Good morning.

We're gonna get started with a meeting of the redevelopment agency.

I'll turn it over to Manager Schiller.

Good morning, Commissioners.

Your first item is public comment.

This is the first time set aside for public comment.

Anyone wishing to provide public comment with regards to any matters on today's redevelopment agency agenda?

Please step a microphone and please limit your comments to three minutes.

Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the first public.

Oh did you want to provide public comment?

Okay.

Please identify the matter on which you want to provide public comment.

Morning, Commissioners.

Monica Gresser, Brazen Architecture 900 Liberace Suite C 111, New Orleans Square.

Um talk I'm speaking today about item number five to rehabilitate New Orleans Square.

Um asking you to vote to rehabilitate it, not to demolish it.

It brings a lot of community, or at least it used to bring a lot of community to commercial center.

Um once we start um putting people back, renovating renovating the building and then bringing people back into the building.

We'll bring that community back again that we used to have.

Um there used to be a lot of events.

Um, my friend and neighbor, uh William Powell, who is now in he's in building B.

He used to host a lot of events there.

He brings in um people from the local community and the tourists.

He would have um who done it's mystery scavenger hunts and wrestling events in New Orleans Square.

We would have Sin City Sisters would also have events in New Orleans Square.

So it was a you know, it was a lot of activity.

There were um what do you call those things?

Uh like little fairs in the courtyard area.

Um, so a lot of things used to happen there, and those things can happen again, but we don't have the um tenants we used to have.

Um, they've all left since there's been so much up in the air about the future of New Orleans Square.

And if we renovate and rehabilitate New Orleans Square, then we bring more people in.

Um, and we can contribute to more of the activities that happen in all of commercial center.

Um, so I am asking you to vote to rehabilitate New Orleans Square, and let's um let's bring let's let's use that for small business and for the community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone wishing to else wishing to provide public comment?

Okay, if there's anybody else that wants to provide public comment, uh please step forward to the microphone lineup.

Uh Sean Grooms.

Uh I am a resident at 3335 Hawk Street.

I have a tavern owner at 501 East Twain.

Um we're very close friends with the Sen City Sisters.

We support them fully.

Um I ask you guys vote to rehabilitate New Orleans Square.

I've I've had a lot of personal history in commercial center, you know, all the all the different businesses that have been there as part of the LGBT community.

And I think that knocking it down, we're gonna end up with a dirt lot for a couple decades.

And I don't think that's gonna help the community.

I don't think that's gonna bring anything back to the commercial center as a whole.

Uh have a very negative impact.

So I asked you to vote to uh rehabilitate it and get the community back in there and bring it back to life.

I don't think it's gonna get uh replaced easily.

Sums it up.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, commissioners.

My name is Paula Sadler, and my address is 900 Liberacci Avenue, suite A202, Lambda Lano 12 Step Recovery Clubhouse, and 953 East Sahara Avenue, suite A200 uh suite E11A, A Harmony Nell Spa.

I've been connected with Commercial Center since I was 16 years old.

I attended beauty school there, attended my first 12-step meetings there, opened a harmony nail spa over 22 years ago.

Founded the Commercial Center Business Association in 2006, and today serve as president of the association and historic society, and also president of Lambda Lauto 12 Step Recovery Clubhouse, which has been serving Las Vegas since 1984 and in commercial center for over 30 years.

And my greatest concern today is not politics, it's people.

Many of these organizations have served Las Vegas for decades, including nonprofits and recovery organizations, vulnerable serving vulnerable members of our community every day.

Since 2023, substantial public funds have reportedly gone towards security, public events, infrastructure improvements, benefiting only portions of commercial center.

Yet little has been publicly discussed regarding relocation assistance, moving costs, nonprofit transition support, or tenant protections if displacement occurs.

Redevelopment should not only focus on buildings and land, it must also focus on people.

If relocation becomes necessary, there should be adequate notice, relocation assistance, business transition support, and protections for long-standing community organizations that help build the neighborhood.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, good morning.

My name is Tracy Simon, and we own Get Our Haircut Barber Shop in New Orleans Square.

When you look at a bit small business, it's easy to see just the brick and mortar, the sign on the door, or the numbers on a lease.

But if you look a little closer, you'll see that those law walls are held together by something much more fragile yet incredibly resilient, human sacrifice.

