LAS VEGAS -- U.S. District Judge Kent Dawson issued a ruling Friday stating Concerned Citizens for a Safe Community and its president, Donna Cox, failed to meet the burden of proof necessary for the issuance of a temporary restraining order against the proposed Pahrump federal detention center.

While the request for the temporary restraining order was thrown out, a hearing is still pending at 9 a.m., Jan. 21, at federal court in Las Vegas on a request for a preliminary injunction to stop the project.

Nancy Lord, attorney for CCSC, argued for the order in federal court Dec. 23 against Josh Aicklen, attorney for Corrections Corporation of America, and Nye County Chief Civil Deputy District Attorney Ron Kent.

CCA was awarded a development agreement by county commissioners Dec. 16, to build a federal detention center to house up to 1,500 inmates awaiting trail in federal court or deportation at 2250 E. Mesquite Ave.

While CCSC cited the final environmental impact statement, which states the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is concerned about the potential impacts of the proposed project and the uncertainty of the water supply, Dawson said the same EIS replies to those issues.

He said the development agreement addresses impacts of lighting, visibility, emergency services, public safety and water and sewer requirements.

Paul Burris, regional manager of Utilities Inc. of Central Nevada, said last week no agreement has yet been signed to provide water and sewer service to the federal detention center and no hearings have been scheduled before the Public Utilities Commission.

While the plaintiffs argued the EIS violated the National Environmental Policy Act, because it failed to look at impacts of the project on the desert tortoise, burrowing owl and their habits, as well as Yucca trees, their only claim consisted of anecdotal sightings of tortoises and burrows, Dawson said.

The EIS documented wildlife surveys at the proposed construction site following protocols set by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the judge said.

Lord charged, in her complaint, a final biological opinion on impacts to the desert tortoise hasn't been issued. A draft biological opinion recommends remediation and a fence around the area before grading, with the expectation two tortoises will probably be killed.

"While plaintiffs argue with the findings, they have not produced admissible evidence demonstrating that those findings are erroneous," Dawson's order states.

The federal court could have jurisdiction to review the actions of federal agencies, but the complaint doesn't mention an agency of the federal government as a defendant, like the Office of the Federal Detention Trustee which prepared the EIS, Dawson said.

While lawyers for CCA and Nye County claimed they weren't federal actors during the Dec. 23 court hearing, Dawson said he isn't making a decision at this time on whether the federal court has jurisdiction except to find the plaintiffs haven't shown they are likely to prevail.

Dawson said without elaboration, "Documentation filed with the response of the Nye County defendants controverts plaintiff's claims regarding open meeting and zoning law violations."

Lord had alleged the county held meetings without giving a three-day notice to the public, including one meeting with only a day's notice. The decision by the county commission to overturn the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission recommendation to deny rezoning for the Mesquite Avenue site was arbitrary and capricious, she claimed.

Dawson cited various court cases in explaining why the plainttiffs need to show irreparable injury and the inadequacy of legal remedies to seek injunctive relief in the federal courts.

"Plaintiffs have not demonstrated immediate and irreparable harm. There is adequate time for discovery and a hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction before construction can be commenced," Dawson wrote. "Insofar as can be determined from the evidence before the court at this time, there is no threat of immediate or irreparable harm."

CCSC and Donna Cox haven't proven the public interest favors the restraining order, the judge wrote.

"The letters from residents who do not want the project near their homes or properties is not an adequate showing that the public interest favors issuance of a temporary restraining order. The duly elected representatives of the community have voted to approve the project. Public interest beyond the community clearly favors the project," Dawson wrote.

The complaint only lists two plaintiffs, Dawson said. There hasn't been a disclosure of how many members belong to the Concerned Citizens group.

"While the court is sympathetic to the concerns of property owners in the vicinity over possible diminution of property values in the area of the proposed prison, this is clearly a political issue to the extent the project does not involve issues of eminent domain," Dawson said.