The Nevada Legislature convened Thursday morning for the start of a special session called by Gov. Joe Lombardo, with more than 20 items on the agenda, including revisiting his wide-ranging criminal justice bill and a massive expansion of the state\u2019s film tax credit program.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Every day, The Nevada Independent will publish live updates with the latest on bill introductions, hearings, votes and behind-the-scenes negotiations.\u00a0<\/p>\n
See below for updates.<\/p>\n
You can view The Nevada Independent\u2019s special session legislation tracker here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Conceptual amendments to overarching health care bill, details on assistance program \u2013 6:13 p.m.<\/p>\n The first details emerged on legislation to establish the Silver State General Assistance\u00a0 Program (SB3<\/a>).<\/p>\n Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro (D-Las Vegas) said the goal is to ensure Nevada is never scrambling to address gaps in federal support for public safety-net programs such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).<\/p>\n “Senate Bill 3 ensures that Nevada has a clear, accountable, immediate mechanism to protect families when federal support falters,” she told members of the health and wellness committee Thursday, outlining that the legislation establishes a permanent framework to provide assistance to families facing “extraordinary circumstances.”<\/p>\n Those circumstances are defined as an event or situation that creates a need for state intervention to protect the health, safety or general welfare of residents, including the disruption of federal benefits.<\/p>\n Cannizzaro said the funding mechanism works by authorizing the transfer of funds from the unrestricted balance of the state general fund under strict conditions, including a gubernatorial declaration of an extraordinary circumstance and that the transfer would not put the ending balance of the unrestricted state general fund below 5 percent.<\/p>\n A conceptual amendment Cannizzaro brought<\/a> deletes specific allocations for SNAP because of the looming end of the federal shutdown and the delivery of benefits resulting from court decisions. She said the program implemented by the bill would address future stoppages should they occur.<\/p>\n Cannizzaro also presented SB5<\/a>, a measure containing elements of Gov. Joe Lombardo\u2019s health care bill and Cannizzaro\u2019s medical grant proposal from the 2025 legislative session.<\/p>\n The bill incorporated Cannizzaro\u2019s proposal for a program to award grants to address shortfalls of health care providers, or centers for medical excellence (SB434<\/a>), allocating $60 million for the program. It also incorporates two key provisions from the governor\u2019s 2025 health care bill (SB495<\/a>) to expedite the licensure process for physicians in Nevada and help speed up hospital privileging decisions, a process where a hospital\u2019s governing body authorizes a health care provider to perform a specific scope of practice at its facility.<\/p>\n Cannizzaro said the legislation is aimed at addressing a critical shortage of health care providers and is essential to offering specialized services in Nevada so patients don\u2019t have to leave the state to receive care.\u00a0<\/p>\n A conceptual amendment<\/a> presented at the hearing would amend the bill to increase the share of funding available to the newly established Nevada Health Authority from 2 percent to 3.5 percent. It would also update Nevada law to allow pharmacists to administer immunizations in accordance with federal immunization standards and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations as of Jan. 1, 2025, along with any future modifications adopted by the State Board of Health.<\/p>\n The vaccine amendment comes after<\/a> CVS and Walgreens temporarily stopped offering the COVID vaccine in Nevada over the summer amid concerns about existing regulations.<\/p>\n The committee amended and passed both bills unanimously.<\/p>\n \u2014 Tabitha Mueller<\/p>\n Film tax credit hearing focuses on fiscal effects, pre-K program \u2013 6:13 p.m.<\/p>\n The first hearing on the latest proposal to significantly expand Nevada\u2019s film tax credit program (AB5<\/a>) focused on an effort to funnel money to pre-K programs, while lawmakers continued to scrutinize the fiscal impact of the proposal.<\/p>\n In a hearing before the Assembly Committee on Jobs and Economy, legislative staff presented its analysis of the budgetary impacts of the proposal \u2014 something that has been a focal point of critics who worry about how it could affect other state programs.<\/p>\n Based on their analysis of the budget entering fiscal years 2030 and 2031 \u2014 which assumed a 3 percent growth rate in revenues and expenditures \u2014 the final balance of the state budget would be about $100 million and $350 million, respectively, below the target balance.<\/p>\n This means that expenditures must be cut, or revenue would have to grow, by these amounts. The analysis also assumed that all other appropriations put forward in the special session would be approved.