[{"_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",6607312,"mediaKeyId","2953361-9b17d6fa2e93eb7e449417a8a272d61e","parentId",2953361,"title","Senate panel replaces proposed prison minimum-wage plan with requirement for DOC reporting after contested hearing","audioSeconds",4742,"startMs",4287000,"endMs",9029000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2953361-9b17d6fa2e93eb7e449417a8a272d61e&start=4287&end=9029","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2953361-9b17d6fa2e93eb7e449417a8a272d61e/thumbnail_4287000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6607312/Nevada/Senate-panel-replaces-proposed-prison-minimum-wage-plan-with-requirement-for-DOC-reporting-after-contested-hearing","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6607312-628ea5c05e0aa53c6ced2f4af626aa1b/orig.mp4?Expires=1776285565&Signature=XSsp6KXz7Qu5bR0KAbeowMGpDpIuLGeQetJPfPQ5fOacsfCsQUgMqxtk6C~uZO0IBoSTYo6pvEtgPhIJuWNdg3d0Ng-9yh5zbmkScm9g3VrFw~hh4X3zdP1EKW99tUrANBXMXoZYKyZk9MC6ubymxfdppBnP9jwemX9IHyzEaXQreBjG6eeEt4rKw6WNfgEfcsg-rUyLLhWKC953u8rUm0gTYEHhQBEfjil6hkgsBydPuD35u0LFpNA3mkjuBCKj7jOQ7Z~XoTRIb3ymPMjhW7Wpc46SXP3oCsXD40~5C3a1kmRHve3xi8F0X-y8aWVC3qrrW7pHzV9mwhU-Hc-dbA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada State Legislature","date","2025-04-10T22:42:49.92Z","article","A bill proposing a phased increase in pay for incarcerated workers in Nevada was the subject of a lengthy hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Presenters argued the measure would restore labor dignity and help reentry; corrections officials and prison-industry veterans warned an enforced minimum wage could jeopardize self-funded programs that provide training and placement.

What was proposed: SB 334 — brought forward this session with support from Senator Neal and advocacy groups — originally required a phased wage increase for incarcerated workers. The sponsor’s draft would have required incarcerated persons to earn progressively higher percentages of the state minimum wage, beginning at 20% on July 1 and increasing over five years to 100% of the state minimum wage by 2029. The bill as presented also included an annual audit requirement of wages paid through 2029.

Historical context presented: Dr. Tyler D. Perry of UNLV gave a historical overview connecting convict leasing and prison labor to broader racial and economic histories in the United States, saying Nevada made “the correct decision in striking the language of slavery and involuntary servitude from a state constitution” and urging lawmakers to consider the dignity of labor when drafting policy for incarcerated workers.

Supporters’ case

- Advocates and witnesses framed the proposal as a dignity and reentry measure. Leslie Turner, deputy director at the Fines and Fees Justice Center, said paying higher wages helps incarcerated people support families, pay restitution and reduce reliance on social services on release.

- Civil-rights and justice-reform groups emphasised that low prison wages (the presentation noted some pay levels as low as about 60¢ per hour in Silver State Industries listings) undercut victims’ ability to receive restitution and impair post-release stability.

Corrections and industry concerns

- Bill Quenga (Department of Corrections, deputy director of industrial programs) described existing systems and rates: “For traditional work… it can vary from a dollar to $7 an hour.” He said certified programs that sell across state lines are paid at federal rules tied to prevailing wages for specific occupations.

- Former incarcerated workers and prison-industry staff warned that a mandatory minimum wage could render the state’s prison-industries programs insolvent. Several witnesses testified that prison industries operate on a self-funded model and are used to provide marketable skills; one former worker said the program enabled him to obtain a high-paying job after release.

Committee outcome and amendment

After hours of testimony and cross-examination the committee agreed on a different path: by unanimous vote members replaced the bill’s original wage schedule with an amendment requiring the Nevada Department of Corrections to prepare a report to the Interim Finance Committee and the Legislative Commission. The requested report must include: how many incarcerated people are employed in each industry, what they are paid, deductions taken (including for room/board, restitution or victim funds), how many eligible incarcerated people declined employment, and how many workers obtained jobs in those industries on release. The committee asked DOC to include annual audit information through 2029. The committee’s motion to amend and do pass (replace text with reporting requirement) carried unanimously; the floor statement will be assigned to Senator Neal.

