The law of the land

Saturday, Jan. 20, 2001 | 10:50 a.m.

There is a war being waged in the valley.

As the population of the Las Vegas Valley swells by 5,000 to 7,000 people a month, land-use conflicts pitting homeowners against commercial developers have become common.

Ground zero for these conflicts are the zoning boards -- Clark County's and those in the various cities. Elected policymakers serve as referees for the often-acrimonious battles where homeowners, who are potential voters, usually represent themselves.

And when the battles are particularly contentious, the law firm of Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner and Renshaw can usually be found representing the developers.

High-profile legal and political battles handled by the firm include last year's "neighborhood casino" in Spring Valley, a proposal approved by the County Commission but reversed on appeal by a state board.

More common are the biweekly battles in the commission chambers over shopping centers or high-density multifamily residential developments: proposals that often spark hostility from owners of nearby single-family homes.

Chris Kaempfer, a partner and shareholder in the firm, says land-use battles are likely to get nastier.

These conflicts "get harder every year" as land to build on gets more difficult to find, Kaempfer says.

'Product of growth'

"It's a product of growth," Mark Fiorentino, another partner, agreed during an interview at the firm's offices on three floors of the Wells Fargo Tower, a tony building on Howard Hughes Parkway.

Sometimes residents who oppose commercial projects have threatened the firm with violence or worse, Kaempfer and Fiorentino say.

"I just tell them, 'It's my job,' " Fiorentino say.

But even those who regularly tangle over zoning with the firm say that the lawyers are aboveboard.

"They are very reputable," Sen. Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, said.

Although Titus has criticized some commercial-zoning applications championed by Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner and Renshaw, she also has received the firm's political contributions.

Those contributions represent influence, but aren't illegal, according to Chuck Gardner, a Las Vegas attorney who has sharply criticized many County Commission zoning decisions.

Gardner believes that the onus for decisions -- frequently bad ones, he argues -- lies with the commissioners and City Council members who allow commercial development to negatively affect residential neighborhoods.

Policymaking boards should have to justify land-use decisions in writing, spelling out the specific legal justifications to change zoning and land-use plans, he argues.

Gardner says contributions play a role in influencing land-use decisions, but only because politicians let them.

"It is the way the system works," agrees Peggy Pierce, conservation committee co-chairwoman for the local Sierra Club. "I have nothing against them -- businesspeople -- being able to put their case forward. But when push comes to shove, our county commissioners and elected officials ought to do what's best for this town, not what's best for their campaign war chests.

"There's no question that money is driving the decision-making, and I don't think that's the way it should be," Pierce says. "One decision at a time (is) eating away at the quality of life in this town."

Kaempfer and Fiorentino, however, say the analysis is common, but incorrect: It ignores the hard work of county and city planning staffs, and the difficult decisions that elected officials have to make. Some decisions are the right ones, even if they aren't popular, they say.

Titus, who says contributions don't play any role in her decision-making, has publicly criticized some commercial applications backed by the law firm.

But the senator and UNLV political science professor says the reason people make large contributions is to "get a seat at the table" where policies are debated.

Kaempfer doesn't disagree. Contributions ensure access for the firm's clients, he says.

Access galore

Access is one thing the company has. It doles out thousands of dollars each year, particularly to local and state politicians who decide the fate of issues in which the firm has a stake.

Like a seasoned roulette player, the firm spreads out its bets.

For example, the firm contributed to the campaigns of all three candidates in a hotly contested County Commission race.

Incumbent Commissioner Lance Malone received $2,000 from the firm in October 1999. But Malone was knocked out of the running in the September Republican primary by contender Chip Maxfield, who received $2,500 from the firm two weeks later.

Maxfield won against Democratic challenger Lois Tarkanian -- but Tarkanian, too, got $1,500 from the firm in October.

Similarly, the firm contributed to both incumbent Commissioner Mary Kincaid and primary challenger Stephanie Smith, a North Las Vegas councilwoman. Kincaid, the winner, received $3,000, while Smith received $1,000.

Kaempfer says the firm's clients know upfront that there is no quid pro quo, no free pass because of a contribution.

Politicians ultimately depend on the voters, not campaign contributions, to get re-elected, he says.

Candidates frequently vote against the firm's clients even though it contributed to their war chests, and likely will do so again, Kaempfer says.

Commissioner Bruce Woodbury receives contributions from the firm, but is probably the most conservative commissioner when it comes to altering land-use plans in favor of commercial development, the attorneys point out.

"Bruce Woodbury votes against us all the time," Fiorentino says with a laugh.

Despite those votes, no other firm in the valley comes close to Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner and Renshaw's record of successful representation for commercial development.

Kaempfer and some prominent elected policymakers say the firm's success is because it chooses good projects to represent. The firm frequently rejects impractical or inappropriate land-use proposals, Kaempfer says.

Another of its advantages is it uses proposals that are well thought out, Fiorentino says.

That's echoed by elected officials.

"My experience with Mark Fiorentino, Chris Kaempfer and the other attorneys who work with that firm is that they only bring issues that have merit before our board," County Commission Chairman Dario Herrera says. "They bring projects that they believe constitute good land-use practices before the board."

Herrera is quick to add that he doesn't always support their projects.

"Chris Kaempfer is an example to me of a top-notch attorney," says Garry Hayes, one of the few attorneys in the valley who will fight commercial-development proposals and the boards that approve them.

Hayes said the firm is consistently well prepared for the often-emotional battles it wages.

Fiorentino and Kaempfer say they deflect opposition by working extensively with people in affected neighborhoods. When possible, they will make concessions to make a project more palatable -- or less offensive -- to potential opponents.

Key concessions

Those concessions can be key to getting controversial proposals approved.

Those approvals, and the precedents they set, make some people extremely unhappy.

Kaempfer, however, says that commercial and high-density residential development is necessary as the valley grows and provides homes and jobs for new residents.

Overall, the growth is happening in a way that makes sense, he says. Kaempfer credits elected officials and planning staffs for putting together a good urban mix.

And he's not ashamed of his contribution to that mix.

"Am I mostly proud of what I've been involved in?" Kaempfer muses. "I can honestly say, except for one or two examples ... I'm proud of the role we've had in building this community."