City Center questions, concerns to be aired during supervisor meeting

Carson City supervisors are set to dig into the details of one of the largest single redevelopment projects the capital city has ever seen when they meet this afternoon.

The $84.2 million City Center Project has been debated for more than a year, but the final feasibility study was released only last week by P3 Development, based in Sacramento.

But the make-or-break nature of the project has been a source of contention within the community as residents struggled to understand the complexity of a public/private partnership and come to grips with uncertain financial details.

For many residents who have been following the progress of the proposal for more than a year, there is little doubt that Carson City needs to take action quickly to save its struggling economy. For others, however, questions and concerns continue to loom.

LIBRARY

Although Laura Sternes would like to see the project succeed, she said the cost to operate the library does not seem reasonable.

"The feasibility study, as well as numerous public and media statements, say that the library can operate a 52,000-square-foot building and add additional hours with the same budget it currently receives to operate a 21,000-square-foot facility," Sternes said.

However, the feasibility study offers a breakdown of how full-time staffing will be realigned. There will be more people, but fewer full-time positions which carry the added cost of benefits.

Others think the present location of the library is just fine.

"The library location, where it is, is great. It is very convenient now to stop by and easily use the library. The library should not be conceived of as a destination where one goes and then strolls through the rest of downtown. It just isn't that kind of place. It will not bring more people downtown, and parking will be a major issue causing even fewer people to use the library," Paul Weaver said.

David Aunkst said he is confused by the library lease.

"All of the provisions concerning the library lease payments to the Nugget, and that they are returned back for its maintenance, is confusing, and to what purpose?" he asks. "Also, what will become of the old library building? Do we really need a new library anyway?"

According to the feasibility study, the lease agreement for the land under the library - not the library itself - while seemingly complicated, would actually return lease payments to the library so that it can remain state-of-the-art. Lease payments made by Carson City wouldn't go to the Nugget, however. They would go to the Hop and Mae Adams Foundation, which would funnel them back through the Library Foundation, earmarked specifically for technology and costs related to the plaza.

Library Director Sara Jones says that people have been predicting the death of books for 30 years, but it is unlikely to happen. And libraries continue to offer so much more than books.

"They offer programs and connectivity. People come for group activities, story time, research. It's a place where everyone is welcome - like a community living room," she said.

A new Knowledge and Discovery Center would build upon those uses and enhance them. There are no plans Jones knows of right now for what the old library would be used for, but it stands to reason it could be sold or used for other city offices.

DIGITAL MEDIA LAB

Aunkst also isn't so sure about a digital media lab.

"There is no guarantee that after the so-called digital media lab is built, that any of these companies will actually move here," he said.

And while he is correct that there is no guarantee, there have been a couple of letters of intent sent to the city stating an interested in locating in Carson City.

Weaver suggested putting the digital media lab in one of the vacant buildings downtown. The lab is now proposed as part of the library.

FUNDING ISSUES

Robert Thomas said he is worried about several of the funding issues.

"I am opposed to an additional 1/8 percent sales tax. We can use that money for more needed uses (such as) police, fire, schools," he said. "The $1.2 million city contribution works out to over $20 for each resident of Carson City. We need other, higher priorities to be provided by these funds."

"The new disclosure that additional revenue for the public funding to include a .5 percent Southwest Gas and 1 percent NVEnergy tax is unacceptable to me as a consumer. My utility bills are high enough at the present time," he said.

City Manager Larry Werner said although this option is not on the table, the city has the ability to raise franchise fees to the statutory maximum if needed to fill any funding gap.

PARKING GARAGE

Several people were concerned that the city is to pay for the parking garage.

"...The most glaring (question) to me is (that) the city is going to pay $7.8 million to build a parking garage, then lease it back from the developer. That makes no sense. That's like I pay a developer to build a house for me, then I rent it back from him," said Paul Craik.

Thomas has his own concerns about the structure.

"The parking facility is paid for by the city, but the overwhelming users of the parking structure will be the office, casino, hotel and retail (private) portions."

VOTE OF THE PEOPLE

Dorothy Arraiz still believes the project needs to go to the voters, but Clerk-Recorder Alan Glover has said a special election would be costly, and proponents argue that the sense of urgency to move forward is due to the present low interest rates.

Arraiz said she fears that if the project fails, taxpayers will end up picking up the pieces.

Additionally, the November elections proved to be a referendum on how voters felt about the project, so some would argue there has already been a vote.

Supervisor Karen Abowd, who ran her campaign in support of the City Center Project, swept the election with 54.1 percent of the vote over her opponent, former city planner Rob Joiner who spoke out against it.

