Mining isn’t just another industry in Nevada. It’s a way of life and a core piece of the state’s economy.
It contributes roughly 6% of the state’s GDP and supports more than 40,000 Nevadans who work directly and indirectly in the sector. Behind every one of those jobs is a family, a mortgage, a kid in a local school, a regular table at a diner in Winnemucca or Fallon. The mining industry is the economic backbone of rural Nevada and bolsters the state’s economy.
However, despite the economic weight of the mining sector, the workers who drive it often struggle to find a decent place to live near the job site.
When a new mining operation opens or expands, hundreds of workers can arrive within weeks. Local housing markets in places like Elko, Tonopah, and Ely already face housing shortages and simply don’t have the inventory to absorb the sudden influx of workers. As a result, workers are forced to commute long distances, and employers struggle to recruit and retain the people they need.
Rural Nevada’s housing market was never designed to support large employers on its own, given the state’s vast geography and widely dispersed population. That’s precisely why investors, both large and small, who finance, build, rehabilitate, and then manage much-needed housing, have become essential to keeping these communities and their economies running. When the local market can’t supply what workers need, these housing providers step in to fill the gap, funding new construction, bringing vacant properties back into use, and creating rental options that otherwise wouldn’t exist.
It’s troubling that legislators in Carson City would handicap these solutions.
Recent housing policy proposals, including blanket bans and sweeping restrictions on these housing providers, would kneecap the very solutions helping address the shortage. Nevada is one of the most mining-intensive states in the country, with employment concentrations roughly ten times the national average. Lawmakers crafting housing policy need to align with that reality rather than ignore it.
The single-family rentals that have been under scrutiny at both the state and federal levels provide workers with flexible, safe, and often more spacious housing options in established neighborhoods and school districts, often closer to work. Removing those options to chase a perceived imbalance in the housing market is not a pro-renter policy—it risks becoming an anti-worker policy.
A professor from the University of Nevada, Reno recently noted that these housing providers play “an important, and often misunderstood, role in helping close the housing supply gap” in Nevada. Where public funding and small-scale development fall short, especially in rural communities, private investment helps finance new construction and restore vacant or distressed properties.
If state lawmakers pursue a broad, one-size-fits-all investor ban, it could sweep up the very housing providers building and managing workforce housing in communities like Elko, Ely, and Tonopah. Policies designed for large metro areas shouldn’t undermine the industries and housing solutions that sustain smaller communities.
In rural Nevada, when housing providers—large or small—invest and build, they aren’t cornering the real estate market; they are expanding access to quality housing, whether for short-term projects or long-term residency. That’s not a threat to these communities—it’s part of what allows them to function and grow.
Lawmakers in Carson City should reconsider approaches that treat housing developers as adversaries. Encouraging responsible development and investment may be key to ensuring that both housing and employment needs can be met across the state.
Liz Arnold is a mining and resources industries advocate and consultant, providing community outreach services to mining companies. She is a member of the Women's Mining Coalition and received the 2021 Prazen Living Legend of Mining Award from the National Mining Hall of Fame and Museum.
Comment
Comments