‘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