Every single day for the past five and a half years in this location, we have poured our life, our savings, and our souls into that space.

The success we built wasn't handed to us.

It was earned with the blood, sweat, and tears, and the weekends missed with friends, and in the relentless drive to serve our community.

We didn't just build a business here, we built a home and a lifeline.

But today the future of all that hard work rests entirely in your hands.

Your next decision is so much more than a standard business transaction.

It is a turning point.

It has the power to either honor the years of sweat and loyalty we poured into your property or to erase them with the stroke of a pen.

Behind the door is a family, behind the success stories of many years of hard work.

We are asking you to cede the human being behind the tenant agreement.

Please choose to protect what we have built together.

Let us continue to grow to succeed and to thrive right here where we belong.

Thank you, JJ and Tracy.

I'd also like to add that on April 29th, my husband stopped breathing and almost died inside that business.

So please, this is how important it is to us that my husband wants to go back after almost dying.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Anyone else wishing revive public comment?

Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the first cloud period.

I'll turn it back over to manager shoulder.

Commissioners, we can now move to the agenda section.

Item two's approval of the minutes of the regular meeting on February 18th, 2026.

I'll entertain a motion.

There's a motion on the floor.

All those in favor.

All right.

Motion carries.

Commissioners, your next items approval of the agenda with the inclusion of any emergency items and deletion of any items.

I'll entertain a motion.

There's a motion from Commissioner Segerblum to approve the agenda.

Please vote.

Motion carries.

Moving on to your business section.

Item four is review the current Clark County Redevelopment Agency fund balance and expected FY27 revenue.

Thank you, Ms.

Director Coleman.

Good morning commissioners.

This is a budget overview for the redevelopment agency.

Current fund balance, we have roughly 52 million dollars.

This is actual cash in the bank.

However, we do have current obligations and allocations already made of roughly 6.1 million dollars.

And when you take that into account, um that brings our available cash balance down to approximately 46 million dollars.

You can see that we're looking to bring in an estimated uh 22.7 million dollars.

This also anticipates any interest that would be paid on those funds.

With that, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any comments or questions from the board?

Seeing none, we'll go ahead and move on to the next agenda item.

Uh commissioners, I'll read items five and six into the record.

Then this are going to be taken as companion items.

Item five is to approve the rehabilitation or demolition of 900 Liberacci Avenue located on APN 162-10-510-029, which consists of a 1.14 acre developed parcel with four two-story retail office buildings containing a gross building square footage of uh 72 uh 500 feet.

Authorize the director of operations to sign agreements and other related documents to facilitate and complete the full rehabilitation or restoration or demolition of the site improvements.

Item six is to approve and authorize the director of operations to repair the public purpose impact analysis report required by NRS 279.486 in connection with a proposed project consisting of the construction and installation of certain improvements to the Clark County owned parking lot at commercial center, 953 East Sahara Avenue, APN 162-10-510-001.

Thank you, Mr.

Manager.

Um I have some thoughts, but I kind of want to get some uh uh input from the board on this and and honestly start with agenda item number six.

There has been discussion for quite some time now that uh Insomniac was interested in the um improvements that have been requested with regards to the parking lot, uh, but I'm not aware at present if there is any uh specific agreement with Insomniac with regards to improvements of their own property uh or for uh use and um expansion of the portion of the parking lot that would be in front of their property.

So can I get a better understanding of where we are on any agreements with Insomniac or any other prevent uh promoter or owner with regards to the proposed um improvements to the parking lot, Commissioner Segerbloom you want to chime in or Ms.

Coleman?

Yes, um I would agree that we don't have anything in writing from them.

They have verbally told me, and I think they've told Maryland too that they are committed to the event center.

Um, and that's gonna cost them probably about 20 million dollars to renovate that.

Um, but they then they do want to work with us on the southwest corner of the parking lot, but I don't think we have to make that decision right now because they're still uh as I said that they have not formally come up with with their commitment to do the to rehab the event center, although they have verbally told me, and I think Commissioner Kirkpatrick would vote for that that they they they plan to do that uh any day now.

Oh okay, Commissioner Kapatrick.

Well well, I'll just chime in.

So we did meet with them, Commissioner Segerbloom, myself, county manager, uh met with them, and then they um we asked kind of what kind of things would you need in order to make your commitment to the 15 million dollars.

