[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6332492,"mediaKeyId","2307033-a1255203511b7b469e64abb7c57170b6","parentId",2307033,"title","Bill would add dental claims to Nevada’s external review process for denied benefits","audioSeconds",773,"startMs",2793000,"endMs",3566000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2307033-a1255203511b7b469e64abb7c57170b6&start=2793&end=3566","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2307033-a1255203511b7b469e64abb7c57170b6/thumbnail_2793000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6332492/Nevada/Bill-would-add-dental-claims-to-Nevadas-external-review-process-for-denied-benefits","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332492-3e400cb03f22775e133b30273445f17e/orig.mp4?Expires=1776668597&Signature=hS0IPG8-ywXqeHpQniwbRqRgkAzci~i9jRNaanoSk2qL1cR4w11Qs6WnnqjnUAvhDiaDbnFH587UIl3yuORlt~HUynSOEsgawBZRE0bt0PsPtsC7J4pWUDUC8c96t~InOmaD4SlLFnXIoU5hkDxicxCZwdHlkXO8M3Lk2kWza5s7KGPxq1Y9~CZI5bE5LJBl74sHTT~jdZbeHblaENWjmdp3DmfoIbRkIlIGxFT0HUDL0UuZOL2MIye1HWEVW-hHB9Oj7Ij5Lb7zoNCEtS-XPIsa6Qka6W6qSBAnMd295VtN6dUNBe4IcdJuVrDQsPSCqOl6H54OQ8dZd2XMBbj6dg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada Legislature","date","2025-02-12T00:00:00Z","article","Assemblymember Tracy Brown‑May presented AB202 to the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee, saying the bill would add dental services to Nevada’s existing external review process for adverse determinations.

‘‘Dental patients currently have no recourse or access to an independent review following the denial of a dental claim,’’ said Assemblymember Tracy Brown‑May, outlining the bill’s intent to allow independent review similar to the process already available for medical claims. The sponsor said the Nevada Office of Consumer Health Assistance (created in 1999) and the state’s external review process for medical claims (added in 2023) provide the model for adding dentistry.

What the bill would do: Paul Klein, speaking for the Nevada Dental Association, said AB202 would amend NRS 695G.241 to include dentists in the definition of a clinical peer, allow dentists to submit written certifications in support of covered services, and permit independent review organizations to consider documentary evidence and treating dentist recommendations when reviewing dental coverage denials. ‘‘Section 3 is the most important. This is the intent of the bill ultimately . . . it expands the rules for managing complaints and external reviews to include insurance policies that cover dental services,’’ Klein told the committee.

Support and concerns: Dr. Amy Abittan, vice president of the Nevada Dental Association and a practicing dentist in Reno, said many denials arrive after treatment is already rendered and that patients should not bear the ultimate financial burden when insurers deny coverage: ‘‘. . .if the ultimate thing is denial, that lands squarely on the patients who have a right to coverage for their medical care from their insurers.’’

Delta Dental (neutral) representative Helen Foley said dental insurance differs from medical insurance and asked for time to provide specific operational information from insurers’ grievance and appeals departments. ‘‘When you talk about a decision here that people don't agree with when you're talking about a physician, it might be tens of thousands of dollars . . . when you're talking about a dental situation, most of them are in the hundreds of dollars,’’ Foley said, urging that rules reflect the different scale and workflows of dental claims.

Procedure and next steps: Sponsor testimony described the external review pathway: after an insurer’s final adverse determination, the patient or provider may seek external review through the Office of Consumer Health Assistance. The outside reviewer evaluates medical necessity and related documentation. The sponsor and dental association representatives said the change would align dental practitioners’ ability to support patients in seeking review with the process available to physicians for medical claims.

