email update 03/29/10 There is an important meeting this Wednesday, March 31, 2010, about the issue of possible urban density development in Red Rock Canyon. There has been a lot of discussion about it and we would like to involve all of you who care so much about the canyon to participate, prior to the […]
Archives for March 2010
PLAY NOW KTNV Channel 13 Action News Story Action News reporter, Annette Arreola reports: Housing Development Near Red Rock Now a Big Possibility
K.M. Cannon/LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL Las Vegas Review Journal Article by Scott Wyland: READ IT HERE: Rhodes Rides Again at Red Rock
Sign up for action emails and updates. I don’t send too many, but they are timely. This is our latest email update, sent March 19, 2010:
Thank you so much for sending letters to the commissioners. After they see how many people care about Red Rock, hopefully they’ll think twice about letting Jim Rhodes take over the mountain with his 1000 houses! We have a very ugly and tough battle, and after the zoning meeting, we still aren’t sure which commissioners will support us, but one thing we do know is that we are getting a ton of support from you, the public.
March 31, 2010, 7:00 p.m. Blue Diamond Quonset Hut Blue Diamond, Nevada (across from the Village Market) Red Rock Citizen’s Advisory Council and County Commissioners to discuss the Jim Rhodes lawsuit against the county and the settlement ordinance introduced to exempt Rhodes’ land from the Red Rock Overlay District. Public invited and encouraged to attend. Nice […]
LAS VEGAS SUN FRONT PAGE ARTICLE
(click the link for the article in today’s paper and some interesting comments from the public)
TODAY’S ZONING MEETING
Great letters to the commissioners, everyone.
Today’s zoning meeting was upsetting. The commissioners said they are not against protection for Red Rock, but they haven’t fought for it yet, either. At today’s meeting, they acknowledged all your concerned emails and said they would open the ordinance to public input for the next 30 days before making a decision. This is not much time to come at 5 years and millions worth of lawyers funded by one developer. The county is in a difficult position, as are we all. Thousands of people passionate about saving Red Rock Canyon are finding themselves in a legal chokehold. We have to try to avoid legal action against the county, or everyone loses, but this ordinance (that allows 1000 homes on the top of the mountain in Red Rock without any overlay conditions) just won’t do! And besides, if the state wins it’s appeal, the county will have sold out for nothing. We should support any efforts by commissioners to figure out a better way. The county is going to come to discuss this at the next public Red Rock Advisory Council meeting (March 31), and said they would also hold another public meeting in Las Vegas (TBD). I’ll keep you posted.
Lisa Mayo DeRiso read the 800 page lawsuit and explained it to me. And we also talked to the lawyers today who are representing Jim Rhodes for the settlement. My layman’s understanding of the legal situation is this:
Originally published by Joe Schoenmann, Las Vegas Sun Read here: https://lasvegassun.com/news/2010/mar/17/rhodes-red-rock-revival/ Wednesday, March 17, 2010 | 2 a.m. Plans for a massive development near Red Rock Canyon — which vanished from public view after becoming mired in a lawsuit — are back. But the five years that have passed since they were first introduced haven’t […]
In a slick move by Jim Rhodes, the Clark County Commissioners plan to betray the will and efforts of so many people who worked to protect RED ROCK CANYON from development.
The Commissioners are involved in some kind of a trade off with Jim Rhodes that undermines the decisions that were made to protect the area.
“I think the short story is this. Mr. Rhoads has sued to overturn Clark County’s Red Rock Overlay and the State senate bill that precludes development in Red Rock canyon. He won a judgment at the state level, which is being appealed. He has lost 3 of his 4 claims against the county, but has announced that he […]
I think this ordinance smells, from a number of different perspectives.
First, why is the county giving up in court when it has already won 3 of the four issues?