Ballot language prepared for second Fuji/fairgrounds question

The second round of potential language for the November ballot question regarding the future of the Carson City fairgrounds and Fuji Park is finished.

City leaders appointed two groups to write ballot language for an initiative petition ordinance sought by the Concerned Citizens to save Fuji Park and the Fairgrounds, although supervisors are uncertain whether this question, one they denied to place on the ballot, or an advisory question of which they approve will appear on the ballot.

The Nevada Supreme Court will decide today whether the Concerned Citizen's initiative petition question, which was supported by 3,400 voters and asks that Fuji Park and the Carson City fairgrounds be "maintained and improved in not less than its present size as a park in perpetuity," will appear on the November ballot.

City attorney's have argued the ballot language proposed by the Concerned Citizens infringes on the city's state-granted right to sell property, an administrative process above the reach of the initiative petition process.

City leaders have looked at commercial development at the city's fairgrounds off Old Clear Creek Road as a way to compete with commercial development just over the Douglas County line, arguing Carson City needs the sales tax dollars that leave the county with development in Douglas. The backlash to the proposed fairgrounds sale created the Concerned Citizens' movement, and forced city leaders to postpone development plans in favor of an advisory vote on the issue.

City supervisors approved the advisory question, "While retaining and improving the area known as Fuji Park, should Carson City make available for commercial development City property known as the Carson City Fairgrounds?" and promised to abide by its outcome.

Supervisors tentatively committed to a mid-July date to choose which of the dueling questions they will place before voters.