Las Vegas Sun

October 22, 2014

Currently: 73° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Court is urged to block Caesars’ arena initiative

CARSON CITY — False and misleading information was used while gathering signatures in support of Caesars Entertainment’s plan to build a 20,000-seat arena on the Las Vegas Strip, arena opponents say.

Taxpayers for the Protection of Nevada Jobs filed its opening brief Monday asking the Nevada Supreme Court to throw Caesars’ initiative off the 2012 ballot.

“During the signature-gathering process, petition circulators used fraudulent means to obtain signatures, including providing false and misleading information about the location and the initiative benefits and detriments to induce people to sign the petition,” according to the group, which is supported by MGM Resorts International.

The secretary of state’s office verified 157,778 voter signatures on the petition, although only 97,002 were needed to place it before voters next year.

Caesars is proposing a $500 million arena to be financed by a 9/10-cent increase in the sales-and-use tax in a proposed three-mile gaming enterprise district near Imperial Palace.

Scott Scherer, attorney for the taxpayer group, said in the brief the initiative was defective because it covered more than one subject. He said it failed to disclose that the petition would eliminate competing arena proposals.

Scherer said the petition fails to identify the area where the tax would be imposed, citing only a Nevada law number. “This is useless to the average person asked to sign the initiative unless they happen to be carrying Chapter 463 of NRS (Nevada Revised Statues) with them to the grocery store.”

Several other arenas have been proposed.

The Legislature approved a bill to allow competition on the ballot to derail the plans of Caesars Entertainment. The bill prohibits the creation of a special tax district that would impose a rate higher than the countywide sales tax rate.

The measure with the most votes in 2012 would win.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments later this year.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 2 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. Let it go to a vote of the people. They will lose when it does and you can stop wasting court time and money with this nonsense.

    The public is not going to approve a TAX to help fun a private company to build an arena on their property.

    Those days are over. Should have done it when the public was throwing their money around like drunken sailors back in 2005.

  2. Sadly the tactics of paid signature gatherers for Nevada ballot measures have found their way here from Califoria. Teaching paid signature gatherers to lie to people, when asking them to sign a ballot measure is standard operating procedure for the political consultants who run these companies. In California, the lies don't matter, unless a voter contacts the Secretary of State or County Clerk and says "Take my signature off that petition. They lied to me." The number of times those calls are made is very small. Also unfortunately, California courts have no interest in hearing lawsuit complaints attempting to invalidate initiative petitions when the paid signature gatherers lie to voters are the door of the grocery store where signatures will be collected. So I will be very interested to see how the Nevada Supreme Court handles this one. The plaintiff better come up with a raft of witnesses to testify at trial that they were lied to, or this lawsuit is doomed. Then, even so, the courts may not rule for the plaintiffs. The political consultants who run these ballot measure campaigns know all the tricks, in terms of what the average judge will let them get away with.