fbpx
Nevada Policy

Press

Press Releases

Feds ordered by Nevada to return water to private church ministry in Nye county

For Immediate Release 
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

 

LAS VEGAS — The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has 90 days to return water to the property of a private church ministry or face significant administrative fines, according to an order from the Nevada Department of Water Resources.

The state order is a boost to the “takings” case against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service — brought by the Nevada Policy Research Institute’s Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation — for having illegally diverted water from the Solid Rock Ministry in Nye County. The case is currently pending in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

The Nevada Department of Water Resources has verified that the Ministry did, in fact, have vested rights to the water that the federal government intentionally, illegally and deliberately diverted from the private property. According to the order from the state, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must return the water to its “historic path” traversing the church property, within 90 days, or face administrative fines up to $10,000 per day until corrective action is taken.

The state order further indicated that federal officials deceived the state of Nevada in documents submitted to it when federal officials claimed historic restoration of a waterway yet diverted the spring-fed stream to a new and inadequate channel reflected nowhere in historic maps or surveys, dating all the way back to the 1890s.

“Getting the water returned would be a major first step in making the Ministry whole, after years of suffering litigation and egregious constitutional violations by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,” said Joe Becker, director of NPRI’s Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation.

“However, the Ministry still suffered significant harm in the interim from the federal government’s actions — including repeated flooding and five years of flood damage resulting from the illegal water diversion project.”

The trouble began in late 2010, when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service illegally and deliberately diverted a spring-fed stream to which Solid Rock Ministry had long-vested water rights. Since at least as early as the late 1800s, the stream had traversed the private property now owned by the church.

This diversion of the waterway and taking of the Ministry’s vested water rights was done without even the federally requisite Clean Water Act permits, in direct violation of FEMA requirements as enforced by Nye County, and with no regard for the Ministry’s religious use of the water for baptisms.

The scofflaw water diversion project had other ramifications as well. In addition to stripping the Ministry of its access to its “river baptism” waters, the diversion resulted in repeated flooding of the church property.

The federal government has denied any liability for the flooding and has argued that the Ministry had no rights to the water that had traversed its property for decades. That federal argument has now been flatly rejected by the Nevada Department of Water Resources.

“When federal officials protested the Ministry’s request for change of water use,” said Becker, “Nevada Water Resources noted the irony in the fed’s position that the church had no vested rights — given that the vested water rights claimed by the federal government itself in the watershed had been acquired by exactly the same means as those held by the church.”

While the order from state Department of Water Resources verifies the Institute’s claim that the Ministry’s vested water rights were violated, significant damage and constitutional violations continue to be suffered by the Ministry.

As predicted years ago by Solid Rock Ministry’s expert hydrologist, erosion from repeated floods — which began after the Fish and Wildlife Service finished its inadequate diversion channel around the property — has carved away large swaths of the once pristine 40-acre property.

And, because of the federal government’s dangerously negligent construction of the channel — never engineered to accommodate any rain or runoff waters — the damage has repeatedly been compounded.

“A mini-grand-canyon now cuts through what was once lush wetlands, and the significant improvements made to structures and the land for the benefit of young campers are being undone with each recurring flood” explained Becker.

Citing three direct violations of Nevada Statutes, the Department of Water Resources’ order for the federal government to replace the water, he said, is further proof that the Fish and Wildlife Service acted outside of the law.

Case History:

Because the United States violated multiple constitutional rights in one fell swoop in August of 2010, the SOLID ROCK MINISTRY filed a Complaint for the tort and due process and free-exercise claims in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The Ministry also in 2012 filed a takings claim in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims — along with a motion to stay proceedings in that court pending the outcome of the injunctive relief sought in the District Court. 

The UNITED STATES however, argued before the Court of Federal Claims that, pursuant to United States v. Tohono O'Odham Nation and that case’s re-interpretation of a longstanding jurisdictional statute as to what constitutes the “same claim,” Plaintiff could not pursue all its claims. The Claims Court held that the Church could not bring a takings claim in the Federal Court of Claims whilst seeking relief for other government transgressions in U.S. District Court — despite the fact that no single federal court had jurisdiction over all the claims, or could make the Plaintiff constitutionally whole for each of the government’s constitutional violations.

Because justice demands that a jurisdictional statute cannot be interpreted to force a Plaintiff to forgo one constitutional right to remedy another and armed with a sympathetic concurrence from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the church, pastored by Victor Fuentes, filed a Petition for Certiorari before the U.S. Supreme Court which, despite amicus briefs filed on the Church’s behalf by both the State of Nevada and CATO Institute, was denied.