<\/p>\n The analysis provides a new metric to judge the financial elements of the proposal, which would allocate $120 million in transferable film tax credits across 15 years \u2014 most of which would go toward productions at a new film studio in Summerlin.\u00a0<\/p>\n The latest proposal includes safeguards against economic downturns that were not part of the bill that died in the 2025 Legislature (AB238<\/a>). These would allow the state to suspend tax credits redemption.<\/p>\n \u201cIt allows for that economic activity to continue \u2026 but it pauses the ability to cash in those certificates,\u201d said Matt Walker, a lobbyist for Howard Hughes Holdings, the would-be developer of the new film studio in Summerlin.<\/p>\n Other changes include pushing back the start date of the tax credits from 2028 to 2029 and immediately requiring a certain number of personnel on film productions be Nevada residents.<\/p>\n The hearing also saw the most significant support of the proposal from state education officials, with testimony coming from the presidents of UNR and UNLV, the state superintendent and the superintendent of the Clark County School District (CCSD).<\/p>\n They said the proposal would improve pre-K programs in Clark County \u2014 the bill would create a special tax district to fund pre-K initiatives \u2014 and benefit college students pursuing careers in hospitality, film or related fields.<\/p>\n \u201cWe will utilize revenue from this legislation to transform education for our youngest learners and our most vulnerable learners,\u201d CCSD Superintendent Jhone Ebert said.<\/p>\n \u2014 Eric Neugeboren<\/p>\n Lombardo\u2019s crime bill could see lowered costs? \u2014 4:45 p.m.<\/p>\n The price tag for Gov. Joe Lombardo\u2019s crime bill has decreased since the 2025 session, in which it was estimated it would cost the state upwards of $40 million in future biennia compounded by increased number of inmates.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n Don Southworth, the offender management administrator for the Nevada Department of Corrections, said that the crime bill could end up costing the state $1 million per future two-year budget cycle. Much of those savings would come from an expected decrease of about 500 incarcerated individuals through a proposed transitional custody program in the bill, he said. <\/p>\n He said that those decreases should offset potential increases in incarceration rates as a result of the bill.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cA lot of what we\u2019re doing here is ballpark guesses,\u201d Southworth said about offender population changes.\u00a0<\/p>\n However, the Las Vegas Justice Court said that the bill would have a significant cost, likely upwards of seven figures due to a data reporting requirement. Judge Jessica Goodey, a Las Vegas Justice Court Judge, testified that the court would submit a fiscal note alongside Clark County.<\/p>\n Opposition, from groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada and Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice, said that the bill is unnecessary and runs \u201ccontrary to data,\u201d pointing to statistics that indicate lowered crime on the Las Vegas Strip.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u2014 Isabella Aldrete<\/p>\n ACLU of Nevada, other community groups protest lack of phone testimony options in Assembly \u2014 3:23 p.m.<\/p>\n The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada along with a host of other community organizations sent a letter to lawmakers protesting the prohibition of testimony by telephone for Assembly hearings during the special session.<\/p>\n The letter sent Thursday said the decision will hinder community participation in the legislative process. The state Senate is allowing telephonic testimony in its committee hearings.<\/p>\n \u201cIf this is truly the peoples\u2019 house, we would encourage you to reverse course and take the peoples\u2019 phone calls,\u201d the letter reads<\/a>.<\/p>\n Assm. Selena La Rue Hatch (D-Reno) told reporters Thursday afternoon that if lawmakers are allowed to vote remotely, the public should be allowed to participate in the same manner.<\/p>\n \u201cI will be watching very closely to see if they are allowed to call in for public comment,\u201d La Rue Hatch said. \u201cWhen you have a hearing at 2:00 on a Thursday, it\u2019s not that easy for someone to come down to Carson City.\u201d<\/p>\n In response to the letter, Assembly Democratic Caucus spokesperson Liz Luna told reporters that there is standing precedent in the Assembly for not having phone testimony during special sessions.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re operating on a skeleton crew,\u201d Luna said. \u201cI know that the Senate is doing [things] differently, but I can\u2019t explain to you why they\u2019re doing so, or how they\u2019re doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n As an example, Luna said she is the only staffer serving in the leadership office.<\/p>\n \u2014 Tabitha Mueller<\/p>\n Unusual procedural maneuver fails to kill film tax bill \u2014 1:09 p.m.