County discusses tightening worker residency requirement

By Kyle B. Hansen

Tuesday, May 4, 2010 | 6:05 p.m.

Clark County commissioners today moved forward on tightening rules that limit where county employees can live.

A county ordinance passed in 2007 prohibits county employees from living outside the county, but it made an exemption for employees in Laughlin and grandfathered in current employees.

Commissioner Steve Sisolak wants loopholes closed so all employees live in the county.

“There’s not a sense of community at all when they get in their car and drive back over the bridge across the river and they don’t buy homes or rent houses or apartments in Laughlin. They don’t spend their money in the stores or the restaurants,” Sisolak said.

“I think it’s ironic or offensive when we get up here and, me included, talk about keeping the business local and let’s hire local contractors and local people, and we’re not even doing it ourselves at the county level,” he said.

Commissioners didn’t take action on the proposal Tuesday, but directed county staff to investigate the issue and return with proposed changes to the ordinance.

Sisolak was previously told that 123 Clark County employees live outside the county, but county staff told the commissioner Tuesday that number is probably high.

For example, a University Medical Center nurse who was thought to live in San Francisco actually relocated to Southern Nevada, but for some reason the nurse’s address was never updated.

Still, other commissioners voiced support for Sisolak’s efforts.

Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani said the Laughlin exemption that was included in the ordinance was needed to get enough votes to pass the commission at that time.

“Personally, I would not have any problems with removing an exemption,” she said.

Commissioner Tom Collins said at one time there was a cost-of-living difference between Laughlin and Bullhead City, Ariz., and there was a housing shortage on the Nevada side of the state line, but that’s no longer the case.