[{"_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",6558215,"mediaKeyId","3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf","parentId",3275221,"title","Secretary of State seeks tightening of notary and document‑preparer rules; bond tiers, in‑state e‑notary requirement proposed","audioSeconds",755,"startMs",2935000,"endMs",3690000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf&start=2935&end=3690","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf/thumbnail_2935000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6558215/Nevada/Secretary-of-State-seeks-tightening-of-notary-and-documentpreparer-rules-bond-tiers-instate-enotary-requirement-proposed","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6558215-e02e9b8826c3e3ba8d02104653728268/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153227&Signature=jFewEoYkxd1BB4RmhroHQU1nyiFd9I9Wj5WP1dpgAg~4fJLcIrtXZ8DR-CBv28kpACBrjL4vSVWLDUyZRIYw-OnXM06LmARYlz0LuJhbI~uzpAbJ-bSwOSQ0JFjDQU6d2CY-WUttf1kMo-CyeQsQ8fOE8PZgcl7heaq9xVgXLwukoWIaLkawZpXz1CEkDiIEAdgV36iyDEmOD~N1WS~ppi64wXILSjM3jFGr2SeNYJsWjCOS31~1URHjocfbsK9Gtnzm1OCZxpYKjtAGuuPFfOwXeSBNcL1K2A0ohRq8gFyq3WWIJyadQWBs3P2OCQOWhuteixkZUpYZGut1jNKHzQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada State Legislature","date","2025-05-13T11:59:44Z","article","The Senate Government Affairs Committee heard Assembly Bill 72, a package of changes the Secretary of State’s Office said would modernize Nevada’s notary and document‑preparer programs, tighten consumer protections and clarify compliance requirements for businesses that provide document‑preparation services.

Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, appearing with staff and students from Cristo Rey High School, described the office’s responsibilities and the programs AB 72 would amend. ‘‘This bill is our effort to modernize the notary and document preparation programs that Nevadans rely on every day,’’ Aguilar said.

Key items explained by the secretary and staff included:
- Statutory references: testimony cited Nevada Revised Statutes chapters related to notaries (NRS chapter 240 and associated NAC provisions) and the document‑preparer program established under NRS 240A and NAC 240A (as described in testimony). The office said it currently commissions nearly 37,000 notaries and issued over 25,000 apostilles/certifications in the last year.
- Document‑preparer bond changes: the amendment would require a separate surety bond for each distinct business entity or sole proprietorship that provides document‑preparation services. The office said bonding tiers and prior adjustments (including a 2019 reduction of an individual bond requirement from $50,000 to $25,000) left ambiguity when a single business held multiple registrations but a single bond.
- Notary professional responsibilities and e‑notary rule: AB 72 as amended would require a code of professional responsibility for notaries and change permissive language on electronic notaries to a clear requirement that an electronic notary public be physically present in Nevada to perform an electronic notarial act via audio‑visual communication.

Deputy Ruben Rodriguez, who answered several implementation questions from senators, said the amended language was intended to allow business owners with multiple entities to obtain appropriate bonding coverage while ensuring consumer protection. The compliance team’s role—training, audits, investigations—was described by student presenters as central to maintaining public trust.

Industry groups testified in support after amendments were accepted. Peter Krueger of Registration Services Association of Nevada and Aurelia Alarcon of the Nevada Land Title Association thanked the secretary’s office for working on the amendments and said the tiered bonding change would help multi‑location operators secure appropriate coverage.

Senators asked for additional follow‑up: Senator Neal requested examples clarifying new bonding triggers tied to court judgments or sanctions; the secretary’s office offered to supply follow‑up information. Senator Krasner asked whether document preparers may help people fill immigration forms; Ruben Rodriguez replied that document preparers may assist with filing immigration paperwork but may not give legal advice.

