Nugget Project: The FAQ spin

When I was at the Nugget Advisory Committee meeting last week, a PR person working for P3 Development and the Carson Nugget handed me a list of Frequently Asked Questions about the project.

One thing a complex project like this could really use is an FAQ list. Of course, this list came from those developing the project, so a little spin was to be expected. But I was surprised at how much spin there was.

The biggest whopper came on the last page:

Q. Isn't this just an easy way for the Carson Nugget to get a free parking garage?
A. No, the Nugget has more parking that it needs. The Nugget actually doesn't want a parking garage. Its present parking is the preferred surfaced parking, as no casino customer prefers to wind through a garage....

When I first read this, I couldn't help flashing back to the tale of Br'er Rabbit, "Oh, please don't throw me into the briar patch!"

If that line about casino customers hating parking garages is true, then Nevada is in trouble, since some of the biggest casinos in the state have them.

Perhaps these FAQs were written before the recent change in the weather when the value of a parking garage became very obvious. Being able to park your car inside and walk into the casino protected from rain and snow certainly seems like an advantage to me. Even in the summer, having your car and person protected from the blazing sun seems like a no-brainer.

If the Nugget really doesn't want a parking garage, the city could save $5.7 million and not build one for them. If the Nugget has more parking than it needs, certainly it wouldn't miss that one little section where the library and public plaza would be located, right?

That's possible, but then the Nugget would have problems with parking if and when it moves forward with adding a hotel to that property, which is why it wants the parking garage in the first place. The people who drew up the plans for this project didn't wrap the hotel around the parking garage by accident.

Methinks this is an overreaction to the accusations that the Nugget and its president Steve Neighbors are pushing this project solely to benefit the casino.

I would argue that Neighbors and crew have been guilty of overselling this project as purely philanthropic. Certainly that is a part of what is going on here, but trying to claim it doesn't help the casino arouses suspicions among the skeptical, and erodes trust.

On that note, here is another whopper:

Q. Doesn't the Carson Nugget stand to benefit as the land owner?
A. No one benefits from the land but the community....

The rest goes on to detail how the land is being donated and none of the money comes back to the Nugget.

But certainly the value of the Nugget casino property will be greatly enhanced by turning an old, ugly parking lot into a new library and public plaza with a water feature, and a new parking garage right outside the back door. Add in the hotel and office buildings, and the increase in business and overall value of the casino is very obvious.

Just because the Nugget stands to gain from this project is no reason to oppose it. On the contrary, this project should add value to the Nugget, the downtown area and the city as a whole. That is its goal.

The argument will be if the benefits of the project as presented will go disproportionally to the Nugget at the expense of the taxpayers. Certainly the placement of the $5.7 million parking garage benefits the Nugget almost exclusively. In reality, this is the amount the city would be paying for the "donated" parking lot where the library and plaza would be located, and that's a lot to pay for such a small piece of land.

Is this a deal that benefits all parties? That's a question yet to be answered and added to a FAQ list.