Rural counties oppose open-space initiative

Thursday, March 7, 2002 | 11:07 a.m.

FALLON -- A November ballot initiative that would provide $120 million for parks and open-space protection in Clark County divided participants attending the Nevada Land-Use Summit on Wednesday.

The initiative would provide $200 million in new property taxes for natural resource protection statewide, with 60 percent of the total going to Clark County for parks, trails and other projects. The ballot question was approved by the Legislature during the 2001 session.

At the land-use summit nine groups formed from about 250 participants discussed the initiative and the impact on access to public lands. A handful of groups supported the initiative, representing a consensus among environmentalists and some state officials who supported the measure.

But participants from rural counties in the state expressed reservations or opposition to the ballot question. Some cited the 88-cent per $100,000 property tax that would back bonds to fund the effort. Others said converting private land to public property -- a central aspect of the initiative -- would be bad policy for counties such as Lincoln, where more than 98 percent of all land is public and managed by the federal government.

"If Las Vegas wants to build parks, don't tax me for it," Lincoln County rancher Bevan Lister said.

He said turning over rural land to the state for use as parks has been bad for his area.

"The state is letting it go to ruin," Lister said.

Bill James, a Las Vegas-area resident and Sierra Club member, said he supports the initiative but believes it could be a tough sell to voters in Clark County and the rest of the state.

Though some of the $200 million is targeted for specific projects, such as $60 million for the Las Vegas Springs Preserve and $20 million for reconstruction of the Truckee and Carson rivers, about $100 million would not go to particular projects but instead provide a fund for grants for rural protection and park development.

"How are you going to convince people to vote for something when they don't know where it's going?" James asked. "I'm all for it, but I'd like to know more."

Maria Ryan, a natural resources specialist for Cooperative Extension Service in Clark County, said she supports the measure because it would relieve pressure on open public lands, providing structured recreational opportunities for Southern Nevada's 1.5 million residents. But Ryan said she knows the initiative could be a tough sell.

Residents in rural areas, surrounded by rich natural resources, have a different perspective on environmental protection, she said. Also, those same residents will fear that land in their counties could be permanently off-limits to development to provide recreational spaces for urban dwellers in Las Vegas or Reno.

"The rurals are going to have a hard time accepting it," she said. "The urban counties are putting so much pressure on them."

While the discussion groups were divided on the ballot initiative issue, they found consensus on other matters. The groups found that access to federal public lands must be preserved, and that education and planning efforts to enhance both access and the experiences of visitors must be developed.

The annual land-use summit is designed to bring people together from throughout Nevada to discuss policy issues. Participants include mining and commercial interests, ranchers, environmentalists and state, federal and local government officials.

On Friday and early next week, organizers -- among them State Sen. Dean Rhoads, R-Tuscarora, and Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga, D-Fallon -- will work to turn recommendations produced by the participants into "action plans." De Braga said committees to examine the summit issues in more detail and, ultimately, legislation, will come from the conference.