Tue, May 6, 2008 (2:07 a.m.)

The deaths of 10 construction workers on the Strip since November 2006 have led to this question: Why should oversight of worker safety be the exclusive province of the undermanned Nevada Occupational Safety and Health Administration?

Las Vegas Sun reporter Alexandra Berzon’s ongoing investigation of the deaths has brought the shortcomings of Nevada OSHA to light. These include a shortage of staff — just 25 inspector positions for the Las Vegas Valley — and the state agency’s history of being soft on contractors found to have violated safety rules.

Clark County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani and Las Vegas City Councilman Steve Ross last week suggested local governments should also play a role.

Berzon provided a good starting point for this discussion Sunday, when she wrote in the Sun about New York City’s approach. The city long ago solved the jurisdictional problem that hampers local governments from being proactive about worker safety.

Although federal law bars local governments from usurping OSHA’s role, New York City officials successfully argued that the city has broad responsibility for public safety. This allowed city building inspectors — in addition to OSHA inspectors — to exercise authority over safety procedures in place at construction sites.

As in most jurisdictions, local government building inspectors here are primarily concerned with ensuring that buildings under construction will be safe for the future occupants. They are not tasked with checking for the kinds of safety violations that could put construction workers at risk.

Berzon checked with legal experts, who said ordinances could be passed that would add construction-site safety to the responsibilities of local building inspectors.

The only real barrier to this idea is money, as the inspectors are already overburdened and many more would need to be hired.

This is an issue for Giunchigliani, Ross and other local officials. Could more building inspectors, with the added responsibility of work-site safety, help prevent injuries and save lives? Would this initiative be worth the expense?

In our view, the answer to both questions is yes.