DOWNTOWN LV: Land-value raise may lift Lady Luck - Business

PRINT THIS Popular

Jul. 03, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

DOWNTOWN LV: Land-value raise may lift Lady Luck

Unrestricted gambling seen as potential use for city-owned parcel

By BENJAMIN SPILLMAN
REVIEW-JOURNAL

Graphic by Mike Johnson

City-owned land that developers want to buy in conjunction with a revival of the downtown Lady Luck casino could fetch twice as much money as originally thought -- although critics of the plan say the city could get even more.

The land value grew because early negotiations between the city of Las Vegas and developers CIM Group of Hollywood, Calif., didn't consider gambling as a possible use for property along Stewart Avenue between Fourth Street and Casino Center Boulevard.

Most Popular Stories

Expect to pay at Nugget's new tower

Fraud with Portent

Debt-ridden casino operators told to expect pressure

REAL ESTATE: Las Vegas home prices stabilize as threat of foreclosure flood wanes

REAL ESTATE: Short sales on the rise

GAMING COMPANY EARNINGS: Station drops $455.4 million

THE STRIP: License approved for Aria

Foreclosure wave continues

GLOBAL GAMING EXPO: Recession over? Don't bet on it

Airport suffers another decline

But once assessors returned reports that suggested unrestricted gambling as a potential use, the value of the deal shot up from $75 to $140 per square foot, or from $15 million to $28 million for the entire 200,000 square feet in question.

The potential increase in value was just one of the changes the Las Vegas City Council approved Wednesday after a progress report on the effort to reopen the shuttered Lady Luck.

"That block has potential for unrestricted gaming," said Scott Adams, director of the city's office of business development. "That is one of the things we've been excited about."

The land appraised for as high as $99 per square foot without gambling and $180 if the developers were able to clear the hurdles needed for a new casino.

Chris Bohner, research director for Culinary Local 226 in Las Vegas, criticized the deal as a handout for developers.

"This sets a very dangerous precedent for the city," Bohner said during an animated speech before the council. "Every other casino developer in this town ... they are going to ask for this deal, too."

Council member Steven Ross also questioned the deal.

"I don't want this to appear like a sweetheart deal," said Ross, who ultimately voted to support the agreement. "Anything we do downtown can't have that appearance."

CIM will get the land only if it meets conditions of a development agreement with the city and it will only pay the higher price if it uses the land for gambling, Adams said.

He also said the city met requirements of a state law that calls for local governments to identify the economic value to taxpayers for a sale of land below appraised value.

Adams said the deal would return more than $100 million to taxpayers in exchange for about $12 million in land write-offs.

"The write-down is on paper; this is real," Adams said of the potential proceeds.

Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman lashed out after Bohner spoke. Goodman raised his voice, banged the dais with his hand and criticized the union for trying to scuttle what he said was the best available proposal to reopen an empty, blighted property.

"For the past several years I have seen a rotting corpse," Goodman said of the property's condition. "The Lady Luck structure has been a blight."

He continued: "This is no giveaway. This is not a candy store. We are getting offers for land when nobody is buying land."

The council heard the update and voted unanimously to approve the new plan, which calls for CIM to invest at least $100 million in the project and start construction by Dec. 31, 2009.

Other provisions in the agreement include:

•An option for CIM to purchase a city-owned parking garage at Third Street and Ogden Avenue for about $6.8 million. The appraised value was $11.4 million to $17.8 million.

•An agreement by CIM to spend at least $100 million on Lady Luck renovations, $500,000 refurbishing the parking garage and $300,000 annually from revenue generated by billboards the developers will install on the Lady Luck's facade.

•A completion date of Dec. 31, 2011.

CIM already owns the Lady Luck and says it is committed to reopening it. Adams said the land deals for surrounding property will encourage the company to complete a higher quality hotel and bring business to an area that is now blighted.

Activity would be a welcome change at the Lady Luck. The casino-hotel closed in February 2006, putting about 700 people out of work and leaving a huge empty shell in the Las Vegas skyline.

At the time, Andrew Donner of the Henry Brent Co., said it would reopen in about a year. But Donner had trouble financing a proposal and eventually brought in CIM Group, which in July entered an exclusive negotiating agreement with the city on a small park and some property around the former post office building across Stewart from the Lady Luck.

The developers want the land to provide more elbow room for a Lady Luck revival. The city wants assurances CIM will create something that complements downtown and also generates revenue to help pay for transforming the old post office into a mob museum.

Just fitting all the goals into a plan took a year. With the vote Wednesday, the City Council says it wants construction under way within 18 months.

"In today's environment that is, I think, pretty aggressive," Adams said.

Contact reporter Benjamin Spillman at bspillman@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3861.

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	8 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. J wrote on July 03, 2008 06:34 PM: Unions have outlived their usefulness. All they do now is get in the way. homeless in Las Vegas wrote on July 03, 2008 02:49 PM: 18 months to ensure a turnaround in the credsit crunch. I don't trust anything with Oscar Goodmans stamp of approval. He has proven in his past, that anything and everything is for sale, at a cost. Casino Con wrote on July 03, 2008 12:24 PM: CIM will sit on the property -- not develop it, citing the credit crunch no doubt -- and then sell it at a profit. Why in the world would the city give them 18 months to start work? Six months should be more like it. CAS127 wrote on July 03, 2008 10:24 AM: ""For the past several years I have seen a rotting corpse," Goodman said And given the Mayor's former line of work (and employers) I'm sure that the Mayor has, in fact, seen more than his share of actual rotting corpses... CAS127 wrote on July 03, 2008 10:21 AM: The true story behind the deal? Just took another look at the map of the "add on" land - it appears to include the central hub of LV bus service. Maybe this goofy deal is being pitched so hard because the true motivation is to find some (any) external justification to "force" the relocation the central bus hub (presumably at a cost in the millions - a cost not included in the city's black-is-white financial analysis). This might be first cousin to the BS "new city hall" proposal. CAS127 wrote on July 03, 2008 10:16 AM: "Adams said the deal would return more than $100 million to taxpayers in exchange for about $12 million in land write-offs. "The write-down is on paper; this is real," Adams said of the potential proceeds The second statement seems to be the exact opposite of what the deal actually entails. The developer will get immediate and near term benefits and the city will get promises - promises secured by - what?. I'm sure the city (Goodman, et al) - if they were honest and straightforward - heh - would simply say that the LL is moribund currently and that a relatively small giveaway now - in the hope of receiving benefits later is worth the risk - because the alternative is simply to let the LL rot. Fair enough. But the government can never be honest and straightforward. No, they have to roll out Adams to tell us that black is white. Thanks - I might have been on board if Goodman and company were straightforward initially - but no, they have to pitch things crooked. So, forget it - if the city political class is made up of liars at dawn, they will still be liars at dusk. Flush the deal and the leaders. vc wrote on July 03, 2008 09:31 AM: I disagree. The unions are not a silly thing of the past. The culinary has secured decent paying jobs for 1000's of people in this community, which have excellent benefits. The casinos would not be paying these people a living wage if it were not for the union. They would treat them just like they treat their non union hourly employees. Like crap. But I think the union is foolish for opposing this project. This is good for the city and I am happy to see progress and I support this project and land sale 110% Why do the Unions Care ??? wrote on July 03, 2008 06:11 AM: The Culinary Union and Steve Ross are PI$$ED because they know that this property is not of sufficient size to EVER be Union. They would rather the place never open, than open up non-union, even though it will provide hundreds of jobs and boost the downtown area. The Unions are a silly thing of the past !!!