[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-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",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_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",6568916,"mediaKeyId","3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f","parentId",3193132,"title","Committee weighs aligning renewal period for Nevada driver authorization cards with standard licenses","audioSeconds",4175,"startMs",2956000,"endMs",7131000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f&start=2956&end=7131","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f/thumbnail_2956000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6568916/Nevada/Committee-weighs-aligning-renewal-period-for-Nevada-driver-authorization-cards-with-standard-licenses","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6568916-e9c725aa49ce72c373bdf9489d32c3c7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442563&Signature=Rxvnf4CylHCFimMbO6fPDGjQOf~ZB8kjFu8OlQTS8giszHd6pft03epsl9b8wyMcs3aQvAENsuFv85xTXy3BRD-s2uABonFE6HxYlIyu9O8UG6tBfTDsMSu96Z3DlOBUnvTXxkAEQr2ek~b7dDL7WxrgpzwH9wZNDNbVtm3OwDBbzzNk2QNEw9g0NcGwgHGJUZ2huJuxHquj~nwgbKZX0a3c8ocboNIXaOekbsadzrXi7N~eI3ak1GHdckioetBrbzYtrDJNn~jxDI71H8U~56SvjJNvDIoOYwU9HYYg51G5sxBqgn4UVzeiEq7eNRcLpyQyjuWJFRjsGzJOTwASYQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada Legislature","date","2025-05-06T00:38:47.91Z","article","Assemblywoman Cecilia Gonzalez (Assembly District 16) and Erica Castro of the Nevada Immigrant Coalition presented Assembly Bill 140 to the Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure, asking that driver authorization cards — the state credential issued to people who cannot meet standard identity documentation requirements — be renewed on the same schedule and fee structure as Nevada standard driver licenses.

\"Our main goal with AB 140 is for DACs to have the same renewal process as our standard driver's licenses in Nevada,\" Castro said, clarifying the proposal does not change written or driving test requirements or the identity documentation required to obtain a DAC.

Sponsors and supporters described the change as largely administrative and focused on safety and equity. Tara Webster of Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada recounted the difference in renewals and DMV access, saying some DAC holders must appear in person more often and that the bill would reduce lost work time and DMV congestion. Cecilia Gonzalez told the committee the bill \"is about safety and making sure that people are insured.\"

DMV and technical detail: Sean Severa of the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles testified the agency is neutral on AB 140. Severa said the bill produces a positive fiscal timing effect because of the concentration of renewals and that DAC holders presently face a more frequent renewal cycle; he also confirmed DAC holders are required to meet the same insurance and testing requirements as other drivers.

Support and public testimony: Dozens of community organizations and residents testified in support by phone and in person, citing reduced hardship and administrative burden for immigrant families, parents, and workers who need reliable access to transportation. Multiple community organizers and groups (Make the Road Nevada, Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, Faith in Action Nevada, Native Voters Alliance and others) urged the committee to pass AB 140 to reduce confusion and lost work time caused by the current four‑year renewal schedule.

Opposition and concerns: Opponents said the measure weakens enforcement and improperly privileges noncitizens. Joshua Skaggs of the Nevada Republican Party said the party opposes the bill and argued DACs should remain distinct from full driver licenses; Janine Hanson of Nevada Families for Freedom urged the committee to oppose AB 140, saying the state should not make it \"easier\" for people who lack immigration authorization. Several callers on the phone line voiced similar enforcement and public‑safety concerns.

Clarification from sponsors and DMV: Sponsors repeatedly stated the bill does not grant legal status, does not change eligibility thresholds for DACs, and does not expand privileges (DAC holders cannot vote and remain ineligible for most public benefits). Severa of the DMV reiterated that DAC applicants must still provide required identification under current law and must comply with the same testing and insurance requirements.

