Council ordered to vote again on federal building

Dan Kulin

Thursday, Dec. 2, 2004 | 11:13 a.m.

A controversial plan for a new Social Security building in Las Vegas will return to the City Council for another vote after a judge ruled the application for the project was not complete, an attorney for the developer planning the project said.

However, an attorney for the residents who sued to block the project said he will probably ask the judge to reconsider his order, which would put the matter back in court before heading to the council.

At issue is if the judge's order means the council must reconsider only one part of the application for the building, or go through a lengthier process.

The building, which is now under construction, has been cited by opponents of Councilwoman Janet Moncrief as a reason for their efforts to force a recall election of the councilwoman. Her opponents have said Moncrief should have been able to persuade enough of her fellow council members to vote with her and kill the project.

In a decision issued Tuesday, District Judge Kenneth Cory ordered the council to take another vote on what is called the General Plan Amendment for the project. The General Plan Amendment changes the city's overall development plan for that property and was needed to clear the way for a zoning change and specific plan approvals for the project.

Last December, the council voted 4-3 to revise the city plan governing land use and rezone the 4.26-acre plot on Buffalo Drive and Del Ray Avenue, across the street from Buffalo Park.

The rezoning of a residential lot allowed developer Irwin Molasky to construct a building that will be used by the Social Security Administration.

Molasky's attorney Chris Kaempfer said the original application did not include a letter from the then property owner stating Molasky had permission to seek the zoning change.

Since that vote Molasky has purchased the property, Kaempfer said.

"There was a technical error with the first application," he said. "Now the City Council will have to take a follow-up vote now that the application is complete."

Kaempfer said if the council votes as it did before, the zoning and development decisions by the council will stand, and not need to be redone.

If the council votes against the General Plan Amendment this time, then the zoning and development decisions based on that amendment would be voided. Kaempfer said if that happened he would appeal the matter.

Kaempfer said he did not know when the matter will return to the council.

Moncrief said Tuesday she didn't know how a new vote on the matter would turn out, but said she's hopeful her fellow council members will be swayed by the concerns expressed by residents.