Trista Gomez
RepublicanQ1 K-12 EDUCATION: In 2023–24, approximately 14% of fifth-grade students and 36% of eighth-grade students in Nevada met or exceeded state standards for science, while many Nevada school districts face challenges attracting and retaining qualified STEM educators. What evidence-based policies, if any, would you support to strengthen science education and access to quality STEM educators across the state, and why?
With foundational reading and math levels at a low, it seems very hard to try to then also pull in science standards.
Anecdotally, my kids had traditional phonics and traditional math, and are able to do hard and high sciences.
Their peers that did not have that seem to struggle significantly. The foundation has to be secure. I absolutely agree that something has to be done about schooling. When were the last set of outcomes that were acceptable, what were we doing, what was the culture, the methods, the structure.
We have tons of data points. We have to agree on what the outcomes should be, when those were accomplished and what we were doing then. For literacy in all areas.
Q2 WATER: Nevada is the driest state in the United States, and our limited water resources are facing increasing demand as drought pressure increases. Research has documented declining groundwater levels and concerns about the long-term sustainability of groundwater withdrawals. What policies, if any, would you support to promote sustainable groundwater use and protect long-term access to fresh water in Nevada? How would you approach balancing competing water demands, such as those from agriculture, communities, industry, and environmental needs?
This is one of my biggest concerns. While Northern Nevada talks about having more than adequate “reserves”, answers concerning aquifers and ground water are always evaded and vague.
Our allocation of the Colorado River was just cut significantly, and that is also because that essential water resource is receding. The debate is so heavy. I wonder if the answer is to say that legislatively, we put laws into place that place responsibility of wells, drainage, inadequate water, property damage, etc, directly on developers and extreme water users.
Our region has natural and real limitations. The people, tribes, animals, landscape, etc, have got to have top priority. Damage done to those populations and resources should be paid for directly by the people building and profiting off of them. I would hope that we could simply say no until we know the impacts, but it doesn’t seem possible in the current political climate.
I believe that if we put an end type of consequence on all types of development, making them responsible financially - with a bond upfront - of resource depletion and property damage - that the resource users would have a barrier and responsibility to residents and resources with real teeth.
Q3 HEAT: Reno was recently identified as the fastest-warming city in the country, closely followed by Las Vegas. What steps, if any, would you take to protect Nevadans from the increasing threat of extreme heat, particularly vulnerable populations such as children, older adults, low-income communities, and outdoor workers?
Another major concern. Congruent to extreme development, warming trends cannot be mitigated with trees and shade structures. Shade structures could be even more harmful.
There has to be a foundational shift in how we are using the resources and thinking of development. The overuse of these resources may very well end up costing taxpayers, and all resident heavily, both financially, with property value, resource cost increase and simply loss of resources.
Again, threshold changes, end consequence mitigation, upfront cost barriers and community contributions are the only way to legally slow and address these issues. There is simply too much financial influence to mitigate it otherwise. I wish we had addressed these impactful issues beforehand.
Q4 ENERGY: In 2025, solar power provided approximately 34% of Nevada’s total in-state electricity generation. As electricity demand continues to grow, what role do you believe renewable energy sources should play in meeting Nevada’s future energy needs? What policies, if any, would you support to facilitate the development of these resources while keeping energy affordable for Nevada households and ensuring that residents who generate their own electricity can participate fairly in the energy system?
Some of these renewable resources have their own issues, long term termination and disposal effects, wildlife effects, etc.
This is a bit of a double-edged sword in my opinion. A balance possibly, including rewards for consumption decrease? Incentive for regenerative options? This needs a transparent conversation with informed professionals and public debate before additional development.
Q5 Nevada has increasingly attracted large-scale data centers and other energy-intensive industries, which can provide economic investment while also increasing demand for electricity and water. What approach, if any, would you take to ensure that the anticipated water and energy needs of these developments are accurately accounted for in planning and permitting, while balancing economic benefits and electricity costs for residents?
There would have to be strict and enforced water usage metering and monitoring.
I also think you’d have to prevent, in legislation, that those centers could ever be considered essential infrastructure that could supersede those resources being over allocated to them instead of people and environment.
Q6 MINING AND MINERAL RESOURCES: As the Silver State, Nevada is a major U.S. source of mineral resources and has some of the country’s largest lithium reserves, which are increasingly important to the nation’s energy and technology industries. How would you balance the development of these resources with potential impacts on water, ecosystems, and surrounding communities, and what role, if any, should scientific and environmental assessments play in decisions about where and how mining occurs?
This is a big answer. Ultimately, possibly, we take precedent and procedure of existing and known mining consequences, put an end consequence and hard limitation of resources in. Something like I suggested for development and data centers. This isn’t an area that I know a lot about, but I know a bit about mines. I am worried about the impacts. Before these are allowed, I think we would have to have legislation that allows change in resource allocation and cost when information changes. Research and limitations, allowance for changes, before we get too far on this, but I think it’s too late. I went to Europe and an informed guy looking to get into the field knew about the Lithium veins in Nevada.