Latest news with #SouthernNevadaEconomicDevelopmentandConservationAct
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Developers, conservationists clash over bill to sell public land for housing
The Clark County Lands Bill would open 25,000 acres of public land in Southern Nevada to development. (Photo courtesy Kyle Roerink) Housing developers and conservation advocates clashed over a bill Thursday that would encourage the federal government to open thousands of acres of public land in Clark County for development, a move critics say will encourage sprawl and supporters argue would lower housing costs. Assembly Joint Resolution 10, a non-binding statement of support sponsored by Democratic Sen. Sandra Jauregui of Las Vegas, urges the federal government to prioritize the passage of the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act, colloquially known as the Clark County Lands Bill, which would open 25,000 acres of public land in Southern Nevada to development. The federal legislation is sponsored by Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto in the Senate and Democrat Susie Lee and Republican Mark Amodei in the House. Thursday was the first time state lawmakers held a public hearing for the resolution, which drew criticism from conservation groups and Nevada residents who spoke in opposition of the measure. Despite forgoing a public hearing, the bill passed the Assembly in April with only six members opposing it, all Democrats. During the Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections hearing Thursday, supporters of the measure told lawmakers the release of public land would spur the construction of affordable housing, but critics argued the measure does not guarantee housing affordability and would only encourage unsustainable urban sprawl and exacerbate water scarcity. Jauregui said there is a severe housing shortage in Nevada, leading to skyrocketing rents and home prices. Jauregui pointed to a 2022 report from Applied Analysis put together for the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association that found the region could exhaust all available land for development in seven years if current construction trends continue. 'This housing epidemic isn't just about a housing supply shortage, but also a land shortage,' Jauregui said. Several housing developers and business interests spoke in support of the resolution Thursday, including the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association, Builders Association of Northern Nevada, Nevada State Apartment Association, and the Greater Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce. The Nevada Republican Party, City of Henderson, Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority and the Nevada Rural Housing Authority also spoke in support of the resolution. Nevada faces a shortage of 80,000 affordable rental homes for extremely low-income residents, according to the Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority. 'This is not about unchecked expansion. It's about strategic, responsible growth that allows our communities to meet the real needs of families, seniors and essential workers,' said Mindy Elliot, a lobbyist speaking on behalf of the Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority and the Nevada Rural Housing Authority. Jauregui acknowledged that just opening public land to development would not be enough to address rising housing costs in southern Nevada. She advocated for the resolution in combination with other housing bills she is sponsoring, including Assembly Bill 241, which would encourage more infill development in urban areas. For nearly an hour, advocates and Nevada residents spoke in opposition to the resolution during public comments. Several took the opportunity to castigate Democrats in the Assembly for failing to hold a public hearing before passing the resolution. The Senate panel also came under criticism for scheduling the Thursday hearing at the last minute. The resolution's opponents cited concerns about water scarcity, utility costs, urban sprawl, and the urban heat island effect — a phenomenon that creates higher temperatures in cities due to an abundance of superheating man-made surfaces like roads and pavement. Some residents expressed concern about the financial burden on taxpayers to fund new infrastructure, services, and roads in low-density suburbs if the resolution passed. During the hearing, critics of the resolution also pointed out that the Clark County Lands Bill does not specifically set aside any land for affordable housing, meaning there is no guarantee any of the released land will result in lower housing costs. Jauregui refuted arguments that the Clark County Lands Bill would not create affordable housing, pointing to Ovation Development Corp's affordable senior housing project being built on land that had belonged to the federal government before it was released to the City of Las Vegas. 'It took five years for this land to transfer from the [Bureau of Land Management]. This new act will streamline the process that allows for these types of affordable housing developments to happen and to happen faster,' Jauregui said. Organizations opposed to the resolution included the Great Basin Water Network, Nevada Environmental Justice Coalition, Sierra Club, Make the Road Nevada, and the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada. Conservation groups argued that infill development of existing neighborhoods is a better solution than development on parcels sprawling along the metro area's edges where federal land would be privatized. Development would exacerbate water scarcity, increase urban sprawl, and worsen housing inequities. An analysis by the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada found that around 80,000 acres of vacant or underused land in Southern Nevada's urban core — more acreage than the entire City of Henderson — could be developed for housing near public transit and existing infrastructure. Olivia Taniger, the director of the Sierra Club Toiyabe Chapter, argued the resolution would undermine attempts to promote infill and public transportation development. 'Folks don't want housing out in Jean. They don't want resources taken away from their communities in East Las Vegas when folks already struggle to get around on public transportation,' Tangier said. She argued much of the public land released by the Clark County Lands Bill would likely be sold for warehouses and manufacturing rather than housing. Kyle Roerink, the executive director of the Great Basin Water Network, highlighted the cost of urban sprawl on water resources in the state. Roerink pointed to research that the Colorado River's flow has shrunk by about 20% since 2000, with further declines projected due to climate change. 'Are you willing to tell your constituents that you support inviting another 800,000 people to the region with Lake Mead sitting at 33 percent full? That's what you need to consider with this legislation,' Roerink said. A joint study by Clark County and the City of Henderson found that development under the Clark County Lands Bill could increase daily water demand by 49 million gallons, or about 18% of Nevada's total allocation from the Colorado River. Democratic Rep. Dina Titus, who represents much of east Las Vegas and Henderson along with the Las Vegas Strip, spoke out against the Clark County Lands Bill to state legislators last month. No action was taken on the resolution. The resolution will need to pass in the State Senate by May 23 before being sent to the governor's desk for final approval. Unlike bills, Nevada resolutions don't require approval from the governor. But Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo has repeatedly advocated the sale of federally managed lands to developers. Last month, Lombardo signed a data sharing agreement with the Bureau of Land Management to help facilitate the privatization of federal land.
