By:  Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President

We’ve written beforehow simple of legislation AB 226 appeared to be.  We also shared our concerns regarding the sought after authority for increases in assessments. 

One of the major proposed amendments attempts to allow for the Board of an Irrigation District to levy a $5 fee, per acre, on all lands in the district, for the establishment of a capital improvement fund to be used for construction or re-construction of irrigation system infrastructure. 

A second amendment would allow for a district to go forward on fixing an emergency situation, without a bid, and without the current restriction that this corrective action could take place with expenditures that would be more than the 5-cents per acre limitation.

The primary reason for the amendment on capital improvements is to properly direct the funds raised to go to the intended purpose of capital improvements for irrigation infrastructure.  As originally proposed, the assessment fees could go to any ordinary expenses of the irrigation district.

During the discussions before the Assembly Government Affairs Committee the conversation surfaced on how badly the state law (NRS 539) needs a full work-through, figuring out the best way to correct the many complications that result from sections of the law which conflict with other sections of the law. 

Members of every Nevada irrigation district need to work with their elected representatives, on the governing body of their irrigation district, to establish sound working relationships for long-term improvements.  Likewise, we need irrigation district boards to do a better job of outreach and relationship building with their constituents.