School Board wants LV to pay

Clark County School Board members took on downtown Las Vegas' mob museum Thursday, telling its financial officer to hit up the city and the developer for $824,759 in anticipated education costs.

The board wants to be compensated for enrolling an estimated 120 students expected to arrive with new workers for the city's tourism improvement district.

The improvement district will be home to the Las Vegas Museum of Law Enforcement and Organized Crime, a 500-room hotel, 200,000 square feet of retail space and 150,00 square feet of office space.

Board members who met Thursday followed the suggestion of Clark County School District Chief Financial Officer Jeff Weiler, who recommended asking the city and the developer, CIM Group, for money to defray increased costs.

"Go talk to them, Jeff," said School Board member Deanna Wright before a 6-0 vote made the request official.

School Board member Larry Mason was absent.

Weiler's position is a departure from an earlier school district opinion on the tourism area. When Applied Analysis, a public policy firm, researched the plan in October, the district's facilities division said no cost impact on schools would occur. Weiler said he was unaware of that position.

The creation of tourism improvement districts encourages the redevelopment of blighted areas. Improvement districts are allowed to keep up to 75 percent of its tax revenue for infrastructure improvements. City plans for the downtown district include a new parking garage and a public plaza for the area bordered by Stewart Avenue, Fourth Street, Casino Center Boulevard and U.S. Highway 95.

Because its tax base would be affected by the improvement district, the board conducted a public hearing, but it has no authority over the proposed project.

A response to the board's request will be decided at a City Council meeting, said Bill Arent, the city's acting director of business development.

City officials indicated the new tourism improvement district was an offer the School Board couldn't refuse.

The estimated educational cost of $824,759, which Arent called a "conservative, worst-case scenario," will be offset by $1.5 million in new tax revenue for a net gain of $679,344 for the district. The district is not receiving any tax revenue from the blighted area, city officials said.

Weiler was skeptical and said he could not be sure that new tax revenue would be used for education because of the state's budget crisis.

The chief financial officer did not respond to Review-Journal questions about the $824,759 estimated cost, which appears not to factor in the state's per-pupil funding contribution, which is about $5,000, $600,000 for 120 new students.

During the meeting, School Board member Sheila Moulton said the state's guaranteed per-pupil support has not been stable. And School Board member Carolyn Edwards said the district could lose sales tax revenue if shops outside the tourism district lose business to stores inside the district.

Arent said the report's estimate of 120 new students is high because the research was done in October when the unemployment rate was 7.6 percent. It's now 10.4 percent, making it unlikely the tourism district will need to hire as many people from outside Southern Nevada, Arent said.

Contact reporter James Haug at jhaug@reviewjournal.com or 702-374-7917