No committee vote was recorded at the hearing. Sponsors and supporters said they would supply additional technical details requested by senators before the bill reaches further committee work sessions.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing with stakeholders in support of the amended bill and staff offering to provide follow‑up clarifications on bonding examples and scope of regulated services.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","5/12/2025 - Senate Committee on Government Affairs","oneSentenceSummary","Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar told the Senate Government Affairs Committee AB 72 would modernize Nevada’s notary and document‑preparer programs, require separate bonds per business entity, and require in‑state presence for electronic notary acts via audio‑video.","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},6558206,"Proposal would expand state’s NCIC program to allow early‑stage venture investments from permanent school fund allocation",765,4921000,5686000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf&start=4921&end=5686","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf/thumbnail_4921000.jpg","/articles/6558206/Nevada/Proposal-would-expand-states-NCIC-program-to-allow-earlystage-venture-investments-from-permanent-school-fund-allocation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6558206-e6aaff583843ebbec1ea561fd9efc64b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153227&Signature=i6pl4o5WAqCGevNXClDrdhhoBFSF3hxsOW1fEwoxGLZOoIxKOuQiYZxB4LBHCxG4YUKizJrkeYN0zzr2fRtpffd7OrECUjyAZAwZ8SAlZChFfQzBqG24ssUDGdFRWU~QFm3iwxHastnd~1DlpTjFUzk3XLYeuO5thsgHrhwl3MLdF4nLybwD-n4gmmltANtctAqecThc774rwIEmWaBhY3bStKffZEh~z9x6bEnpnvVpnksjwaXTypc~bR0CV3dy~-TEGRs5laCPLyZIDwfWCExzHIicjxwayPy9IOkvmeU0GlacbQN6yigSxyeLWM7u3B9ODZ1CAb99Q5waboZmjQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Government Affairs Committee heard Assembly Bill 427, which would revise the Nevada Capital Investment Corporation’s (NCIC) statutory authority so the corporation may make early‑stage and middle‑stage venture investments in Nevada businesses using funds previously authorized from the permanent school fund.

Assemblyman Steve Yeager, sponsor of AB 427, said the NCIC was created in 2011 (Senate Bill 75) and capitalized at $50 million; the legislature increased the amount authorized in 2021 to $75 million under Senate Bill 68. Yeager said the NCIC’s historical focus on later‑stage equity investments leaves a gap for early‑stage companies seeking seed and Series A capital, and the bill would allow the NCIC to invest both directly and through qualified venture managers, align investment priorities with the state economic development plan produced by GOED, and prioritize companies that hire Nevada workers, pay high wages, provide benefits and advance sustainability goals.

Jeff Saling (via Zoom), a startup investor and fund manager who testified in support, explained typical venture capital investment sizes and stages to the committee: smaller pre‑seed checks often range from tens of thousands up through mid‑six figures, seed rounds commonly range from $250,000 to a few million, and Series A rounds are larger still. Saling and Yeager emphasized that venture portfolios must be diversified because returns usually follow a ‘‘power law’’ in which a small number of winners generate a large share of returns.

Senators pressed on several points: Senator Ellison asked about typical investment sizes; Saling outlined a spectrum from pre‑seed through Series A and larger. Senator Neal raised concerns about selection criteria and whether an emphasis on GOED alignment, high wages and health insurance could disadvantage early‑stage or non‑tech entrepreneurs; Yeager said the bill was intended to provide flexibility and leave portfolio allocation decisions to the NCIC board. Senator Krasner asked about downside risk and remedies if a company defaults; Yeager and Saling said early‑stage investing carries losses as a normal part of venture portfolios and the program expects diversification and professional management to protect the corpus. Senator Daley questioned removing the chancellor of the Nevada System of Higher Education from the board and replacing that seat with the GOED executive director; Yeager said the change was intended to avoid conflicts of interest if NCIC invested in university‑linked ventures, but agreed to consider alternatives.

Opposition and neutral callers were minimal or absent at the hearing; Katrin Ivanoff registered opposition by phone, citing a desire for conflict‑of‑interest safeguards for officials and their families. The committee did not take a roll‑call vote at the hearing.

