Court kills ballot measures

Two ballot measures aimed at significantly altering, or even upending, the city of Las Vegas' redevelopment plan should not be placed before voters, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The decision backs up a District Court ruling and the stance of Las Vegas city leaders. Justices did slap the wrists of City Council members, however, for refusing to put the measures on the ballot.

"Because we have prevailed, our community will continue moving to a new level with wonderful projects like the Lou Ruvo Brain Institute and The Smith Center for the Performing Arts," Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said in a statement.

The statement said the ruling keeps the measures out of the June 2 municipal elections and eliminates the call for a special election to put them before voters.

The backers of the measures, Culinary Local 226, issued a statement saying that "it is unfortunate that voters will not have an opportunity to vote on these important issues."

"While the Supreme Court rejected our initiative and referendum on narrow technical grounds, we believe voters want reform of the Las Vegas City Council and redevelopment agency. We will continue to push for that reform."

Goodman has said union heads were lying to people; Culinary officials have said city leaders feared a vote of the people. The union organized a successful drive for two measures, gathering more than 14,000 signatures.

One, an initiative, would require voter approval if the city planned to spend more than $2 million a year paying back a "lease-purchase" agreement, which is the type of financing being considered for the proposed new city hall.

The initiative also sought to give voters control over future changes to the city's redevelopment plan, which uses incentives paid for by new development to attract developers to blighted areas. That control rests with the city's redevelopment board, which consists of the mayor and City Council members.

The second measure, a referendum, called for the repeal of the existing redevelopment plan. Backers said that would affect future projects only. The city disagreed, saying the repeal would endanger $80 million in commitments the city had made to developers and lead to a legal maelstrom.

Supporters gathered enough signatures to put the items before voters, but the City Council voted not to do so after City Attorney Brad Jerbic called them legally deficient.

That was a mistake, justices wrote.

"In the future, should the City Council believe that a ballot measure is invalid, it must comply with its statutory duty to place the measure on the ballot," justices wrote in a unanimous ruling. "It may then file an action in district court challenging the measure's validity."

The union's statement said, "The Supreme Court ruled in our favor on a very important point. The court said that the City Council had no power to refuse to put the initiative and referendum on the ballot."

Still, the justices had to determine whether the District Court "abused its discretion," and "we must consider the city of Las Vegas's objections ... while placing the burden on the city to demonstrate the measures' invalidity."

They found the city successful.

"The proposed initiative pertains to more than one subject," justices wrote, which violates a law that says initiatives must address one subject.

They also agreed with the District Court and the city the referendum would end the redevelopment plan altogether, affecting existing and future projects.

"The description of effect for the proposed referendum is entirely misleading," the opinion said.

Contact reporter Alan Choate at achoate@reviewjournal.com or 702-229-6435.