Letter: Nevada in need of tax reform

Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2005 | 9:12 a.m.

The residents of Clark County would like to inform the newcomers, such as James Sida (the author of a Nov. 27 letter to the editor, "If Prop 13 is so great, why the exodus to here?"), why two referendums for tax reform are necessary.

For several years Nevada voters grudgingly acknowledged the need for moderate increases in home and business property taxes, covering existing infrastructure and some growth. These same residents revolted when the politicians suddenly demanded outlandish property tax increases this year due to "growth" and won temporary relief through the state legislators. Now the politicians, who appear to be beholden to the developers of "Growth," must have some permanent restraints.

The proposal by state Assemblywoman Sharron Angle ("Proposition 13") would permit moderate property tax increases to support existing government services such as city and county bureaus, libraries, schools and police and fire protection. It does not address any other type of taxation. The intention is to maintain the existing infrastructure but divorce property taxes from the enormous appetite of new developments.

State Sen. Bob Beers is introducing a different proposal (the Tax and Spending Control initiative, also known as TASC) intended to limit all taxation to the percentage of growth. This acknowledges that maintenance of new construction will require additional taxation, but the costs of construction for "growth" will not come from taxation.

Passage and adoption of both referendums will merely force payment of growth to be some way other than through direct taxation. Perceived failure of similar referendums in other states could be due to the politicians' failed attempts to circumvent the restraints through outlawed procedures.

Richard E. Law

Las Vegas