Outcome and next steps: Committee testimony concluded with the DMV and sponsor remarks; no vote was recorded in the hearing transcript. Sponsors said they expect to continue outreach and that aligning renewal periods could ease DMV administration and reduce burdens for affected residents without changing eligibility or substantive legal status.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","5/5/2025 - Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure","oneSentenceSummary","Assembly Bill 140 would align Nevada driver authorization cards (DACs) with standard driver's licenses by matching renewal timing and fees; sponsors say the change eases DMV burdens and reduces lost work time for DAC holders, while opponents questioned enforcement and immigration implications.","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},6568920,"Nevada committee hears bill to extend rooftop solar benefits to affordable multifamily units",2921,1423000,4344000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f&start=1423&end=4344","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f/thumbnail_1423000.jpg","/articles/6568920/Nevada/Nevada-committee-hears-bill-to-extend-rooftop-solar-benefits-to-affordable-multifamily-units","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6568920-f7f7db19f1b7e05037eb2584f130f3d8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442563&Signature=NYPjKr-gkwGT4APE28mfwyIFKeox9KdzSIxN~MX0Rnr9mylxABWqM1XsoZxG6ASCPaiSCmr7jIbIqJDnI3o56UNnNTJWT5KCyQ-2D4BQineUxo-t0d16IgV3HHAws5b-eSkfiutdt7tZZbiilASqg5GpzSwyIuKEMgXxP6HAekg8uHNOxNzD-H0KvQikq~-86LEmsZLiuQIBWN8wQ7x7dZfnFgpqRKtJTk3hFYWYp852duL75AUyotTidKiJufvMAonzyMWlsJgtUHeL5ETmbIgcYF8auSQmCP-sl8UVKtAAmZTxn0QDli9TvVVtDeMk8UVu3UJyuSTdR~v~KCkF8Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assemblyman Howard Watts (Assembly District 15) introduced Assembly Bill 458 on behalf of the bill sponsor, telling the Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure the measure would expand access to rooftop solar for low‑income Nevadans who live in individually metered multifamily affordable housing.

\"This bill is about increasing access and opportunity to utilize solar energy,\" Watts said, adding that the measure was developed with input from the Nevada Clean Energy Fund and utilities.

Kirsten Stasio, chief executive officer of the Nevada Clean Energy Fund, told the committee AB 458 would unlock federal and tax-credit funding for affordable housing. \"This is the solar power affordable housing bill that unlocks solar for certain low income households in Nevada,\" Stasio said, noting the Nevada Clean Energy Fund had been awarded a $156,000,000 Solar for All grant and that federal tax credits could cover up to 70% of installation costs for eligible affordable housing developments.

Why it matters: Supporters said AB 458 would reduce energy burdens for renters who cannot install rooftop systems on individual meters, extend net‑metering benefits to a historically excluded group, and leverage federal grant and tax resources to deploy roughly 50 megawatts under the program. Stasio estimated the Solar for All effort expects to deliver guaranteed energy savings to roughly 50,000 Nevadans and support more than 1,000 jobs through workforce development tied to the program.

Provisions and costs discussed: Presenters and witnesses told the committee the bill targets individually metered multifamily affordable housing (not master‑metered properties). Stasio said costs vary by building and could range from about $500,000 to $1 million per installation depending on size and whether battery storage is included; she estimated household payback periods could be roughly 10 to 15 years and said NCEF structures projects with a 12‑year loan paired with a rebate so households receive savings from day one.

Concerns and conditions raised: Senator Hansen and labor representatives pressed for strong labor standards and enforcement. Hansen asked whether the $156,000,000 federal Solar for All award triggers Davis‑Bacon prevailing‑wage requirements; Stasio replied, \"Davis Bacon and related acts are a requirement of that $156,000,000 Solar for All award.\" Danny Thompson, representing IBEW locals, said the bill in its current form \"creates serious problems\" and warned third‑party ownership structures and unclear installer standards could shift costs to nonparticipating ratepayers and leave tenants at risk if systems are not installed or maintained by qualified electricians.

NV Energy and others asked for more clarity on program process, interconnection and whether battery storage would be treated differently for allocations. Marie Steele of NV Energy said the bill would benefit from further rulemaking detail and had remaining questions about battery storage as a resource type.

Supporters across housing, environmental, health and community groups described the bill as an equity measure. Speakers in support included the Nevada Housing Coalition, the Nature Conservancy, Nevada Hand (an affordable housing developer), the American Lung Association, local housing authorities, and tribal and community groups. Olivia Tanager of the Sierra Club Northern Nevada chapter said the bill represents a \"fiscally responsible and forward‑looking investment\" and urged committee support.

What the bill would not do in this draft: Presenters emphasized the measure does not change testing, tenancy or program eligibility rules for insurance; rather it creates a mechanism to allow rooftop systems on affordable multifamily properties to participate in net metering and to access federal grants and tax credits. Watts and witnesses also said consumer protection statutes that already apply to solar installations would continue to apply to projects funded or operated under the program.

Next steps: The chair closed AB 458 testimony after in‑person and phone testimony concluded. Sponsors and stakeholders indicated they expect technical amendments and further work with utilities and labor on consumer protections, labor standards and rulemaking language before the measure proceeds.

Ending note: Supporters framed AB 458 as a targeted way to use Nevada's abundant solar resource to reduce energy insecurity among low‑income renters; critics urged tighter labor and procurement safeguards and more detailed regulatory process before deployment.

