I've always said the real problem behind the water issues is not Mulroy or the SNWA, but rather weak and ineffective elected officials who refuse to lead and acknowledge there need to be limits to growth in a city in the driest desert on the continent.

Water is the most precious commodity in a desert community and for way too long it has been underpriced in the LV Valley. That said, any price increases should not penalize those who conserve or have low water use. Let the rates impact the most those who use the most water.

Also, the SNWA should immediately be told by its governing board to suspend pursuing the fiscally disasterous $15.5 BILLION pipeline and in-state groundwater development project and instead to study and report back to the board and the public the costs of other more enduring and less expensive in the long term options.

The money currently being spent on the pipeline would go a long way in paying for the needed third straw.

The single largest threat to Nervada's natural heritage is the SNWA pipeline. That is why the Center for Biological Diversity and myself are so passionate about seeing it get defeated.

To further set the record straight, neither the Center for Biological Diversity nor myself have ever opposed a proposed solar facility in Nye County or any where else in Nevada. A further example of Ms Haworth's sloppy fact checking.

If Ms Haworth could see past the tip of her nose, she would recognize that the statements and data I used in my LTE came from the environmental impact statement paid for by the SNWA as a requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act. But Julene and others, don't bother to read that document, it might contradict your baseless opinions.

The pipeline fantasy is a bad dream for Las Vegas tax and rate payers, ranchers, Tribes and rural communities, and Nevada's natural heritage. The now quoted $15.5 BILLION pricetag is understated as it does not included the monitoring and mitigation that would be required of the SNWA, nor the yearly operations and maintenance costs.

Las Vegas needs to face up to the need for growth restrictions and live within our water budget while working to acquire more Colorado River water and water from desalinization plants in Mexico and California.

Of course it would be too much to expect the Ms Haworth and the home builders and development community to understand this obvious fact.

Officials' silence on the matter recalls Theodore Roosevelt's famous phrase: "A typical vice of American politics is the avoidance of saying anything real on real issues."

Teddy Roosevelt got it right - the elected officials of Nevada and especially southern NV lack the courage and integrity to call the question on what is a sustainable future for the Las Vegas Valley. Considering we are in the driest desert in North American, and climate change reducing water supplies in general - both aquifer and river, it is not a doubling of the population as envisioned by SNWA planners.

If approved the water from the pipeline will only lead to a false sense of security and ultimately result in a cataclysmic collapse of southern NV - after destroying the basic ecosystems of central Nedvada in the process.

@ "WaterSmart" - obviously you are a SNWA flunky - that you JC, Zane or Lisa?

It is precisely because I was the Clark County Environmental Planning Manager for 5+ years and got to see the sausage being made as a member of the intergovernmental body of cooperating agencies for the environmental impact statement that my remarks and observations have credibility. I witnessed SNWA's squelching of questions and criticism by its own staff and other scientists.

When I suggested that the National Science Foundation or another impartial third-party should review the science and modeling being used, Pat Mulroy personally went to the County Managerto have me silenced and removed.

In addition, despite what your SNWA propaganda machine is trying to sell to the public, the environmental impact statement is NOT a portrayal of the worse case - the federal agencies are obligated by law to disclose the most likely case supported by science and data. The facts and figures in my letter come straight from the environmental document - sorry if it doesn't support your lies and distortions.

And SNWA is outright lying yet again when it claims that unproven monitoring and mitigation will prevent serious environmental damage from occurring.

As for Nevada state law, what SNWA leaves out is that the law permits them to suck dry the groundwater basins, killing plants dependent upon ground water and sending the water instead to support unsustainable growth in Las Vegas.

But SNWA and the pipeline are really just sideshows - the real elephant in the room is the need for the elected officials to do their job and begin a serious discussion on growth limits.

Cy, when will you wake up and research your story before publishing it?

The cost of the pipeline is now $15.5 BILLION as documented in a report provided to the state engineer by the SNWA. The pipeline is 306 miles plus laterals. The SNWA preferred alternative is for over 176,000 acre feet of water per year.

Your figure of 127,000 acre feet saved through cash for grass is bogus and way off - the correct figure is about 26 acre feet per year.

PS - any mitigation monies are tortoise "blood money", paid in echange for tortoise lives and habitat to be sacrificed for development.