Ending: Committee members asked few questions during the hearing; the bill was presented, received supportive testimony from dentists and a neutral statement from an insurer, and the hearing was closed without a committee vote recorded in the transcript.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","2/12/2025 - Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor","oneSentenceSummary","Assemblymember Tracy Brown‑May told the committee that AB202 would extend Nevada’s independent external review process to deny dental‑coverage decisions, allowing treating dentists and patients to seek an independent determination after a final adverse insurer decision.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature NV, Nevada","taxId",78440,"location","Nevada","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6332497,"Bill would let Nevada courts appoint receivers to fix severely substandard rental properties",2535,162000,2697000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2307033-a1255203511b7b469e64abb7c57170b6&start=162&end=2697","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2307033-a1255203511b7b469e64abb7c57170b6/thumbnail_162000.jpg","/articles/6332497/Nevada/Bill-would-let-Nevada-courts-appoint-receivers-to-fix-severely-substandard-rental-properties","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332497-c08757e882ed89084986472ea5804312/orig.mp4?Expires=1776668597&Signature=fPWnK7WIZrPA5pmPMAY1Hr30G6EpZgwRbsz2W9Qp8CaMVApmJ9Gn0pLo0hQa0O7JMg0Pj8ZZNCb0LI5IwAq85K7y6EAHySXigRFpO0HvhUH3ve03HrVVcAX4q1ZtcsAaxrFWA~MLYsQoSphILcNGHtuJuFyx2dhmfp~FurKjfhNx-8AaK2VC203uMcn-IyiyTWWVcDBY4ne5~-q9Hlcl9Dre~sogE2E9a8BD9r0ez4ycKKFhMNirn2Vn7shuoYoFATx1rivApdBrm5w0M32K2-QdLPNBFS02CRZ3ka9L7Nqm8KIzKKA-nU2JQPOGS2WTbM1F5E7Hv6xoDSSmFCk1MA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assemblymember Venetia Considine (sponsor) told the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee on the bill that AB211 would authorize district courts to declare residential properties ‘‘substandard’’ and, after specified findings, allow appointment of a receiver to repair or rehabilitate the property.

The bill is aimed at extreme cases in which code enforcement and local agencies have repeatedly tried to get an owner to make repairs but the owner ‘‘rebuffed, ignored, or . . . is unable to bring the property to code on their own,’’ Assemblymember Venetia Considine said. “AB 211 provides a solution to the extreme situation when a property is significantly substandard and all attempts to bring the property to standard are rebuffed, ignored, or the situation is where the owner is unable to bring up the property to code on their own.”

Committee members were told the measure covers the same procedures for counties and cities in separate sections and is not intended as an immediate receivership shortcut. ‘‘This is not an instant fix. This is only used or would be used in extreme circumstances when every other attempt to abate, fix, work with the property owner has been exhausted,’’ Considine said. Clark County representatives and other local officials described multi‑year cases in which large apartment buildings had repeated health‑and‑safety problems that code enforcement could not resolve.

Why it matters: Sponsors and county witnesses said the bill would give local governments one more legal tool to protect tenants and public safety when owners refuse to act, and to preserve surrounding property values. Opponents said the measure needs tighter due‑process language so owners clearly understand the required procedural steps before receivership can be imposed.

Key provisions and procedural guards
- County and city tracks: The bill contains parallel county (sections 2–18) and city (sections 20–37) provisions with the same substantive standards.
- Notice and timing: Sponsor testimony said conceptual amendments replace a short three‑day notice with a 30‑day notice in certain sections to ensure owners (for example, out‑of‑state owners or registered agents) receive mailed notice consistent with NRS 244.3605.
- Court‑level declaration required: The district court must determine that a property is substandard before appointing a receiver. Sections cited by the sponsor list specific findings the court must make and allow the court to consider the history of agency contacts with the owner.
- Costs, relocation and rights of tenants: If repairs affect safe occupancy, the bill permits the court to order the owner to pay reasonable relocation costs and requires the owner to offer returning tenants a first right of occupancy after repairs. The court may also order reasonable and actual costs to the city or county and require notice to tenants. Sponsor testimony said the bill permits the court to award attorney fees and costs in its discretion (language in the conceptual amendment).
- Receivership duties and oversight: The bill sets duties for receivers, requires monthly reporting and enumerates processes for discharging a receiver. Sponsor witnesses emphasized the bill is limited so it ‘‘does not limit the rights available under any other provision of law’’ and does not strip constitutional protections.

