City officials regroup on annexation bid

Launce Rake, Diana Sahagun and Angela Soo

Wednesday, Aug. 1, 2001 | 10:52 a.m.

Doug Selby is not used to facing a picket line when attending private land-use meetings.

Selby, deputy city manager for the city of Las Vegas, braved those pickets for a closed-door meeting with the federal Bureau of Land Management on Tuesday. A frustrated Selby said afterward that the protesters are missing the point: A proposed 80-square-mile annexation to the city doesn't imply bulldozers immediately burying environmental resources throughout the huge swath of land.

"It's just a line. It just extends the city's boundaries," he said. "Protecting the environment is not something I take lightly."

City and BLM officials met for the first time since last week's request to annex the land surfaced. The request generated a resounding "no" from the BLM, puzzlement from county and federal elected officials and vocal opposition from environmentalists.

Many feared that the annexation, which would double the size of Nevada's biggest city, would also double the amount of developed land at the heart of the county. And a universal concern of annexation opponents was that consultation -- with the environmental camp, with neighboring governments and other agencies -- didn't occur.

Some of those issues spilled over into a taping of KLVX Channel 10's Nevada Week in Review program Tuesday night, which will air Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Clark County and Las Vegas officials sparred over the annexation issue during the taping.

Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said at the taping that the city would withdraw the portion of the annexation request that affects the Desert National Wildlife Refuge -- about half of the original request, and a particular point of concern for environmentalists.

Goodman said that the county shouldn't have been surprised by the annexation request because the city has discussed growth for two years. But he agreed that the city erred in failing to consult Sens. Harry Reid or John Ensign on the annexation.

City Councilwoman Lynette Boggs-McDonald said the county will try to develop the 80 square miles if the city doesn't.

"I don't want anyone to be fooled that even if it stays within the county that it would not be developed," she said.

However, County Commissioner Mary Kincaid-Chauncey said the county isn't likely to support developing the area because the only close sewer connections are to city lines.

Kincaid-Chauncey said air quality protection plans now under federal review don't permit development in that area, outside the urban core.

That brought a sharp retort from Boggs-McDonald, one of a number of city officials who bitterly opposed the county's just-completed takeover of all air quality programs.

"So you're going to control our land use because it affects air quality," Boggs-McDonald said. "I thought you weren't going to do that."

The county had promised a fair and generally hands-off approach to city land-use policies during the sometimes acrimonious debate over the air quality issue.

But the city lost that battle, and so far has lost the annexation question as well.

Selby said the city has heard the concerns from all quarters, and is rethinking the approach to the issue. One possible route to bringing in multiple stakeholders into the conversation would be to discuss the issue in meetings of the Regional Planning Coalition, an advisory board, which includes members from the county and other local governments.

Selby said the city doesn't have a firm timetable for discussing the issue, and potentially has a lot of time to decide on a course of action.

"All that's kind of speculation right now," he said. "We're still looking at the issues. It's up to the city to make the next move, and we haven't decided what that's going to be."

Mark Morse, BLM field manager, said his agency had to reject the city's request because annexation almost certainly implies development -- and that means that everyone with a stake in the issue, from a private landowner to the Clark County Commission, should have at least the opportunity to voice their concerns or support.

"Annexation (of federal land) usually doesn't need full exposure, but in this situation, annexation is a first step," Morse said. But he understands the city's concern that the land to its northwest is the only place to grow.

"They have to do what they think is right for their city."

The BLM is trying to make sure that everybody with an opinion gets to make their point, he said.

About 20 protesters outside the BLM offices wanted to ensure their point doesn't get lost.

"I realize we need some growth, but we have to do it right," said Elizabeth Meinhold, a protest organizer who lives at U.S. 95 and Durango Road, a few miles from the targeted area.

"This is the last part of the pristine valley that we have. It's not just about being a tree-hugger," Meinhold said. "It's about building a strong community that's not just predicated on building and building."

Among the concerns of the protesters is that about half of the proposed annexation is a federal wildlife refuge.

"To annex a wildlife preserve is insane," said Alan O'Neill, executive director of Outside Las Vegas Foundation, a nonprofit group the works to preserve federal public lands around the Las Vegas Valley.