Nugget project: Questions, misconceptions cause emotions to outpace reason

For several weeks, I've been working to put together a complete examination of the Carson Nugget downtown redevelopment project. It's an extremely complicated project, so complicated that after interviewing several of the main people involved, I'm convinced that many (if not all) of them fail to fully understand it.

But the news that the president of the Carson City Library Foundation Pat Glick is canceling the organization's membership in the Chamber of Commerce over this issue is extremely distressing.

Glick is upset about Chamber president Jim Smolenski's appearance before the Board of Supervisors, where he said the organization could not endorse the project at this time because there are too many unanswered questions.

With all due respect, I believe that Glick has let emotion overrule reason in this issue. It is sad that intelligent people on both sides cannot see the reality.

The chamber does not, repeat, does not oppose the project. Their position is that there are unanswered questions that they would like to see answered before offering their support. And if you want to win support for a project like this, you do not attack and/or vilify people who have questions. You help them find the answers.

In my investigations so far, I have found that there are many, many questions to be answered. Some of those who have reservations have stated that the city has not been transparent enough in this process. The real truth is that there are enough unresolved issues in this very complicated project that it appears to people on the outside that the supporters are hiding something.

I don't believe this to be the case. I have several very good friends who are supporters of this project. They honestly believe this is the right direction for Carson City, and I cannot fault them for their passion.

But I'm afraid that this passion is blinding some of them to the reality of this debate. There are questions that need to be answered, as several of the people closest to this project openly admitted to me. Issues of financing, who owns and controls the land, details about the Mae Adams Foundation, the viability of the business incubator and digital media lab, and who is paying for what are questions that still need to be resolved.

I was taken aback when supervisor Robin Williamson attacked Smolenski after he stated the Chamber's position. She seemed not to understand the difference between withholding judgment and opposition.

And then I watched others pile on the criticism of the Chamber and Smolenski, in a seemingly coordinated attack. A cynic might look at this overreaction as proof that the supporters are trying to ramrod this project through no matter what, or that they have things to hide.

I don't think that is the case. I think some of these people are so caught up in the project that it is resulting in a breakdown of communications.

I sat down with Mayor Bob Crowell last week to talk about this project. We both agreed that each side in this debate have misconceptions about the other, many of them fueled by the multiple outstanding questions about the project.

Unfortunately, Glick's letter withdrawing from the Chamber widens this divide. Instead of understanding the Chamber's trepidation, they are vilifying them for it. How does that help the situation?

I think both sides of this debate need to take a step back. This bickering does not help us find the answers we need to take the right course of action. We need to answer the outstanding questions before taking a position on supporting or opposing this project.

City officials owe it to the citizens to withhold judgment until all the facts are in. Otherwise, they are going to split this city into the two camps, and that split will have ramifications far into the future.

This project has a much better chance of success if the people are behind it. That isn't going to happen in an atmosphere of accusations and threats.

So please, take a time out.