You are on page 1of 4
‘ualfon Mentors: (otra tetoan Garman wars Enter ayn Keepstok Nea Ce ca Cores Frm esa Spans sca cot ‘om Tis" en eas lancer ties Foe Hee taney Gone ‘Surety Fe Rt Use yen ‘usettondry (erty Conisine ira Fe Garg, jor asptaon CGrmmesine sation ter Fata Color ans Stee Ost 18 Iemozee ery Lxeto Famer Orns ich and ‘tow tbat any Mehr Seon Str Tease, aa Se ico sane . FeterGuzman esa, as pasar Cur Aajre Cao Fates, Gr Aa Caner Grurere Sob cashe Fre et ero. Fog Gut Sect ese we aia Fame Sa sane Men Ose 21 Pater then Char (étarme Use 0 tars lenge arena Soe, Bilal a chan tin ae anc Eo inept Beat ogo, Bai ay ch Guatcie oe ‘i lor pay a uarrsnan Shad eae roy sas Sete Cia 17 ty me Fes 02, SUE Ting Fe, “am Dla Ses ru SW oa 248 geno Bo, bn ite ‘Gaiman cz, Fas Pop, Grup Sue, Geto dca hata ‘Gaiman kero tsa Carn ‘ine nance uadona Long Finer 22 hese Dstt ral Poi Ts sty on RISKY & COSTLY Dear Fellow Nevadan, We are writing to you today to alert you about a risky proposal that would Question 3, a Constitutional Amendment on Nevada'ws statewide ballot this November, would dismantle our existing electri system and jeopardize the efficient and affordable network we all rely on. ‘The promoters of Question 3 have said themselves they can’t guarantee it would lower electricity prices. That is certainly no surprise given the experience of other states that have attempted to deregulate their electricity markets. For example, when California experimented with deregulating its electricity system in the early 2000s, it led to dramatic spikes in electricity prices, rolling blackouts, the Enron scandal, and over $40 billion in additional costs to consumers and taxpayers. Today, California's electricty rates are nearly double Nevada's. ‘There is no doubt that Question 3 is a risky proposal, which would jeopardize the low rates and reliability we can count on under our current system. ‘We want a guarantee our families can count on dependable power on a hot summer day or ¢ freezing winter night. And we're alarmed by reports that Question 3 would provide less protection for consumers, especially those who live in small, hard-to-reach areas. Perheps our biggest concern about Question 3 is the fact it would lock this and leave its implementation up to the State Legislature and courts this deregulation proposal leads to higher rates and less than reliable service, as it has in other deregulated states, it would take at least 4 years to repeal and get it out of our Constitution. Clearly, we have strong views on Question 3 and its many consequences, which is why we formed the Coalition to Defeat Question 3. {over, please] Were a growing bipartisan coalition of consumers, businesses and organizations from across Neveda opposing Question 3 and its risky proposal for our state. If you agree Question 3 is wrong for Nevada, then we encourage you to join today by returning the enclosed postage-paid card! ‘You can also join the coalition on our website, NOon3.com I: won't costyowa'thing to join, but adding your voice to this growing movement will really make a difference. “Thank you in advance for your time and your consideration. Sincerely, c Orbe Quese~ Ware Ore C Be ROO Angelo ‘Aragon Maria Dent Richard P. McCann President State Director Executive Director Professional Fire AARP Nevada Nevada Association of Fighters of Nevada Public Safety Officers PS. Please fill out and moment and won't cost you a thing, ¥. Itwillonlytakea PAID FOR BY THE GOALITONO DEFEAT QUESTIONS» #.0.80X1509, LAS VEGAS, NV 29125-1520 NOon3.com

You might also like