Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Larry Cruikshank / Special to the Las Vegas Sun
Snow dots the mountains on Monday, Feb. 9, 2009, behind the visitors center at the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area.
Sunday, April 18, 2010 | 2 a.m.
Developer Jim Rhodes smiles on Blue Diamond Hill on Monday, May 5, 2003. Las Vegas can be seen in the background.
Sun archives
As the Clark County Commission prepares to decide whether to continue its legal fight with developer Jim Rhodes over his plans to build near the Red Rock National Conservation Area, two petitions are circulating.
The petitions from opposing factions both claim they want to “save” Red Rock.
How can that be?
Before I answer, some background:
In 2005, Rhodes’ Gypsum Resources sued over a county ordinance that prevented him from building more than one house on every two acres of his land. With a May 3 trial looming, county attorneys have advised commissioners to approve an agreement they worked out with Rhodes. A court in November 2009 sided with the developer, they note, striking down a state law that mirrored the county restrictions.
The tentative agreement would restrict the number of acres Rhodes can develop to 1,700 — he could develop up to 2,400 acres regardless of whether he wins or loses. At the same time, the settlement would grant the county more oversight. With the agreement, some 500 acres that Rhodes owns within the conservation area would not be developed if it is exchanged for nonsensitive land.
A group concerned about maintaining the beauty of the Red Rock area wants the commission to continue its court fight and to place an advisory question on the November ballot to protect “environmentally sensitive areas from incompatible development.”
The other “Save Red Rock” group is Rhodes’. The person handling his petition, consultant Terry Murphy, said she believes the agreement worked out between Rhodes and county attorneys really does save Red Rock.
Murphy offers a pros/cons list of what would happen in the following scenarios: if the settlement is accepted; if Rhodes wins in court; or if the county wins in court.
Let me guess, Rhodes’ hired hand concludes the best thing for the county is to accept the settlement.
Her argument is similar to the one made by county attorneys, who argue if the case goes to court and the county loses — or even if the county wins — Rhodes could develop the land and do it in a piecemeal way without strong county oversight and with less public input.
What happens if the settlement is accepted?
The county will have more oversight; the public gets to be more involved; no piecemeal development; access points are changed; and the 1,700 acres that Rhodes can develop are those acres occupied by a gypsum mine.
For information from both sides, see saveredrock.net (Rhodes’ site) or saveredrock.com.
•••
Even though it could lay off hundreds to close a budget deficit, Clark County wants to replace Phil Rosenquist, an assistant county manager who is retiring.
Rosenquist was hired in 1991. After five years as director of Development Services, he was appointed assistant county manager in April 2007.
Do they really need to replace him? After all, the county wants to save money, and assistant county managers don’t come cheap.
You’re correct about the pay. Assistant county managers earn $120,473 to $186,700 a year.
Whether a replacement is needed, you be the judge.
The county typically employs three assistant managers who work for County Manager Virginia Valentine.
Last year, one of her three assistants, Darryl Martin, left for a job in Texas and his position was not filled. His duties were assigned to the remaining two managers.
When Rosenquist leaves, Valentine will have one assistant manager, and his area of expertise is judicial.
Rosenquist’s duties include oversight of 10 departments, including Fire, Parks, Public Works, assessor’s office and Comprehensive Planning. He is the primary liaison to the Flood Control District, Regional Transportation Commission and Health District and chairman of the Long-Range Planning Committee.
Valentine notes that over the past few months, the county has reduced its management ranks by 13 percent.
What the hell is the matter with this guy Rhodes anyways? Yeah, lets build houses right up to the edge of the park and TOTALLY ruin its beauty and peacefulness so it looks like Central Park in NYC. Stop being so damn greedy and look at something besides the almighty dollar for a change. Just because you CAN do something doesnt mean that you SHOULD.
I say let it go to court. I trust them more than this county commission who will just put all sorts of expensive restrictions and delays into the process.
I built my own house here and know first hand what a pain in the butt the county regulations are. In addition, a lot of them are really dumb requirements (like requiring flood control in places where the water does NOT run).
One of the problems here in vegas is the size of county government. They get into everything, including telling you if you can feed a kitty cat that comes to your door.
I say shrink the size of the county government while the economic pressures are there.
Government just isnt any better than the private companies its designed to regulate. Why we believe otherwise in the face of massive data to the contrary is really confusing to me. Look at the Madoff scandall, the financial debacle with fannie mae and freddie mac, social security being bankrupt along with medicare, the inefficiencies of the post office and amtrak.
I have watched the county commission meetings. All they seem to do is want to let contracts that require the maximum possible wages to the workers, not the best deal for the taxpayers !!!
If this is what the county manager needs an assistant for, let his retire on his huge pension (no doubt) and dont replace him.
Scroll forward 50 years and Red Rock will be another tourist blight.
Too bad we couldn't have put a warning label on these developers. Or is it too late now?
"Show me the water!" Show me the water!
