LETTERS: MGM shouldn’t extinguish last free amenity

I retired to Las Vegas 12 years ago and love it here. I came because I loved the Strip and all it has to offer in entertainment, food and ever-changing beautiful casinos. My husband and I drive their two to three times a week to dine, shop and see the latest shows. We have stayed here despite the accelerating crime, increased cost of living, no public amenities such as a zoo, aquarium or museums, and our underwater home because we can always run to the Strip for an hour or two and enjoy the casinos.

Now, MGM Resorts CEO Jim Murren thinks we should also pay for parking, which would cost us a minimum of $520 annually ("MGM to charge for parking," Jan. 16 Review-Journal). We could no longer run down for lunch or drive from one casino to another, as we frequently do. Locals and seniors should be given free parking or pay a small fee (such as $25) for an annual pass.

I understand the Strip will never go back to the old days of customer service before profits, but at least let us keep the last free amenity. Pretend we matter.

Claudette Dorian

Las Vegas

Protecting NV Energy

I certainly agree with the letter from Jim and Christine Wunderlin ("Countering NV Energy," Thursday Review-Journal). I was on the verge of signing a contract for solar panels when the Public Utilities Commission rendered its rate decision. I would like to be part of the solar energy effort, but that decision made it impractical to proceed.

The fact that NV Energy will pay 13.5 cents per kilowatt hour for power from the Crescent Dunes solar plant near Tonopah instead of 11 cents per kWh from residential customers makes no sense, except to justify a rate increase. Additionally, that electricity must be carried over about 200 miles of transmission line. There will be power losses because of the inherent electrical resistance in the transmission lines.

Moreover, NV Energy announced plans to build a $1 billion gas-fired plant, another expenditure added to the rate base. And the Crescent Dunes project, costing more than $900 million, has a federal loan guarantee of $737 million.

I am less than thrilled that the PUC is taking such good care of NV Energy.

John Macdonald

Las Vegas

Stand up for solar

I am tired of hearing people complain about how rooftop solar owners receive government incentives and about how the rest of the ratepayers subsidize those homeowners by paying a higher rate for power. These people all seem happy that NV Energy got its way with the Public Utilities Commission, and that rooftop solar uses will have to pay their fair share.

Wake up. When NV Energy triples its service charge and cuts the buyback rate by 70 percent, do you think any of that increase is going to trickle down to you? That money is all going to end up in Warren Buffett's pocket. And if, by some chance, he decides to send some back to grid users, the extra money from those 6 percent, rebated back to the 94 percent, might come to 20 or 30 cents for you.

People are so upset about seeing someone else get something they aren't getting. So they are happy to see neighbors charged triple and paid back 30 percent of what the original deal stated. Rooftop solar owners paid their money in good faith based on what was offered, and they are getting shafted by NV Energy, just like we all have for years. I don't have rooftop solar, but I can appreciate the expense and effort those people invested to improve the environment, only to have NV Energy browbeat the PUC into going back on the original deal, now that it's too late to do anything about it.

Lou Young

North Las Vegas