Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Thursday, Nov. 20, 2008 | 2 a.m.
Most days of the week Oscar Goodman and labor get along.
Beyond the Sun
But on Wednesday, the Las Vegas mayor was firmly fixed on his legacy, making it clear he wouldn’t let anyone, including the Culinary Union, stand in the way of a downtown development plan.
The drama, complete with screaming and finger-pointing, played out at a Las Vegas City Council hearing, where council members were set to vote on a $266 million bond measure that would finance construction of a new city hall — and, officials say, set into motion a series of development projects, including a gaming resort, that would revitalize downtown.
(Moving city hall from its current location would open a large swath of land on Las Vegas Boulevard, including a parcel the city owns. The city figures that between land sales and tax revenue from new development, the city hall move will pay for itself over the next eight years while bringing new business downtown and creating more than 13,000 jobs.)
Goodman noted the project would provide construction work for the trades and employment for the service unions.
Still, Chris Bohner, the union’s research director, protested the measure. Backed by more than 100 union members wearing red T-shirts, he called the plan fiscally irresponsible, especially at a time when the city faces a $150 million deficit over the next five years and has announced cuts to public services.
Goodman, rising from his seat and wagging his finger, wouldn’t have any of it.
Bohner: “Can I proceed with my testimony?”
Goodman: “No! Because you’re disingenuous! You’re disingenuous!”
Bohner: “It’s not disingenuous.”
Goodman: “I’m not going to allow lies! Tell the truth! Tell the truth!”
Bohner continued, saying the union opposes the measure because it leaves taxpayers “on the hook” for the debt, with the expectation that several development projects will come to fruition and generate enough money down the road to pay it off. He also accused the council of pursuing a so-called “certificate of participation” instead of regular bonds so that it could avoid having citizens vote on the issue.
Goodman fired back that the union’s leadership was doing a “phenomenal disservice” to its rank and file. After all, he said, a new resort would hire thousands of Culinary members when it opens.
He then flashed back to his days as a criminal defense attorney and compared union protesters to federal prosecutors and FBI agents who showed up in courtrooms, arms crossed, to intimidate judges. “There is no intimidation here,” Goodman said. “The judge did his job. He wasn’t intimated because of numbers.”
That comment drew a round of applause from a dozen or so building trades members sitting across the council chamber gallery.
“We’re trying to keep you working,” Goodman said. “Help us do it. Don’t impede us.”
And then to Bohner: “I don’t respect you, sir.”
Councilman Larry Brown, whose successful bid for the Clark County Commission had been opposed by the Culinary, got in a few shots of his own at the union’s leadership.
Making an apparent reference to the union’s recent campaign against him, he said, “The misinformation, the blatant lies, the misunderstanding. I can understand that. But then to take that and promote it publicly is just wrong. It’s disingenuous and it’s cowardly.”
He challenged Culinary leaders “to get back on track with this council.”
The building trades group applauded Brown.
After the council passed the measure unanimously, the Culinary members stood up, clapped in unison and chanted “No new city hall!” before filing out of the chambers.
Goodman couldn’t resist one more shot. He mocked them. “Excuse me, I didn’t understand what they were saying,” he said. “What did they say?”
Earlier in the meeting, Goodman and Brown acknowledged the risk of the deal, but said the risk of doing nothing is much greater.
Pilar Weiss, the Culinary’s political director, said she was surprised by the officials’ criticism of the union. “Some politicians think the Culinary Union should stick to negotiating contracts and not have any opinion about the greater good,” she said. “We represent 60,000 members and their families. Those people are taxpayers.”
She said the union also protested the city’s plan to sell downtown property to the new owners of the Lady Luck at a discounted rate because “we’re against the city giving away incentives to private companies over taxpayers.”
To be sure, the union is also concerned about its numbers. It wants to ensure any future casino jobs will be union. “They can say a lot of things,” Weiss said. “But just saying they like unions does not mean all middle-class jobs with benefits.”
Unions are what has killed GM,Ford and Chrysler.