And uh last time I checked, we were still working on our side on what some adjustments that we could make or things that could be.

So I think would we're all still waiting to get back together to figure out uh exactly what that looks like, but they did, and at one point I believe they had pulled some building permits to start looking at that.

Is it an ice house that it used to be or something?

It was some type of place.

It wasn't ice house, it was an ice rink.

Ice rink and and where the doors played.

Yeah, right.

So um I do know that I think we were still trying to work out some details.

Okay, I feel like we've kicked the can down the road multiple times here about so we did receive a list from Insomniac that had a number of items on it.

They prioritized um create priority one, priority two, priority three.

Um we worked with our district attorney's office to identify which of those items um were in alignment understanding the current deed restriction.

Um, and there were four items that were identified.

Uh one being extension of the sidewalk, uh, passenger vehicle drop-off zone, lighting and restriping of the entire parking, upgrading of lighting and restriping of the parking lot.

Um, we received an estimate from our real property management group um for those four items for the entire parking lot, and that number is uh 19.9 million dollars.

Okay, and that's 19.9 million dollars without any kind of written agreement.

That would be just the request here today is to approve 19.9 million dollars without any.

I think I think would maybe um DA Rogan can jump in and clarify what this we wanted uh for you guys to have all of the information when considering um this item, but DA Rogan can explain for you explicitly what this item calls for.

Thank you, Ms.

Grogan.

Thank you, Jeff Rogan, deputy district attorney.

So before we can before you can authorize the expenditure of this money, there has to be some kind of report generated for the board of county commissioners to make certain findings that this is a worthwhile investment, and those are outlined in uh NRS 279.486.

And so there's generally are that the buildings or improvements are a benefit to the redevelopment area or the neighborhood and some other findings as well.

So what your vote today would be just to begin that process, um, and then we would bring this back to a joint meeting of the RDA board and the board of county commissioners for you to ultimately determine whether to make the expenditure of the the 20 million dollars.

All right.

Um else want to speak publicly.

Uh just to clarify, this is 20 million dollars for the parking lot.

Well, it's it's not even for the parking lot, it's a portion of the parking lot.

A portion of the parking lot.

Well, there are certain features like the extension of the sidewalk and the passenger pickup zone that are very specific to the southwest quadruent.

However, um upgrading of lighting and restriping would be for the entire parking lot.

So, yes, it's 20 million dollars for those four items.

Which could I ask this question?

So I remember when Chris G was here, right?

And so um we we may we we barely maintain it, right?

So keep it uh parking worthy, but I mean this would be kind of an entire rehab of the parking lot as a whole, right?

Because I think the parking lot, if I remember correctly, with Chris G, she had the Boy Scouts come out and paint it at one point, right?

Lisa, you remember that?

Yeah.

So I think that this would be the entire this would like be starting from scratch, right?

You'd have to dig it up and put it back, which then for the long term of that commercial center could for years, it would be a long time before you came back and did it.

Uh uh, I would want to defer to real property management.

They put the quote together to maybe tell us a little bit more about what that 19 million entails.

I know it's a restriping of the parking lot, but I don't know the details.

Uh thank you, Dr.

Briley.

Hello, uh Sana Bradley, Director of Will Property Management.

Um we did do an estimate for a rehab of the entire parking lot.

Um, it does include all new asphalt and lighting.

Um, a lot of um concrete flat work goes into the 19 million dollars.

Okay, but it doesn't, it's not we we looked at the request from Insomniac, the priorities are identified by Insomnia Act, and what you put together is an estimate of the highlighted items, extension of sidewalk, passenger vehicle drop-off zone, lighting, parking restriping, not an estimate of every single thing that they've requested.

I don't know that we had a list of everything they requested.

I'm gonna let John come forward to speak to that.

That is correct, yes.

John Advent, Real Property Management.

We we concentrated our estimate on the things that were the top four, but the scope required that we made our way through the entire parking lot for paving, which is why you saw that number reach 20 million.

Great.

Just important clarification.

I I think I think this is a really um important point.

I think you tried to make it what's before us today on this item is not to allocate any dollar amount, but whether or not these potential improvements can be taken to the stakeholders, the tenants really, and ownership groups that are impacted.

Is that right?

Because that because I am not at a place where I'm willing to allocate that those dollars right now without a whole lot more in terms of commitments, right?