In the other supervisor race, John McKenna, who won the seat with 63.65 percent of the vote, took a wait-and-see approach to the project over his opponent Day Williams, whose campaign was based largely on his objection to the project.

JOBS

James Edmonds worries that the jobs will not go to locals.

"It is pretty common these days for contractors to bid work thousands of miles from their home. A project this size will surely attract contractors from several states, many times underbidding local contractors. If out-of-state contractors bid and win local contracts, they take their money with them when they leave," Edmonds said.

WORDS OF SUPPORT

But not everyone finds fault with the City Center Project.

Frieda Ford, a member of the Friends of the Carson City Library, is on record as supporting the project.

"My message for our city supervisors is 'go for it.' I see this project as a lifeline to bring Carson City out of its severe economic situation at the present time. We are drowning. We need help. To do nothing is not a solution. We will continue in a downward spiral without intervention," she said.

Doreen Mack agrees.

"There is a risk in everything, but if we do nothing, the consequences are going to be very costly to our community. Vacant, abandoned buildings are not only an eyesore, but also a source of crime. If we don't take a risk, then where do we begin in turning around the economy?" Mack asks.

"We have an opportunity to build a community and create a new history. That is a gift from the Mae B. Adams Trust. The sole trustee, Steve Neighbors, is an honorable man (who) has more than gone out of his way to see that her wishes were met. Mr. Neighbors is trying to establish an environment that will grow with our changing times, to have a downtown and establish retail businesses for entrepreneurs and jobs within our community," she said.

I read your piece in Sunday's paper and reviewed some of the feasibility study. I did not read it entirely, but I saw enough that I have serious concerns for the project and am 100% against it as it is now financially structured.

It appears to me that Carson City takes on a large amount of future debt to allow the Mae B. Adams Trust to generate a positive cash flow for it's investment at taxpayers expense.

Some examples of my concern are:

1. The parking facility is paid for by the city but the overwhelming user of the parking structure will be the office, casino, hotel, and retail (private portions).

2. The jobs being created are, at least initially, funded by city money as the office space #2 ($16,856,000) and the hotel ($22,797,000) are scheduled for the future. However the jobs created for these parts of the project are shown as being generated at generally the same time as the remainder of the project and counted as jobs being created by private funding 266 but in reality the number is 83 less. The question is when will the office #2 and hotel be built, if ever.

The initial public investment is $31,967,000 but the initial private investment is only $12,671,000 for office #1.

3. The new disclosure that additional revenue for the public funding to include a .5% Southwest Gas and 1% Nevada Energy Tax is unacceptable to me as a consumer. My utility bills are high enough at the present time.

4. I am opposed to an additional 1/8 % sales tax as well. We can use that money for more needed uses, police, fire, schools.

5. The $1.2 million city contribution works out to over $20 for each resident of Carson City. We need other, higher priorities to be provided with these funds. City street repair is the first item that comes to mind.

6. The total public cost is listed at $32 million, but it appears to me that it is substantially higher, $2.6 million yearly x 30 years is $78 million.

7. The permanent job total created by this endeaver is projected to be only 80 hotel jobs, hardly a great contribution to Carson City's economy during the next 30 years.

8. If a new library is needed, then it should be funded and constructed as a stand-alone project. It would be much less expensive and less of a burden on the Carson City taxpayers.

9. There is too much risk associated with this project for Carson City and the potential reward does not justify the potential liability.

ROBERT THOMAS

I had just received a wonderful book 'Early Carson City' by local residents Sue Ballew and Trent Dolan on our historic downtown. I was saddened to see how much history is gone, and in the process, we have lost a culture and tourism trade. There was absolutely no regard for the value of many historic buildings. 

We have an opportunity to build a community and create a new history. That is a gift from Mae B. Adams Trust. The sole trustee, Steve Neighbors, is an honorable man and has more than gone out of his way to see that her wishes were met. Mr. Neighbors is trying to establish an environment that will grow with our changing times, to have a downtown and establish retail businesses for entrepreneurs and jobs within our community. His plan also allows for parking which is a huge issue.

We are a college town, we need a college presence, and our community needs to step up to the plate to make this a desirable community for the changing times. 

There is a risk in everything, but if we do nothing, the consequences are going to be very costly to our community. Vacant, abandoned buildings are not only an eyesore, but also a source of crime. If we don't take a risk, then where do we begin in turning around the economy? 

Perhaps the issue is, what is a community? A community is a gathering place where people get together to eat, have tea, coffee, talk and shop. You will see these people on a regular basis and they will get to know your name and you theirs. It is a safe place filled with life.