Local examples, scope and concerns
Clark County Government Affairs Manager Joanna Jacob and Clark County Commissioner Tic Sagerbloom described local incidents used to justify the bill: a large property with hundreds of units that had been the subject of multiple health‑district visits, reports of dead animals in a pool, homicides, drug activity and other conditions that made the building unsafe. ‘‘I have 200 tenants . . . I don't have a place to take 200 people and put them in another unit,’’ Commissioner Sagerbloom said, describing the difficulty of relocating large numbers of low‑income tenants. Jacob said some problems have persisted for months and years despite outreach and that the county sought a clear legal remedy.

Opposition and due‑process questions
John Sandy of the Nevada State Department Association testified in opposition, urging clearer, enumerated due‑process protections before a receivership would be imposed and noting a receivership can ‘‘have pretty drastic ability to encumber the property.’’ Committee members asked about the record that would accompany a court action; sponsor witnesses said the bill contemplates the court will consider the enforcement history (affidavits and prior agency communications) when the case is filed.

Technical edits and next steps
Sponsor testimony and stakeholders identified a package of conceptual amendments that the sponsor said she would file, including the 30‑day mailed notice change, clarifying discretionary attorney‑fee language, and other conforming edits. No committee vote was recorded at the hearing; the sponsor closed by thanking the committee and noting the bill’s use would be limited to extreme cases.

Ending: The committee took testimony from local governments, tenants’ advocates and landlord representatives and closed the hearing on AB211 without action recorded in the transcript.","Assemblymember Venetia Considine told the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee that AB211 would allow district courts to declare residential properties ‘‘substandard’’ and, in extreme cases, appoint a receiver to repair, rehabilitate or abate conditions that substantially endanger tenants or the public.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6332487,"‘Lizzie’s Law’ would tighten inflatable‑device rules after fatal bounce‑house accident",4332,3623000,7955000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2307033-a1255203511b7b469e64abb7c57170b6&start=3623&end=7955","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2307033-a1255203511b7b469e64abb7c57170b6/thumbnail_3623000.jpg","/articles/6332487/Nevada/Lizzies-Law-would-tighten-inflatabledevice-rules-after-fatal-bouncehouse-accident","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6332487-85094257b4dc148803b7ff4d86f1c247/orig.mp4?Expires=1776668597&Signature=ABd4rxMYVrwOh1r1Ws1zHvShxpmysFEmvnp1pN7mAMdMZMNfOCfgRHnXZER9YGWIOt5gxCfgAQ1BZ4saqKQY-hs0Br6StJXaQW-drSuaUh~u26fybJFzTzsBtQEnyURDzvxLGBWqLjT6BUbYDIxXa3~ggjaLqZPrvhczGXv~n1QvBAbYxEDHmcoH0TS0L6HkHUS8lA6NGi3nBfQvF9oq2Lqan8~LmJMqM-oEfKZqQWSYtodT09XGqiaBk~Jg9UjxsYf~WaLj9OXRfAHBVmMzlswMirGCvfRKsQgEPaUAxi8fvh74F4B9021-B~sE2p~CLDbnFcbtEYq8HxWY4di1Rg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assemblymember Tracy Brown‑May presented AB198 and witnesses described a fatal 2019 bounce‑house accident in Reno that sponsors say demonstrates a statewide need for minimum safety rules for inflatable amusement devices.