So so part of uh Jeff Rogan, deputy district attorney, for part of the consideration that you'll have to make when you when we if you authorize to begin this process, we have to come back.

You have to um make findings that the expenditures is worthwhile under the statute.

And one of the things that you can take into consideration is neighborhood comments about that.

So part of our uh part of our examination about whether this is an investment that you should undertake would include reaching out to those neighbors.

Additionally, as as has been mentioned, there is a restrictive covenant on this parking lot, and so we would have to discuss the continuation of that restrictive covenant or or discontinuation of that restrictive covenant with those neighbors because technically all that legally all that we were allowed to do with that parking lot is provide for parking and walkways.

So if we were providing for events, that would be technically something we would need to revisit.

So that seems pretty logical to me as a point to move forward on that does no harm, but I'll leave it there.

Commissioner McCurdy.

Yeah, we as you indicated, Ms.

Chair, we've been talking about this for quite some time, uh a few years now, and I think this would allow for the ability to move forward with getting us something back that we will be able to thoroughly analyze based upon the information that you've been given.

Very good.

Uh so I do want to go ahead and take a vote on six, and then we'll go back to five.

You should take the vote separately, yes.

Okay.

All right.

On agenda item number six, I do want to just bring up also we've had these discussions, Mr.

Rogan and and uh Commissioner Segerbloom.

Spending 20 million dollars, or frankly, any dollars on the parking lot without a serious change to the restricted covenants is pointless and not a good use of taxpayer funds, plain and simple.

So I know that you've already started that process and we're sort of going through what it would take to make that happen.

Um I will make a motion to move to approve agenda item number six with the understanding that the redevelopment agency along with the district attorney will engage in direct negotiations and discussions with all of the other property owners to release the restricted covenants that go along with that parking lot.

How long do we think that that will sorry before we before we we vote on that?

What what amount of time do we need in order to bring this back to the board?

Because again, we need to move forward with things and not be kicking the can down the road.

We've already um with uh the assistance of uh DA Rogan, we've already started looking at what some of those documents could be.

And so I don't know, Jeff.

So the issue is there's a number of different property owners that we would have to discuss um what the what this looks like.

Um so I don't I don't know how long this will take.

I I think some may be ready to have a discussion and and willing to engage in that.

Others may not be.

So I I can we could have um we could continue to keep you informed about the progress of those discussions, but I can't honestly give you a an estimate of how long this would take.

Yeah, so can I just make a suggestion uh because I do think that and I don't even like redevelopment, so I can't believe I stayed for this meeting, but but I do uh so can I just make a suggestion?

People do you gotta say yes or no sooner rather than later for the budget as a whole on what the expectation is for it.

I I think in Commissioner Sagerbloom, I know you've had a couple of meetings with people uh with groups already, but I think 90 days if you get people in a room and you say, okay, and you go back to not only Insomniac, but all the other people there to say, are you even interested in this?

Because if we can't get 75 plus percentage to start with, then we should drop it and do something totally different, right?

I think 90 days, that's the end of summer.

I do think that if people really want it, they're gonna step up.

And we have to get 100%.

So that's work on Commissioner Sagerbloom to to do, but um, I I do think we have to set a hard date.

I do think these folks keep coming out every time wanting to know what their future is, and I do think that they know people that 90 days seems more than reasonable.

It doesn't mean that we're gonna finish the process, just don't get panicked about legal descriptions and all that other stuff, but at least we're going to have them.

It's no different than when I do an SID in my district.

You're just gonna agree to this, right?

And we'll get you the paperwork later so that we as a board can make educated decisions.

That I think 90 days is more than sufficient myself.

Absolutely.

People talking to people, everybody's ready to go.

We just need some something legal.

Doesn't have to be the perfect document, but some draft of what they would be asked to sign and an explanation for what it would be.

Mr.

Rogan.

Um thank you, Chair uh Jeff Rogan, deputy district attorney.

I completely understand Commissioner Kirkpatrick and I can work to make that happen.

I just want to clarify that you you said 75% would have to be.

I know it's a hundred, but I'm just 100%.

Not everybody's gonna make every meeting, so you gotta start with a bulk.

But a hundred percent is needed.

I get it.

And I'm well, and truthfully, if it's not a hundred percent, if one of the property owners wants to sue us, so be it.

I mean, let's do it.

Let's not invite lawsuits, Commissioner.