Meanwhile, because the U.S. Federal District Court moved so slowly on the Church’s remaining claims and despite surviving motions for summary judgment against it by the feds, Pastor Fuentes was left with no choice but to voluntarily dismiss claims at the District Court, simply so it could vindicate its constitutional right to be free of an uncompensated taking — a takings claim which, due to three more floods at the hands of government, has now become the legal claim by which the church can be made closest to whole.

Sadly, the damage done by this repeated flooding is now so severe that no choice is left but to hold the federal government accountable for at least a temporary taking of not only the vested water rights, but the entire property for more than five years, without the availability of the tort remedy or the injunctive relief originally sought to restore the property to its pre-diversion-project condition.

View the images of the erosion and flooding on the property. 

Top pension in Nevada PERS hits $278,000 — despite being reduced payout

For Immediate Release 
Contact Robert Fellner, 702-222-0642

LAS VEGAS — Today, the Nevada Policy Research Institute released pension payout data from the Public Employees’ Retirement System of Nevada (PERS) for the fiscal year ending 2016 on TransparentNevada.com — the state’s largest public-pay database.

The data reveals 1,605 retirees are collecting an annualized pension payout of at least $100,000 — a 37 percent increase from the previous year’s report.

The top payout went to former University of Nevada, Reno head coach of football Chris Ault who collected $278,497.

“Even more shocking, however, is the fact that this is actually a reduced benefit,” explained Nevada Policy Research Institute Transparency Director Robert Fellner.

Retirees have the option of receiving a reduced amount in exchange for other benefits — such as being able to pass the pension on to beneficiaries in the case of death.

NPRI estimates Ault’s full pension would have been around $400,000 had he decided not to take advantage of the provision that allowed him to pass his reduced benefit on to a beneficiary after he passes away.

The next three highest payouts went to:

  1. former Clark County worker Robert Taylor: $262,173
  2. former Clark County fire battalion chief Paul Calabrese: $259,372
  3. former Clark County fire battalion chief Donald O' Shaughnessy: $248,418

The average retiree with at least 30 years of service collected a pension of $68,899 — nearly half of whom also elected to receive a reduced benefit in a manner similar to Ault.

Among the public entities that had at least 100 retirees, the highest average full-career pensions for former employees were:

  1. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, at an average of $98,534
  2. City of Henderson, at an average of $94,729
  3. Clark County, at an average of $90,522
  4. City of North Las Vegas, at an average of $86,127        
  5. City of Las Vegas, at an average of $85,565

Multiple retirees receive pension payouts that appear to exceed the legislative mandate given PERS in NRS 286.015 to “provide a reasonable base income to qualified employees…whose earning capacity has been removed or has been substantially reduced by age or disability.”

Examples include:

  • Former Metro Lt. and now assistant federal public defender Dan Coe, who began drawing at age 38 his annual $110,804 PERS pension, which over his lifetime is estimated to total $13.2 million.
  • Former Clark County fire chief Bertral Washington, who receives an annual $105,695 PERS payout for his 25 years of service, while simultaneously drawing $308,000 annually in pay and benefits as Pasadena, California's fire chief.
  • Former Las Vegas fire chief John (Mike) Myers, who collects a $119,327 annual pension for his 27 years of service while receiving an approximately $180,000 salary as the new fire chief for Portland, Oregon.

At over $1.4 billion, PERS costs for Nevada taxpayers and government workers equaled 12 percent of all state and local tax revenue combined in 2013 — the second highest rate nationwide.

Fellner notes that the Legislature is largely responsible for the burden being passed onto today’s government workers.

“Short-sighted legislators passed extraordinary enhancements whose costs will take decades to unwind. Today’s workforce is now required to pay for these mistakes in the form of larger payroll deductions and reduced benefits.

“As a result, all three stakeholders — employers, taxpayers and workers — would benefit from reform.”

To explore the full dataset in a searchable and downloadable format, visit TransparentNevada.com.

For NPRI’s analyses of the Nevada PERS situation, visit: http://www.npri.org/issues/detail/pers

ESAs take big step forward with Supreme Court ruling

For Immediate Release 
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

LAS VEGAS — Education Savings Accounts and real educational choice for parents and children is one giant step closer in Nevada, now that the state Supreme Court has released its ruling on the matter.

While the court ruled against the ESA program on one technical funding issue, all other constitutional challenges against the program were rejected Thursday in the high court’s opinion.

NPRI Communications Director Michael Schaus explained how the decision, despite postponing ESAs, is ultimately a huge step in the right direction.

“We are thrilled to see that the Supreme Court Justices ruled that ESAs are constitutional, rejecting all other substantive challenges. Only a technical funding issue was found to be in violation of the constitution — an issue that could be easily addressed by the legislature. Soon, Nevada families will finally be able to see real educational choice in Nevada.”

