-sought, but still controversial, pact that would guide development of the Las Vegas Valley's northwest.

The Las Vegas City Council on Monday kicked the proposed agreement between the two governments to the county after approving a few small changes to the wording. The interlocal agreement is designed to stop commercial zoning approvals on county islands within the city.

Councilman Larry Brown, who with Councilman Michael Mack represents the part of the fast-growing area that is within the city limits, said the proposal is now acceptable to the council, but could easily be sabotaged if commissioners or county staff added deal-breaking language.

Three commissioners have consistently opposed the pact, arguing that it would freeze zoning plans throughout much of the 33,000 acres in the northwest. Three commissioners, including Chip Maxfield, who represents the county part of the area, have consistently supported the agreement.

The swing vote for the issue will be Atkinson Gates, who said she is concerned about one aspect of the interlocal government agreement: a provision that says "Both parties recognize the city's intent to grow" north of Moccasin Road.

Atkinson Gates said she is not sure if the provision is, for her, a deal-breaker, but she contends that the city has enough vacant land to keep growing for two decades without adding more land in the northwest.

"They have enough land to develop for 20 years," she said. "If it's 20 years out, why does this have to be part of the agreement now? Not that I have a problem with them growing."

County commissioners reacted angrily earlier this year after the city asked the federal government for its OK in an attempt to annex 80 square miles northwest of the valley. The annexation effort failed to win federal support and was tabled.

Las Vegas City Council members tweaked a few points in the agreement Monday. One change allows for a zone change outside existing master plans for the city and county if both governments approve the change.

"If a good development comes in, we don't want to lose it," Mack said.

Mayor Oscar Goodman and others raised concerns about a provision that would bar any consolidation of city and county government services unless approved by both governments.

Goodman said any such consolidation would take years, but he didn't want to see it barred indefinitely. The council added a five-year sunset clause on the provision.

Brown said he believes the agreement can now be accepted by the County Commission, but he warned that it would be easy to scuttle.

If anyone, a commissioner or staff member, from the county "wants to sabotage the agreement, they can," he warned, by adding language unacceptable to the city.

"The city has certainly taken the high road and accepted these changes" proposed by the county, Brown said.

The agreement has come before the city three times. The county will see the pact for a third time today.

The county could modify language in the pact or pass it as it stands. Either way, it will go back to the city council Wednesday for what might be the final test of the proposal.