","Assemblyman Howard Watts presented Assembly Bill 458 to the Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure, proposing to let individually metered affordable multifamily housing in Nevada participate in net metering to reduce energy burdens and access federal and tax‑credit funding.",{"_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},6568901,"Bill would add procurement discretion for drones used by Nevada agencies, sponsors say",165,7202000,7367000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f&start=7202&end=7367","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f/thumbnail_7202000.jpg","/articles/6568901/Nevada/Bill-would-add-procurement-discretion-for-drones-used-by-Nevada-agencies-sponsors-say","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6568901-ffc9c9fdebbe3cb95656b77a5e6d45fe/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442563&Signature=HWJb5GK3cFb7pA7cMHDKcrHRslzAV0VchxN24TSccWNUmSc9zkH6Kbt6bBDU7J8tvaEwCLW-UNgBwmI0ZRG-3D6KaWYa3Z0mtjlGVR78H3D2PvCMX4ES5ZwbfT-uAt1L5h18jQYItkFseqfEpKgF69JjUSGMGuAmCc7t8ZCv6qw-BS3LGAlhUUy9ZO1CCPegN~FhDopJJyi3GX-XfZRnHIcXVSwWaREf1CSNM4qUZvbcAJl~z0zcsAKprRXyWeWVwWlXz3CRlR8fsrso3yVKwnBkz5~ex0QNfdK9SCGeJ1wH1GLF8~GscpgLec4x26GfeQtTBN7KUwlAIPYQSlJYYA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Lisa Cole, the bill sponsor, told the Senate committee AB 439 is a follow‑up to prior 2023 legislation (SB 11) that placed sourcing limits on drone procurements and first‑responder uses. Cole said the bill adds necessary discretion so agencies can access effective and affordable drone systems while continuing to meet national‑security standards modeled on Department of Defense sourcing requirements.

\"This bill is meant to address a disconnect that will allow well‑intentioned limitations on sourcing to stand, but adding the needed discretion to ensure our agencies are equipped with the best available technology and still remain national security standards,\" Cole said.

Madison Campbell of Flock Safety, a company that advocates for first‑responder drone technology, told the committee AB 439 passed the Assembly unanimously and that amendments strengthened transparency, procurement integrity and security provisions. Campbell said current restrictions had unintentionally created barriers for smaller or rural first‑responder agencies that could not access some affordable solutions on the market.

Support and outcome: Committee testimony was brief and supportive; there was no in‑person or phone opposition recorded in the transcript. Sponsors said they had worked with stakeholders to add safeguards in amendment language and that the bill aims to level the playing field for agencies large and small to deploy secure drone technology for emergency response.

Next steps: With no recorded opposition in the hearing transcript, sponsors expect to continue technical coordination during subsequent committee stages.

","Assembly Bill 439 would clarify sourcing restrictions from prior law to allow agencies discretion to acquire secure drone technology while preserving national‑security standards. Supporters said the bill fixes unintended barriers that prevented some local agencies from accessing life‑saving, affordable systems; no opposition testifiers appeared.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6568906,"DMV asks for technical fixes: medical codes on IDs and mailing flexibility under AB 20",408,7488000,7896000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f&start=7488&end=7896","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f/thumbnail_7488000.jpg","/articles/6568906/Nevada/DMV-asks-for-technical-fixes-medical-codes-on-IDs-and-mailing-flexibility-under-AB-20","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6568906-9f9559d76f3670f6098e3cb0fdf7276f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442563&Signature=mm9ynS2fb~77GIrbqfL-d9eUos5FbUNZcPeR6Dvft089vKVkVHaxQXvzHoDOPpEJohTluuQkSbQ7JXESTyfgBxASAu~X3bLDDaWGoSNtz9~iy-3sLf0ajVWCocxJ17~l2aV5b32vOUcd-eF-7S0b5Twu77u3TWvNPx3tcrx7WW6DvcP41RGjbHAw4c22YVvDg6~tyA-pk-gKL7OEGr0icp7ERFX8nTzHChQrIXPXBk7qWDqL0SKctD-OHrGeKulLQ3TOxBoZagz1BG5F~qq1mCavB1lL9cnNUgE0GsBDzpgjksMgnLXIknVwLGDqGuF5qc6B6~312GjDGuNwMkeHhA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Sean Severa of the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles briefed the Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure on Assembly Bill 20, a DMV cleanup bill that would (1) explicitly allow the agency to continue printing medical codes on the back of driver's licenses and identification cards to accompany a medical symbol on the front, and (2) permit the DMV to use private carriers such as FedEx or UPS for certain mailings.

Severa told the committee the medical code is an optional numeric reference that emergency responders can use to identify a driver's listed medical condition; the DMV does not print the condition itself on the card. He said the provision aligns with the intent of SB 362 from the prior session and restores a capability the DMV has used since 2003 but which LCB clerical issues had affected in codification.