Family testimony and sponsor overview
Mitch and Wendy Hammond told the committee that their daughter, Lizzie, was killed when a backyard inflatable device and a water slide were lifted by a gust and struck power lines at about 17 miles per hour. Wendy Hammond described checking that ‘‘it had stakes around it’’ and said she was ‘‘falsely reassured’’ because she later learned the stakes used for that device were intended only to prevent small shifting and not to prevent lofting. She told the committee the device ‘‘went up into the power lines’’ and that rescue crews spent minutes waiting for utility personnel and ladder trucks before recovering children from the device; Lizzie was later declared brain‑dead and her family chose organ donation.

Assemblymember Brown‑May said the bill—presented as ‘‘Lizzie’s Law’’ by supporters—would set statewide minimum standards already used in Clark County and by many professional operators, including business licensing, insurance requirements, inspection logs, mandatory anchoring, wind‑speed monitoring, warning signage and operator training.

Major provisions discussed
- Licensing and insurance: The draft would require operators that make inflatable devices available to hold a valid state business license and liability insurance or a bond of at least $1 million.
- Logbook and inspections: Operators must keep a written or digital logbook available for inspection that records pre‑use inspections and the time/date of any temporary or permanent discontinuation.
- Wind speed cutoff and monitoring: The draft initially set a 10 mph limit; sponsors negotiated to 20 mph and then the committee discussion considered reverting to 15 mph after testimony that the incident involved a 17 mph gust. The bill requires use of an anemometer to measure wind speed and recording the reading in the logbook.
- Anchoring: After industry and sponsor negotiations, the bill requires weights (recommended 75 pounds per anchor point) rather than stakes for hard surfaces and permits stakes on soft ground; the bill would require a weight or stake at every anchor point and follow manufacturer's guidance if heavier anchors are specified.
- Operator warnings and public information: The bill would require a prominently posted warning (red, large type) that the device has caused injury or death if improperly installed and that a logbook is available for inspection.
- Civil presumption: A statutory provision in the draft would create a conclusive presumption of negligence per se in civil actions for violation of the act’s requirements.

Support, industry negotiation and questions
Committee testimony included many community members, business owners and personal‑injury attorneys who supported the bill as basic consumer safety regulation; the Nevada Justice Association called it ‘‘basic consumer protection and safety.’’ Several small operators testified in support with suggested revisions (for example, permitting weights rather than stakes on hard surfaces and clarifying operator presence requirements).

Sponsor counsel Elliot Mallon said the sponsor and industry negotiated multiple conceptual amendments to allow 75‑pound weights instead of 100, permit weights rather than mandatory stakes on hard surfaces, require training of the renter if an operator does not remain on‑site, set a compliance effective date of January 1, 2026, and restrict logbook inspection to customers and enforcement agencies. Mallon characterized the bill as incremental: ‘‘we are working with them to try to find compromise to keep kids safe, and I think we have gotten a long way, in accepting a lot of the amendments that they brought forth.’’

Enforcement and open issues
Committee members asked about enforcement responsibility (business licensing offices were discussed as a likely local enforcement channel), what constitutes acceptable logbook custody for devices left at events, whether operators must remain on site or whether renters must be trained, and the appropriate wind‑speed threshold. Sponsor and industry representatives said many responsible operators already follow much of the draft language; supporters urged the committee to prioritize a standard to prevent lofting and other wind‑related incidents.

Ending: Supporters closed with a request that the committee advance the measure; the hearing record shows no committee vote during the session transcript.","AB198 would require business licensing, insurance, inspection logs, anchoring weights or stakes, a wind‑speed cutoff and prominent warning signs for inflatable amusements. The bill—prompted by the 2019 death of a Reno child, Lizzie Hammond—sets inspection, anchoring and recordkeeping requirements supporters say will prevent lofting incidents; the","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Bill would add dental claims to Nevada’s external review process for denied benefits

Bill would let Nevada courts appoint receivers to fix severely substandard rental properties

‘Lizzie’s Law’ would tighten inflatable‑device rules after fatal bounce‑house accident