Developers, conservationists clash over bill to sell public land for housing

The Clark County Lands Bill would open 25,000 acres of public land in Southern Nevada to development. (Photo courtesy Kyle Roerink)

Housing developers and conservation advocates clashed over a bill Thursday that would encourage the federal government to open thousands of acres of public land in Clark County for development, a move critics say will encourage sprawl and supporters argue would lower housing costs.

Assembly Joint Resolution 10, a non-binding statement of support sponsored by Democratic Sen. Sandra Jauregui of Las Vegas, urges the federal government to prioritize the passage of the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act, colloquially known as the Clark County Lands Bill, which would open 25,000 acres of public land in Southern Nevada to development. 

The federal legislation is sponsored by Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto in the Senate and Democrat Susie Lee and Republican Mark Amodei in the House.

Thursday was the first time state lawmakers held a public hearing for the resolution, which drew criticism from conservation groups and Nevada residents who spoke in opposition of the measure. Despite forgoing a public hearing, the bill passed the Assembly in April with only six members opposing it, all Democrats.

During the Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections hearing Thursday, supporters of the measure told lawmakers the release of public land would spur the construction of affordable housing, but critics argued the measure does not guarantee housing affordability and would only encourage unsustainable urban sprawl and exacerbate water scarcity.

Jauregui said there is a severe housing shortage in Nevada, leading to skyrocketing rents and home prices. Jauregui pointed to a 2022 report from Applied Analysis put together for the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association that found the region could exhaust all available land for development in seven years if current construction trends continue.

“This housing epidemic isn’t just about a housing supply shortage, but also a land shortage,” Jauregui said.

Several housing developers and business interests spoke in support of the resolution Thursday, including the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association, Builders Association of Northern Nevada, Nevada State Apartment Association, and the Greater Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce.

The Nevada Republican Party, City of Henderson, Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority and the Nevada Rural Housing Authority also spoke in support of the resolution. 

Nevada faces a shortage of 80,000 affordable rental homes for extremely low-income residents, according to the Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority.

“This is not about unchecked expansion. It’s about strategic, responsible growth that allows our communities to meet the real needs of families, seniors and essential workers,” said Mindy Elliot, a lobbyist speaking on behalf of the Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority and the Nevada Rural Housing Authority.

Jauregui acknowledged that just opening public land to development would not be enough to address rising housing costs in southern Nevada. She advocated for the resolution in combination with other housing bills she is sponsoring, including Assembly Bill 241, which would encourage more infill development in urban areas.

For nearly an hour, advocates and Nevada residents spoke in opposition to the resolution during public comments. Several took the opportunity to castigate Democrats in the Assembly for failing to hold a public hearing before passing the resolution. The Senate panel also came under criticism for scheduling the Thursday hearing at the last minute.

The resolution’s opponents cited concerns about water scarcity, utility costs, urban sprawl, and the urban heat island effect — a phenomenon that creates higher temperatures in cities due to an abundance of superheating man-made surfaces like roads and pavement.

Some residents expressed concern about the financial burden on taxpayers to fund new infrastructure, services, and roads in low-density suburbs if the resolution passed.

During the hearing, critics of the resolution also pointed out that the Clark County Lands Bill does not specifically set aside any land for affordable housing, meaning there is no guarantee any of the released land will result in lower housing costs. 

Jauregui refuted arguments that the Clark County Lands Bill would not create affordable housing, pointing to Ovation Development Corp’s affordable senior housing project being built on land that had belonged to the federal government before it was released to the City of Las Vegas.

“It took five years for this land to transfer from the [Bureau of Land Management]. This new act will streamline the process that allows for these types of affordable housing developments to happen and to happen faster,” Jauregui said.

Organizations opposed to the resolution included the Great Basin Water Network, Nevada Environmental Justice Coalition, Sierra Club, Make the Road Nevada, and the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada.

Conservation groups argued that infill development of existing neighborhoods is a better solution than development on parcels sprawling along the metro area’s edges where federal land would be privatized.  Development would exacerbate water scarcity, increase urban sprawl, and worsen housing inequities. 

Housing, or warehousing?

An analysis by the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada found that around 80,000 acres of vacant or underused land in Southern Nevada’s urban core — more acreage than the entire City of Henderson — could be developed for housing near public transit and existing infrastructure.

Olivia Taniger, the director of the Sierra Club Toiyabe Chapter, argued the resolution would undermine attempts to promote infill and public transportation development.

“Folks don’t want housing out in Jean. They don’t want resources taken away from their communities in East Las Vegas when folks already struggle to get around on public transportation,” Tangier said.

She argued much of the public land released by the Clark County Lands Bill would likely be sold for warehouses and manufacturing rather than housing. 

Kyle Roerink, the executive director of the Great Basin Water Network, highlighted the cost of urban sprawl on water resources in the state. Roerink pointed to research that the Colorado River’s flow has shrunk by about 20% since 2000, with further declines projected due to climate change.

“Are you willing to tell your constituents that you support inviting another 800,000 people to the region with Lake Mead sitting at 33 percent full? That’s what you need to consider with this legislation,” Roerink said.

A joint study by Clark County and the City of Henderson found that development under the Clark County Lands Bill could increase daily water demand by 49 million gallons, or about 18% of Nevada’s total allocation from the Colorado River.

Democratic Rep. Dina Titus, who represents much of east Las Vegas and Henderson along with the Las Vegas Strip,  spoke out against the Clark County Lands Bill to state legislators last month.

No action was taken on the resolution. The resolution will need to pass in the State Senate by May 23 before being sent to the governor’s desk for final approval. 

Unlike bills, Nevada resolutions don’t require approval from the governor. But Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo has repeatedly  advocated the sale of federally managed lands to developers. Last month, Lombardo signed a data sharing agreement with the Bureau of Land Management to help facilitate the privatization of federal land.