\"This is not something new that the DMV has been doing; we've been doing it for 20 years,\" Severa said. He also told the committee the agency had a positive fiscal timing impact in its fiscal note related to renewals under another bill and would absorb minor grammar costs.

Support and opposition: Industry representatives including the Alliance for Automotive Innovation supported AB 20 and noted a friendly amendment clarifying an indicator inside autonomous vehicles that activates while automation is engaged. A caller on the phone line opposed the printing of a medical code, saying the change would be an \"invasion of privacy\" because it would alert insurers and government agencies to health conditions; the DMV replied that the code is optional and that it does not print diagnoses on cards.

Why it matters: DMV witnesses framed AB 20 as a technical fix that restores intended functionality from prior legislation and reduces operational friction for the agency; supporters described the autonomous‑vehicle indicator amendment as a safety improvement.

Next steps: The committee closed testimony on AB 20 after short in‑person and phone testimony and accepted clarifying questions. No committee vote is recorded in the hearing transcript.

","The Nevada DMV presented AB 20, a cleanup bill to (1) clarify printing of medical condition codes on IDs to work with the new medical symbol introduced last session and (2) give the agency mailing flexibility for insurance notices. Supporters and a leading auto industry group backed the changes; a caller raised privacy concerns.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6568911,"Counties seek ability to recover NEPA review costs for renewable projects under AB 70",432,7910000,8342000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f&start=7910&end=8342","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193132-8ce68a619f905f1ff90d28898c4e3d2f/thumbnail_7910000.jpg","/articles/6568911/Nevada/Counties-seek-ability-to-recover-NEPA-review-costs-for-renewable-projects-under-AB-70","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6568911-436bf70b4df0b27cc34ec858d479ace5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442563&Signature=W2fVcgXN8j3oQEFm7ZbC2JkC3LMEL7pIOil0IGsHRYc5fIh8YYmg2qW2PaqDH3wDl8fihh6xWobcGpfFN4EkCls6WE1Lvef34JUrpt66xEKVb5AA3Jfs0fyh3ecLPhOZci7bFPq5vuX39HWC4m7nTj9VRcic11qToRfKM-paMK4X5weqqC2Hc98YxkMLlIF6arTF2JBFl1EuVqliPF8XjdQbI2IlLwxtKXP6SS8tkPceee14iFv05b14uC~RpjmQfxPCLCPvaWrq12HOmk4znlDvryTN7C0pGO9NndStZEk-jraZQP929PMAOf0XYEeoB1D3O1YWsnZBI52sZ9NFGg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Vincent Guthro, executive director of the Nevada Association of Counties, told the Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure that Assembly Bill 70 provides a mechanism for counties to recover the actual costs of reviewing renewable energy applications that trigger the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

\"This bill and its first reprint represents a lot of compromise, and a lot of work that was done for an agreement between local entities and renewable energy developers,\" Guthro said, summarizing the bill's intent to allow counties to recover up to $50,000 in actual costs for NEPA‑related review and planning.

What the bill does: Guthro described provisions that permit prepayment with a refund if prepayments exceed actual costs, allow developers to request proof of actual costs before reimbursement, and avoid preempting previously negotiated local agreements. The bill would not retroactively alter local ordinances or special use permits that predate a project's NEPA‑triggered application.

Stakeholder reaction: Jayna Moan of The Nature Conservancy said TNC supports AB 70 because it provides counties a pathway to greater engagement on permitting renewable facilities and transmission. Industry witnesses, including the Solar Energy Industries Association, testified they were neutral after months of discussions and amendments and thanked NACO for its work on balancing county participation while allowing projects to proceed.

Why it matters: Proponents said the measure addresses county capacity and helps ensure local governments can participate meaningfully in the federal permitting process without derailing development. Supporters framed AB 70 as a compromise that clarifies reimbursement while preserving local negotiation and economic development.

Next steps: Committee testimony closed with the sponsor and stakeholders in neutral or supportive positions; no vote was recorded in the hearing transcript.

","Nevada Association of Counties presented AB 70, a compromise bill allowing counties to recover up to $50,000 in actual costs to review renewable energy project applications subject to NEPA. Supporters framed the measure as a stability tool for local engagement; industry witnesses remained neutral after months of negotiation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee weighs aligning renewal period for Nevada driver authorization cards with standard licenses

Nevada committee hears bill to extend rooftop solar benefits to affordable multifamily units

Bill would add procurement discretion for drones used by Nevada agencies, sponsors say

DMV asks for technical fixes: medical codes on IDs and mailing flexibility under AB 20

Counties seek ability to recover NEPA review costs for renewable projects under AB 70