Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Under an agreement approved with the county, developer Jim Rhodes can build on part of this land near the Red Rock National Recreation Area.
By Kyle B. Hansen (contact) 
Published Wednesday, April 21, 2010 | 2:01 p.m.
Updated Wednesday, April 21, 2010 | 5:55 p.m.
A divided Clark County Board of Commissioners approved a settlement Wednesday over the proposed development of land near the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area.
Commissioners voted 4-3 to accept the settlement with developer Jim Rhodes after hours of sometimes emotional testimony and debate during a zoning meeting.
Rhodes owns 2,400 acres in and near the conservation area. Under the agreement, he would be allowed to develop up to 1,700 acres, but only if commissioners approve the development and a federal appeals court sides with the state on a law regulating development.
Commissioners Susan Brager, Larry Brown, Tom Collins and Steve Sisolak voted for the settlement, while Commissioners Rory Reid, Chris Giunchigliani and Lawrence Weekly voted against it.
The settlement ends the county’s legal defense of an ordinance that prohibited Rhodes from building houses on the land that once contained mines.
Rhodes can submit a “major project” application to develop the area, but county commissioners aren’t required to approve the plan. County staff estimates it would take at least a year for any project to get approval.
The portions that are off limits to development are in the Red Rock conservation area and near Blue Diamond. The settlement also bars Rhodes from using State Route 159, which goes through the conservation area, to access any development once construction is complete.
Developer Jim Rhodes smiles on Blue Diamond Hill on Monday, May 5, 2003. Las Vegas can be seen in the background.
Commissioners listened to hours of testimony from residents and interest groups before beginning their own debate on the issue.
“This has been one of the most difficult decisions … that I’ve had to do as a commissioner,” said Brager, who represents the area.
Brown said that if the county were to reject the settlement and the court ruled against the county, commissioners would be forced to allow more development with less oversight than they would get from the settlement agreement.
“I see the piecemeal development of this area as something that could go terribly wrong,” Brown said.
But Giunchigliani and Reid said Red Rock was too important to the community to allow any development.
“When do we choose to fight?” an emotional Giunchigliani asked. “If you don’t fight now, when do you?”
Reid, who is the board’s chairman, echoed the fight theme.
“I’ve been here seven-and-a-half years, and I’m leaving soon. And I think that there are times when compromise is appropriate and there’s times when you need to take a stand, and I do not want part of my legacy to be that I compromised on Red Rock,” Reid said.
After the vote, someone in the audience shouted “shame on you” to the commissioners, and some members of the public used the meeting’s public comment period to condemn the decision.
Clark County passed an ordinance in 2003 to block development of the area near Red Rock Canyon. The county’s law mirrored a state law.
In 2005, Rhodes’ company, Gypsum Resources LLC, sued the county over the ordinance. Since then, a federal court has said the state law was unconstitutional. A trial on the county’s ordinance was scheduled for May 3.
County lawyers said since the court has already struck down the state law, they stood little chance of winning their case, so the settlement was the best way for the county to avoid legal costs and maintain more control over the development.
The state’s case continues to work its way through the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Rep. Dina Titus, who as a state legislator sponsored the bill now in question, spoke to the board by phone from Washington, and asked commissioners to reject the settlement.
“If the Clark County Board of Commissioners decides it is in its best interest to settle, I believe strongly that the settlement agreement must be conditioned on the result of the state’s appeal,” she said. “The settlement should make clear that no actual land development can occur until the state’s appeal is resolved. It should further provide that the developer has no particular rights while the appeal is pending, even if the county approves the developer's major project application during that period.”
Kevin Powers, a lawyer with the state’s Legislative Counsel Bureau, also told commissioners to either reject the settlement or make it contingent on the state’s appeal.
But Chief Deputy District Attorney Rob Warhola, who led the county’s negotiations with Gypsum, said it was too late to make such major changes to the agreement.
After commissioners sided with Warhola, Powers said the state could still seek a stay from the courts to keep development from happening until the appeal is resolved.
Brager and Sisolak were angry Titus was allowed to testify by phone, and asked why regular citizens who are unable to attend the meeting weren’t given the same opportunity. County staff then made a phone line available for people to call in later in the meeting and speak on the issue.
Great news. Free enterprise and private property rights prevailed.
As a bonus this will really irritate the hippies!
Disgusting. What a joke Jim Rhodes is. Builder of shoddy houses and greedy developer. Exactly what this city needs- more urban sprawl. Enjoy that tall refreshing glass of sand when the water runs out in this area in a couple of years.
Will Jim have to get out and do the work himself? After sticking subcontractors and suppliers on his last project, I don't know who will work for him unless they are paid up front.
It is a sad day to see the county commissioners sell out.
Las Vegas is already over built and does not need more development.
Rhodes needs to make up for his greed and shoddy building history by donating this land and making it a park.
:: makes mental note to vote Larry Brown out when he's up for re-election ::
The Commissioners should be ASHAMED of themselves. Their so hard up for Money that they will do anything for it. Even if it means selling out Red Rock. And for Jim Rhodes he is a Dirt Bag! Leave Red Rock alone!!!
This is an outrage! Of course they approved it, business as usual, pro development dollars finding their way into the back pockets of the county commissioners. WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE OF THIS DEVELOPING CRAP!!!
Scratching my head in dismay; all these foreclosures, vacant homes, masses leaving Las Vegas, questionable water resources etc. Watch history repeat itself!
No, he is not going to build ON Red Rock but having an Albertson open right next to the entrance to Bonnie Springs is just the same.
the powers that be will always, ALWAYS rule on the side of business.
there is ZERO need for homes in that area.
