Details on how to finance a new stadium remain unclear

Launce Rake and Rob Miech

Thursday, May 13, 2004 | 11:24 a.m.

Those making the pitch to move the Expos from Montreal to Las Vegas hope to be able to offer up public funds as part of the package, though coming up with the money could prove to be a challenge.

Clark County Manager Thom Reilly said the team and county officials have discussed using redevelopment property-tax money to fund a new stadium, but the details on how such a plan would work are far from clear.

Baseball backers have discussed using a redevelopment agency as one of the ways to raise public financing.

Clark County's redevelopment agency, not yet a year old, follows the traditional model: Seed money is used to acquire property, build infrastructure and attract investment. As decaying urban neighborhoods rebound, the increased property taxes do not go into the county's general fund, but instead are diverted back into the redevelopment areas, ideally creating a cycle of renewal.

Under state law, Clark County's redevelopment agency has broad powers to build infrastructure, demolish buildings, and acquire property willingly or through the government's power of eminent domain.

The agency, under the direction of the Clark County Commission, also has the potential ability to issue more than $8 million in bonds to jump-start the redevelopment process, although those bonds would have to pass several local boards before they could be issued.

Major League Baseball officials have said they want two-thirds of the financing of any new stadium to come through public sources. The proposal to bring baseball to Las Vegas calls for a $450 million stadium behind Bally's and Paris Las Vegas.

Those close to the Expos negotiations cited SBC Park in San Francisco as a model that most closely resembles the one they are proposing to the relocation committee.

The Giants' stadium, which was built in 28 months and opened in 2000, cost $255 million, $100 million of which was earned from naming rights, $145 million from a loan secured by the team and $10 million via tax-increment financing (TIF) through the San Francisco's Redevelopment Agency.

A key player in the Las Vegas negotiations said the possibility of a TIF district, which would be overseen by Clark County's redevelopment agency, is being investigated.

"No new taxes are created and there is no use of any existing taxes," a source said. "Our plan just talks about being able to get assistance that anyone else would get with a development project."

When a redevelopment agency chooses tax-increment financing as a revenue source, a base-line date is set, and all property taxes paid by property owners within the defined redeveloped area as of the base-line date are added up.

The total of the taxes paid as of that date becomes the tax base. After that date, all additional taxes paid by property owners within the district go to the redevelopment district.

The redevelopment district typically borrows with a bond issue against the presumed future revenue stream that would come from the extra taxes created by the redevelopment's creation of new businesses as well as by increases in the value of existing properties in the district.

Redevelopment plans do not touch the existing tax base but divert increases in property taxes that otherwise would go to the state, county and Clark County School District.

In Clark County, three commercial areas have been targeted by the new redevelopment agency. One area is in Winchester, between Las Vegas Boulevard and Maryland Parkway along Sahara Avenue -- an area that includes the old Commercial Center. Another is Sunrise Manor at Sahara and Boulder Highway, an area with tracts of abandoned buildings and some apartments. The third is on the west side of Maryland Parkway between Twain and Desert Inn Road.

The Strip, however, is not generally considered a decaying urban neighborhood. The state law creating the county's redevelopment agency designates "blighted areas" and adjacent properties as the targets.

Areas along the Strip from Sahara to Flamingo Avenue are, however, included in redevelopment plans to provide income to support the targeted areas.

Lesa Coder, the redevelopment agency's operations director, echoed other county officials by saying a thorough analysis would have to be done before the county could say if redevelopment financing could support a new stadium.

"Any redevelopment area, regardless of its end use, has to meet all the state requirements," she said. "Could it be done? You never know until you do all the analysis."

Clark County Commissioner Myrna Williams said she wants to see more detailed plans, but has reservations. One of them is that the area which might be home to a new stadium might not meet the test as a "blighted area."

"If it's not demographically indicated as a redevelopment area, we're not doing it," she said. "That would defeat the purpose of what we're trying to do with redevelopment tax money."

She also has concerns about the impact a stadium would have on traffic in her commission district.

Reilly said that an effort to divert property taxes garnered through redevelopment plans might have to go through the Legislature, which created the county redevelopment agency. The plan certainly would have to be passed by the Clark County Commission, he said.

County managers have not briefed the commissioners on the discussions with the stadium backers, he said. The backers have not received any commitment from the county leadership, he added.

"We told them that we would be willing to explore the concept," Reilly said.