[{"_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",6574933,"mediaKeyId","3182048-128bd3ec64a25b6dce1de7f8c6bf07a6","parentId",3182048,"title","Sponsors narrow bill to allow certain noncitizens to apply for Nevada police jobs; opponents cite vetting and public-trust concerns","audioSeconds",3759,"startMs",3336000,"endMs",7095000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3182048-128bd3ec64a25b6dce1de7f8c6bf07a6&start=3336&end=7095","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3182048-128bd3ec64a25b6dce1de7f8c6bf07a6/thumbnail_3336000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6574933/Nevada/Sponsors-narrow-bill-to-allow-certain-noncitizens-to-apply-for-Nevada-police-jobs-opponents-cite-vetting-and-public-trust-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6574933-723cee60db7bb860145f7f619bab4549/orig.mp4?Expires=1775652247&Signature=HT43I8quNMuuPTcwSs-P0pvARhyDc07i0YVEOlb-GOnUF1LXRU2ezUKz9SnNZRKw3cj2SLcWxoIb-C6zMUJcJAtGlib9x4YEElDldCxZIqpzDGyninu3kco8iMM6YTJvThqJvFisZLbXbK5em3NpD1~0vUxbO0xADmXpk4Sl~zpoxPpiotQjILEZ2LwwuuOUJEthCV7GcEBqNhCa~yUiQouJAXdnYk43Hg~24CN4fZWuK689HPdrWfFkq-CIAzKvvXAGW17xKpMcsIY3XnDolEqQfEXu1EvHDqsKu3BTO~mlaWaaNKNm4uIwUULlsAovYxLhP9Z3WdbuLgd~9N7P9A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada Legislature","date","2025-05-02T17:17:35.497Z","article","Senate Bill 155 drew a lengthy committee hearing on May 2, 2025, as sponsors described a narrowly tailored measure to allow some noncitizens to apply for law-enforcement positions in Nevada.

Senator Edgar Flores, sponsor of the bill, told the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs the measure has two components: first, it would clarify existing law allowing honorably discharged members of the U.S. armed forces who are not U.S. citizens to pursue employment as peace officers; second, it would permit lateral movement for peace officers from jurisdictions that already permit noncitizen officers — allowing those officers to apply to Nevada agencies and undergo the usual Nevada vetting process.

\"All we are doing is allowing them the opportunity to apply,\" Flores said, noting that agencies can still reject applicants after background checks. He told the committee the bill was intentionally narrowed from a broader original draft to build consensus and allow agencies time to evaluate the policy.

Assemblymember Ruben De Silva, who spoke about his own experience as a noncitizen who later served in the U.S. Marine Corps, framed the measure as a step toward including immigrant residents in public-safety roles. \"When you give immigrants an opportunity to serve in these sort of capacities ... they tend to over perform,\" De Silva said.

Opponents included representatives of major county law-enforcement groups and members of the public who argued agencies may not be able to complete thorough foreign background checks and that noncitizen officers could raise public-trust and legal issues. Jason Walker, representing the Washoe County Sheriff's Office and the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association, said local hiring standards — set out in NAC and NRS 289.11 — require a thorough background check and typically a U.S. citizen. \"Police officers often have powers that exceed those of ordinary citizens ... Most or some may argue that these powers should be limited to U.S. citizens,\" Walker said.

Other callers and opponents raised related concerns: whether temporary visa holders would be eligible (some feared the bill could be interpreted broadly), whether foreign criminal records could be reliably checked, and whether federal funding or firearm-possession laws might be implicated. Several callers urged lawmakers to reject the measure.

Flores and De Silva emphasized the bill does not require agencies to hire any applicant and that applicants would still be subject to Nevada's background checks and academy standards. Flores listed the background checks a lawful permanent resident commonly undergoes in federal immigration processing — including FBI fingerprint checks and the DHS biometric checks — and told the committee that applicants who previously served in U.S. military service underwent additional vetting.

Committee members questioned both policy and technical details. Assemblymember Golding asked whether law-enforcement agencies could seek information about an applicant's prior employment status in another agency; Flores said agencies may directly contact previous employers and vet lateral candidates the way they would any other applicant. Assemblymember Gallant asked whether states that already allow noncitizen officers have reported safety problems; Flores said he had not found data linking such policies to incidents but did not assert none exist.

