Lawmaker’s move to sell public lands in Nevada attracts criticism

Rep. Mark Amodei led House Republicans in approving a reconciliation bill Monday that included a late-night amendment to sell off more than 93,000 acres of public lands in Nevada — much to the chagrin of environmentalists and congressional Democrats.

The House Natural Resources Committee approved a portion of the Republicans’ budget package with an amendment put forward by Amodei, R-Nev., and Rep. Celeste Maloy, R-Utah, allowing the sale.

The amendment would allow the sale of 65,129 acres of public land in Clark County — an amount equivalent to 71 percent of the area of city of Las Vegas — plus 15,860 acres in Washoe County, 12,085 acres in Lyon County and an unspecified amount of forest service land in Nevada, according to Amodei’s office.

It also authorizes the sale or exchange of approximately 356,100 acres in Pershing County that were previously identified for disposal by the Bureau of Land Management to be exchanged at a 1-to-1 ratio.

The amendment specifies that the land in Clark and Washoe will be used for affordable housing. The land in Lyon County will be sold to the city of Fernley and be developed as the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center II, according to Amodei’s office.

“It’s an opportunity to free up some federal land in areas that you normally have to run a regular lands bill, which we have had a phenomenally hard time” getting passed, Amodei said in a phone interview Wednesday.

More than 80 percent of Nevada’s land is owned by the federal government, and for years Nevada’s federal delegation has sought to both expand conservation of public lands and economic development and housing through various lands bills in Congress. Those bills have been unsuccessful.

Rep. Bruce Westerman, chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, said in a statement the bill will generate more than $18.5 billion in new revenue and savings.

“These budgetary measures will deliver on President Trump’s agenda to make our nation energy dominant today and into the future,” he said in the statement.

Proceeds to D.C., not Nevada

Nevada’s House Democrats complained that under the amendment pushed through by Amodei, the proceeds from federal land sales would not go to Nevada as has been the practice and instead go to help cover the Trump administration’s proposed tax cuts.

“Nevada gets screwed. We don’t get any of that money,” said Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., in a phone interview Wednesday.

Rep. Susie Lee echoed that sentiment and called the proposal a “slap in the face to Nevadans.” She said that for decades, federal law ensured that proceeds from land sales in Southern Nevada stay in Nevada, but Amodei’s “traitorous maneuver” would instead send Nevada’s land proceeds to Washington to “pay for tax cuts for billionaires.”

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., called the proposal “insane” and the “single biggest sell-offs of Nevada public lands in history.”

Cortez Masto and Lee had led the bipartisan Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act, a years-long proposal to both help Clark County grow while also protecting acres for conservation. Cortez Masto said Amodei’s proposal ignores that longstanding effort.

Amodei said his amendment preserves all the money that is in the existing Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act account from previous land sales, but he confirmed the land sales from the 65,000 acres of public land in Clark County would go to the federal government.

As of Dec. 31, 2024, the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act contained $1.8 billion.

Amodei said the late Nevada Sen. Harry Reid “pulled off a pretty big miracle” 23 years ago when he ensured all money stayed in Nevada through the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act. But members of Congress in the other 49 states disagree that the money from federal land sales in Nevada should stay in the Silver State, Amodei said.

“If somebody’s got a majority leader of the Senate handy that can force his will on the process on both sides of the Hill, then God bless them. Let’s get him or her rolling, because I can’t find, on the House side, anybody that says, ‘Yeah, let’s leave that money in Nevada,’ ” Amodei said.

Mike Ford, a longtime Nevadan with experience in public lands and conservation through his work for both the BLM and the Conservation Fund, applauded Amodei’s proposal.

“Congressman Amodei did Nevada, especially Clark County, an enormous favor and we should be thanking him rather than condemning him for partisan political purpose,” Ford said in an email. “Without this language, and his proactive efforts, the entire SNPLMA funding stream would be at risk under the current administration and national political landscape.”

Responding to criticisms about the “late night” approval of the amendment, Amodei said the chairman asked for Amodei’s amendment to be last. He added that he had phone calls with Lee and Cortez Masto, and that his name has been on the Southern Nevada lands bill since 2022.

“The cake isn’t completely baked, but this is an important first step,” Amodei said. There will be some adjustments, so there’s wiggle room available, he said.

“I know my colleagues have said some mean things about me, and it’s like, I’ll get over that, and I hope they will too, and so we’ll hopefully live to fight another day to get the right thing done down there,” he said.

Tribes, environmentalists concerned

Native activists say the proposal targets Tribal homelands. The proposal targets the area near Nevada’s newest national monument, Avi Kwa Ame, as well as Gold Butte, and land that borders the Pyramid Lake Paiute Reservation.

“These are not excess acres,” said Taylor Patterson, executive director of Native Voters Alliance Nevada, in a statement. “These are Native lands. And the people advancing this know exactly what they are doing. This is the same story our people have lived through for generations. Erase us, sell what is left, and pretend it was never ours. But it was. And it still is.”

Environmentalists said the move bypasses standard procedures when it comes to selling public lands and limits public participation.

Kyle Roerink, executive director of Great Basin Water Network, said land sales have to go through a time-consuming Resource Management Plan process under the Bureau of Land Management and requires environmental impact statements as well as public participation.

By turning the land sales into legislation, that process is done away with, Roerink argued.

“Go back and watch any hearing on SNEDCA (Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act) in Congress. You know what you won’t see? You will not see an opponent get any time at the microphone in Congress,” Roerink said.

Nevada has long faced a housing crisis, and opening up more land could have a big impact, especially in Clark and Washoe counties, said Nicholas Irwin, research director for UNLV’s Lied Center for Real Estate. Supplying new units of housing is the only way to put downward pressure on prices, he said.

“It’s one thing to have the ability to build, but if you don’t have land that’s suitable, or land that certainly has the right characteristics that can allow it to be developed, that impacts your ability to supply those new units,” Irwin said.

Where would affordable housing be?

Titus said Amodei’s proposal doesn’t address conservation, water or infrastructure. The land included in the proposal is not the suburbs of Vegas, but in areas like Mesquite, Searchlight and Moapa. Infrastructure improvements for power, water, sewers and roads will be required to accommodate that growth, she said.

There’s no limitation on development related to capping development if water levels drop, Titus said, and there is nothing in the proposal requiring developers to contribute to the cost of infrastructure.

The office of Gov. Joe Lombardo, who has been vocal in calling on Congress to open more federal land for housing and development, declined to comment for the story, saying it is an evolving federal issue.

Contact Jessica Hill at [email protected]. Follow @jess_hillyeah on X.