Why the change matters

- Supporters said the original bill sought to correct low wages that they described as exploitative and to shorten a path from confinement to stable community reentry.

- Opponents and corrections staff argued for preservation of programs that provide training and pathways to employment; they urged more data before changing wage rules that could make programs unsustainable.

Committee direction

Committee members asked DOC to return with the requested detailed data, including the count of incarcerated people who decline work assignments and a breakdown of deductions from payroll (room and board, restitution, victim funds) so legislators can assess fiscal trade-offs and impacts to victim restitution and program sustainability before any further statutory change.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","4/10/2025 - Senate Committee on Judiciary","oneSentenceSummary","After a contested hearing with advocates, academics and corrections officials, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously replaced SB 334’s proposed phased minimum-wage plan with a requirement that the Department of Corrections report detailed data on incarcerated employment, wages and deductions.","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},6607322,"Senate Judiciary Committee advances a slate of public-safety and administrative bills; several carry unanimous support",9122,39000,9161000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2953361-9b17d6fa2e93eb7e449417a8a272d61e&start=39&end=9161","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2953361-9b17d6fa2e93eb7e449417a8a272d61e/thumbnail_39000.jpg","/articles/6607322/Nevada/Senate-Judiciary-Committee-advances-a-slate-of-public-safety-and-administrative-bills-several-carry-unanimous-support","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6607322-f955187f625a070817666f7268f2069e/orig.mp4?Expires=1776285565&Signature=A5kd4J941xT2L70YKNtMJaq204ute1ESylV6PkJxSNA1LuanwUG341y4urYvcUWgHJQasYAYAS9zM0Z3TfFJnhMETFGpxU1BIZyR3nUz2o6SDI6Qzjutgvc6BVpIU75X4HVMGqmQ14a4Gr5BO14pfAizh6Cucd6ZLBpDhC~FRT2sRpTJc~kVRAMb96IcE8YIQcqsNN5PsqfVsIxC1DCQ29NimAC7AZ8UsX0KRT-JCRaAcpcIVedpBumQnCGptDUVrw2IUymtLsl4qhBeyZv2dZ8gumDQ2A4cLhFA9JxQjPCBhYfkUJF3Kd~T4A2rJ0SO96HrdAqbnVgPB6-6DQoyhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Judiciary Committee held a work session and bill hearings that resulted in votes to amend and “do pass” on a series of measures including SB 7, SB 60, SB 62, SB 75, SB 76, SB 213, SB 125, SB 275, SB 347, SB 432 and others.

Committee Chair Scheibel opened the session and asked staff from the Legislative Counsel Bureau to summarize each measure and any proposed amendments. Jared McDonnell of the Research Division walked the panel through the work session document at the start of the meeting.

Why it matters: The measures range from technical and administrative changes — such as fee-setting authority for the Secretary of State (SB 75) — to crime-and-victim-focused proposals that change penalties or create funds (SB 60, SB 62, SB 76). Most measures were amended by stakeholder agreement before the committee voted.

Key outcomes

- SB 7 (pre-sentence investigations): Committee moved to amend and do pass. Motion by Senator Lang, second by Vice Chair Flores. The motion carried unanimously; the floor statement was assigned to Senator Lang. The amendment was submitted by the Washoe and Clark County public defender offices and changed timing and contempt provisions in NRS 176.153.

- SB 60 (crimes against older/vulnerable persons): Committee adopted an Attorney General–sponsored amendment that narrowed and restructured the original bill; motion by Senator Lang, second by Senator Krasner. The motion carried unanimously; floor statement assigned to Senator Krasner.

- SB 62 (crimes, victim funds): The Attorney General’s amendment deleted several sections of the introduced bill and authorized new remediations and appropriations, including up to $1,000 for hate-crime property remediation and appropriations to victim-compensation and trafficking funds. Motion to amend and do pass by Senator Orenshall, second Senator Lang. Senators Hansen and Ellison recorded nays; motion carried and the floor statement was assigned to Senator Pizena.

