Senate committee hears bill to void dormant Fort Mohave Valley regulations

The Nevada Senate Committee on Government Affairs opened a hearing on Assembly Bill 1 on a request to void long-dormant regulations adopted by the Colorado River Commission (CRC) related to Fort Mohave Valley land.

Eric Witkoski, executive director of the Colorado River Commission, told the committee: “Back in 1957, Congress gave Nevada the option to purchase 15,000 acres in the Port Mohave Valley land near Laughlin.” He said the CRC adopted regulations in 1986 under NRS authorities and listed the administrative rules as NAC 3.21.100 through NAC 3.21.230.

The bill’s purpose, Witkoski said, is housekeeping: the statutes authorizing the CRC’s role over that land were repealed after the Legislature transferred control to Clark County, and the regulations remain on the books though they have no legal effect. He told the committee that in 2007 the Legislature transferred the CRC’s authority over the land to Clark County and that “in 02/2009, they repealed the statutes that were in place for CRC to have any jurisdiction over that land.”

Heidi Clarkson of the Legislative Counsel Bureau’s legal division clarified the legal point for the committee: the text of AB1 “does not have any effect on the regulation of the actual land that was part of this Fort Mohave Valley development law. All this bill does is to void certain regulations that had been adopted previously by the Colorado River Commission when they did have statutory authority over this land.” Clarkson told the committee that because no current state agency holds the necessary regulatory authority to repeal those rules, legislative action is required to remove them from the administrative code.

Committee members asked about the current disposition of the land and the details behind the regulations. Witkoski said the CRC transferred possession of the property to Clark County in 2007 and that the commission no longer holds the land. He said the Division of State Lands initiated a rulemaking in 2023 to repeal the regulations, but Legislative Counsel advised that the CRC was the adopting agency and that, because the CRC no longer has the statutory authority, only the Legislature can direct removal of the rules from the administrative code.

Senators pressed for additional factual detail — acreage remaining, how proceeds from any sales were handled and how Clark County is using the land — and Witkoski said the CRC no longer holds that information and suggested the committee could follow up with Clark County offline.

No members of the public testified for, against, or in a neutral position on AB1 during the hearing. The committee closed the hearing and did not vote on the bill.

Background: testimony to the committee traced the matter to a 1957 federal option to purchase up to 15,000 acres, CRC rulemaking in 1986, a 2007 legislative transfer of authority to Clark County and a 2009 repeal of the underlying statutes that enabled the CRC regulations. AB1 would direct legislative action to void the obsolete administrative regulations that remain on the books despite the earlier statutory changes.