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Titus rips bill that ‘doesn't do anything about affordable housing'
'That bill doesn't do anything about affordable housing and certainly doesn't require anybody to pay for the infrastructure that's going to be needed for that growth,' Rep. Dina Titus told state lawmakers about a measure the overwhelming majority of them support. (Nevada legislative stream screengrab) U.S. Rep. Dina Titus told state lawmakers Wednesday that efforts to open up more federal lands for development 'doesn't do anything about affordable housing,' and warned of the consequences Nevadans will face as a result of economic and budget policies being pursued by President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans. U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and U.S. Rep. Susie Lee, both Democrats, reintroduced the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act, commonly referred to as the Clark County Lands Bill, in March. The measure would open 25,000 acres of public land in Southern Nevada that Cortez Masto and Lee say could lead to development of more affordable housing. Opponents warn the bill is a recipe for unsustainable urban sprawl that will not significantly address the housing shortage. In a statement emailed to Nevada Current, Titus said she is opposed to the lands bill as it is currently written, saying it will make 'land available to developers to build more homes that average Nevadans cannot afford.' 'There is no requirement for set-asides for affordable housing in new developments,' in the legislation, Titus said in the email. 'Affordable housing should be the goal of a lands bill, not incidental to it.' Titus sponsored a version of the bill with Cortez Masto in 2021. In a statement, her office said 'it has become clearer since 2021 that developers want to build more expensive homes in the 'ex-urbs,'' and 'the cost of providing infrastructure has become prohibitively expensive' especially considering the impact of Trump's tariffs on building materials. State lawmakers recently passed a resolution backing the passage of the federal bill, which Titus took aim at while addressing them in Carson City. 'You're supporting a lands bill and think that's a silver bullet for affordable housing,' Titus said to legislators. 'That bill doesn't do anything about affordable housing and certainly doesn't require anybody to pay for the infrastructure that's going to be needed for that growth.' When asked about Titus' comments to state lawmakers, Lauren Wodarski, a spokesperson for Cortez Masto, said the senator has repeatedly called for an 'all of the above approach' to address the housing crisis. She also noted the legislation is supported by 'affordable housing organizations and local governments who all agree it is necessary to make more land available for housing development in Southern Nevada.' In her email to the Current, Titus also underscored the point she made to state lawmakers that the lands bill does not take into account 'the cost of providing infrastructure to outlying developments, which taxpayers rather than developers would be required to pay for.' She also said the legislation would 'create new burdens on our limited water supply.' Another 'major flaw' of the federal lands bill is that 'it encourages expensive urban sprawl when there are lands within our existing urban area that could be developed without distant and costly extensions of infrastructure,' Titus noted. A local analysis by the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern and the regional planning collaborative known as Southern Nevada Strong has shown significant infill land available. The study, released in February, found 78,285 acres that 'were identified as vacant or underutilized land' and 'approximately 85% (69,300 acres) was classified as vacant, while the remaining 15% was deemed underutilized.' Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo has long pushed for more federal land to be opened up as a solution to develop housing. Lombardo sent several letters to the Biden administration last year that blamed the administration for its role in the housing crisis, saying it wasn't doing enough to make more federal land available for housing development. Assembly Joint Resolution 10, which also calls on the federal government to release federal lands, passed April 17, 36-6, with overwhelming support from Democrats and unanimous support from Republicans. Six Democratic Assemblymembers, Natha Anderson, Venicia Considine, Tanya Flanagan, Selena La Rue Hatch, Cinthia Moore, and Howard Watts, voted against the resolution. The measure has not been voted on in the Senate. Titus, who herself served in the Nevada Legislature for two decades prior to winning election to federal office, spent most of her address to state lawmakers warning of a 'tsunami' of challenges coming to Nevada as a result of actions already taken by Trump as well as policies Trump is pushing the Republican held Congress to enact. Trump's sweeping global tariffs will will increase the price not only of consumer goods, but also the cost of housing, Titus said. 'If you're going to put tariffs on construction materials like steel, lumber and aluminum and you're going to try to build affordable housing, those prices are going to go up,' she said. Trump's many tariffs currently in effect include a global 25% levy on aluminum, lumber, and steel. 'Again, that's going to hurt Nevadans and make it harder at a time we need more housing for people to get into a house,' Titus said. Republicans in Congress have also proposed sweeping cuts to various federal programs including Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. Trump has issued multiple executive orders curtailing, halting or ending altogether federal funding for a host of federal programs. Elon Musk, the billionaire head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, has also cut swaths of federal funding, positions and projects. Noting about 30% of Nevada total state government funding comes from the federal government, Titus warned state lawmakers they will be forced to deal with the consequences of federal cuts. 