Lawmakers aim to rethink excessive water use penalties in Southern Nevada
Jeniffer Solis
(Nevada Current) The Las Vegas Valley Water District implemented a water rate structure two years ago that imposed hefty levies on the valley’s biggest residential water users. Now state lawmakers are seeking to reexamine those fees following years of community pushback.
Residential water use accounts for 60 percent of the water consumed in the Las Vegas Valley. The excessive use fee was designed to affect the 10 percent of single-family residential customers who are the largest water users, and slow the flow of the valley’s diminishing water resources.
But critics of the excessive use fee say the measure does not consider the lot size of properties subject to the fees and disproportionately impacts those living in the City of Las Vegas and unincorporated Clark County. The cities of Henderson, North Las Vegas, and Boulder City do not have excess use fees.
The Assembly Committee on Natural Resources heard Senate Bill 143 on Monday, a bill that would authorize the Joint Interim Standing Committee on Natural Resources to evaluate and review the excessive use fees and other water conservation efforts that impact turf and tree canopy.
If passed, lawmakers would be tasked with making recommendations for the 2027 legislative session.
The bill, sponsored by state Sen. Rochelle Nguyen (D-Las Vegas), passed the Senate in April with unanimous bipartisan approval.
Nguyen said the bill’s intent is to examine water conservation efforts in Nevada, particularly in older neighborhoods with more mature landscaping and larger lot sizes that may require more water.
“A large part of my district is in older neighborhoods, often historic neighborhoods, and a lot of those older neighborhoods have lots of mature landscaping, including a tree canopy that’s often 50 to 75 (years) if not older in age,” Nguyen said. “These older residential communities are really the closest things that we do have to an urban green space and places that are lacking investment by our municipalities and new parks and green spaces for outdoor recreation.”
Nguyen said residents in her district have repeatedly expressed frustration about the disproportionate impact of excess use fees incurred by maintaining their mature landscaping.
In Southern Nevada, the excessive use charge applies to residential water customers who exceed certain seasonal thresholds. The charge is $9 per 1,000 gallons of water used beyond the threshold.
“We have plenty of people that cannot afford the landscaping and water costs associated with maintaining their existing landscaping,” Nguyen said.
During the hearing, supporters of the bill said they fear the excess use fees would eventually drive the loss of mature tree canopy in Las Vegas, lower air quality, and increase 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.
Robert Hillsman, an anesthesiologist and one of the top 100 water users in Las Vegas in 2023, spoke in support of the bill. Hillsman said he has landscaped much of his one acre property and his water bill has doubled due to the excessive use fees.
“There are hundreds of thousands of dollars in landscaping, and despite the removal of grass, my water bill now exceeds $3,000 per month. This is due to the very unfair, lowered limited gallons and very abusive excess water surcharges,” Hillsman said.
Hillsman argued the excess use fee does not help mitigate the “rapidly escalating urban heat island effect.”
Andy Belanger, the director of Public Services at Las Vegas Valley Water District, said the excess use fee is working as intended.
“The excessive use charge was designed to increase water conservation among people who are price insensitive to water conservation, and it has done that,” Belanger said during the hearing.
“It only hits the top 6% of water customers because nearly half of them have changed their behavior. The people who are still paying that, have been resistant to change,” he continued.
Belanger emphasized the importance of water conservation in a state that only receives about 2% of Colorado River flows.
While the Las Vegas Valley Water District testified as neutral on the bill, Belanger said the agency would support the idea of a study on water conservation and was fully prepared to defend the excess use fee in front of the Joint Interim Standing Committee on Natural Resources if the bill passed.
Laura McSwain, Founder and President of the Water Fairness Coalition, said the bill was a good first step in creating oversight for water conservation policies in Southern Nevada.
“For 20 years, [the Southern Nevada Water Authority] and the Las Vegas Valley Water District executive team has focused on the removal of grass from water savings and spends millions of dollars each year in community outreach advertising using Lake Mead levels to convince residents to submit to their policy prescriptions for water savings.”
McSwain, who lives on a half-acre lot in Las Vegas she purchased nine years ago, said current residents should not have to bear the brunt of the water savings if that water is only being conserved in order to fuel more growth in Las Vegas. The district, she said, should be aggressive in pursuing new water saving technologies to address needed conservation.
“Why would the agency responsible for water delivery and water safety so aggressively seek the removal of elements that so much protect our quality of life?” McSwain said.
Nguyen said if the bill passed, she wants the Joint Interim Standing Committee on Natural Resources to investigate the impact of turf removal on urban heat island effects and the benefits of preserving trees and grass.
The committee would also be charged with reviewing advancements in landscape water conservation technologies and considering exceptions for turf grass growing under trees, based on research on the cooling benefits of the combination.
No action was taken on the bill. The bill will need to pass in the State Senate by May 23 before being sent to the governor’s desk for final approval.