Another issue to be addressed is main street parking, which is separate from the city center project that Mr. Neighbors has planned for. Quite Frankly, we cannot have a functioning downtown with retail businesses and establishments that make up the city core, such as: a bank, satellite, post office, butcher shop, grocery store etc., without on-street parking. That is the lifeline for every business, and we cannot market any retail until we eliminate the fence and deal with the parking on main street. 

That brings me to the other issue that will be addressed by the board of supervisors for other funding requests. As far as the city responding to emergencies, use Stewart Street or Division and come up side streets. The other day, there was an accident on Carson and Washington streets. Emergency vehicles used Carson Street where they could have used Stewart, eliminating the downtown congestion.

There have been thousands of dollars spent on years of studies with no results. Making a decision does not mean that it is set in stone and cannot be changed, but at least we would have moved forward, taken action and given it a try. 

One decision that was acted upon and completed was Roop Street. Congratulations!

DOREEN MACK

Unfortunately I was not able to pick up Item 28 from the agenda, but am very familiar with it and at this time, I totally disagree with Carson getting involved in the project unless Mr. Neighbors is paying for it out of his pocket.

We have so many vacant buildings, and more keep cropping up daily or weekly. Our taxes went up, and building assessment down, water bill doubles, gas at this time it creeping up, food has gone up, medical is outlandish and people are unable to pay their heating bills, fix their cars for daily use, and we need to get into taxing people for some project he is dreaming about? NOT!

Let's get some supportive businesses to fill some of our vacancies to bring more tax monies into Carson without burdening the taxpayers that are overtaxed at this time.

MARY GEISLER

I have read the feasibility study and still have questions, especially about the library. I have asked these questions at public forums on the project and do not believe I am getting accurate information - only opinion.

The feasibility study, as well as numerous public and media statements, say that the library can operate a 52,000-square-foot building and add additional hours with the same budget it currently receives to operate a 21,000-square-foot-facility.

This does not appear to be a reasonable assumption. Either the current number of staff is way too high for the existing facility or there will be nowhere near enough staff for the new building.

It appears to me that the library and the city manager have deliberately low-balled the operating cost of the new facility.

The second concern I have is that the supervisors, the city manager and the feasibility study assume that the 1/8-cent sales tax increase is a done deal. I submit that the city may have other, more pressing needs for the use of this sales tax, and that it is not (or should not be) a done deal.

I would like to see this project succeed, but it appears that the supervisors and city manager have already made a decision and are not interested in any public input.

Thank you for your article.

LAURA STERNES

This needs to go to the voters. Once we are led down the yellow brick road, the property owners will ultimately pick up the cost when it becomes not workable. The big dream!

DOROTHY ARRAIZ

This is a boondoggle from start to finish. When someone can't give you all the costs associated with the project, there is a problem. Mr. Neighbors and the board of supervisors is taking money from the people of Carson City without their approval. Why did the Board of Supervisors vote down Pete Livermore (4 to 1) when he attempted to have this put on the ballot last year as an advisory vote? Because they knew it would be voted down, just as the V&T was when it was put to the people. The only person who is going to make money off this deal is Steve Neighbors. The citizens are getting the shaft, as usual.

With the state of the economy in Carson City and the desperate plight of the existing hotels, why are they even thinking of putting a hotel in? This is folly! None of the business that they claim will come will bring enough people to Carson City to make any impact.

If Mr. Neighbors really wants to help the people of Carson City, he would build a new multi-use sporting center (in addition to the one that is planned at the Girls and Boys Club from Q18 funds) that would generate sports tourism and bring tourism to the town. What library in any town (other than the Library of Congress) brings people to visit? There are enough libraries in Carson City right now. A learning center would be better located at WNC - where people are in school.

Stop the spending frenzy. I don't want my property taxes increased. Who do we hold accountable when the city is so in debt that we can't pay our bills? Will we be able to sue the current board of supervisors for getting us into this mess? I thought that we had sent a message with our votes in November 2010. Apparently, we need to start a recall on the elected officials who do not listen to what "We the people..." want.

LINDA BARNETT

My message for our City supervisors is "Go For It." I see this project as a lifeline to bring Carson City out of its severe economic situation at the present time. We are drowning! We need help! To do nothing is not a solution. We will continue in a downward spiral without intervention.

As the sole trustee of the Mae B. Adams Trust, Steve Neighbors has made an incredible offer to Carson City. I cannot imagine turning down this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. All of Steve Neighbors' actions and contributions over the past year have shown his good faith intentions and his unfailing vision for Carson City.