Well, but Mr.

Schiller.

We can't let one one of the problems has been in the commercial center if some property owner says no, and everybody says, Oh, we can't do anything.

The truth is we can do something.

Um we have majority of people are here already that own the property, so we're ready to get it.

Understood.

Commissioner uh Commander Schiller.

Um, I just wanted to add um for some context.

The meeting um and my conversations with Insomniac um to Mr.

Rogan's point, the issue of the parking lot in relationship to the plans.

So them coming in as a private entity to invest in the event center is is really a key investment.

Part of the dialogue just to connect the parking lot to it is the deed restriction tied to how they utilize the parking lot both for attendance at those events and also outside activities.

So I think that's why you're seeing kind of some of the detail coming forward related to that.

A little bit of the car before the horse with the dollars, so I agree with that, but I just wanted to give context to kind of the overall plan when I've met with Insomniac.

All right.

Can I say one?

Yes, sorry, Commissioner Buck.

Wouldn't it make more sense to vote on number five before number six?

Um I would say no because it is a much more complicated discussion.

I think but if if there's a vote to demolish it, why would we vote to do an analysis report for the because the parking lot's a separate issue?

That's a different building.

It's different building.

So it's it's great.

It's still it is still a uh an issue that is could be seen together, and it makes a big difference on how we handle number five.

I respectfully disagree.

Okay, there's a motion on the floor for uh approval of the director of operation to prepare the public purpose impact analysis report and bring back an agenda item uh within 90 days and direction of the district attorney to move forward with direct negotiations with other uh property owners in commercial center.

Please hope all right.

Moving back to agenda number five.

Um so I I have walked around New Orleans Square multiple times, including last Friday.

I've talked to tenants.

I I respect all of those that have come to this meeting and many, many before.

I don't get the nostalgia for the shopping center myself.

I truly don't.

I have talked to developers who um have more more stal nor nostalgic view of commercial center and downtown and other areas, and I I don't I I don't pretend to understand the nostalgia for New Orleans Square.

Um that said, in talking to Director Bradley and Mr.

Advent, um it is a more complicated process to simply demolish New Orleans Square than I understood.

And so I I would like uh Director Bradley, Mr.

Advent to come just remind us exactly of the additional challenges that come along with demolition that are different than the other building.

Shauna Bradley, director of real property management.

Um the demolition that we have provided an estimate for.

Uh the difference between the demo of this building and the building that we just demolished is that this has a shared property wall with an ex a building that we do not own, and a fire exit stairwell that we would also have to replace.

What are the additional costs associated with having to rebuild the fire staircases and other amenities?

Looking for specific costs or just kind of generalized.

So I mean obviously there'd be additional engineering going for that building.

Um that we would have to basically create access for them.

I believe that we are also their elevator access, so we would have to create that second floor.

So we would we would need to do some improvements to uh properties in order to make it accessible to the second floor while the uh I I know that some of the towns have raised and I've raised before the the concept of a relocation.

Um I think that probably should have happened before now, but Ms.

Coleman, can you chime in on whether there's been efforts to try and relocate tenants within commercial center or outside of commercial center, regardless of what we do today, whether it's renovation or demolition?

You can't stay in the spot during rent during renovation, so there's gonna be a need to vacate this the place.

Right.

We have discussed the possibility um Clark County, the redevelopment agency nor Clark County own any additional uh space in commercial center.

Um, and so we've had a variety of discussions regarding helping folks relocate or helping them find others.

Um we've had conversations about putting together potential relocate uh relocation packages where we uh uh provide um uh a cash uh amount um to compensate uh potential tenants um uh uh that gives them the opportunity to uh relocate on their own.

Um we were waiting for the board to make a decision um one way or the other so we know um the concept of rehabilitation provides an opportunity uh once the building is complete uh for maybe potential tenants to come back and in the relocation situation may look different uh versus if there is a decision to demolish the building where there wouldn't be any future opportunity for tenants to come back, and so that decision could change what and how we um address the tenants um moving forward.

Okay, Mr.

Chair, and Mr.

Gibson.

How many tenants are we talking about?

Currently, right now we have 10 tenants.

And what percentage of the building is occupied?

The buildings are occupied.

Well, the build uh let's see.

So um of the leases that we currently have, we have 2200 square feet, 2200 square feet, 750 square feet, 2200 square feet, we have one unit that's 800 square feet, um, eleven hundred square feet, eleven hundred square feet.

