Leaders: Open more U.S. lands

WASHINGTON -- Fearing that Las Vegas slowly is running out of property for development, business leaders are suggesting that Congress expand the amount of federal land in Clark County that could be opened to builders.

Members of the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce floated the idea in meetings with Nevada lawmakers this week in Washington.

They also suggested that Congress expand the Southern Nevada public land law so that profits from federal land auctions in the valley could be used for a wider range of benefits.

"We are starting to run out of land to be developed in Southern Nevada," Steven Hill, president of Silver State Materials, told Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., in one of the meetings.

The topic was on the minds of at least some of the dozen members of the Las Vegas chamber and the Boulder City Chamber of Commerce who attended two days of briefings by Bush administration officials, lobbyists and congressional leaders. The meeting was organized by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev.

Ensign and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said they would consider the ideas raised by the chambers. But they cautioned that getting public land bills through Congress is a major undertaking.

Reid said it would carry risks. The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act that was passed in 1998 was unusually generous to Nevada, requiring that all profits from BLM land disposals be spent within the state, mostly on Clark County recreation and conservation.

Land auctions so far have generated a windfall of more than $2.7 billion. The Bush administration has tried unsuccessfully several times to divert a portion of those profits to other needs or to deficit reduction.

Hill asked lawmakers to consider broadening the law to allow land profits to be spent on transportation and other needs as well.

Nevada's senators have made small changes in the law in recent years that have allowed Lincoln and White Pine counties to share in the windfall. Reid said he and Ensign have talked about making further changes, "but it is something we have to be very careful about."

"It is really difficult to open that bill because people who are not from Nevada will want to spend the money on non-Nevada programs," he said.

Hill, whose company is a major concrete supplier, is chairman of the Las Vegas chamber's government affairs committee.

"At this point we are just having a conversation," Hill said of the land proposals. "As time goes on, that conversation needs to be had and we don't want to wait until it is too late and it causes a major disruption in the economy."

"It already is having a pretty significant effect on the cost of housing in Las Vegas," he said. The cost of land is growing in part because of a diminishing available supply, he said.

The 1998 law directed the BLM to make available 54,000 acres for development within a boundary that encircles the metropolitan area. Congress added 22,000 acres in 2002.

There also are "tens of thousands" of available acres around Laughlin, Searchlight, Mesquite and other communities outside Las Vegas, BLM official Carrie Ronning said.

The BLM has disposed of roughly 34,500 acres, according to Steve Tryon, assistant field manager for the Las Vegas BLM office.

At recent rates of development, Hill said the BLM land could be exhausted within a half dozen years or so. But others say the slowdown in the Las Vegas housing economy could draw out the process.

It is unclear how much more U.S. land could be identified for disposal or where it might be located. Tryon said Red Rock westward and Lake Mead eastward would make expansion in those directions hard.

Likewise, county officials want to hold off on development along the Interstate 15 corridor south of the city so as not to run afoul of air quality laws that could jeopardize construction of the proposed Ivanpah airport, the chamber officials were told during the week.

Land bills "are some of the most difficult pieces of legislation," Ensign told the business leaders. Environmentalists, developers, utilities, local governments, and land users like hunters and off-road enthusiasts inevitably clash.

As far as freeing land for development "every time we have done it, the only way we could is because we expanded wilderness as well. The environmentalists want more wilderness and the developers want more land to develop. It is a trade-off."

Porter said he supported opening other parts of the valley for development "but it is not as simple as just releasing land. You have to look at air quality and the future of water and infrastructure needs."

Porter, who attended most of the chamber briefings, said it was clear the topic concerned the business community.

"I think the fact that it was brought up with most every elected official means there is an appetite to find some specific solutions," he said.