A large crowd was all geared up at Tuesday’s Nye County Commission meeting to give the board a piece of their minds when it came to a proposal regarding limitations on the number of large animals that can be kept on certain properties in Pahrump.
But as it turned out, none of the commissioners were keen on the idea either.
It was clear from the start that those in the audience were agitated over the proposal. Nye County Planning Director Brett Waggoner said his department had not seen a positive reception for the proposal either.
With so much negative feedback, Waggoner brought the proposal back to commissioners to cement their intentions on a possible amendment to Nye County Code 17 aiming to regulate large animal ownership on properties zoned Rural Estates or Rural Homestead.
The proposal was prompted by a nuisance complaint at a China Street property in Pahrump. The commission addressed complaints of a property owner keeping too many large animals there in April, at which time Waggoner said county staff had been directed to draft a proposal limiting livestock, such as cows, pigs and goats.
That draft was then put onto an agenda for the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission, a preliminary step for code changes.
“It was not very well received and it didn’t look like it would go anywhere,” Waggoner stated. “I heard from a few of the commissioners as well and the response was more or less, ‘What the hell is this?’”
Waggoner said he was simply seeking to understand what the commission was attempting to accomplish in regards to regulating livestock.
“Originally the whole idea was to come up with something everybody could live with,” commission chair Frank Carbone replied. “We want to make sure we don’t have things like that [China Street nuisance] again… The whole idea was to put something together that said, ‘Here are some parameters we need to follow.’”
Carbone added it was obvious that the community was opposed to any such parameters and therefore, he felt it would be more appropriate for those with complaints about their neighbors’ animals to try to work the issues out themselves.
The general consensus of the community seemed to match this thinking, with public comment predominantly against limitations being placed on livestock in rurally zoned residential areas. Instead, most felt any nuisance complaints arising from the ownership of large animals should be addressed on a case-by-case basis, as they are currently.
Once the public had its say, commissioners offered their own thoughts and it was immediately apparent that none were actually in favor of the concept. As such, it was no surprise that by the end of the discussion, they had decided to let the item die for lack of motion. This means the ordinance proposal will no longer move forward, a fact that had meeting attendees applauding and cheering.
Contact reporter Robin Hebrock at rhebrock@pvtimes.com