Uh the building's roughly 73,000 square feet.

10,000 square feet.

May I ask a question?

So we we do tentative improvements all the time ourselves.

So um, because I I'm looking at your budget, I'm looking at just two items that we've talked about, and I don't see how we could do all of it uh at once, regardless, let alone the other redevelopment agencies that we've done.

But when we do tentative improvements, um I I've seen us do things like put everybody on the first floor, and then we do the second and third floor, and then we move them.

I mean, it would be a little inconvenient, but I gotta believe that if you've been there for 30 years, you're probably not interested in moving somewhere else because you likely would have already done that.

Um is that not options that we could do, Shauna and John?

Or I mean I feel like we got to know what we're getting into on top of it, right?

And so you got to start on one floor to figure out what what you might see in the walls or when you bring things up to code.

Could could I just because as you answer, I I'd like you to consider one other thing.

Um do we know whether or not there's asbestos in this building, and if there were, um are you able to do a floor with occupied space above or below it if there's asbestos there.

I'll start with um we have not RPM has not had the opportunity to go in and do testing to determine what type of materials are in the building, so we do not know that yet.

Um we did create this estimate in our recommendation, if you did move forward, would be to vacate the building and do all of the tenant improvements because we have to install fire sprinkler lines.

There's no fire sprinkler protection in the building currently.

So, in order for us to bring it up to code and give you vanilla shell, we would need to bring in um fire lines, and that would be difficult construction to do in an occupied building.

I haven't been uh I I have to admit I I've felt that the complexity of all of this would militate to a demolition as opposed to a a uh you know fix-up.

But I I'm willing to consider that it's just that I don't think we know enough yet.

I mean, we're talking about making a commitment the way this item is written, we make a commitment to demolish it or not.

If we decide not to demolish it, then we've made a commitment to uh fix it.

And uh I think the thing that we need to do first, and uh we can probably go in there without blowing the building up and without hurting anyone, and do an investigation to determine whether or not there are things that would need to be remediated that would blow the price of this thing up because I think that the if there is if there really is a a for instance an asbestos issue, at least we want to know what we've committed ourselves to, and I don't think we can do that unless we know that there is a contamination that needs to be addressed.

I I would agree we were asked if we could 100% hold to that number and without a feasibility study, uh, we could not Commissioner Naftan I I I agree with that comment, but I also think in tandem we we owe it to our tenants now to be honest about what the future looks like for that building.

And I what I've heard today and in lots of prior discussions is there isn't a way to feasibly modernize and bring that building up to code without emptying the building.

And so why we would not start on a tenant relocation program, uh I don't I don't understand.

I think we ought to, because I don't see a scenario that we don't get to that end regardless.

So here uh a question for Mr.

Rogan, because it's not technically on the agenda for today.

Can we authorize a program today or give direction for a program today for tenant relocation and enable RPM to go in and do testing so that we can have a more honest discussion about this?

Um you can uh Jeff Rogan Deputy District Attorney, I think I think you can direct staff to do that.

That that's not really an action item.

All right, Ms.

Golman, do that okay.

All right.

Um Commissioner Segelum.

Can I just add the truth is this is 70,000 square feet.

If it comes in anywhere close to the 15 million dollars, and I'll throw my my five million in there, um, you're getting a bargain.

The building itself uh once it's done is gonna be worth 55 to 60 million dollars.

So there's a real purpose to doing this rehab if we can do it.

I agree that we want to make sure that there's no asbestos or something that's uncertain, but they've done an investigation and come back with around 15 million dollars.

So I do think we'd it's important to consider what we'd end up with if we do rehab it, and also if we tear it down, you're gonna have a hole between those buildings.

Commercial center, we spent the last several years actually getting it back into shape, and we're already there.

We're we're Los as I am just opened.

We're we're making progress.

The the center buildings all all leased, the most of the other stores are leased.

I mean, we made tremendous progress and to tear this out um without realizing what we're gonna end up with, which is a space for 10 years, is is really gonna hurt everybody in this in the New Orleans Square, not just the people in the building, but everybody in commercial center.

So I think if we could make a motion to let them do further investigation, we can start the process to see how we would move people if we want to move people.

