Letter: Maybe BLM land could be leased

Monday, Nov. 30, 1998 | 11:32 a.m.

Re: "7,500 acres of BLM land beckoning Northern growth."

Has anyone given thought to the federal government retaining title to the 7,500-acre tract and long-term leasing it to a developer who would then develop and operate it as a long-term income property? This would mean more affordable homes for people who would own their homes but lease the land on which it is built.

It would also build long-term flexibility into the development, even to the basic layout of the streets and other common areas, by enabling needed land-use changes to be planned ahead and made gradually as leases run out or come up for renewal.

The developers would have a continuing stake in the success of the community as a place where people want to live -- as opposed to the present practice of "sell today, gone tomorrow."

Residents would have the benefit of a continuing management presence that would take a long-term interest in keeping up land values -- as measured by leasehold income. Such income in turn would reflect in real terms the residents' sense of security and satisfaction with their community.

A century from now, moreover, the land would still be in one title, which would facilitate conversion to other uses more appropriate to that time.

The organizational model for such a development would be Las Vegas' magnificent hotels, which are themselves very much communities even though specialized to a different market niche. What they have in common is that they are successful entrepreneurial undertakings providing a desirable living environment for their clientele.

Think what innovative ideas in community design and management might arise if North Las Vegas, the Bureau of Land Management and private community developers were to take a page from the notebook of Las Vegas's hotel industry. The idea opens many possibilities to the imagination.

Spencer H. Maccallum Tonopah