Paul Larsen, attorney for Boulder City, listens in court Friday as Sherman Rattner defends his plan for a land sale to enrich residents. Clark County District Judge Kathy Hardcastle ruled against his ballot measure plan. Photo by Gary Thompson.

The champagne wishes and caviar dreams of some Boulder City residents were dashed Friday, when a judge tossed out a ballot question that could have made everyone in town a millionaire.

Though she lauded the exercise in democracy, Clark County District Court Judge Kathy Hardcastle ruled that the measure went well beyond what the law allows.

A group calling itself the Coalition to Protect the Future of Boulder City floated the initiative, which involved selling off a huge swath of vacant city land and dividing the proceeds among the community's 15,200 "residents of record" as of March 31.

The group also drew up an opposing measure that would have secured the same property against any future sale or development.

Coalition leader Sherman Rattner described the questions as a simple choice between selling land around Boulder City or preserving it, but Hardcastle said the initiatives "go way beyond that."

Of particular concern to the judge was the non-profit trust that would be created by the ballot measure and headed up by Rattner and his fellow coalition members.

Those unelected trustees -- not the city -- would oversee the land sale, which involves 107,000 acres of mostly empty desert in the Eldorado Valley, south and west of town.

The trust would be "almost a monarchy," Hardcastle said.

"You just want to substitute your judgment for the officials who were elected by the people to make these kinds of decisions," she said.

"You want to take all of the administrative decisions for this property away from the elected representatives ... and you want to offer a carrot to get people to vote for it by saying we're going to pay you."

Similar concerns prompted Boulder City officials to file a lawsuit on June 13 in hopes of blocking the ballot questions. Coalition members answered Wednesday with an 80-page rebuttal.

Though he is not an attorney, Rattner represented the group in court Friday.

Dressed in a striped, charcoal gray suit that matched his foot-long ponytail, he stood before the judge and cited a U.S. Supreme Court decision that describes "the initiative petition as core political speech."

Rattner said city officials want to stifle that speech because they don't care for its content.

"The effect of what they want ... effectively denies the people the right to have a vote. Denying the people the right would be reprehensible," he said.

Coalition members collected at least 1,000 petition signatures from voters in Boulder City, more than enough to qualify four different questions for the November ballot -- two that would have sold off the property and two that would have secured it against any future sale or development.

Rattner's somewhat rambling arguments took up most of the more than two-hour hearing.

Armed with a cardboard box filled with papers, he referenced state and federal case law and attacked the city for what he considers its past misdeeds.

He was interrupted twice by his own beeping cell phone.

Three other coalition members, none of them attorneys, joined Rattner at the defense table.

They squared off against a legal team that included Boulder City Attorney Dave Olsen and Paul Larsen and Jennifer DiMarzio from the prominent Nevada law firm of Lionel Sawyer & Collins, which the city hired to help with the case.

Clark County also joined the plaintiffs, though Deputy District Attorney Catherine Jorgenson did not offer any arguments on the county's behalf during Friday's hearing.

Larsen called the idea of turning over city land to a private group of trustees "a train wreck."

"Essentially, they can do anything they want to with this property," he said.

Larsen also noted that the 107,000 acres in question includes 85,000 acres that has been set aside as habitat for desert tortoise and other protected species.

That conservation easement is the key component in a federal permit process that allows the development of some 145,000 acres in the Las Vegas Valley, Larsen said. If the easement were lost and the permit cancelled, development would grind to a halt, as each individual property was forced to undergo separate environmental review.

"That can take years, sometimes many, many years, even decades," Larsen said.

Olsen sat quietly throughout the hearing. His only statement came near the end, when he said that the true intent of the ballot questions "is to take control of the Eldorado Valley from the city and place it in the hands of a small group of private citizens."

Hardcastle agreed moments later, striking down all four of the coalition's initiatives.

She said Rattner and company were to be applauded for stoking debate over land use issues in the area, and she welcomed them to file an appeal with the Nevada Supreme Court.

Outside the courtroom after the hearing, Rattner said he thought Hardcastle got it wrong.

"She should have given the people the right to vote. That's too important," he said. "We're going to appeal. I feel there's a good chance we can get an appeal done in time" to still get the questions on the November ballot.

Rattner said next time he plans to hire a lawyer to represent him.