Building City Mahal

Monday, April 13, 2009 | 2:07 a.m.

The Nevada Supreme Court last week denied the Culinary Union’s request to force the city to put its controversial city hall project on the ballot. The court said the complaint should first be heard in District Court.

The union quickly moved to refile the case in District Court, but it is doubtful the case will be decided before April 22, when the city starts printing absentee ballots. That may result in a de facto win for the city, but it doesn’t resolve the issue of the city’s actions.

After the City Council voted this year to move forward with a $250 million city hall project, the union filed two initiative petitions that would have put the issue to a vote. The City Council denied the petitions, saying they were unconstitutional.

The courts will decide whether the city had the legal authority to do that. No matter how the courts decide the legal issues, what cannot be denied is the city’s arrogance in the way it has handled the city hall project. City officials pushed the project through and all but ignored the objections of those who question the need for a new city hall, the timing of it and the financing the city is using.

As we have noted, this is not the time to build City Mahal. Especially during tough economic times such as these, the city should find ways to operate more efficiently and work to consolidate its services with those of other government agencies.

Instead, the mayor and City Council are making disingenuous arguments about a city hall being an economic engine. Please.

If this project is so good, why not take it to a public vote? Why not make the case for it to the public? Why not engage in a real public discussion about it?

Why? Because people might realize it’s all a ruse so the City Council and Mayor Oscar Goodman can build an expensive monument to themselves, complete with a brass plaque bearing their names. Disgraceful.