Carson City supervisor: Paul McGrath

Paul McGrath

67 years of age

Retired Executive Director, Western States Sheriffs' Assn (a Nevada Corporation)

Clark Co. Community College /UNLV (4 years - No degree) Business/ Economics/Criminal Justice Majors (74-78)

Elected Sheriff, Carson City 1987-1995 (8 yrs); implemented Safe Graduation and Boys and Girls Club of Western Nevada.

Moved to Nevada with in 1955. Married Darlene in 1961, three grown daughters with six grand children; Carson High School 1955-1959; USMC 1959-1963 (served in Okinawa & Japan at the onset of the Vietnam War); worked for the BLM & BIA 1963-1969; Deputy Sheriff Ormsby County/Carson City 1969-70; NHP 1970-1987 (promoted through the ranks to Captain); Carson City Sheriff 1987-1995; Executive Director, Western States Sheriffs' Association (1995-2008). Retired 3/31/08

No arrests

Carson City should become the region's shopping/tourist/ business center similar to Reno of the past for adjoining counties (Storey/Douglas/Lyon & Lake Tahoe)

Three issues facing Carson City are operating revenues/spending priorities/revenue collections & a fourth, growth planning/management.

Carson City, along with Douglas County has ample number(s) of casinos in my opinion. However, additional building of casinos should be determined by the market and not restrictions of government.

Layoffs of current city employees should only be considered after all other alternatives (city reorganization/ shorter work week/reduction in employee benefit packages/ overtime control/buy-out -early retirement programs and other financial impacts that involve employment. Cut-back in city services and programs should also be considered.

Crime in Carson City has stayed constant over the years and only changes as growth has affected the services being provided. Gang related crime always hits the news with greater impact that influences public perception of the crime problem. Carson City has enough law enforcement personnel to adequately address the gang problem without adding any new employees. The gang problem can be addressed with adaptation of proven programs already being used by other law enforcement jurisdictions that do not impact local funding/finances.

I'm opposed to this tax increase! Approval by the Board of Supervisors, is one of the reasons for my candidacy for Ward 4 Supervisor. Carson City needs board members who can say "no", and not allow proposed tax/fee increases to go to the voters without through and complete review. The Public Safety Commission's report outlines increases of personnel and equipment that are wish lists, and does not justify the $2 plus million of dollars that will be added to our taxes (avg resident add$160-190 per yr + that 3% assessed value tax). It also does not address the on-going costs associated with keeping personnel when the problems are resolved. This tax increase is not justified nor needed and not appropriate during this economic downturn.

The V&T question is another tax that should not have been directed to the citizen of Carson City for approval by the Board of Supervisors. A sales tax increase was approved some time ago, and along with promised matching monies from the state, and private donations, the V&T project has not progressed as planned. Carson City should withhold any future financial support from the project until the tracks meet the county line with Lyon county. The project should be completed without any further tax payer contributions.

Regardless of what direction you arrive, the impression will be the same "what a picturesque and beautiful city". First negative impressions, the traffic. The Board of Supervisors touts their efforts in getting the freeway started when they imposed a .05 cent gas tax to the state. Completion by 2010 is not going to happen. The freeway was already work programmed by the state, and Carson City Supervisors just volunteered at the expense of the taxpayer to pay for the freeway. A proposal for the new Board of Supervisors will be to pursue some type of tax adjustment, and to stop future taxes being paid to the state that should be used for local roads and streets.

The planners should have started the project in Carson City with construction heading northeast. Having toured the near completed portion of the V&T in Storey County, the project has merit, but needs private funding or grants for completion. If funds cannot be raised, shut the construction down at Mound House until funding is available. A number of problems are not resolved in my opinion (question the revenues, rider projections, business acceptance, and yearly operating costs).

Having resided in Carson City for fifty plus years, redevelopment in downtown has always been somewhere in the city's planning. Redesigning the highway, and adjoining streets should not be considered until the south portion of the freeway has been funded. This is and idea that should be put back on the shelf until final funding approval/work begins. The time line for this has now been extended to 2015-2020? By then, a number of changes would have occurred that would affect any road design for downtown Carson City. The plan has merit, but a two lane roadway in downtown may not work.

Monetary incentives normally come from redevelopment taxes already paid by businesses to attract other businesses. A business wanting to relocate or establish in Carson City may need this incentive to make up their mind. I'm personally opposed to this idea, and feel any business who wants to relocate would have developed a plan to insure success before relocating. This incentive has a potential for a lot of political maneuvering in who or who should not receive the incentive dollars.

The Carson City Library is managed very well. The library services always seems to be the first to be cut when the city is experiencing funding shortfalls. The library has slowly grown over the years, and now, as far as I'm concerned is adequate for the community. I'm sure, like the Fire and Sheriff's departments the Library has a wish list that would be nice to have, but may be to expensive.

The city in planning housing and other developments has done a good job in establishing parks throughout the city. Funding to maintain and develop new parks has been approved with tax increases, plus assessments on developers to build and maintain the park system within their developments. Currently, Carson City has in my opinion adequate parks. As originally proposed a number of years ago, Fuji Park in the south end of town should be relocated out of commercial zoning. This would allow the city of attract more businesses to the south end of Carson City.

Treatment of individuals has been more fair than others. I have no idea how to answer this question. In my experience over the years, the city has dealt with my concerns in a professional way.

As a former elected city department head, the interaction with the various departments and the governing Board of Supervisors has allowed my candidacy to have a unique perspective in dealing with the needs and wants of the city. I'm a candidate because the supervisor's role is implementing programs, setting spending priorities, and developing policies that govern the city. In my opinion, the Board of Supervisors have been on a spending spree with tax payer dollars for a number of years. The two tax questions for the November ballot are typical examples of the Board of Supervisors lack of leadership in issues they should have resolved, and not forcing those issues to the voters. If elected to the Board, my position will be to act as an advocate for the business and residence tax payers of Carson City.


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment