Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Water Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission sends proposed change on water-right relinquishment for parcel divisions to Planning Commission for study
Summary
The board remanded a proposed amendment to county code that would allow the county to require relinquishment of water rights when large parcels are divided in closed groundwater basins; commissioners disagreed on whether such conditions fall within county authority and asked planning staff to study and return with a recommendation.
Elko County commissioners on Tuesday referred to the Planning Commission proposed changes to county code that would let the county require relinquishment or other conditions relating to water rights when land is divided into new parcels in closed groundwater basins.
The proposal stems from an identified gap in the countyordinance: parcel maps (used to create multiple new lots) currently trigger a compulsory requirement to show two acre-feet of water per new parcel in closed basins, while a separate process called the "division of land into large parcels" did not carry the same automatic water-rights condition. Planning staff said the discrepancy could create an avenue to avoid the water requirement by using the large-parcel route repeatedly.
County planning staff described the change as an attempt to close a potential loophole that lets developers create multiple domestic wells without relinquishing water rights; opponents argued the county does not administer water rights and that such conditions could be construed as outside the countyauthority.
One commissioner suggested alternative language limiting the number of times the large-parcel division could be used on a given parent parcel to prevent a de facto subdivision without going through formal subdivision review. Others urged caution, saying discretionary "may" language could give future planners a blunt instrument that could be applied unequally.
After extended discussion the commission voted to send the proposed code change back to the Planning Commission for study and a formal recommendation before the board takes final action. The remand requires planning staff to examine whether the county should apply a uniform requirement, to consider alternatives (limits on repeated large-parcel divisions), and to draft consistent language to bring back to the county board.
The boardaction preserves current policy while initiating a detailed review of the legal, administrative and practical implications of imposing water-rights conditions on land divisions in closed basins.
