Lawmaker rips county’s failure to audit air quality program

Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2001 | 11:19 a.m.

A move by the Clark County District Board of Health to forgo an independent examination of a controversial air-pollution control program is unacceptable, a ranking Democrat in the Nevada Senate said Tuesday.

State Sen. Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, said she has asked for a special hearing of a legislative subcommittee on air quality to consider the apparent unwillingness of the health board to examine the emissions reduction credit program, which became inactive in January, when new dust rules came into effect.

Whistle blowers and environmentalists dogged the emissions program for years, charging that it allowed companies to pollute.

Defenders of the program say it played an important role in reducing pollution for years.

In the program, companies were allowed to trade the right to put pollution into the air in exchange for reducing a particular kind of pollution -- fine, airborne dust known as particulate matter. The pollution credits in the program, compiled by paving dusty roads throughout the county, were traded and sold.

Although about $8 million worth of the pollution credits are still outstanding, rule changes governing the handling of unpaved roads made the program, health district staffers told the health board last week.

Since the program cannot continue in its present form, the audit isn't needed, health board member and Clark County Commissioner Erin Kenny said.

"That is unacceptable," Titus said Tuesday. The suspicions of program observers need to be put to rest, one way or the other, she said.

Failure to examine the program's history "would confirm people's suspicions, including mine," she said.

Titus has asked state Sen. Jon Porter, R-Henderson, to have an air quality subcommittee hearing to discuss the audit. Porter is chairman of the subcommittee, which closed a series of sometimes contentious meetings last year by directing the health district to perform the audit.

The order was prompted by a report by independent consultants that said there was evidence of widespread problems in the Air Quality Division, and specifically within the emissions program.

Health district board members, including Kenny, have called that order an unfunded mandate -- a mandate that would cost the district more than $500,000 in funds that are not available in the budget.

At the heart of the issue appears to be a jurisdictional question. Kenny said the Legislature shouldn't impose such a mandate on a local government entity, in this case the health board.

Porter, however, said it is within the Legislature's authority when it comes to health issues.

"We do have the authority protect the interests of the Southern Nevada community," he said. "We expect an audit and an investigation. If not followed through with immediately, we will legislatively insist on the audit being completed.

"It seems to me that some members of the board are thumbing their noses at the Legislature," he said. "It appears to me that some members of the board are hiding something."

Porter and Titus reiterated the subcommittee's demand that the audit be completed soon -- before the end of the legislative session in June. Porter said he believes that the audit could be completed, and results presented to the Legislature, within that time frame. The Legislature's direct authority over the health district is minimal, but the Legislature could direct the Legislative Counsel Bureau to do its own review of the emissions program, Porter said.

He said the health district should pay for it, however.

Kenny said she doesn't believe an audit would find evidence of wrongdoing, but said any examination would have to be complete -- no half measures -- because of the convoluted and complicated nature of the program.

The emissions program changed yearly in about a decade of operation, as board members tweaked the program with policy changes.

The full health board has not debated the issue of whether an audit should be done, and few have openly suggested that it should not. Health board members didn't respond to requests for comment Tuesday.

Kenny said that the question before the board revolves around money. The half-million that would go to an audit -- money that probably would have to be authorized by the Clark County Commission -- should be used to help fund new air pollution control measures mandated by the federal government, she said.

Hiring new inspectors to enforce recently enacted rules to control air pollution will cost $1 million or more, she said.

"We need to move forward, and not spend in excess of half a million dollars looking backward," Kenny said. "I certainly would hope that the Legislature would trust local elected officials to do their job and manage their finances."

In the middle of the battle between the Legislature and the health board are the Air Quality Division and health district staff members, who say they aren't opposed to a full audit.

Christine Robinson, division director, did not immediately return phone calls Tuesday, but said last week that she feels an audit would help clear the air of charges surrounding the emissions program.

But the ultimate decision to do or not to do the audit rests with the health board, Robinson emphasized.

Jennifer Sizemore, health district spokeswoman, said an audit is still a possibility. But if an audit is done, it should be done with an eye to the future -- toward determining what elements of the old program should remain and what needs to be done differently or discarded.