Um but I just I I just want to reiterate the fact that keeping this building, in my opinion, is critical to commercial center to the extent we can do it, and it could end up with being a bargain if we have 70,000 square feet for 15 to 20 million dollars.

Well, I if I might, Mr.

Chair.

I I respect that.

I respect that.

I think the concern right now for me is I think clearly is uh Commissioner NAFTA said, we're gonna have to move people out anyway.

So we need to to get after that, get a program going and figure out exactly what it's gonna take to do that, and then execute on that plan.

I mean, we we're gonna do something.

The only concern I have is that uh if, for instance, you've persuaded me that we need to rehab it as opposed to demolish it, then I think we need to do the investigation before we authorize it so that we know what we're committing ourselves to.

That's all I'm saying.

And I I I totally agree with that.

Okay, so you know, again, if there's asbestos, demolish it is gonna cost a fortune too.

So yeah, I get that.

And I and I I do want to clarify, Commissioner Sierra Bloom.

I know you and I had this discussion.

Um, I had a follow-up discussion with uh Director Bradley and Mr.

Advent about your statement that this building is maybe worth 55, 60 million after the fact.

I I I had that I asked that question to them.

I don't think that's their position.

I don't think they've taken on that responsibility to project what this building might be worth post-renovation, but if I'm wrong, please correct me.

Um I I believe um that again, Shauna Bradley Rail property management.

Um that number is based on an estimate to rebuild um a building from scratch in that spot.

Right.

So that would be the replacement cost of tearing it down and building a new building, which is a very different proposition for if we do the renovations, it will be worth in the marketplace $55 million.

So I I think sort of getting back to some of the comments from from the current tenants, 100% understand where you guys believe that we should spend 20 to 40 million dollars of taxpayer funds into this property.

If you were the property owner and you spent that kind of money on it, then the end result of that would be to substantially increase your rents in order to recoup that investment.

So I think that we as the property owners who will then have to rent this building out in the future or sell it to somebody else who would then rent it, need to understand better.

What are we really buying for $50 million if that's actually the number that we're gonna spend on this?

Um, because we can't just rely on some replacement cost value.

Uh we need to really understand in the marketplace what are we buying for $15 million to make a cogent evaluation of it.

So I would say, as part of this discussion today, where I don't think we're really voting on five, but rather giving direction, we need to have an expert in the real estate field tell us if we do these renovations, what are we really buying for for that after the fact?

And that's gonna be projections of what the lease rates are.

And quite frankly, those lease rates are might well be higher than what you guys are willing to pay.

That's the complaint that I know downtown Las Vegas is getting from Fergusons and and a lot of the um East Fremont Street area is is that the city of Las Vegas went into a lot of renovations uh in that area, and now the lease rates are too high for exactly the type of tenants that are in New Orleans Square right now.

So I think we need to have that information to make a realistic evaluation of whether the investment is worthwhile of taxpayer dollars.

Commissioner McCurdy.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

So if we can just boil this down, uh what we're not gonna do today is have action on item five.

Item six has already been taken care of, which allows for you know further interrogation of what's to come.

Uh, but also the direction will be for staff to go ahead and take an evaluation, uh, see if there is any business in a building, come back to us after you also speak into an appraiser to see what you know the possibilities are on this on a site, and once we have that information, we'll come back and possibly take action on demolition or rehabilitation.

Yeah, I think that's that your understanding, Miss Coleman and Director I'm sorry.

Along with putting together potential relocation option, package options that would address either or demolition or rehabilitation of the building.

Because though they would be different.

So we put together two.

Um, and depending on what option the board chose to go with, that you would have a relocat relocation package to reflect that.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Becker.

Um, yeah, I just for legal.

What are the implications if it's determined that asbestos is in the building?

For I mean, because the demolition changes and a rehab would change as well.

And personally, I've had to deal with this with Clark County environmental charges with there wasn't even asbestos present, and I had to deal with it, and the threat was hundreds of thousands of dollars.

So I'm just curious what would happen if this comes back with asbestos.

How are we going to go forward then?

Jeff Rogan, Deputy District Attorney, Commissioner Becker, to your question.

I don't know any legal implications.

I think that RPM would have certainly um implications for how they conduct either the demolition or rehabilitation.

Obviously, they have to remove the asbestos before they can, and that's a cost.

Um, but uh I know of no legal claims or legal issues that would arise simply because of the presence of asbestos in the building.

