Las Vegas council keeps stadium financing measure off ballot

That is despite a court order permitting a June 2 referendum on the issue and despite some City Council members’ assurances that they wanted to hear the public’s opinion on how to pay for the apparently dead soccer venue.

The council on Wednesday adopted an ordinance that places language in the city’s charter that prevents the city from “contributing, investing or lending any of its revenue or assets … for a Major League Soccer (MLS) stadium in Symphony Park.”

That is the same language Las Vegas residents would have seen on a June municipal election ballot question asking voters to weigh in on some $56 million in public subsidies that city leaders once hoped to set aside for the stadium project.

Now that it’s on the city’s books, that question cannot appear on this spring’s ballot, City Attorney Brad Jerbic said. That means the divisive stadium issue is distanced from a pair of incumbents who supported public spending on the stadium deal and who are up for re-election. Early voting in that election starts Saturday.

Lois Tarkanian, the only incumbent up for re-election who opposed the stadium’s financing plan, abstained from the vote. So did Councilman Bob Beers, a stadium opponent, and Mayor Pro Tem Stavros Anthony, a stadium opponent who is running on a largely anti-stadium platform against mayor and stadium supporter Carolyn Goodman.

The three, Tarkanian, Beers and Anthony, launched a weekslong campaign to put the stadium subsidy issue to voters after coming out on the wrong end of a stadium development vote in December.

Each reiterated their desire to see the matter go to voters before watching from the sidelines as their colleagues killed a public vote on the issue.

Coffin said he was voting in favor of the item in the interest of saving voters money, taking a tack that could prove helpful to stadium supporters looking to parry election opponents’ attacks on the issue.

City Manager Betsy Fretwell has estimated it would cost Las Vegas a little under $1 million to put the issue before voters in June, provided there are no general election candidates to put on the same ballot. That would only happen if one candidate in each of the five municipal races wins it outright with more than 50 percent of the April 7 primary vote. If at least one of those races fails to see a resolution in the primary, the ballot measure would cost the city no extra money to put the stadium question to general election voters.

Coffin, for one, figured there was a good chance the city would have to pay more to put the question up for a referendum.

Fellow stadium backer Ricki Barlow took that logic a step further, scolding subsidy foes for risking further taxpayer-funded expenditures on the stadium issue while sidestepping a vote on the topic.

“You can’t speak out of both sides of your mouth,” Barlow said. “Don’t run away from the issue, vote on the item.”

Contact James DeHaven at jdehaven@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3839. Find him on Twitter: @JamesDeHaven.