Ending: The hearing closed with committee members debating risk, governance and selection criteria; sponsors indicated willingness to work on board composition, investment thesis and other technical language before a work session.","AB 427 would let the Nevada Capital Investment Corporation invest in early‑ and middle‑stage Nevada businesses using the $75 million permanent school fund allocation, permitting direct investments or investments through qualified venture managers.",{"_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},6558211,"Bill would protect Civil Air Patrol volunteers’ jobs during training and missions",400,4132000,4532000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf&start=4132&end=4532","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf/thumbnail_4132000.jpg","/articles/6558211/Nevada/Bill-would-protect-Civil-Air-Patrol-volunteers-jobs-during-training-and-missions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6558211-d517e48d1ec6bed329783496bf9340e7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153227&Signature=LplaHisXPwNPswtjT8guQnexPUNuFyl-ljNjDoaUysnuCPMgNF6odgsTbKWEfB87H2eJci~sa~RnDrfiMSAbu3urO2oKip5jdBk0gVFKv5BtLEfZN9UXGLMoHM0E-xAdwS~OvC4UtQh~hL0VmWO351kK3ljGsd0~mjhDdCDqnCRAU1UeIgo0Kex9i9CzARDuFEn2lBL6P-yN1XKsdr3EtzHCEmLrgAUD4qxxv6nnpCiqpGXevnDZp5Y8fmp5SSNN7YE3yZ6CPskQAjkca-TZFoU7sRpHXrG96~rH4OT-qdCrw~p1~r3XLwj2llTHYRUPQ7MjBt71l7i~fw2iiNNteA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Government Affairs Committee heard Assembly Bill 422, which would give Nevada Civil Air Patrol volunteers limited job protection when they take time off for CAP training or emergency missions.

Assemblyman Steve Yeager, sponsor of AB 422, described the Civil Air Patrol as ‘‘a congressionally chartered, federally funded 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation that is the civilian auxiliary of the United States Air Force’’ and outlined its three missions: emergency services, aerospace education and cadet programs. Yeager said Nevada’s wing includes hundreds of adult members and cadets and stressed the organization is volunteer‑based.

Section 1 of the bill would allow a CAP volunteer to take up to 10 days of training leave and up to 30 days for emergency mission work without losing their position, seniority or accrued benefits. Employers could treat the leave as unpaid; volunteers would provide sufficient documentation and employers who violated the protection would be subject to civil action under the bill’s terms. Section 2 would prohibit employers from barring CAP volunteers from search and rescue activities required by CAP membership when the employee meets the statute’s conditions.

Colonel Russell Smith of the Nevada Wing Civil Air Patrol described missions that included prolonged searches (for example, the Steve Fossett search) and the statewide COVID‑19 distribution of personal protective equipment and supplies to remote areas. Smith said CAP’s small‑aircraft fleet and ground teams helped get supplies to Ely, Elko and Winnemucca during the pandemic; he also recounted a recent mission in Monitor Valley where CAP located a missing pilot.

No opposition testimony was recorded; the committee took no formal vote at the hearing. Lawmakers praised CAP’s volunteer work and said the bill would give volunteers assurance they could participate in critical missions without risking employment.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing with no recorded vote; sponsors said the measure is aimed at strengthening Nevada’s emergency‑response capacity by protecting volunteer participation in CAP missions.","Assembly Bill 422 would let Civil Air Patrol (CAP) volunteers take limited unpaid leave for training and emergency missions without losing seniority, accrued leave or position; testimony described CAP missions, statewide volunteer counts and recent disaster support such as COVID PPE distribution and search‑and‑rescue operations.",{"_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},6558220,"Nevada committee hears bill to formalize interlocal agreements with tribal governments",1403,1405000,2808000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf&start=1405&end=2808","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf/thumbnail_1405000.jpg","/articles/6558220/Nevada/Nevada-committee-hears-bill-to-formalize-interlocal-agreements-with-tribal-governments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6558220-c8202491996fde2404d91ea2aa53c760/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153227&Signature=bNj5nAjKpjLXcIEIcYDgKoPZDTIFnlDRAA9fzFVbi5fxcswithffhVXDBEvrX3XaoEkWr4HC3CM2HY8IFwangC4kL0THdQN15IW7SYHCWrGc-4XeJKZCmOGrZPCd~H-qOoX60JYa5slPsV0S-KDCBKpxwXN8Px9J9gXixvwaEvXwAZQ3SEpvGGxvyHaiYmLrMI9RPuRs1pTNVBBdp~rKbQq-oe7VEXGmn-uYPLO1QACoxP24uXAJagF646yzXtFLOZiFVhVQ4P9SeGmsKc1vQLQGb12U66vPse0yHe3enKL7aVyBBUdEnheh-HynzmlFwv3QM74FKe29aD-6FO~Rjg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Committee on Government Affairs held a hearing on Assembly Bill 392 on a proposal to codify procedures for interlocal agreements between Nevada counties or municipalities and tribal governments.