- SB 75 (Secretary of State duties/fees): The amendment clarified that statutory fee amounts are caps and removed some dissolution fees; it also added provisions as to automatic renewal of some business licenses and credential recognition for the Pritzker Architecture Prize laureate. Motion to amend and do pass carried; nays recorded from Senators Ellison, Hansen and Krasner.

- SB 76 (fund for compensation of victims of securities fraud): The Secretary of State’s amendment would cap the fund at $500,000. Motion to amend and do pass carried unanimously; floor statement assigned to Senator Winn.

- SB 213 (unlawful dissemination of intimate images): Two amendments were considered, including a public defender’s revision to the definition of “intimate image.” Motion to amend and do pass carried unanimously; floor statement to Senator Stone.

- SB 125 (services to victims of crime): The bill authorizes disclosure of certain confidential information to a statewide center to assist victims; the bill includes permissive language. Motion to do pass carried with a single recorded nay from Senator Krasner; floor statement to Senator Steinbeck.

- SB 275, SB 347, SB 432 and other measures: Each was taken up in turn and the committee voted to amend and do pass most measures. Several criminal-justice items drew dissenting votes recorded in the transcript; those are noted above.

Votes at a glance (selected items)

- SB 7 — amend & do pass. Mover: Sen. Lang; Second: Vice Chair Flores. Outcome: carried unanimously.
- SB 60 — amend & do pass. Mover: Sen. Lang; Second: Sen. Krasner. Outcome: carried unanimously.
- SB 62 — amend & do pass. Mover: Sen. Orenshall; Second: Sen. Lang. Nays: Senators Hansen and Ellison. Outcome: carried.
- SB 75 — amend & do pass. Nays: Senators Ellison, Hansen, Krasner. Outcome: carried.
- SB 76 — amend & do pass. Outcome: carried unanimously.
- SB 213 — amend & do pass. Outcome: carried unanimously.
- SB 125 — do pass. Nays: Senator Krasner (sole nay). Outcome: carried.
- SB 275 — do pass. Outcome: carried unanimously.
- SB 347 — do pass. Nays: Senators Ellison, Hansen, Krasner. Outcome: carried.
- SB 432 — amend & do pass (penalty category change). Outcome: carried unanimously.

What the committee said: Chair Scheibel repeatedly encouraged continued stakeholder meetings where members reserved the right to change floor votes and noted that amendments reflected negotiated compromises between prosecutors, defenders and agencies.

Next steps: For bills that passed out of committee the next step is a floor vote before the full Senate. Several measures were assigned floor statement volunteers; sponsors and staff said they would continue work with stakeholders on outstanding concerns.","The Nevada Senate Judiciary Committee on a hybrid meeting amended and advanced more than a dozen measures ranging from pre-sentence investigation rules to victim-compensation funds and Secretary of State fee authority.",{"_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},6607317,"Senate committee advances Ellison bill to toughen unlawful-occupancy rules after hearing with law-enforcement, defenders and business groups",2544,1714000,4258000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2953361-9b17d6fa2e93eb7e449417a8a272d61e&start=1714&end=4258","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2953361-9b17d6fa2e93eb7e449417a8a272d61e/thumbnail_1714000.jpg","/articles/6607317/Nevada/Senate-committee-advances-Ellison-bill-to-toughen-unlawful-occupancy-rules-after-hearing-with-law-enforcement-defenders-and-business-groups","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6607317-c97f6ca91d057654540dfa1cc28fa157/orig.mp4?Expires=1776285565&Signature=amkNLrjFclIALxyKxBOmbnm3NO87NubyRvDnYUkbMmBohdXvgfA~S2MiI3BKowQvcEeOq4fwjUVKFTs3QyiZjQtbaXNgNgP4MRSkNYOtLB6xMdnwOMYsXJ7xfNapXwkHFgkKdGzZAvKCjq7NiG~-ADxVljToq5PyjeQDYmicGHK~1oF6-X9zypVRXQy231Fqt~ZWrmOOMglT47qy2ydrYZxbz~kyS7dX6WybDyb12pQ65RExztR6eO7KE6n1esGD47UFmvswhDYHLSlHN0--DRQtxpNBO4WEPWhmBphQqiBbPnP6q0vtquniFLhBDw~IyELVPBT-REJnpenwCYsNEw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senator John Ellison presented Senate Bill 202 to the Senate Judiciary Committee as a response to “takeovers” of vacant and occupied dwellings — including cases in which people use forged rental agreements, utility hookups and other documents to establish possession.