Jason Walker and other sheriffs' representatives asked the committee to consider making permissive language rather than mandatory wording (for example, allowing agencies to consider such applicants rather than specifying that they \"shall\"). Several public callers, including veterans and party officials, urged rejection.

The committee did not take a vote during the hearing. Sponsors said the measure is a narrow, incremental change intended to allow agencies flexibility to consider applicants who are lawful permanent residents or honorably discharged service members and to allow agencies to continue applying existing vetting and approval standards.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","5/2/2025 - Assembly Committee on Government Affairs","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 155 would clarify that honorably discharged noncitizen veterans may apply for Nevada law-enforcement positions and allow lateral applicants from jurisdictions that already permit noncitizen officers; sponsors described the measure as a narrow pilot, while sheriffs and callers expressed concerns about background checks and public trust.","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},6574937,"Nevada bill would require clearer written notice, 48-hour warning for officers in internal probes",701,1381000,2082000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3182048-128bd3ec64a25b6dce1de7f8c6bf07a6&start=1381&end=2082","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3182048-128bd3ec64a25b6dce1de7f8c6bf07a6/thumbnail_1381000.jpg","/articles/6574937/Nevada/Nevada-bill-would-require-clearer-written-notice-48-hour-warning-for-officers-in-internal-probes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6574937-209e7caebfebc8a51c9b2d5245c91931/orig.mp4?Expires=1775652247&Signature=DMdOlb-tbRuL-i9dyo2Xrarp~~TU31cAyBgk5K8pnJjo9VAz51y7-1h-fuD61rm-IOTxmwF7x6Q86Pmny5ZhSXDisuhqcgMuEtfYrRIGmt0nA6~nYp28uVM2Suq3BXz2DlNVttpjDlLinPOmhKFzIhEypbO5PSYK77f901QYkVFLNWJagnC~XTvGkUh88NW2dBdeItPr1pMLZw2N6YoRm7TDBTAAYQSXBzQXvsAZLxxAJkPGZiekylaVk2-0i8Vj8z-805bWxk9NvByp~Rlnlucr1m6Ll64rETf2qX7eeYKzfh1U7bHUewGA44U9jopl-R3wFoa1qgDLAJfKo2uKlQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 279, introduced to the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs on May 2, 2025, would require law enforcement agencies to include a specific description of alleged misconduct and the date, time and location of the alleged conduct in written notices given to peace officers in internal investigations.

Supporters said the change would restore the intent of the Nevada Peace Officers Bill of Rights and prevent what they described as surprise, broad-scope questions during interrogations. \"Either of these examples is completely unfair. They were an ambush and resulted in discipline that is now challenged through court costly arbitration,\" said Andrew Reigenbaum, executive director of the Nevada Association of Public Safety Officers, describing cases in which officers were questioned about events not described in written notice.

The bill would also clarify that witness officers — not just subject officers — must receive at least 48 hours' written notice before compelled interviews. \"Originally the drafters of 289 intended for subject officers and witness officers to be given 48 hours' notice,\" Reigenbaum told the committee, adding that the change would protect an officer's right to representation.

Senator Julie Pizzina, who introduced SB 279, framed the measure as restoring due-process protections in NRS chapter 289. \"This bill aims to enhance transparency and fairness in the investigative process for peace officers,\" she said when presenting the measure.

Representatives of several statewide law-enforcement associations and local agencies testified in support. Joshua Martinez of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department said the department worked with the sponsor on the current language and supports extending the 48-hour notice to witness officers. Jason Lesher of the Washoe County Sheriff Deputies Association and other coalition representatives said the 48-hour minimum is workable and that agencies generally accommodate additional scheduling needs.

Proponents gave concrete examples of the problem the bill intends to fix: an officer notified only about an alleged nepotism violation but later questioned about unrelated computer misuse; another provided notice about a single traffic stop but was then questioned about several other stops from later months and later disciplined for an event he had not expected to be questioned about.

Supporters argued the statute already allows agencies to stop an interview and re-notice an officer if new allegations arise, and that SB 279 only requires agencies to be more precise in their initial notices. \"If new or additional information is discovered during an interview, NRS 289 already has provisions to stop the interview, give the officer a new notice, and restart a new interview with new allegations,\" Reigenbaum said.

No neutral or opposition witnesses appeared in person or by telephone during the committee hearing; the record before the committee consisted of sponsor remarks, association testimony in support and public comment in favor. The committee did not take a vote during the hearing.

