Las Vegans would feel at home in Arizona

Las Vegas, we need to talk.

We've known each other a long time. I'm a proud native Nevadan. My family has been kicking around the Sagebrush State since 1881.

But there comes a time when you have to set personal history aside and do what's best for the community. That moment has arrived.

It's time for Clark County to secede from Nevada and attach itself to Arizona. Call it a native son's modest proposal.

I know it sounds irrational, but hear me out. It's the only reasonable way for Southern Nevadans to ensure their future economic prosperity. And the relationship is not without historical precedent.

Much of what we call Clark County was once known as Pah-Ute County in the Arizona Territory.

Pah-Ute County was created in 1865 by the 2nd Arizona Territorial Legislature and existed until 1871, when it was clipped like a toenail and made part of the Nevada Territory.

So, you see, we wouldn't actually be joining Arizona, but rejoining it after 140 years.

An Arizona hookup has other benefits, too.

Unlike our Northern Nevada neighbors, Arizonans actually seem to like us. Las Vegas is the second most popular destination for airline travelers from Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport.

Just think: No more getting an earful from Renoites about how Las Vegans are ruining their Silver State.

Sure, Clark County pays the vast majority of the taxes in the state, but that just means Northern Nevadans will have to start demanding that their corporate gold mines at long last start paying their fair share of the state's revenues in exchange for the billions in annual profits they extract and take to places like Colorado and Canada.

All I can say is, "Good luck, Winnemucca."

As an added bonus, joining Arizona means we finally will have big league sports in our new state capital, Phoenix. Baseball, football, basketball, hockey. From professional lacrosse to women's basketball, Arizona has it all.

You say Phoenix is too far from Las Vegas?

True, Phoenix is 285 miles away. Then again, Carson City is 441 miles from Las Vegas.

Sadly, we'd lose Lake Tahoe. But we'd gain the Grand Canyon, and that's more than a fair trade.

Granted, our business titans will have to bribe, I mean befriend, a whole knew set of politicians, but that's a small price to pay for the benefits of Arizona statehood. From what I read, Arizona politicians seem very, shall we say, approachable.

Newspaper columnists and Internet pundits will be delighted to know that Arizona appears to have even crazier politicians than Nevada. Say goodbye to Sharron Angle and hello to Constitution-shredding Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

But by far the best reason to cut ties with Nevada and jump the broom with Arizona is this: water.

By the Southern Nevada Water Authority's own dire projections, we're running short of it. One day soon, its bosses say, Clark County won't have enough water to enable it to prosper anew.

The water authority, of course, has a plan to solve this problem. It's spending billions to drill a hole through Sunrise Mountain to add another "straw" to suck water from a depleted Lake Mead. And it wants to spend many more billions on a pipeline from rural Nevada to parched Clark County. At best, the pipeline would increase our water resources by 200,000 acre-feet.

Southern Nevada's problem isn't that its residents are wasting water. It's the fact that we get most of our water from the Colorado River. And when the Colorado River Compact was signed into law back in 1922, the Silver State received just 300,000 acre-feet of water.

That was plenty in 1922, but not enough in 2011. The water authority's answer: the pipeline.

Forget for a moment that rural Nevadans are opposed to the idea and consider it yet another example of bully Las Vegas throwing its weight around. (They're right on that account.)

What I want to know is, how much is it going to cost?

Back in 2005, the water authority's experts calculated the pipeline's price tag at $2 billion. That sounds expensive.

By 2007, the new official cost projection had risen to $3.5 billion. That seems absurd.

But that's a drop in Lake Mead compared to the August 2011 estimate prepared as a worst-case scenario by the respected Hobbs, Ong and Associates: $7.3 billion.

And even that number is deceiving. It doesn't include the $8 billion in potential interest payments.

That's more than $15 billion for the water authority's $2 billion pipeline project. Water rates for current Southern Nevada users would skyrocket in the name of making way for possible new construction in a community that has thousands of houses sitting empty.

If Southern Nevada gets 90 percent of its water from the Colorado, and receives a mere 300,000 acre-feet from the river, how much does Arizona garner?

It's a staggering 2.8 million acre-feet from the Lower Basin alone. That's enough water to easily accommodate the growth of Arizona and its newest county.

What's in it for Arizona?

Millions in casino gaming tax revenue at a time that state, like so many, faces a budget crisis and numerous unmet needs. Throw in a few billion the water authority won't need to spend on a pipeline to White Pine County, and that ought to be enough dowry to ensure a fancy wedding.

The O'Callaghan-Tillman Bridge across the Colorado would come to symbolize our mutual devotion.

So comb your hair, put on a clean shirt and shine your shoes, Nevada, and let the courtship begin.

Sure, there are details to work out, but love and necessity will find a way. Call it a secession procession.

And if you find my idea too far-fetched to take seriously, then ask yourself the following question.

Which is a crazier notion: a quickie marriage of convenience with our old friend Arizona, or spending up to $15 billion on a water pipeline?

John L. Smith's column appears Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. Email him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call 702-383-0295.
He also blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/smith.