I have visited the site and any sort of development is an improvement from its current state. The actual area to be developed is scarred from years of mining, and is not in what most people would consider "Red Rock". Agree or disagree with development, at this point it is essential to promote a potentially rectifying project that will bring thousands of jobs to the Las Vegas market. Urban Sprawl is unavoidable when demand driven economics make SFRs the most populate choice for living; but, this project poses a unique opportunity to create a nationally recognized development that promotes a new generation of sustainable growth.
It is time to vote out Steve Sisolak. He never listens to what the community wants.
I watched the meeting. The commissioners made it clear that Rhodes cannot build anything without the Commission approval. They can say NO for almost any reason.
Mr Rhodes has property rights. Four commissioners showed courage in doing the right thing. The other three played to the crowd and made a decision they think is politically popular.
I fondly recall driving west on Sahara Avenue until I reached the end of the pavement ... Then continuing to drive up into the foothills, and stopping to just relax in the dark night, looking out over the valley and looking up at all the stars .. Enjoying the solitude found just west of town.
That was just about where The Lakes was built 20 years ago.
I also have a 4x4 guidebook from 1963 that tells me to head west on Charleston until I can take the 4x4 trails, just past Decatur.
Funny how one person's "wilderness" is another person's neighborhood.
Larry Brown will not get my vote should he decide to run again. In fact, I will do everything in my power to support whoever challenges this jerk.
What a joke these so-called commissioners are. How much is Rhodes paying each of them for their vote. This is just another example of why we need a new group of commissioners. Remember how they derailed the 215 project because they wanted the unions to get the jobs on the northern beltway. This is just more of the same BS from this group.
Did Collins make any money on this ????? How many of these bums are headed to the big house
@Nayr Admittedly I have a vague sense as to where this potential development project will be built, however the gist of the argument is that Las Vegas has more than enough stucco developments, has plenty of empty lots dotting the cityscape (perhaps hundreds) and there's just simply no more need for more of the same cookie cutter homes. There's already a glut of homes on the market and more rampant development will continue to drive prices down. More importantly, the questions of this city's sustainability are unanswered and unsolved. This may be pockmarked by old mining, but can we as a city protect the natural scenary that surrounds our valley?
What do you expect when all five are democrats. Might as well have all the previously convicted democrat County commissioners back in office. No point: No checks and balances within the Commission. Let's get some GOP members elected.
I say that if Rhodes can bring in enough water, permanently, for all the homes he wants to build, go for it.
Otherwise, the commissioners are out of their minds. Have they forgotten that in 3,938 days, Las Vegas will run out of water????
I agree, time for some fresh faces. Frankly making a deal on red Rock really made no sense. There simply was no way he would of been able to develop it other wise. I suspect a few commissioners got a little richer on this one.
Disgusting
This does not matter. Rhodes can't even afford to pay a firm to design a plan. He would have to spend millions and wait years to develop. In a way its better to play thier bluff.
First of all, who would ever lend this idiot money again? His loans that will never be re-paid are with the FDIC and the tax payer will probably ultimately flip the bill for this failed businessman, if you can even call him that...probably more like con-man! He should be in jail
I am a big supporter of Dina Titus. That being said, she should not get any rights that other citizens don't get. I can't call in to make comments on County business, why should she? Special treatment for the congresswoman. That stinks.
This is a scandal but the best thing we can do as citizens is vote the supporting commissioners out of office. Luckily my commissioner (Lawrence Weekly) voted against this preposterous project.
The real question is why did Rory vote against this? Wasn't he getting a big enough payoff?
On the other hand, the people in Sisalok's district need to be raising hell over this.
As for my Commissioner, well, what can you expect from a guy named after a drink? I can't wait til I can vote him out.
Whats important here is :
Where will the fire station be built at .....
and - will there be a lot of overtime hours to run and maintain it ?
Happy Earth day!
Rhodes is bluffing....he's not building jack out there because no one will buy anything (in case you hadn't noticed?)till homes go into foreclosure or short sale. not to mention no one wants to live way out in the sticks anyways
what a great idea, more development. rhodes, you're a genius.
How many more empty, unsold homes does Clark County need? How many more builders are going to declare bankruptcy, wash their hands of their failed developments, and go off to build more unneeded housing projects?
My hats off to the four commissioners who voted to settle. It truly is the best decision for financial, asthetic and future control of expansion. It is never easy to buck public sentiment and vote with your own convictions. I really believe the four commissioners understood the situation better than they are given credit.
I visited Red Rock canyon in January on my first ever trip to Vegas. Drove out with my rental car passing one after another housing developments on the way, some of which seemed to be totally vacant and abandoned. Very sad to see how the economy left all these homes empty it kind of reminded me of mini ghost towns. But Red Rocks is a beautiful area, seems rather greedy and senseless to build even near that site. I think this developer has one thing only on his mind and that is greed! Hope he never builds anything. Even here in Pennsylvania we have major sprawl and over development problems. Stop it before it's too late.
The responsible thing for the county commission would be to put a moratorium on all "urban sprawl" projects until the water situation has been resolved. We really don't need any more projects further away from the city that will require more water for county required landscaping along new roads or in a new developement. Not to mention maintaining even more roads, police services and one or two more fire houses while we are in a "budget crisis". I suggest that unless Rhodes can guarantee that these things will be funded solely by his project then it should not go forward. Simple supply side economics says that you must reduce the supply to increase the price of a commodity due to a higher demand. Are home prices not low enough for everybody yet?