The ACLU had argued that ESAs violated the state constitution’s “little Blaine amendment,” because parents would have the option of spending ESA funds at private religious schools. Another case filed by a group of parents claimed the reform would harm public schools, because school districts would no longer receive a portion of per-pupil state funding for students that took advantage of ESAs.

The justices ruled that neither of those substantive challenges to the program had merit, finding fault only with the order in which ESAs were funded by the Legislature, and the lack of specificity. This simply means the order in which elements of public education must be funded, and an acknowledgement as to how education is being funded, must be addressed by legislators — who will merely have to tweak the current ESA law. If done, nearly 8,000 Nevada students will then be able to take advantage of personalized, and tailor-made, educational options.

NPRI issued the following statement:

Although we’re disappointed that the program remains delayed because of the ruling, it is good to see that the justices have affirmed the right for a parent to make their own decisions about their child's education. 

The freedom that parents will have, thanks to the nation's most inclusive educational reform, will be unimaginable. When legislators address the one remaining obstacle to implementing this program, there will be a floodgate of opportunity opened for Nevada’s youth — a new gold rush for educational innovation.

The right for families, not bureaucrats or politicians, to make the decisions that best fit their educational needs is now one step closer to reality in the Silver State.   

Now, it is once again up to the legislature. For parents, this isn’t some obscure political issue, or complex policy proposal — it is personal. It’s about their children.

And they’re ready for ESAs.

The court’s decision can be read by clicking here.

Metro pushes for expanding ‘More Cops’ tax despite failing to use millions stashed in reserve

For Immediate Release
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

LAS VEGAS — The Las Vegas Metro Police Department, with the help of the Southern Nevada Tourism Infrastructure Committee, is looking to extend and expand the “More Cops” tax in Clark County — despite a well-documented failure to use existing funds dedicated for hiring more uniformed police.

(Click here for more information on LVMPD’s request to extend or expand the More Cops tax.)

“If Clark County taxpayers are to AGAIN be tapped for ever-higher law enforcement taxes, they are entitled to an entirely new level of public accountability from Metro regarding how it deploys the resources it receives,” said Nevada Policy Research Institute Senior Vice President Steve Miller.

“In 2005, citizens were told the More Cops tax would allow Metro to hire 1,278 new, uniformed officers by 2015,” explained Miller. “Instead, Metro only hired 566 in that time period.”

According to investigations into the fund by the Nevada Policy Research Institute’s journalism outlet, Nevada Journal, the biggest concern for taxpayers should be the lack of transparency regarding existing More Cops funds.

“The funds were intended, and in fact required, to be used to hire more cops. And yet, that’s not what has happened,” said Miller. “Almost $19 million was spent on other funding needs from the More Cops fund, and about $113 million is just sitting in the account — unused toward new hires, despite the department’s repeated request for more uniformed officers.”

While the cost of hiring police officers has increased over the years, Miller says the department’s unwillingness to use existing More Cops funds should preclude discussion about expanding or extending the initiative.

“When Metro brass state publicly that they are running a deficit, and allegedly need more police to battle crime throughout the area, they conveniently ignore the fact that there is well over $100 million sitting in a bank account, earmarked specifically for meeting these needs,” Miller said.

“Before asking taxpayers to cough up more of our hard earned dollars, there needs to be more transparency, and Metro needs to be clear about how it intends to use the funds it has already stockpiled.”

The Nevada Journal’s ongoing investigation into the More Cops tax, including Metro’s decision to use More Cops funds for other purposes, can be found on NevadaJournal.com.

###

Two-thirds of union members back ‘Worker’s Choice’ idea

For Immediate Release
Contact Michael Schaus, 702-222-0642

 

LAS VEGAS — A new national survey indicates that nearly 30 percent of union members would opt out of union membership if they knew they could keep their job and not face any penalties. 

The survey is part of National Employee Freedom Week (NEFW), an annual national campaign that informs union members about their workplace rights, including their right to exit union membership. NEFW runs Sunday, August 14th through Saturday, August 20th and consists of more than 80 organizations in over 35 states.  

Responding to charges by labor leaders that opting out of membership makes employees into “free riders,” the NEFW coalition conducted additional state-specific surveys to test support for a new policy known as “Worker’s Choice” — a policy that would allow workers who opt-out of paying membership dues to represent themselves in negotiations with their employer. 

Nationally, more than two-thirds of union members agreed with the proposal, and over 60 percent of union members in Nevada were supportive.

NPRI’s communication director, and executive director of National Employee Freedom Week, Michael Schaus described the results as a “huge win for employee freedom.”

