Over the years we have experienced tremendous growth in our valley, and with this growth has come strains on our infrastructure and changes to our lifestyles. What is remarkable to me is how well our community has been able to accommodate this tremendous rate of growth. Through the effort and cooperation of the public and private sectors, we have maintained a thriving economy, improved the quality of life for our residents, and turned what otherwise might have remained a hostile desert into one of the most desirable living communities in the country. We have had to tolerate some growing pains along the way, because progress rarely comes without some inconvenience. But, overall we have an awful lot to be proud of.
The Federal Government has been a major player in southern Nevada throughout the years not only in its regulatory role, but also as a major employer and as a major landowner. To the extent that it is the purpose of this hearing to reevaluate the role of the Federal Government in Nevada, I would like to offer my observations and suggestions.
The activities of the Federal Government in land use decisions should be only those that are necessary to enforce provisions of the Constitution such as those relating to property rights, to the rights of citizens to freely locate, and to protect against unlawful discrimination. Further, the Federal Government should continue striving to achieve its national priority of providing decent, safe, and affordable housing for our citizens. Beyond this, it would seem that land use decisions are best made at a local level. The suggestion that the Federal Government become involved in "Smart Growth," whatever that term means, is frightening. Local governments are far better equipped to deal with land use decisions.
Over the years, the Federal Government has played a dominant role in protecting our environment, and for the most part the results have been satisfactory. However, it seems that the time has come to put some balance into the process. Some agencies and regulations have grown to the point of being overly burdensome and out of balance with other needs. In some cases, opponents of growth have abused the regulatory process to further their own agendas. As current regulations are enforced and new regulations proposed, I would like to see some cost/benefit analysis performed to assure that the burden of the regulation does not exceed the benefit hoped to be derived.
In particular, I am concerned that some of the regulations relating to air quality, water quality, wastewater treatment, wetlands, the disabled, and endangered species impose costs and time delays way beyond benefits provided. Compliance with overly burdensome regulations strains our ability to provide infrastructure necessary to accommodate those choosing to move to our community, and diverts our limited resources from more beneficial uses. As relates to the housing industry, such regulations drive up the cost of housing thereby denying housing opportunities to many families.
I am further concerned if unreasonable regulations adversely affect our ability to attract new industry to southern Nevada. Our economy is fragile because of its level of dependence on one industry. We need to attract new industry to diversify our economy and maintain its vitality. We should not allow concerns about attainment of perhaps unreasonable federal standards to discourage industry from locating here.
Discussion of Federal regulations also brings up the issue of unfunded mandates. If the federal government chooses to impose costly requirements on us, then the Federal Government should also be sure that adequate revenue sources are available to comply with these requirements. To do otherwise will limit the ability of our local governments to provide the other infrastructure and services expected from them.
Since the Federal Government is such a major land owner in Nevada, what it does with its land impacts all of us. I am happy to see that BLM will again be selling parcels of land in developing areas. A significant impact on the cost of providing infrastructure has resulted from the necessity to leap frog over BLM parcels. Allowing some of the proceeds from BLM sales to be returned to the local governments is a fair way to reimburse for the costs of providing the infrastructure that enhanced the values of the BLM parcels. I am also pleased that BLM will be working with local governments on decisions relating to the disposition of such parcels.
The auction of BLM parcels is a much better choice than disposition of land through the exchange process. The history of the exchanges seems to be that the government overpays for the property being acquired and undervalues the property being disposed of. This is not only a bad deal for the taxpayers, but also unfair to those who must acquire land in the marketplace.
I would be pleased to see more public/private cooperation as it relates to Federal facilities in southern Nevada. For example, our industry specializes in providing housing. To whatever extent we can participate in providing needed military base housing, we cannot only save the government a considerable amount of money, but also can provide better quality housing than is likely to be produced through other government procurement practices.
An area our industry would welcome help from the Federal Government is in regard to tort reform. The housing industry throughout the country has been attacked by trial lawyers promoting litigation as a means of generating unconscionable legal fees. The consequence has been that in many places liability insurance is prohibitively costly or unavailable. Many builders are unwilling to build attached for-sale housing because of a fear of class-action suits. The result is that a sufficient quantity of affordable housing is not being built.
A final area of concern I have is the speed with which we are able to respond to our growth needs. We are growing fast in southern Nevada which means we need to act fast to provide the infrastructure we need to support this growth. We need new roads, highways, water systems, sewer systems and so forth built now.
To whatever extent the federal government can assist in providing funding and expedite the process will be beneficial to all of us. Delays are costly both in terms of money and in terms of the quality of life for our residents.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you, and would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.