Assemblymember Max Carter, sponsor of AB 392, told the committee the bill ‘‘is about setting up guidelines for interlocal agreements between municipal entities and tribal institutions.’’ He said the measure grew from concerns raised by tribal leaders and local governments during interim work.

The bill’s tribal backers described two main aims: to protect tribal sovereignty and to provide predictable procedures when either party is not meeting contract terms. Andrea Martinez, former chairwoman and tribal citizen of the Walker River Paiute Tribe, said cooperative agreements are “vital for ensuring the safety and well‑being of our citizens, particularly in rural Nevada,” and warned that ‘‘instances of negligence and inaction can undermine these important partnerships.’’ Will Adler, representing Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe and Duck Valley Shoshone‑Paiute people, told the committee the bill would ‘‘document in AB 392 what is the structure in several tribal relations today’’ and make the existing, informal practices clearer and more widely usable.

Provisions highlighted in testimony include an acknowledged 90‑day orderly cancellation or cure period if either side fails to perform, language intended to prevent counties or local entities from demanding that tribes ‘‘surrender part of their sovereignty,’’ and a requirement that counties at least hold good‑faith discussions with tribal governments about services such as emergency medical services, detention, policing co‑operation or social services.

Senators asked several practical questions. Senator Allison pressed on the capacity of Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) coverage in rural regions; Will Adler said some BIA regional offices cover vast areas with very limited field staffing, increasing the need for cooperative local agreements. Senator Neal questioned the bill’s definition of “good faith” and whether it altered contract law; Adler and Carter said the explicit definition was added after Legislative Counsel Bureau input to ensure the phrase would trigger a first‑step conversation rather than mandate outcomes. Lawmakers also discussed fiscal uncertainty: Neal noted a fiscal office could not determine the financial impact because of sovereign‑immunity considerations and asked whether the bill would place payment duties on tribal governments; Carter and tribal speakers said the intent was not to waive sovereign immunity but to create predictable timelines and guardrails that address county concerns about delinquent payments while protecting tribal autonomy.

Assemblymember Carter reported a friendly amendment submitted by the Southern Nevada Water Authority to exempt water utilities from the bill’s application; Chauncey Chatto of the Southern Nevada Water Authority and Leo Dralstoff of Truckee Meadows Water Authority testified that the amendment resolved their concerns and put them in support of the amended measure. Chatto explained the concern: without the amendment, sovereign‑immunity issues could complicate the ability to collect remittance for water service from a tribal customer with an outstanding balance.