I am looking forward to a revitalized downtown with a center redevelopment area to be proud of, a fantastic new Knowledge and Discovery Center, a digital media complex to make us competitive in the 21st century, and much more.

Please do not turn down this golden opportunity!

FRIEDA FORD

Thank you for the opportunity to express my opinion on the City Center Project.

I think we need to go very slowly on this project.

There are a few items in the plan that seem to be good. Principally, it would clean up a sprawling parking lot that needs help. It would provide more parking for the state workers, enabling the removal of cars now parked on Musser. That is a very unsafe area for the workers who must cross Musser and cannot be seen due to the parked cars. Also, it would provide space for a Nugget hotel on the same parking lot. If the state needs more office space, that too could be part of the complex.

There are items that should not happen. The library location, where it is, is great. If it needs to be bigger, let's put on a second, and maybe third story where it is. If the estate really wants to invest in Carson City, they should be willing to do that for the city. It is very convenient now to stop by and easily use the library. The library should not be conceived of as a 'destination' where one goes and then strolls through the rest of downtown. It just isn't that kind of place. It will not bring more people downtown, and parking will be a major issue causing even fewer people to use the library.

The Nugget hotel should not be built on the west side of Carson eliminating that parking, Nevada Day, and ice rink space. It should be placed on the back parking lot in place of the library. If built on the west side, it will generate a safety issue by increasing the pedestrian traffic trying to cross Carson Street.

If we want to create a digital media industry in this town, we should use one of the large number of currently vacant existing buildings in this town. We don't need a new building for that purpose.

We need more study of what to do with Carson Street. There is still too much traffic there to reduce it to two lanes. If we did that and placed parallel parking on the sides, traffic would continually be blocked by cars trying to maneuver in and out of parallel parking places. What we should do is to follow the lead of many towns across the nation and make Carson and Stewart Streets a one-way pair. This seems to work, and would allow for two lanes plus angled parking on one side of the street. A very good example of this with parking on two sides can be found in Salinas, Calif.

It is good that the estate wants to make their property more attractive. Let's make sure we do the right things and don't wind up creating more problems.

PAUL WEAVER

I am not in support of the City Center Project as it has been presented. Just a few of the concerns and questions I have:

1. I cannot support an increase in the sales tax or utility fees, unless we could eliminate the sales tax increase for the V & T Railroad, and that apparently is not possible.

2. Any requests for federal highway dollars should be for the completion of the bypass. This should be a high priority.

3. The new additional requirement of $1.2 million annually from the city general fund doesn't seem to be feasible considering the present day economic conditions.

4. It doesn't seem logical that the hotel would be located across the street from the Nugget and parking, but that's really their call. Also, weren't there previous reports from the hotel industry that the current occupancy rate in Carson City could not support another hotel?

5. All of the provisions concerning the library lease payments to the Nugget, and that they are returned back for its maintenance, are confusing, and to what purpose? Also, what will become of the old library building? Do we really need a new library anyway?

6. There is no guarantee that after the so-called digital media lab is built, that any of these companies will actually move here.

DAVID AUNKST 

Let's start out by discussing the positive merits of this project. In my opinion, there are a few, temporary construction jobs, maybe some business relocating which should add a few jobs, but that's about it. 

Now for the questions on this project, which there are too many to address here, but the most glaring to me is the city is going to pay $7.8 million to build a parking garage, then lease it back from the developer? That makes no sense. That's like I pay a developer to build a house for me, then I rent it back from him.

And as far as adding retail space, look around Carson, there is plenty of empty retail space to be had.

What happened to the idea that the Gaming Control Board and Health & Human Services were going to move from their present locations to this wonderful City Center?

Let's look at  Mr Lewis and the trail of failures he leaves behind. All one has to do is use Google to do research on P3 & Mr. Lewis, it will open your eyes. In Stockton, Mr. Lewis approved change orders without consulting the mayor or board of supervisors, resulting in huge cost overruns for that project. Is that who we want in charge of this project?

Too much money spent on promises and wishes for me. Count my vote as a no for this.

PAUL CRAIK 

First of all, the title "City Center Project" is all wrong. It should be called the "Save the Nugget Project."

Second, until there is a resolution between the Mae Adams Trust and the IRS, how can the city even think about moving forward? For all we know, the IRS may lien all the assets of the trust to pay back taxes. This entire project should be put on hold and the city should stop the expenditures of any additional funds. We have been told absolutely nothing about the various issues between the Trust and the IRS or what the demands of the service are and what the responses have been of the Trust.

