More Times idiocy

Nevada taxpayers have taken a cue from the gaming industry, according to Monday’s New York Times. A lengthy report about the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act suggests we’ve all been “cashing in” at the “expense of taxpayers from the 49 other states.”

How dare we protect sensitive land and set aside acreage for active recreation without local taxes, bond issues or private donations?

Monday’s article, part of a five-day series on land management issues in the West, seems to suggest we’re stealing from Washington.

“Because of a stipulation created by the Nevada legislators, the money has not been deposited into the general federal Treasury, but rather put in a special Treasury account to be spent almost exclusively in Nevada on a something-for-everyone collection of projects,” the article states.

How audacious. Nevada actually wants to use its land.

It’s one thing to be hyper-interested in all things Las Vegas, but at least the Times could do it well. Maybe by the end of this year, Macau will really be the “New Vegas” and the Times can parachute its trained eyes into that town.

Contrary to the popular myth perpetuated in the Times piece, most of the valley’s “rampant population growth” hasn’t occurred because taxes are so low. That would suggest that Nevada has a diverse economy in which corporations vie for the best national talent by hyping the lack of a personal income tax.

Nevada has a service-industry economy, and the people flocking here for service-industry jobs largely depend on their unions to provide free health care and wages that, until recently, could pay for a house and send the kids to college.

Nevada’s tax burden cannot be overstated. The state ranks fourth (as in highest) for tax burden, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation.

The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, championed by Sen. John Ensign when he was in the House and former Nevada Sen. Richard Bryan, has freed up some of the federal land in Clark County to competitive bidding. Developers get to build houses, workers get a place to live and local and state governments get to collect property taxes.

To read the Times, you’d think we were creating a burden on the federal government by actually improving the land.

“I think that they just don’t understand just how much federal land we have in Nevada and how much we’re impacted by it,” said John Lopez, Ensign’s chief of staff. “Quite honestly, we’ve been spending the money on worthwhile things. This land would be worthless if it wasn’t for the local governments bringing out the infrastructure.

“We’ve added value to this land.”

Here’s another Nevada fact that just didn’t translate in the piece: Some 90 percent of the state is owned by the feds — and not managed that well, I might add.

Proceeds from land auctions have been spent making federal land usable or reachable. Some of the money built a visitor’s center at the Red Rock National Conservation Area.

The Times suggests some expenditures designated as conservation “have been so broadly defined that they resemble traditional pork.” The pork? A Web site, a mobile fire trailer and safety programs for the region’s abandoned mines.

Lopez said a full third of the proceeds from public land auctions has been spent on federal land.

“They don’t point out all the things we’re doing to make it better for all taxpayers,” Lopez said.

In fact, the Times suggests local authorities in eastern Nevada, covered under other land management acts, have grown more bold in spending auction proceeds. Ten percent of sales there pay for law enforcement, fire protection and transportation.

Here’s a bit of friendly advice to the Times: If you actually go to rural Nevada, you’ll quickly understand why 10 percent of the money is being spent on public safety. The feds aren’t out in force maintaining the land. The property tax rolls run really short. It’s hard to get around, and, thanks to the drought, it’s a tinder box waiting for a spark.

The Times, of all publications, seems to suggest the Bush White House has soured on the law because we’re spending it poorly. Actually, the feds want the money because we’re making the land worth something. All Bush and Co. see is the cha-ching of $2.7 billion to Nevada.

Of course, the sales weren’t supposed to bring in that much, which is why the White House took notice. Rest assured, the dead housing market isn’t going to help auctions keep pace with the record revenue collections.

What the Times suggests is a “Christmas list drafted in Carson City” is still largely all about conservation. Sure, we may be buying toilets for Lake Mead, but they’re at Lake Mead.

Gulf Coast states get to spend their share of the oil revenue on anything they want. At least our law specifies the proceeds will go toward conservation.

Contact Erin Neff at eneff@reviewjournal.com or (702) 387-2906.