Zoning rules changes upheld by judge

Erica D. Johnson

Thursday, Sept. 25, 2003 | 11:32 a.m.

A district court judge on Wednesday upheld a county ordinance that requires a two-thirds vote by Clark County Commissioners to approve zoning changes.

The ruling will make it more difficult for local developers to receive zoning changes from the Clark County Commission.

District Judge Valerie Adair said state law does not prohibit the commission from requiring a two-thirds majority vote -- five out of seven commissioners -- to make zoning changes.

The Legislature left zoning procedures open, Adair said, which means the commission has the authority to enact its own guidelines.

The ruling went against attorneys for the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association, whose attorneys had argued that the county couldn't impose anything more than a simple majority vote.

"There is nothing to indicate that the Legislature intended to preclude the County from enacting a supermajority," Adair said.

Rob Warhola, who represented Clark County, said the ruling marked a step in the right direction for Clark County because it encourages the development of master-planned communities.

The ordinance will go into effect Nov. 8, he said.

"It adds an important piece of the puzzle," he said. "It gives more credibility to master plans. And it makes it more difficult for developers to rezone."

Chris Kaempfer, lawyer for the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association, said he is considering appealing the ruling. He said the county does not have the authority to allow a supermajority vote on zoning issues.

"The Legislature has to give the county specific authority to do that and they didn't do so," he said.

Kaempfer said the supermajority rule violates the principle of "majority rule."

"There are philosophical differences there as well as the legal infirmity that goes along with the supermajority rule," he said.

The ordinance requiring the supermajority vote came as part of a sweeping reform of the county's land-use policies.

Commissioners also voted to require "compelling justification" for zoning requests that do not conform to the county's underlying master development plans.

The ordinance, approved in April, was put on hold while Clark County filed a declaratory relief action against the home builders association to solve the dispute.

Adair said the debate centered mainly on whether lawmakers had expressly given the commission the authority to enact a supermajority.

"The court's role is not to second-guess the County Commission in terms of zoning," she said.

Garry Hayes, an attorney who represented three citizens groups that had joined the county in the court battle, said Adair's decision reinforces the idea that commissioners can set their own voting requirements.

The commission has indicated that it wants master plans and managed growth in Clark County, he said.

"The commission has a wide range to set their policies," he said. "I think they're moving in the right decision."

Longtime neighborhood activist Carolyn Edwards, who was also a named as a plaintiff in the court battle, said she thought Adair's decision was the correct one.

"I'm thrilled," she said. "I think it helps bring more integrity to the County Commission."