I read the Nugget Project report, and besides all the rhetoric in the first few sections, I feel that the public needs to focus on the information contained in the report from our district attorney. If you have not taken the time to read the report from the district attorney, you definitely should. In the report, the district attorney acknowledges that the Redevelopment Area Plan 1 only runs through 2031, clearly ten years short of the proposed thirty-year lease period. How often in the district attorney's report do you see the words "Unclear" or "Untested?" All these questions have to wait for the act of formalizing the documents before they can be answered.

There are some real pitfalls for the city going forward with all of this. If Office Building Number One is not fully rented at "market prices," could the city wind up being on the hook to foot all the payback to the developer? We know nothing about these consequences.

We still do not know anything about the developer's financing or who the "conduit" is or their credit-worthiness. To this day, we still have been told nothing about the funds that the developer intends to come forward with. Now we see that the city has decided to use general fund monies to finance the city's portion that will be made available by raising our property and sales tax. Just how long these increases will remain in effect is not addressed in the report. The city has predicted that city revenues will grow at the rate of three percent a year. If the city diverts this revenue stream in addition to the monies raised by increasing the property and sales tax to paying for this project, how will the city meet the demands for natural growth of the city and its ability to provide for the increased demands of its residents?

We all read the reference to the State of the State message from Governor Sandoval regarding growth, but it is obvious that the writer failed to listen to the part about no new taxes or fee increases. How very convenient to leave that part of the governor's message out.

The board should really be asking itself, "Is this really the right time to undertake this project.?" There still remain some very important parts of the puzzle that have not been revealed, particularly with regards to the developer and his financial ability to underwrite the costs or produce a bond that will cover all the costs. The city has shown its hand and it is time for the developer to show us his.

As for the city's ability to carve out a niche in the digital media market, The Nevada Appeal's February 13th article contains an excellent story on what some people who have been in the Incubator and digital media development for some time say about our chances: "You can have a beautiful building and some lunkhead bureaucrat running it."

Hasn't anyone realized that the digital media world has already been carved out, and it does not include Carson City?

Yes, Nevada is the gambling state, but I wonder, if the money for this City Center Project was coming out of the pocket of the members of our board of supervisors, would they really do it? What do you think?

GIL YANUCK

I have been following the Nugget/City Center Project, and after reading the feasIIbility study I have the following comments to make.

(1) We are in a bad recession and are having trouble keeping existing services running and not laying off any more personnel in the city. Yet we have $2.6 million to put towards this project when we can use this money to fund necessary services. The city offices that are in the old Fireside building will move yet again to office space in this project. This makes no sense since we have the Northgate complex still owned by the city, as well as the Fireside building we obtained and moved offices, as well as the library annex there.

I am a business owner, and watch as more and more businesses are closing in this city. Why would we even begin to build more retail space and office space when we have a nearly 40% vacancy rate? I deliver the phone books to the businesses in Carson City and have done so for the past 5 years, and over the past 2 years, I have seen nearly 40% of the business locations go vacant with more coming up in the next month as 4 are in going-out-of-business sales.

Where are these buildings' tenants coming from? I want to oppose this entire project as unaffordable and not needed.

The skating rink is a feel-good project but a money loser that doesn't benefit many. If we are to continue it, we should purchase our own rink and cut costs to make it pay for itself, or get rid of it.

As for a new library, I do not see any need for one when the future is over the Internet and you can place a lot of computers in the current space since actual paper books will be going the way of vinyl records.

I only see Mr. Neighbors as trying to turn around the Nugget and sell it at a profit. That is his profession and his other job, and what he is working on with the Nugget, why else this sudden project to build all around the Nugget? Since his taking over the Nugget, he has closed the buffet and sold off the fixtures and sold off the gold collection. The catering services have risen so far that the Fandango's buffet is so much cheaper, so more groups are moving their functions to the Fandango, so the catering services are declining by their own actions.

(2) Mayor Crowell, Supervisors Abowd and Aldean all need to excuse themselves from any vote on this project since they all own property within 6 blocks of this project and will benefit from this project's passage, and therefore, cannot vote in this matter due to a conflict of interest. I will file an ethics complaint if they refuse to recuse themselves from this issue.

(3) I cannot support this project since I do not see the benefits short-term or long-term. The digital labs can be done with existing vacant property, and the incubator the same. These are the 2 aspects that I can see being positives, but we have plenty of available space that can be turned into appropriate space for these endeavors. The events plaza is great, but we cannot afford this great luxury in this budget-challenged time.

GENE MUNNINGS