“No workers should feel trapped in their union. It’s not fair to them, and it’s not fair to the union,” explained Schaus. “This year’s poll results show that, nationally and locally, majorities support this concept of worker’s choice — letting employees decide for themselves whether or not they will belong to a collective bargaining unit.”

In addition to educating union members about their rights, NEFW also helps them exercise these rights. The NEFW website features an interactive map that includes information on opt-out windows, sample opt-out letters, and information about union alternatives.

The surveys were conducted by Google Consumer Surveys, between July 13th and August 2nd, 2016. They each surveyed roughly 300 people and have a margin of error of approximately 6 percent.

###

Sleight-of-hand, intimidation used to make PERS the nation’s richest plan

For Immediate Release
Contact Robert Fellner, 702-222-0642

LAS VEGAS— A lawmaker received numerous threatening phone calls and emails from Vegas police officers after he suggested a slightly less generous pension enhancement than the one demanded by unions — one of the most shocking findings from a historical analysis documenting how the Public Employees’ Retirement System of Nevada (PERS) grew to become the nation’s richest public pension plan.

“The fact that a lawmaker received threats after proposing an enhancement, albeit one not as rich as demanded, demonstrates how pervasive this culture of union entitlement has become,” said Robert Fellner, director of transparency research at the Nevada Policy Research Institute.

The union’s preferred enhancement ultimately passed, paving the way for one 38-year old to draw an annual $110,804 pension, while working full-time. Given the individual’s age, actuaries project he will receive a total of over $13 million in combined lifetime PERS payouts.

The Nevada Policy Research Institute’s just-released white paper, Footprints: How PERS, step by step, made Nevada government employees some of the nation’s richest,documents how PERS was covertly turned into a government-union gold mine, at taxpayer expense, over the past 40 years.

Government unions repeatedly stormed the Legislature, demanding that short-term investment gains be used to pay for new enhancements, rather than pay down the system’s multi-billion dollar deficit or be saved as security against a future market downturn.

Financially naïve citizen-lawmakers were all too happy to go along, as the enhancements appeared free during their term — allowing them to curry favor with government unions while postponing any cost increases until well after their personal legislative terms ended.

This is one reason why plans like PERS are fundamentally flawed, according to Fellner.

“Public pension plans are inherently opaque, with PERS in a class of its own. By design, the system shrouds cost from public view, pushes those costs onto future generations, and ultimately, exposes both taxpayers and employees to tremendous risk. If properly understood, Nevadans would demand immediate system reform.”

Compounding the problem is a retirement board that consistently exclusively of PERS members — one of only four plans out of 87 major public plans surveyed nationwide to do so. Several current PERS board members are union bosses themselves, and appear earlier in the legislative-sessions records as lobbyists for enhancements, before ending up on the board itself in later years.

Excluding both government employers and taxpayers completely — despite both being stakeholders in PERS — sends a clear message: only plan members’ interests will be represented.

In fact, that is just what has happened, according to Fellner.

“Requiring the PERS board to consist exclusively of plan members reveals the premise underlying the past 40 years of PERS-related legislative history: The system exists to serve government unions, at the expense of both employers and taxpayers.”

Soaring costs

In a recent Forbes.com column, Chuck DeVore of the Texas Public Policy Foundation calculated the cost to pay down Nevada’s pension debt as the 4th-highest nationwide, requiring a 16 percent hike in all state and local taxes for the next 30 years.

Last year’s 2.3 percent investment return means that PERS has failed to hit its investment target over the past 5-, 10-, 15-, 20- and 25-year periods, the first time in history this has happened, and a strong indication that costs will continue to grow.

Footprints concludes by urging the Legislature to adopt reforms similar to those enacted by the federal government and several states — such as Arizona and Utah — and move employees to a defined contribution plan.

“A defined contribution plan benefits government employers and taxpayers by providing complete cost stability and transparency, while providing government employees a fair, sustainable retirement benefit that they can count on,” says Fellner. “The current system, by contrast, exposes retirees to a substantial risk of pension cuts, should we see a serious market downturn in the next 10 years.”

# # # 

 

Media Mentions

Opinion piece by Nevada Policy president, John Tsarpalas

Nevada Policy article on business regulations in the state of Nevada

Quote from Outreach and Coalition Director, Marcos Lopez.

Nevada Policy

Media Inquiries

Please put “Media” in the subject line and include your questions, deadline, and contact information, and we will respond as soon as possible.

Join the fight to save Nevada.

Sign up for Nevada Policy’s weekly emails to stay up to date on the most pressing issues facing Nevada today.

Media Inquiries

Name(Required)