Break the unions. They are employing illegal immigrates also. Call ICE
Good job Mayor Goodman, as usual! And councilman Brown, same to you as well. I've been nothing but impressed with the mayor and city council since moving here 5 years ago. Kudos to the plan!
odog,Are you impaired? Mismanageent,over compensation for upper management,failure to build fuel efficent cars did the big three in. Unions have not been a problem for years now. Did you notice Congress grilling the CEO's from the big three about them all flying to Washington D C in private jets? Do your homework before you make ridculous staements. Before you call ICE you better check with Bush who will call them off.
The problem with Oscar is he is chasing this downton idea when it is doomed to fail. He is the mayor not a dictator. Just wait till the taxpayers get the bills for this failed idea. Remeber Jan Jones and her Neonapolis?
Goodman is a fiscal bafoon but I am surprised ODOG and JohneVegas are on his side.
I guess they think anytime the government spends money it MUST be for something good.
Goodman's growth plans are just plain stupid. You can't bond $260 million for a GOVERNMENT building and thinkt he economy will grow. You can't give away $130 million in taxpayer dollars to private companies and think the economy will grow any more than not giving the tax dollars away.
Goodman is a corporatist, plain and simple. He wants your tax dollars to spend on his pet projects so he and his friends can live rich.
We need to look no further than Phoenix for boneheaded leadership and complete mismanagement.
They spent millions on a city owned convention center that never filled.
Then the city says "we don't have enough hotel space downtown" so they spent MILLIONS more building a massive city owned hotel. And that too totally flopped.
Now the city is trying to build a billion light rail system that is increasing traffic and destroying small businesses (and oh by the way they forgot to put in a stop at the airport so they are going to have to bond millions more to rip up track and then lay a new route).
Smart growth, managed growth, downtown redevelopment. Whatever you call it, its stupid ignorant, fiscally irresponsible, and economically incompetent planning.
"They [Phoenix] spent millions on a city owned convention center that never filled."
That compares with Las Vegas in what way?
Your logic seems very shortsighted. All your arguments appear to assume the bond money somehow disappears from the picture. As if "private companies" are these faceless voids that suck it up and burn it.
I think you left halfway though economics 101. In my experience, private companies employ actual people, and in doing so, those individuals make a living, and they spend the living they make in the community where the money came from.
Oscar has been nothing but great for Las Vegas. You, on the other hand, should move to Phoenix, the convention capitol of the world!
It was part of the downtown redevelopment.
Subsidize this, have the government build this, have the city own this. Spend, spend spend to redevelope.
Never understanding where the money comes from. In order to "redevelope" downtown you have to spend taxpayer dollars. That means government subsidized redevelopement comes at the expense of a shrinking portion of the city somewhere else.
In terms of leaving economics 101, corporate subsidies have the same problem as above.
Take tax dollars and give to company X. That money has to come from somewhere. Well it comes from the other businesses in the community in the form of lower sales or higher taxes.
At best corporate subsidies leave your city no better off. At best! Generally, because the project the government is pushing is something that would not have been built without the government help, it is likely to be a net loss.
If the private sector can't build it on its own, it never would have been profitable...aka people wouldn't have voluntarily paid for it themselves.
Oscar has been nothing but bad for Las Vegas.
I think no one on this board can really say anything unless they have access to the financial analysis of the situation. It's called capital budgeting, you have to spend money to make money. KDR, you seem like you don't like much that goes on in Vegas. Why don't you move?
While I am not advocating either side, can you please breathe some fresh air into your posts with some positive insight once in a while? You take issue, but never offer a better solution. So what, just let the city stagnate because you don't think we should spend taxpayer money? That's WHY WE PAY TAXES, to better our community (or so we hope). Better yet, you seem to know what everyone else is doing wrong, why don't you run for mayor and fix this whole town!
My point is, its easy to judge when on the outside looking in. Its much different when you have many different responsibilities which often times conflict. You have to take the information you're given, create a sound analysis, and make the best decisions based on that.
And, being a native Las Vegan (a rare breed), I can tell you, Mayor Goodman is much much better than other mayors we've had, and much better than other mayors in other cities. He truly has an interest in this community, which is hard to find in elected officials.
Furthermore, I think this idea sounds fine, if the financial analysis supports it, which, as I said before, no one here knows because no one here has access.
And how exactly does the private sector pay for a city hall building which will free up space for new projects? What, they'll build one for us just to get at the land? Doubt it.