New county growth panel proposed

Traffic gridlock. Air pollution. Overcrowded schools. Zone changes.

Welcome to life in the Las Vegas Valley.

Go to any city council or Clark County Commission meeting, and it is obvious that Southern Nevadans are growing more frustrated with every new Rite-Aid or 7-11 that sprouts up in an area once zoned for single-family homes.

And while it may not always be as obvious as the heavy equipment grading its way across the valley, there have been attempts by local officials to get a handle on the ever-increasing population and its effects.

Take the two failed bids by Sen. Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, to create a boundary around the valley that would have restricted growth in outlying areas.

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, sponsored a bill to create a nine-member regional council to develop a 20-year regional plan, which passed the Assembly during the 1997 legislative session but died in the Senate.

Then there's the Southern Nevada Planning Authority, an advisory committee directed by the Legislature to provide a comprehensive report on growth issues during the 1999 legislative session.

The latest attempt to manage growth comes in the form of the Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition, which, if approved, will have the authority to discuss various regional issues, develop related policies and follow through on activities begun by the planning authority.

An inter-local agreement to form the coalition was unanimously approved this week by county commissioners and the Henderson and North Las Vegas city councils. If Las Vegas and Boulder City jump on board within the next month, the coalition could hold its first meeting as soon as Dec. 8, according to Betsy Fretwell, intergovernmental relations director for the city of Henderson.

She said she expects the coalition to improve communication between local governments and address pressing regional issues.

"This coalition has a lot of marching orders," she said. "One facet would be to discuss regional growth issues and possibly discuss planning policies."

The coalition is the brain-child of County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury who suggested taking the existing Government Efficiency Committee and changing its role to specifically address growth management. Among its responsibilities, it would make nonbinding recommendations to local governments on growth issues.

"I introduced the plan because there had been a lot of talk about regional planning," Woodbury said. "I just thought the time was right, and we could move forward."

Woodbury said, however, he saw no reason for this group to be legislated by the state.

"If we're not going to disenfranchise constituents, we can't make this a binding authority because someone's not going to have representation," he said.

Woodbury feels the coalition can play a valuable role on growth management. "Regional issues now have a consensus," he added.

Fretwell added that the coalition is a logical nexus to the planning authority when it disbands after the upcoming legislative session.

Guinchigliani said she appreciates what local officials are trying to do.

"But I don't believe the way this is written it is going to accomplish what the public sector deserves and wants," she said.

She finds the formation of the new coalition ironic considering the county did not support her bill despite the similarities.

"I amended my bill," she said. "The only thing I think is different is that I put timelines in ... I think it's an attempt to prevent us (Legislature) from enacting any legislation for regional planning.

"The public is sick of these eat, meet and greet groups that come together and don't come up with a plan. The coalition needs foresight and vision about what this valley is going to be."

County Commission Chairwoman Yvonne Atkinson Gates said the coalition is not a new idea.

"More than 3 1/2 years ago I had proposed putting together a regional board," she said. "When you have municipalities that abut each other, there is a need for communication."

Atkinson Gates said the coalition will allow all the municipalities in the valley to sit together and talk about common issues.

"Through coordination and consensus we can accomplish things for the community," she said.

A classic example, according to Atkinson Gates, is when North Las Vegas approved the zoning for the Texas and Fiesta hotel-casinos. That decision had an impact on the neighboring city of Las Vegas in the form of traffic congestion.

"The coalition now requires us to talk about things," she said. "It also gives us an opportunity to have the same regulations and to try to have consistencies between the county and all of the cities."

As to criticisms that the coalition creates more bureaucracy, Atkinson Gates said it will have the total opposite effect.

"Things that affect the valley will now be considered from a regional point of view," she said.

She compared the interlocal agreement to that of the Southern Nevada Water Authority.

"Through that agreement we address the issue of water in this valley jointly together, with no state intervention," she said. "We can accomplish the same thing (with the coaliton)."

Guinchigliani is not so sure.

"I hope that by them making this move they are ready to come to the table and that they are actually trying to come together with some progressiveness," she said.

Henderson Mayor Jim Gibson, who helped negotiate the coalition's inter-local agreement, said it will give his community a louder voice on regional issues.

"I think it is a wonderful first step," he said.

archive