<\/p>\n The most prominent measure of the special session almost died before it even arrived.<\/p>\n Immediately after the introduction of the bill to expand Nevada\u2019s film tax credit program (AB5<\/a>), Assm. Selena La Rue Hatch (D-Reno) objected to the bill using a little-known procedural maneuver<\/a> that allows any member to object to a bill\u2019s introduction. If that motion passes, the bill cannot be considered or reintroduced.<\/p>\n After several breaks in the action, it failed. The vote on the motion tied 21-21, meaning it did not carry the necessary majority to pass and will head to a committee hearing \u2014 but it will need at least one member who voted to kill the bill to change their vote.<\/p>\n Speaking to reporters after the vote, La Rue Hatch said she found the rule after combing through parliamentary procedure.<\/p>\n \u201cI just was very concerned because I don\u2019t think that the film bill is an emergency bill,\u201d she said. \u201cI don\u2019t think that this is something we should be considering in a special session, and I didn\u2019t think that it had the support.\u201d<\/p>\n Progressive groups have long opposed the bill, describing it as a handout to movie studios, and held a press conference Thursday morning to voice their opposition.<\/p>\n The vote capped off a one-hour recess during which proponents of the bill whipped votes on the floor to determine whether it could survive. Assembly leadership \u2014 including Assm. Sandra Jauregui (D-Las Vegas), the sponsor of the film tax credit bill \u2014 huddled with legal counsel.<\/p>\n As the recess reached nearly an hour, Assm. Tracy Brown-May (D-Las Vegas), who was not present on the Assembly floor, appeared over Zoom to vote on the bill remotely. The Legislature has not had remote voting since the pandemic, according to legislative staff.<\/p>\n Right before the vote, Assm. Cecelia Gonzalez (D-Las Vegas) objected to the use of remote voting, but Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager (D-Las Vegas) said that Brown-May had personal matters in Las Vegas and the vote was cleared by legal counsel.<\/p>\n Brown-May ultimately voted against the motion to kill the bill. If she had not voted, the bill would have died.<\/p>\n There were six Assembly members who changed their vote on the legislation compared to when an initial version of the bill passed 22-20 in May.\u00a0<\/p>\n Supporters-turned-opponents were Assms. Bert Gurr (R-Elko), Jovan Jackson (D-Las Vegas) and Gregory Koenig (R-Fallon), while new backers who previously voted against it were Assms. Brian Hibbetts (R-Las Vegas), Cinthia Moore (D-North Las Vegas) and Hanadi Nadeem (D-Las Vegas).\u00a0<\/p>\n Newly appointed Assm. Jason Patchett (R-Las Vegas) voted to kill the bill, despite his predecessor \u2014 Assm. Toby Yurek (R-Henderson) \u2014 voted for it in May.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n After the vote, Patchett told The Indy he wants to see the bill text before making a final decision. He added that his vote was because of his unfamiliarity with how legislative activity worked.<\/p>\n \u201cI didn\u2019t know what was going on procedurally,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Jauregui and other legislative leaders were not immediately available for comment as they headed into a caucus meeting.<\/p>\n \u2014 Eric Neugeboren<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Nevada Legislature convened Thursday morning for the start of a special session called by Gov. Joe Lombardo,…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":377881,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[35],"tags":[181428,181429,181430,181431,181432,48592,181433,181434,181435,181436,210,1141,1142,181437,181438,181439,181440,181441,7218,181442,181443,181444,181445,181446,181447,181448,181449,67,132,68,65813],"class_list":{"0":"post-377880","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-health-care","8":"tag-aclu-nevada","9":"tag-bert-gurr","10":"tag-brian-hibbetts","11":"tag-cecilia-gonzalez","12":"tag-cinthia-moore","13":"tag-cvs","14":"tag-don-southworth","15":"tag-greg-koenig","16":"tag-gregory-koenig","17":"tag-hanadi-nadeem","18":"tag-health","19":"tag-health-care","20":"tag-healthcare","21":"tag-jason-patchett","22":"tag-jessica-goodey","23":"tag-joe-lombardo","24":"tag-joseph-lombardo","25":"tag-jovan-jackson","26":"tag-live-updates","27":"tag-liz-luna","28":"tag-nevada-attorneys-for-criminal-justice","29":"tag-nevada-health-authority","30":"tag-nicole-cannizzaro","31":"tag-sandra-jaurgui","32":"tag-selena-la-rue-hatch","33":"tag-toby-yurek","34":"tag-tracy-brown-may","35":"tag-united-states","36":"tag-unitedstates","37":"tag-us","38":"tag-walgreens"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/377880","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=377880"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/377880\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/377881"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=377880"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=377880"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=377880"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}