October 23, 2008
Commissioners Uphold Special Use Permit for Toreson Industries

By Dave Maxwell, Staff Writer

Photo by Dave Maxwell
Public hearing before County Commissioners on special user permit for Toreson Industries.

By a unanimous 5-0 vote, Lincoln County Commissioners denied the appeal by residents of Rachel to overturn the County Planning Commission decision September 11 to issue a special use permit granting a zoning variance to Toreson Industries.

Developer Jim Toreson wants to put a privately operated minimum/medium security prison on about 100 acres of the 1,000 acres he owns about four miles west of Rachel.

October 20 about a dozen people from Rachel attended the three hour public hearing session which followed a lengthy regular County Commission meeting. Planning Director Clint Wertz recommended the special use permit be accepted as originally decided by the Planning Commission and that the Rachel appeal be denied.

Deputy District Attorney Daniel Hooge stated at the beginning of the meeting board members were to focus on what was spelled out in the Nevada Revised Statutes in determining whether the Lincoln County Planning Commission used proper discretion when issuing the special use permit application. Hooge stated the board’s focus be, “that it fits the purpose and procedure of Chapter 8 in Title 13, and that it is essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare based on the evidenced presented to them.” One question the Commissioners, sitting as the Board of Appeal, addressed was, Did the Planning Commission make a mistake in approving the special permit application submitted to them or not, within the framework of the evidence submitted?

Wertz also spent considerable time going over the many conditions that were put on the special use permit issued to Toreson Industries, all of which he said, they have agreed to. Included in the major conditions are the requirements that Toreson has to find a company that wants to put a private prison in Rachel within 18 months from the September 18 issue date. The prison facility will be limited to 1500 beds; all correctional center staff must receive and maintain American Correctional Association accreditation for the duration of operation of the proposed facility, and all buildings constructed as part of the special use permit shall include noise attenuation construction methods to mitigate against exterior land use activities and associated noise levels.

Considerable time and discussion was spent by a few Rachel residents who signed up to speak against the special use permit. Their comments focused not so much on the special use permit question, but rather on how much and for what reasons they did not want to have a private prison located near Rachel. All the problems they felt would be associated with, or created by, its existence were pointed out.

Board Chairwoman Ronda Hornbeck said she felt that Jim Toreson might have a very difficult time, in light of present economic conditions, finding a private prison contractor within the 18-month time limitation of the special use permit. “He’s got his work cut out for him…He may or may not find a buyer,” she said.

After nearly three hours, Commissioner Paul Mathews said it was his understanding the Board’s task was to rule on a very narrow picture regarding the action taken by the Planning Commission to issue the permit to Mr. Toreson and whether or not it was proper. It was not the purpose at the public hearing, Mathews felt, to vote whether or not the prison should be there, but rather did a property owner have the right to request a special use permit zoning variance to do with what he wanted on his own land, and did the Planning Commission act within it’s authority to grant the permit? “After that,” Mathews said, addressing the Rachel people, “then we (the Commissioners) become on your side. As the development agreement goes through, the master plan amendment, all of those things start being presented to us, then we can start looking at the bigger picture of all the details you’re talking about…Then we’ll come up with everything we can think of to stick on them (Toreson Industries) to protect our county.”

Jim Toreson was at the meeting, but did not speak. Attorney Dylan Frehner represented Mr. Toreson before the Board and said he felt the Planning Commission had acted in a proper way when issuing the special use permit to Toreson Industries.