Thoughts on property tax reform

To the editor:

Why aren’t real estate taxes decreasing as property values are dropping?

In the first place, why should those who buy real property with after-tax dollars then have to pay additional “rent” to their local governments indefinitely? It’s interesting to note how the political class recoiled with horror at that portion of last year’s eminent domain initiative that would have declared property rights “fundamental rights.” Can we be taxed for exercising a “fundamental right”?

But second, even if property taxes are deemed an appropriate way to fund local governments, why not set the annual or biennial budget, add up a “grand list” of assessed property, and then regularly reset the tax rate to produce only the revenues needed — with the rate to be OK’d by public vote of the elected County Commission?

Dana Sorenson

SPARKS

Year round

To the editor:

Some 20 or 30 years ago, when I lived in the Chicago area, a neighboring community was growing at such a fast pace that they couldn’t keep up with school construction. The absence of a larger tax base may have also contributed to the problem.

As a result, the town fathers elected to utilize year-round schools.

The idea was to have longer breaks during the year, therefore freeing up classroom space for additional classes. They would also need fewer teachers because the teachers could switch to a new group of students on each break — and the teachers would be paid more for the increased time spent annually in the classroom.

Great idea, and it worked for a while.

The smarter children were able to retain more of what they learned as a result of the shorter breaks. Meanwhile, the parents of the less-smart children did as usual and complained about the inconvenience of things such as scheduling vacations.

A few years later, the system was discontinued and the property taxes went up to cover the additional cost of building new classrooms and hiring new teachers.

I understand that under the 12-month system here in Clark County, rooms are locked on track break, the air-conditioning runs 24-7, and the district needs extra teachers because they also go on track break.

Why do we have this ridiculous system if there is no reward?

Glen Standridge

HENDERSON

Rolling around

To the editor:

The proposed recycling changes that will feature larger containers may be good for some. But they will not work for many who are elderly or disabled.

The person who is making these decisions should spend a few days in a wheelchair trying to use and move these things around. There have to be options for people who cannot manipulate large, heavy objects.

This is just as hard as trying to negotiate the temporary sidewalks on the Strip, such as those between the Wynn Las Vegas and The Venetian, with a wheelchair. The law requires a minimum width of 36 inches for one-way traffic and 60 inches for two-way traffic — yet these range from under 3 feet to possibly 4 feet wide. The county allows the blatant violation routinely.

TX Vogler

LAS VEGAS

Yucca water

To the editor:

Amid all the rhetoric that goes back and forth about the Yucca Mountain water issue, if you read between the lines you’ll find some interesting information that the state authorities and our local congressional delegation don’t really want known.

In regard to the accusations that the Department of Energy is “stealing” Nevada’s water, what they don’t tell you is that all the water being used for the drilling operation is going right back into the ground, within just a few miles, and into the very same groundwater basin as the wells that it was drawn from. The state of Nevada is not losing water to this program at all. It’s going right back where it came from, often within hours of being pumped. But the politicians don’t really want you to know that.

I find it interesting that, for years, Nevada politicians, press and bureaucrats have loudly proclaimed that “science” shows Yucca Mountain to be a bad site for nuclear waste. Yet all the time they are making these claims, they are working very hard to prevent or shut down the very science that, if their claims were true, would support their arguments. That tells me that they may not be as confident in the science as they want you to think they are.

It’s hard to criticize those who advise us not to trust the government. But one thing I’ve learned over many years regarding this mess is that the federal bureaucracy has no monopoly when it comes to official government dishonesty — not with the competition they’re getting from the government and congressional representatives of Nevada.

DAVID MERRITT

AMARGOSA VALLEY