Water Planning Initiative
Will Be on the County Commission's
March 11 Agenda

Citizens Advocating For A United Vision
Pamela Galloway & Marge Frandsen & Others
Pat Phillips

Commissioners Comments

Dear Washoe County citizens:

We are a nameless coalition of citizens advocating for a united vision in which Washoe County's future growth is determined by its sustainable water resources. Water experts maintain we have enough water to sustain a population of 600,000.

We are men, women, Democrats, Republicans, city dwellers and county residents residing in areas from southern Washoe Valley to the North Valleys and Spanish Springs, public and private sector employees and retirees, business people, environmentalists, current and former elected officials, candidates for public office in 2008, all very concerned about the future of Northern Nevada! We are united in our support for sustainable future county growth which ties land use to sustainable water resources. We are not "no-growthers" but rather "sustainable growthers".

Plan of action: At 2 p.m. Tuesday, Feb. 19 we will present the ballot question to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) during the public comment portion of its meeting, requesting we be placed on the BCC's March 11, 2008 agenda for consideration and action to place our land/water question on the November 2008 election ballot. We believe strongly that the voices of the general public deserve to be heard regarding our future growth, development, and use of water resources.

Pass it on! Please consider sharing this email will with your friends, neighbors, all concerned citizens and voicing support for the ballot question with your county commissioner representatives if the spirit moves you.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this regard.

Pamela E. Galloway
Marge Frandsen
Two of many advocates for a sustainable Washoe County

###
Go to Top

I noticed two interesting articles in the Reno Gazette Journal:  1) The BCC is considering the legality of a petition for preventing overuse of water; and 2) The editorial citing the Lake Mead/Lake Powell drying up and that it is important that it not happen in Reno.  Then, (Why am I not surprised??) that it will be caused by people who are selfishly keeping their water rights.

I support the right of the citizens to petition to protect water for the following reasons;
1.         THIS IS A CASE OF GREED vs. RIGHTS.  The current citizens are the ones who currently HAVE the rights.  They based their decision to locate a business and/or home because of what Reno is.  Last time I looked at the Constitution and the policies of this country and county, decisions are supposed to be based on rights.  Future citizens do not cast votes; current citizens make them.  They have just as much right (if not more) than speculators and power mongers.  The population is only protecting their rights.
This is where greed comes in.  The editorial actually headlines the very reason that Las Vegas and the two lakes are in danger, but they missed the point.  The decisions for rapid growth were directed at short-term and short-sighted results… more growth, more money, more power.  Short-term goals usually result in community, area, and business death if not tempered with long-term smart planning.  Overuse is a result of greed, not by the citizens, but of a select few who will profit from it on a short-term basis (growth, money, power).
I do not know of anyone who wants to live in a static or dying community.  EVERY citizen would enthusiastically support smart planning and growth.  All the people want is their rights.

2.         TRUST.  Having a Master Plan is great.  Nevertheless, history and experience have shown that the plan is only good until a business, usually a developer, and files to change their area.  If they do not get what they want, the city, be it Reno or Sparks, will give it to them.  The Planning Commission and other entities seem to be heavily comprised of invested interests such as contractors, engineers, developers.  As a result, the citizens either have given up or do not trust any of the decision-making bodies.

CONCLUSION
People and businesses have moved to Reno for a reason.  There is a quality of life that is rarely available in this world.  We want to preserve this commodity.  We do not want what is happening to Las Vegas, happen to us.  We want smart planning that will insure a bright, sustainable future for both citizens and businesses.  It will result in attracting higher-quality economic growth and quality of life.

A petition would allow the people a voice.  Isn’t that the bottom line?

Pat Phillips

###
Go to Top

Commissioners Comments
Humke:
--Wants the language to first go CAB's, NAB's, other elected bodies, TMWA, etc. for comments before putting it on the ballot.
--Several concerns re legality: Will it restrict commerce? Will it restrict regional planning board? Can a county ballot initiative amend state statute? Nevada water law works and "this throws much of that body of law out the window."

Galloway:
Wants it to go before the board as written on March 11. He also asked for a agenda item to repeal the Reg Planning Commission's approval of Reno's SPA (29,000 acres).

Jung:
Supports it going before the board on March 11.

###
Go to Top