Ellison, sponsor of SB 202 and a senator representing a large rural district, told the committee the bill is aimed at stopping people who move into empty or temporarily unoccupied houses, change locks and claim a right to remain via forged paperwork. “What this law will do, I hope, will address…where you don't have to pay somebody to get out of a vacant house,” Ellison said during his presentation.

Nut graf: The bill seeks to expand criminal definitions related to housebreaking and unlawful occupancy and would amend civil summary processes to accelerate owners’ ability to regain possession. Supporters said the measure would help property owners and business owners reclaim property quickly; opponents — including public defenders — said it risks penalizing people who were themselves victims of scams and objects to shortening the period available to contest lockouts.

Major provisions and amendment

- Adds language to housebreaking and unlawful-occupancy statutes to cover use of false or forged rental agreements and related documents to gain possession of a dwelling. The sponsor described proposed amendments that would define “squatter” and clarify that a person using forged documents to obtain possession can be charged even if the dwelling is vacant.

- The conceptual amendment discussed in committee would shorten the calendar period in which an unlawful or unauthorized occupant who has been locked out may file a verified complaint seeking reentry; the amendment text discussed in the hearing reduces that period from 21 days to 5 calendar days (the sponsor said LCB drafted the language).

Public testimony and main points

- Support: Nick Schneider, director of government affairs for the Vegas Chamber, said the bill “would get property back into the hands of the rightful property owners.” Senator Ellison and other supporters described repeated incidents in rural and urban Nevada where occupants changed locks, boarded windows and removed or damaged property.

- Opposition/concern: John Puro of the Clark County Public Defender's Office told the committee, “Unlawful occupancy is already a gross misdemeanor.” Public defender witnesses and counsel in Washoe County said their concern is that innocent renters may bring forged agreements and be prosecuted or lose due process if the contest period is shortened. Angela Knott of the Washoe County Public Defender's Office noted that the bill as introduced lacked a mens rea element (she suggested adding “knowingly” to language referring to false rental documents) and warned the policy might punish victims of fraud.

- Neutral/field perspective: Josh Martinez of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department described these incidents as “a fraud situation in all 3 cases” the committee outlined, and said the department takes reports and conducts investigations but noted the practical difficulty in proving fraud and locating the person who forged paperwork. Martinez advised that the measure could be “another tool in the tool bag” if it helps speed removals while still respecting constitutional protections.

Committee action and next steps

After testimony and discussion, the committee voted to amend and do pass SB 202 by unanimous vote. The motion to amend and do pass was made and seconded in committee; Chair Scheibel and members asked the sponsor and stakeholders to continue meeting to refine the bill’s language (including the contest period and mens rea language). The committee assigned the floor statement to Senator Ellison.

Why this matters to the community

SB 202 targets a pattern of conduct stakeholders described as increasing in scale, from urban rental scams to rural takeovers. The bill would affect property owners and renters statewide, and could change how quickly owners can use summary civil or criminal processes to remove unauthorized occupants. Public defenders and law-enforcement witnesses urged careful drafting to avoid prosecuting unwitting renters who were themselves victims of fraud.

Ending note: Committee members who reserved their rights emphasized continuing stakeholder meetings. The sponsor and defense counsel agreed to keep working on definitions and procedural timing before the floor.","SB202, sponsored by Senator John Ellison, would expand definitions and penalties for housebreaking and unlawful occupancy tied to false rental agreements and would shorten the period an unauthorized occupant has to contest a lockout. The Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to amend and do pass after extended hearing and stakeholder discussion.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate panel replaces proposed prison minimum-wage plan with requirement for DOC reporting after contested hearing

Senate Judiciary Committee advances a slate of public-safety and administrative bills; several carry unanimous support

Senate committee advances Ellison bill to toughen unlawful-occupancy rules after hearing with law-enforcement, defenders and business groups