News
Opinion
LAKE TAHOE — Nevada's latest iteration of a bill that threatens the state's withdrawal from the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency does little to build the consensus and community needed to truly improve the lake's quality or the quality of life for those who live and play here.
Although the current bill is more well thought-out than the previous version, it still continues to perpetuate a perceived divide at Lake Tahoe. The new bill pits Nevada against California, and Nevada against Con gress, in a political move with un known results.
It's not that the bistate compact that brought California and Nevada together to protect Lake Tahoe doesn't need a once-over — or that the agen cy that was created by that compact doesn't need some overhauling. It's that both of those goals could be ac complished more successfully with Nevada and California's lawmakers working together.
The Nevada Assembly should re ject Senate Bill 271.
Nevada has made its point that Lake Tahoe's regulatory structure needs to be re-examined, but that process will be more productive if it is done without ultimatums.
Although the current bill is more well thought-out than the previous version, it still continues to perpetuate a perceived divide at Lake Tahoe. The new bill pits Nevada against California, and Nevada against Con gress, in a political move with un known results.
It's not that the bistate compact that brought California and Nevada together to protect Lake Tahoe doesn't need a once-over — or that the agen cy that was created by that compact doesn't need some overhauling. It's that both of those goals could be ac complished more successfully with Nevada and California's lawmakers working together.
The Nevada Assembly should re ject Senate Bill 271.
Nevada has made its point that Lake Tahoe's regulatory structure needs to be re-examined, but that process will be more productive if it is done without ultimatums.