No committee action or roll‑call vote was recorded at the hearing. The bill’s sponsors said they welcome further technical amendments; proponents urged lawmakers to move the measure so tribal governments and county agencies have clearer, standardized pathways to negotiate service agreements.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing on AB 392 with no recorded vote and invited additional witnesses; the record includes the friendly amendment exempting water utilities as posted on NELIS.","The Senate Government Affairs Committee heard testimony on Assembly Bill 392, which would set rules for interlocal agreements between counties/municipalities and tribal governments, add a 90‑day orderly cancellation process and require good‑faith discussion while protecting tribal sovereignty; a friendly amendment exempted water utilities.",{"_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},6558201,"Panel backs requirement that humans make final emergency‑management and utility shutdown decisions over AI",247,8556000,8803000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf&start=8556&end=8803","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3275221-256758770808ffbd04c01f1a1799dacf/thumbnail_8556000.jpg","/articles/6558201/Nevada/Panel-backs-requirement-that-humans-make-final-emergencymanagement-and-utility-shutdown-decisions-over-AI","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6558201-4ff2f0afe70760be72e6d6babea26d89/orig.mp4?Expires=1771153227&Signature=HCwumSBJVDPdnwiYIA1BbT1kmhG9DMyb6cv7ygvSF9dAm0QTxbBdr~JgchO5jzFp6AuaBTGa8QMFlzFsZClIunTNSe4RNdke~lo8hP3o9zvLokKhsmSR-p0FpdGdYkgdK6WirWJ1rSHoVdK5LwFneYsox8Z~H6Jz7sY5EijPH6eveVMmfl-JDSTvVePTHcxERqOMdnVjfNnoWVfvpNz~Fa7W8ncURmie4WEEAE2V7L2ulByK48qXnD3EPZIdRmCJUUBoFdrCOfTANN8wxq8Kp2Tmbw4SA1dqdRu8LT9dmquRD2lU1uiJupr6FHQz8aXNvWTS9yywlwFw322K5JdF4g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Government Affairs Committee took testimony on Assembly Bill 325, a measure from the joint interim standing committee on government affairs that would require any state or local emergency‑management plan to reserve final decision‑making authority to a natural person when AI systems are used to assist in emergency response or utility service disruption decisions.

Assemblymember Slayton Torres Fawcett, co‑sponsor, said the bill defines artificial intelligence as ‘‘a machine‑based system that can, for a given set of human‑dependent objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions, influencing real or virtual environments.’’ She and co‑sponsor Assemblymember Max Carter told the committee their primary concern is that AI tools be permitted to ‘‘facilitate’’ operations but not to assume final responsibility for decisions such as mass power shutdowns.

Carter used a local example to illustrate the point: he said that when an electric utility (referred to in testimony as MV Energy) considers shutting power in high‑wind conditions in areas such as Kyle Canyon, algorithms may be useful for analysis but the final call whether to reduce or discontinue service should be made by a human. The bill would also prohibit a utility from making a final call to reduce or shut service in response to a disaster solely by automated decision.

Senator Neal praised the bill’s caution and referenced cybersecurity and earlier incidents where vulnerabilities in smart‑city systems were exploited; he said the pandemic and smart‑city incidents showed how attackers could target emergency systems. Maurice Washington, legislative liaison for Americans for Prosperity, said his organization had filed written opposition but would testify neutral because an amendment directing final decisions to humans addressed its principal concern; Washington also warned that the bill should not unintentionally discourage AI innovation.

No committee action was recorded; sponsors said they will continue to refine the language in response to feedback and pursue work‑session consideration.

Ending: The hearing closed with general support for retaining human oversight over high‑stakes emergency and utility decisions while preserving space for AI to assist operationally; the committee requested continued technical refinement.","Assembly Bill 325 would require emergency management plans adopted by state or local agencies to ensure a natural person, not an AI system, makes final decisions on emergency response, allocation of resources and utility service reductions; sponsors cited cybersecurity and real‑world examples such as utility shutoffs during high‑wind events.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Secretary of State seeks tightening of notary and document‑preparer rules; bond tiers, in‑state e‑notary requirement proposed

Proposal would expand state’s NCIC program to allow early‑stage venture investments from permanent school fund allocation

Bill would protect Civil Air Patrol volunteers’ jobs during training and missions

Nevada committee hears bill to formalize interlocal agreements with tribal governments

Panel backs requirement that humans make final emergency‑management and utility shutdown decisions over AI