'As y'all have to deal with every day, Nevada requires a balanced budget,' Titus said. 'You're going to have to deal with what's coming on May 1,' she said, referring to the date when the state Economic Forum will set its final budget limits that legislators and the governor must meet when they approve a budget for the upcoming biennium. 'When you get the economic forecast May 1, you'll be hearing how much funds will be cut and how much you can spend. I'm not too optimistic,' Titus said, adding 'it's likely you'll be back in a special session when you figure out just how much it is you're going to have to cut or pay for or eliminate.' 'You have to deal with this firestorm somehow,' she said.
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Westerners are up in arms about proposed public land sales. NV Dems don't seem to notice.
Lake Mead reservoir levels have dropped more than 150 feet since 2000. Federal officials project greater drops throughout this year. Echo Bay Marina, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, summer 2024. (Photo courtesy Kyle Roerink) While Lake Mead sits at about one-third full, a bipartisan cohort of Nevada's state lawmakers think now is the time to sell off public lands to support more Colorado-River-dependent homes and businesses in Southern Nevada. On Thursday, Nevada Assemblymembers, the majority of whom are Democrats, overwhelmingly voted to ask President Donald Trump to support selling off tens of thousands of acres outside of Las Vegas as fast as possible. The resolution implores the administration to support federal legislation from Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act. The news of the 36-6* vote in the Assembly comes as communities across the West are rising up and opposing efforts to sell off public lands. Coalitions of concerned citizens across party lines have reservations about these efforts to build in areas prone to drought, wildfire, or flooding. Nevada Democrats do not. Traditionally, public lands privatization is an issue championed by sage brush rebels and urbane developers aligned with the GOP. The Keep It Public movement in Nevada has some legitimate supporters but a dark underbelly. Thanks to a special carveout in federal law championed by Nevada Democrats in the late 1990s, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) sells off large chunks of public land that facilitates cookie-cutter growth around Las Vegas and praise from politicians. Across the West, the private-sector crowd views many places not named Yosemite or Yellowstone, or lacking a Grand or Great adjective, as blank canvases for industry. The industry du jour changes among the decisionmakers. But the lands are always expendable enough. Today, affordable housing is the artifice by which powerful interests believe they can get cheap land for major projects. For Las Vegas, there's less water in the Colorado River System and rapidly warming temperatures posing deep uncertainty. As for the overall quality of life, it depends on your income bracket. And most of the people championing public land sales don't fret around tax time. Many politicians are, after all, wealthy. For the masses, there are more regressive taxes and higher utility bills across Nevada than decades past. Nevada's public education system still ranks as one of the worst in the nation. The health care system is near the bottom rung. The well being of children is worse in Nevada compared to other states. And, of course, housing affordability is a major problem as investors like Black Rock buy up residential blocks that were, you guessed it, built on lands sold off by the BLM. A quarter century of practice can fairly raise the question: Is the public-lands-sale model working? Now is the time for Nevada to tell the others in the West: proceed with caution. Instead, Nevada politicians of all stripes are saying 'build, baby, build.' The challenge, of course, is finding an effective substitute that meaningfully incentivizes the private sector without further sapping the public in the long run. In Clark County, there are more than 75,000 acres of infill available. But developers aren't buying it at meaningful rates to appease political appetites. We have opportunity zones, abatements, investment trusts, deductions, and credits that industries benefit from in the West. Data centers, energy companies, mines, and casinos are a few industries that can attest to the benefits. Meaningful solutions to the housing problem will require financial tools and reasonable foresight too. And that will require more than milking the sacred cow of legitimized public land sales. We need to put people where there's existing infrastructure, high-rise opportunities, walkability, and mass-transportation options. There must be water and power infrastructure already in-place. But instead, Nevada Democrats just supported putting more folks in the wildland-urban interface so associated with the fringes and foothills of western public lands. These are water-scarce places currently home to desert tortoise and important carbon capturing environments. Many of the very people who attest to giving a damn about urban heat just voted to exacerbate the problem. But don't try telling them that. There's money to be made. The type of sprawl Nevada Democrats voted to support via AJR10 will warrant expensive new water lines, sewer systems, roads, electricity infrastructure, schools, fire stations, and a host of other intangibles that have costs that span decades. These are not one-time expenses. They are