If enacted, the bill would amend the notice provisions in NRS 289.060 (the Peace Officers Bill of Rights) to require that a written notice specify the \"acts or omissions constituting the alleged misconduct\" and provide date, time and location, in addition to making clear the 48-hour notice applies to witness officers.

Supporters said the change would reduce arbitration and litigation costs by reducing procedural objections to investigative processes. Critics (noting examples in other states) have previously raised concerns about the operational consequences of additional notice requirements, but no opposition testimony was recorded at this hearing.

SB 279 will proceed through the committee process for further consideration; the committee did not produce a final action on the bill during this session.

","Senate Bill 279 would require law enforcement agencies to provide peace officers with written notices listing specific alleged acts or omissions, plus date, time and location, and to extend the existing 48-hour notice requirement to witness officers.",{"_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},6574928,"Boulder City attorney warns Nevada Supreme Court ruling limits who can lead police employment investigations",7247,7247000,-1,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3182048-128bd3ec64a25b6dce1de7f8c6bf07a6&start=7247&end=0","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3182048-128bd3ec64a25b6dce1de7f8c6bf07a6/thumbnail_7247000.jpg","/articles/6574928/Nevada/Boulder-City-attorney-warns-Nevada-Supreme-Court-ruling-limits-who-can-lead-police-employment-investigations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6574928-2138f61b0277f36e40d82ff657f1d9c9/orig.mp4?Expires=1775652247&Signature=jtYur-0lYaFMUU41AnYC2St6T7KJbSlKbkeaNjNsBRO-YMCok1VwBNGsUD-7CJGKeJJCLix0Mjj4xLH-ybs5W~RVrbD9rISznD-js3raWCp4PVuz~aXwvTM8GGYgl5cy4k3oXIh-id6hOqNlXCeLmY5iYXZ0Z7S71Hyc3oQYmmPu5JpjUxdpNhxU3DlZglNJMd~YEHJPJGq4RHk3K6FwoXD1GbXHRN~jCaVvNHDKLthVl7xGSbNXtB06U2K4054YwnOiEGhaXqLGe~W5sg82bF8AODRkkFtHayMmbOOoE-Z8937kHXBlFDKOl14M6qtLA5RoaH9T6YqY~J717dTrYw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Brittany Walker, city attorney for Boulder City, told the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs during public comment that a Nevada Supreme Court decision issued in January interpreted NRS chapter 289 in a way that limits which individuals may lead investigations of peace officers.

Walker said the court held that \"only a ranking Peace Officer can lead an employment related investigation against another Peace Officer,\" and that the opinion described the investigation as an \"internal investigation.\" She said the city did not become aware of the decision until after the deadline for bill draft requests and that the ruling is \"extremely problematic,\" especially for small departments.

Boulder City, Walker said, has about 40 officers and routinely uses human resources staff or outside law firms to investigate employment complaints such as allegations of harassment, discrimination or retaliation. \"If the city police department was the only agency that can investigate allegations of harassment or discrimination, there would be no way to avoid even the perception of bias compromising the integrity of the process,\" Walker told the committee.

She urged the Legislature to consider clarifying the statute so that small agencies can continue to use HR professionals or independent investigators to preserve impartiality and access employment-law expertise. \"We're not opposed to police peace officers having all of the protections of NRS 289 even in an employment complaint context. We simply want to be able to use HR or a third party law firm to complete the investigation to preserve the integrity of the results and have the expertise necessary to properly evaluate the merits of the complaint,\" Walker said.

Walker also noted the practical difficulty posed when the investigation subject is an executive-level officer such as a police chief or deputy chief: \"The bigger question we have right now is who would investigate an executive level peace officer like police chief? Their subordinates?\" she asked.

No bill amendment or committee action followed during the public-comment period; Walker said she would submit the comment in writing and asked the Legislature to consider remedial language.

","Brittany Walker, city attorney for Boulder City, told the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs that a Nevada Supreme Court decision this year interpreted NRS chapter 289 to restrict who may lead employment-related investigations of peace officers, raising procedural problems for small departments.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Sponsors narrow bill to allow certain noncitizens to apply for Nevada police jobs; opponents cite vetting and public-trust concerns

Nevada bill would require clearer written notice, 48-hour warning for officers in internal probes

Boulder City attorney warns Nevada Supreme Court ruling limits who can lead police employment investigations