Tell Deadbeat Developer Jim Rhodes
ENNNNN
OHHHHH!!!!
NO!
One sure thing; You cannot take Jim Rhodes at his word.
Do we have to screw up Red Rock canyon?
EMPHATICALLY tell him to go away!!!
This is just another good reason to dump District Attorney David Roger at the next election. Note that the "county attorneys" are the ones who are advising the Commissioners to be weak. Did Rhodes financially support the county attotney's boss Roger during his last campaign? The Commissioners have every right to determine whether rural zoning remains in place, and should not be showing such weakness in this case.
If you think the economy is bad now wait 50 years down the road when our Vegas homes will be worthless cause there will be more homes than water. Stupid is as stupid does.
Rhodes has been one of Las Vegas' most successful and controversial developers and home builders. He developed Rhodes Ranch in southwest Las Vegas and Tuscany Village in Henderson. He provoked the ire of environmentalists with his development of the Red Rock County Club community near the recreation area of the same name.
Rhodes drew news coverage again when Erin Kenny, the former Clark County commissioner, disclosed that Rhodes paid her $200,000 a year for consulting after she pleaded guilty to federal corruption charges. Kenny was sentenced to 30 months in prison in connection with the bribery case.
The Arizona Corporation Commission questioned Rhodes about his business relationship with Kenny when he sought to establish a water utility for a master planned community proposed in Golden Valley between Kingman and Bullhead City.
The Arizona panel also grilled Rhodes over $148,000 in fines he paid after admitting he illegally funneled campaign contributions in 2002 through employees and employees' spouses to Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and then County Commissioner Dario Herrera. Herrera also was convicted in connection with the bribery case.
The Rhodes Companies filed the bankruptcy petition but an attachment notes that 31 affiliated companies also are seeking protection under Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
http://www.developerimplode.com/Jim-Rhod...
I said this on another Discussion Page. I feel it bears repeating.
Construction of housing projects near RED ROCK CANYON national park) have been an issue for over 10 years. This is because the PEOPLE of Clark County do not want to impact the beauty of Red Rock Canyon area.
In the 1990's, there were agreed-to legal restrictions as to where and how close to Red Rock Canyon, home development would be allowed. Such restrictions were placed on Blue Diamond development too.
Well, it appears such legal restrictions have been circumvented, as usual, and real estate GREED has raised its ugly head again. The City of Las Vegas, and the County Commissioners, always seem to approve ANY develpment plans - no matter how questionable.
This pattern of approval for development seems to occur no matter what natural beauty is diminished, or how many homeowners are transplanted - all for the financial gain of developers, and satisfaction of Las Vegas power brokers.
Since 1994, such development has occurred for the questionable "betterment of Clark County," and to support (unrestricted) growth. As for visitors, they could care less what we build - until they experience the traffic jams we have - and the SMOG that we can't get rid of.
It should be noted that many States actually care about their history, natural recreation areas, and their citizen's rights - and thus, oppose development beyond a practical, financially risky, or undesirable limit.
Some cities have even "thrown out" industries and developers, by NOT GRANTING them a license to operate or build - because THE PEOPLE liked their town the way it was, and its available resources would not support further development.
And just maybe the people thought their nice little town was just fine the way it was. When has that happened in Clark County? I suggest, never.
Do you think the Water Department has ever thought of suggesting restrictions on growth - even for one second? Has often does anyone in government ask if the citizens want "more," or reject development plans that the people of Clark County DO NOT WANT?
An example that Clark County should follow occurs in Florida - the Sunshine State - where it is illegal to build a building that BLOCKS THE SUN and casts a SHADOW on another building's pool area. It is called "the Sunshine Law," and it is enforced. Clark County does not have such a law - as is evident along the Strip (which could now be called: "shadow canyon.".
It would be nice if Clark County would enact a law that would prohibits development near any State or National park, which might impair or limit its visual or physical beauty, or cause environmental concerns.
I still love this town. Let's not SCREW IT UP any further.
There appear to be serious issues with the so-called settlement. Although it suggests Rhodes will access the development from the east side of Blue Diamond Hill, it guarantees access elsewhere if that isn't possible - and it isn't. It also puts the county in the hotseat for paying for access, utilities and everything else. So it looks like just another screw job where the people of Clark County will provide the profits for a private developer while destroying one of our most beautiful amenities in the process.
In other words, business as usual. I'm sure the Southern Nevada Water Authority, however, is an enthusiastic supporter of Rhodes' scheme. All those yummy new water hookups!!!
Red Rock is a treasure for all of us. I hope it is preserved for future generations. On the flip side, if Mr. Rhodes owns the property, he has a right to develop it. How did he end up buying it? With all of the BLM land in and around Clark County, why was this valuable piece not purchased by or traded for by the BLM? Then we could assure it's beauty will be preserved.
no more building until we have the water,better roads less crime,it will no happen.
Who pays the water authority for hookups? How does that work?