forever expenses. Nevada Democrats and Senator Cortez Masto are desperate to expand the existing policy from former Senators Reid and Bryan known because it dispenses proceeds from public land sales. And other states will take notice. Such revenue streams are red meat for states looking to Nevada as an exemplar. BLM accounts for $4 billion in revenue generated from public land sales since the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act first took effect. Public education, regional water managers, and the aviation department split less than $700 million since the genesis of the program, according to a federal report released last summer. New proposals would have to indeed fill the gaps. But it does make you wonder: Are public land sales the only way to support our community? Is it sustainable? Are the funds sufficient to cover the new needs that will inevitably occur. Nevada Democrats think so. But these are folks who also think that, of all things to ask President Trump to do, selling off public lands is the most pressing issue of the day. *The six members of the assembly, all Democrats, who voted against the resolution were Natha Anderson, Venecia Considine, Tanya Flanagan, Selena La Rue Hatch, Cinthia Moore, and Howard Watts.
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Public lands bill would open 25,000 acres to development in Las Vegas area
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — A public lands bill reintroduced by Democratic U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto on Wednesday would authorize the sale of up to 25,000 acres in Clark County, possibly opening new areas for housing and business development. The Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act (SNEDCA) also includes a 56,000-acre expansion of Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area and 9,290 acres to expand Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area. The move comes after Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo's call for more federal land to be turned over for housing last year as President Joe Biden proposed federal support for affordable housing. That produced a cooperative effort between county, state and federal officials to identify federally-owned land that could be sold cheaply to encourage affordable housing development. But critics warned against a Wild West approach to development. Cortez Masto's legislation could open up the door to explosive growth at exactly the time Nevada needs to be careful about using its resources appropriately. 45 sites identified for affordable housing concentrated in southwest Las Vegas valley 'This is not a bill for working people who can barely afford to get by,' according to Vinny Spotleson, chair of the Sierra Club's Toiyabe Chapter. 'This legislation exists to enrich developers with cheaper land in currently undeveloped areas.' Others pointed to the current water shortage as a megadrought continues in the desert Southwest. 'This dangerous piece of legislation takes money out of the pockets of existing residents,' Kyle Roerink, executive director of the Great Basin Water Network, said in a news release. 'But it also takes Colorado River water to places where it's never been before. With Lake Mead hovering at one-third of its capacity, this thirsty bill is not necessary or sustainable. Who will get left holding the bag: Those who can least afford it.' Roerink estimated the land that would be sold at closer to 30,000 acres, and pointed to a recent report that 82,000 acres is already available if developers would just fill in the valley's gaps. The bipartisan legislation will protect over 2 million acres of public land for conservation and recreation, including the designation of nearly 1.3 million acres of the Desert National Wildlife Refuge, which was established to protect the habitat of desert bighorn sheep. Last year, the bill passed through the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee with bipartisan support. U.S. Rep. Susie Lee (D-Nev.) is introducing companion legislation, cosponsored by U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nev.), in the House of Representatives. 'For years, I have worked with community leaders across Clark County to create this legislation,' Cortez Masto said in the announcement. 'As more and more people call Las Vegas home, we need to find a solution that promotes responsible economic development, builds more homes families can afford, and protects our environment and outdoor recreation. This much-needed bill is that commonsense solution and I'm going to continue working get it done.' Business representatives applauded the bill. 'Southern Nevada's continued economic diversification depends on the release of additional public lands,' Betsy Fretwell of Las Vegas Global Economic Alliance said. 'This bill is an important step forward in ensuring the sustainable growth of our region while preserving the natural resources that make Clark County a unique and vibrant place to live and work.' Maurice Page, executive director of the Nevada Housing Coalition, said, 'The Nevada Housing Coalition supports Senator Cortez Masto's efforts to balance conservation and economic development in Southern Nevada through the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act. This legislation represents an important step toward unlocking additional land for much-needed housing development while ensuring that sustainability and environmental stewardship remain priorities. Expanding access to land for residential development, particularly with provisions that prioritize affordable housing, is critical to addressing Nevada's housing crisis. We look forward to collaborating with policymakers and stakeholders to ensure that this bill translates into real housing opportunities for Nevadans.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
