◆ SpookStack

Memo for Mr. Resen Siegel and his associates in connection with the construction of the Flamingo Hotel at Las Vegas. This stop order was dated August 7, 1946. At the time the stop order was issued the attorney for Siegel in Las Vegas, Nevada “requested the regional office of the CPA in San Francisce to allow the ¢con- struction of the building to be continued pending the outcome of the hearing, J7C which was scheduled within a week. The request ae: complied with. BULLD DIG PLAY I «2 CPA, upon doing contacted by Agents informed that the CPA repnlations specifically prohibited a person in : cifically hibited a person the field from giving information to other agencies. Ga off the a record, showed a diagram of the Flamingo Hotel, which comprised the Casino, the kitchen and the dining room surrounded by a 200-room hotel, of stores and a series of cottages which would complete the layout. advised that Building No. 1, which comprised the Casino, kitchen an g BX room, was actually under construction prior to the original CPA freeze order 4ssued on March 26, 1946. However, none of the other buildings were under construction nor were there any connecting tunnels or conduits “—_e ‘ that they Were & part of the structure under progress. According t relative buildings under construction, such as these wherein separate an distinct buildings were being built, the GPA has always refused to permit any — further buil x he ones actually under construction prior to the freeze orcer 2c out tec the Agents that based on previous CPA decisions in similar s he did not see how it would be possible for the CPA to give the Flamingo Hotel permission to continue with its conatruction. — He stated that the CPA had an “open and shut case against Siegel". | At the hea : , 1946, bet ore Sy o was appointed to hear matter, io. ° e se a ar i ets for the Flamingo Hotel presented a plan dated January 12 and contended s was the plan followed in the con struction of the Flaminge roves. A =i out at the hearing that bx this plan lacked details such as 6 on and he, therefore, questioned whether they could proceed with the building, using only the plans of January 12, The contractors for Siegel further preduced a letter directed to the CPA isd dated April 17, 1946, in response to a wire from the CPA dated April i6, | which stated that they mst stop construction if the construction was in i violation of the freeze order, The respondents produced a letter to the effect that they were proceeding on the plan of Jarmary 12 and as was 1 4 started before March 26 they were not violating any freeze order aeiaalall — 3 ‘ advised that the CPA failed to present any proof that the respon violating any order issued by the CPA, and from the facts presented he decided in favor of the respondents. pre mm exten Tomer cp ie genes s M LF] ‘ a 1 Mr i + he personally th b 2c of the CPA, and er ore the commissioner on August 15. . off ce erate ep ttn