Ms.

Kramer Becker Commissioners, in addition to um the testing that you've um directed RPM to do, I would ask that it include a full feasibility um analysis of the facility, all the mechanical systems and kind of the entire um realm and scope of work of what we typically do when we buy um purchase um property.

But in addition, they are gonna need um funding to conduct that analysis.

So I don't know if part of the record can include an allocation to to perform that that task.

And if we need to bring back on a more expedited basis an allocation of redevelopment funds at our next board meeting, then I think we can we can work on that.

Ms.

Bradley, Director Riley, did you have another comment or is that with it?

Just to address the asbestos question.

I just wanted to um can let you know that the building that we just demoed at commercial center did have asbestos, it just changes the way that we go about the demolition.

Thank you.

What if if so what if what are we talking about?

The difference in cost for rehabbing something with asbestos we would be able to better answer that question after feasibility if we found that there were asbestos in the building, it would depend on where it is located, whether or not it was going to be friable or something that could be um acted.

And the building right next door did have it.

They were built, I believe in 1975.

It's a different building.

Yeah.

Okay.

Can I ask this question?

Where was the asbestos in the other building?

A lot of times um the linoleum is where it is.

I mean, that's what I find in my manufactured home parking lot.

So uh a lot of times it was the flooring and not necessarily the walls.

I mean, uh maybe you could just share with us what the findings were uh from the last demo.

We don't have that information with us today, Commissioner, but we would be happy um to get it back to the board.

No, I just think that it would help everybody to kind of know so then we can have all the facts and figures before we go forward.

Very good.

Commissioner Gibson.

The timing's critical here.

So how long do you need to uh find someone, get a number, bring it back, and then have a have a study conducted?

How much time are we talking about?

Gonna let John Admin answer that.

Yeah, comfortable with about six months to get that done.

Six months.

Well, maybe you could maybe you could come back in.

I'd say be prepared in at the 90-day time frame that we're all gonna be coming back to give us an update, even that's obviously not gonna be the full scope of things.

But yeah, I think we this thing's been kicked down the road so many times we're trying to move forward and we'd love to get it moving, at least have answers back sooner rather than later.

So all right.

Any other direction from the board relating to agenda number number five?

All right, with that, I'll go back to Commander Schiller.

Commissioners your uh next item is to approve and purchase nine adjacent and semi-contiguous parcels comprising of 2.76 acres of vacant land, assessors parcels numbers 161-27-212-005 to 2008, 161-27-203-011 to 014, and 161-27-311-001.

Fund the purchase price of uh $2,405 and 10,000 for closing costs, ratify the appraisal performed by Matthews appraisal and authorize the director of operation to sign escrow documents and other any other related documents to complete the transaction.

All right.

These are parcels that we've worked with the um owner on.

Uh there are plenty of opportunities, I think, for different development, but not if we don't take the whole all of this land.

There's also uh I don't know that anything is ongoing now, but public works is taking a look at the alignment of Stephanie there because this is a really messed up area.

You come in to you come along on Stephanie from Russell Road, then the uh Stephanie kind of curls to the west a little bit, and you end up uh at a uh 90 degree angle coming into Missouri, which then intersects with uh at the intersection of Boulder Highway, and then when you cross, you just came off of Missouri, you go right straight across, and there's a really straight road that is Stephanie again.

So we can't do that unless we own this property, and we we need to look at a way to reconfigure that intersection if it works.

So I I think this is a worthwhile investment.

I'd move approval of uh the purchase of these parcels.

Any other comments or questions from the board?

If not, go ahead and vote.

Motion carries manager Schiller.

That concludes your agenda.

This is a second time set aside for public comment.

Anyone wishing to provide public comment with regards to matters before the Clark County Redevelopment Agency?

Please step forward to the microphone, state your name, and please limit your comments to three minutes.

Um I actually sent an email over to uh Commissioner Sigurdloom's office.

I think maybe there for item five.

I think maybe there might be other options even to explore here.

Uh one thing I suggested was possible commercial subdivision.

If you guys can find a way to sell off New Orleans Square piecemeal instead of redeveloping it yourselves, it would invite the uh sorry, invite the community to personally invest in the building and perhaps be another off ramp for the county with that property.

Uh thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Anyone else wishing to provide public comment?

Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public comment period and we are adjourned.

Thank you.