Thanks Max!
While I'm no fan of his hillbillies casino, I do thank Max Baer for shining a clear light on some of the problems with governance in Douglas County. Let's take a look.
1. Lack of meaningful staff analysis: It's hard to believe, but our professional planning staff recommended approval of this project as submitted, including variances for two 12-story, 143-foot hotel towers (over three times the height limit), looming over residential uses to the east, and for a 20-story, 2,600 square foot sign, leaving the Douglas County Planning Commission to do its own analysis and make those an issue. This is not unique to this project.
There are only two possible explanations for this. Either planning staff is not doing its job or it is not being allowed to do its job. If I were a county commissioner I'd want to know the answer to that and take steps to correct the situation.
2. A disconnect between planning and implementation: Our officials frequently seem to lose track of the connection between making plans and implementing them. The community decided on a 45-foot height limit here, but the county commission ignored that and approved a project over three times as high.
This begs the question, just what do our plans and regulations mean? Apparently, very little. Plans are useless if not followed. In the past it was questionable master plan amendments. Is it now going to be unjustified variances? Again, we see this disconnect in many projects, not just this one.
3. Failure to give due consideration to thoughtful public input: Those of us who've tried to influence decisions here have gotten used to being ignored. But in this case the county commission ignored the planning commission it appointed.
The controversy over the planning commission minutes illustrates clearly the degree to which our officials simply ignore input that doesn't support the outcome they want. And perhaps the degree to which some officials go to hide information from others.
In discussing the minutes, one county commissioner apparently said that receiving more detailed minutes explaining the planning commission's thinking on this project wouldn't have made any difference. Was his mind made up in advance?
4. Disregard of the law when it proves inconvenient: The 45-foot height limit, which is law, apparently means nothing when it proves inconvenient to county objectives. And neither do the required findings of hardship for issuing a variance. Simply saying there is a hardship does not make it so.
There is absolutely no lawful basis for the variance that was approved. There is no physical constraint to reasonable use of this property and thus the hardship required for a variance simply doesn't exist.
Many other projects nearby have dealt successfully with similar topography. And Casino Fandango and its associated hotel and theater show that it is perfectly possible to build a successful casino/hotel/theater within the height limit, on a hillside site no less.
This variance is nothing more than a grant of special privilege to Mr. Baer. And that is a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which commissioners swore to uphold when they took office. But who cares about the Constitution when gaming revenues are at stake?
5. A perpetual fiscal crisis is used to justify anything and everything: It is interesting to note that, while the planning staff produced virtually no meaningful analysis of the troublesome land use issues here, the county manager produced a detailed fiscal analysis purporting to show the public riches that will flow from this project, doubtful ends thus justifying the questionable means. This approach is all too familiar.
Every year the manager sings the budget blues to a chorus of agreement from the county commission. Then the perpetual fiscal crisis is used to justify a hands-off approach to whatever development projects later come along. Or whatever else the county wants. In this case we are expected to believe that fiscal salvation lies in the Baer project when the six or so existing hotel casinos in the county haven't resolved past fiscal crises or prevented the current one. How many more do we need?
This wouldn't be so bad if there was some attempt to assure that projects fit this community, but as the Baer project so clearly illustrates, the county usually just approves what is submitted. The community is expected to adapt to the project, not the other way around.
When this sort of stuff goes on in public, one wonders what is going on behind the scenes. How we do these things says who we are as a community. Using doubtful ends to justify questionable means is simply wrong. We need to do better. Our officials need to take a hard look in the mirror and ask if they are really doing the job they were elected and hired to perform with the integrity we expect of them and which I hope they expect of themselves.
Terry Burnes
Terry Burnes is a Gardnerville resident retired from a 30 year career in county land use planning.
