Supreme Court asked to expedite Las Vegas city hall case

By Cy Ryan (contact)

Friday, April 24, 2009 | 3:03 p.m.

CARSON CITY – Two groups have asked the Nevada Supreme Court to speed up handling of a dispute over construction of a new city hall in downtown Las Vegas.

Ballots for the June 2 municipal election already have been mailed to voters overseas and the city hall question isn't included.

Andrew Kahn, attorney for the Las Vegas Taxpayer Accountability Committee and the Las Vegas Redevelopment Reform Committee, said a quick decision is needed so the question can be included on the ballot.

He said there are so few overseas voters “that even if they are all treated as votes against the measures, the measures could well still pass by a legally sufficient margin, hence the case is not moot.”

Kahn raised the possibility of the court ordering a special election if the case is not decided in time for the upcoming city election.

The groups and Culinary Union gathered more than 14,000 signatures on a petition to include the question about whether the city should go forward with plans for the city hall in downtown Las Vegas.

But District Judge David Barker ruled the initiative petition was invalid on grounds it dealt with more than one subject. And it failed to inform the voters of the true effect of the movement.

Barker ruled, “The initiative petition includes two distinct subjects, one relating to voter approval for all lease purchase agreements (whether for redevelopment projects or otherwise}, and the other seeking to govern the redevelopment agency by popular vote.”

The petition, Barker said, misleads voters by failing to explain that passage would jeopardize existing redevelopment projects and their financing.

Supporters say the new city hall would cost $150 million and produce 13,000 new jobs in downtown Las Vegas. Opponents put the cost at $267 million.

Kahn, in his motion to expedite the handling of the case said, “The voters are threatened with irreparable financial injuries: the use of a lease-purchasing scheme for a new city hall to avoid a contrary vote of the people, a scheme which the city admits will cost millions of dollars more than a method of financing which goes before the voters, general obligation bonds.”

His petition says ordering a special election on the dispute would mean extra cost to the taxpayers and no one expects the Las Vegas City Council or City Attorney Bradford Jerbic to personally bear the cost.

If the court delays a decision and decides to put the questions on the ballot in a later election, the city and its partners “will likely have entered into binding agreements (and perhaps started building) which they will then contend is ‘grandfathered’ and immune from these ballot measures,” said Kahn.

The city will now have its chance to file a response and ask the court to uphold the decision of Judge Barker. The Las Vegas City Council and City Clerk Beverly K. Bridges are named defendants in the suit.