Las Vegas Sun

March 28, 2024

AG says Supreme Court should revisit Caesars arena case

The Nevada Supreme Court should either rehear or clarify its previous decision on the petition for an 18,000-seat sports-entertainment arena on the Las Vegas Strip, the state Attorney General's Office says.

But whichever way the court rules, it's most likely there will be more legal fighting, says state Deputy Attorney General Kevin Benson, who filed the latest brief in the case.

And this battle has been before the Supreme Court for two and a half years.

Caesars Entertainment, after its proposal was rejected by the Clark County Commission, wrote an initiative petition to submit to state voters in this coming election. It called for construction of the pavilion by levying a 0.9 percent sales and use tax on an area estimated to be 1,700 acres on the Strip.

And it gathered the required signatures of more than 157,000 voters on the petition to qualify it for the ballot. The petition envisioned the arena being built on land donated by Caesars at the Imperial Palace.

The legal battle started with Taxpayers for the Protection of Nevada Jobs and it reached the high court in November 2010. The court unanimously ruled last month the language on the petition did not adequately inform those who signed it of the impact.

"Due to the description's stringent and complex qualifications, most voters would not comprehend the true effect of the initiative — establishing a tax district in order to build an arena at a specific location on the Las Vegas Strip," said the court, which ordered the case back to District Judge Todd Russell to correct the problem.

But the court, in a footnote, denied the motion to take the question off the ballot, causing confusion that the language is flawed but it can still appear on the election ballot.

The court quickly retreated, taking back its decision and ordering briefs from both sides.

Benson, who represents Nevada's chief election officer Secretary of State Ross Miller, said the competing positions "demonstrate that there is at least sufficient ambiguity that the attorneys for each side can make good faith arguments whether the initiative should be placed on the ballot."

The court could strike all the signatures gathered on the petition and Caesars could have to start over the circulations again. The case could be returned to the District Court to see if it can correct the problems identified on the petition.

Benson says the secretary of state wants a decision so preparations can be made whether to leave the matter up to the voters. "The secretary has no interest in whether the Arena Petition proceeds to the 2012 ballot," said Benson. "The key question is simply whether it does or not."

And the Legislature fashioned a competing initiative to prohibit creating a taxing district. And the one with the highest vote tolls will win if both are on the ballot.

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