Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Licensure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washoe County's licensure changes draw questions on fiscal impact, provisional hires
Summary
Washoe County School District's bill to allow provisional hires and remove duplicate licensure fees drew questions from legislators and the Nevada Department of Education about fiscal impacts and whether the district or state should track provisional employees.
Assembly Bill 49, introduced as a school-district bill draft request from Washoe County School District, would allow local school districts to place certain education personnel in positions on a provisional basis while they pursue endorsement or licensure and would remove a duplicate licensure fee in section 3 unless that portion is struck, presenters told the Assembly Ways and Means Committee.
Dylan Shaver of Pinion Public Affairs, representing Washoe County School District, said the measure aims to remove small barriers that prevent qualified people from filling high-need roles such as school social workers, counselors and certain technical positions. He gave an example of a pediatric nurse who could not be productively employed while obtaining additional licensure and later took another job.
Doug Owen, Washoe's chief human resources officer, said the district has worked with the Nevada Department of Education on the proposal. He told the committee that removing the fee in section 3 would create a several-hundred-thousand-dollar fiscal impact for the Department of Education because the licensing fees fund the licensing division and background checks.
Amelia Thibault of the Nevada Department of Education told the committee that the fiscal note for section 3 estimated an approximate revenue loss of about $410,000 per year, mostly due to background-check costs that the department pays to the Department of Public Safety, and that sections 1 and 2 would still require a management analyst position to track provisional licenses within the current licensure system.
Shaver and Owen said the district's intent is not to shift licensing workload to the state; rather, Washoe would track provisional placements and continue to perform background checks and required reporting. Thibault and committee members discussed whether the bill as drafted implied a form of provisional licensure from NDE; Thibault said the department anticipated a "form of provisional license" and emphasized that the department needs capacity to track provisional or pending licensees and that a new licensure system is expected in 2027.
Several supporters, including the Nevada Association of School Boards and the Nevada Association of School Superintendents, testified in favor, and the committee asked the parties to work on clarified language to ensure the district would perform the tracking so the fiscal note to NDE could be removed. Presenters said they would collaborate on amended language and a revised fiscal note if necessary.
