Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Manufactured Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee reviews AB38 to update manufactured-housing statutes, expand recovery fund and require park office hours
Summary
The Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor heard testimony on Assembly Bill 38 during a committee hearing in Carson City and via remote locations, where presenters and supporters described the bill as primarily statutory cleanup with several policy clarifications and modest tenant protections.
Get email alerts on the Manufactured Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor heard testimony on Assembly Bill 38 during a committee hearing in Carson City and via remote locations, where presenters and supporters described the bill as primarily statutory cleanup with several policy clarifications and modest tenant protections.
Proponents and the bill’s presenters told the committee the measure removes travel trailers from the division’s oversight, adds manufactured buildings to the statutory definitions, clarifies who may collect from the manufactured-housing recovery fund, requires posted office hours for park management and makes certain investigations confidential.
Steve Acroft, administrator of the Nevada Housing Division, told the committee the bill aligns the division’s statutory oversight with the appropriate structures and regulatory authorities. “Effectively, what we're doing here is squaring the statutory oversight of the division with the appropriate structures,” Acroft said, describing changes to definitions and which types of structures fall under state oversight.
Acroft and the division’s presentation noted that travel trailers are regulated by other authorities — chassis oversight by the Federal Highway Administration, vehicle licensing by the DMV and construction standards commonly based on RV Industry Association (RVIA) guidance — and are not treated as permanent housing in the statutes being amended. The presenters said the bill will instead explicitly include manufactured buildings in the chapters the division enforces.
The bill’s text also clarifies the scope of the manufactured-housing recovery fund. Under current statute, the division said, recovery is limited to a purchaser of a home or structure; AB38 would allow recovery claims to apply to additional licensed activities such as alterations, remodels and repairs. Acroft characterized the change as closing a potential disconnect between who pays into the fund (all licensees) and who may recover from it.
AB38 includes provisions labeled in the presentation as sections 37–40 that address park management and tenant responsibilities, including a requirement that park offices post and maintain office hours. Harrison Vaughn of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, representing the Manufactured Home Community Owners Association, told the committee the office-hours requirement is a “customer service element” and said the association worked with the division in interim negotiations. “Customer service and resident experience is something really important to manufactured housing,” Vaughn said.
Maurice Page, executive director of the Nevada Housing Coalition, testified remotely in support and framed manufactured-housing communities as an affordable-housing option that needs clearer statutory structure. “AB 38 brings clarity and structure to one of the most scalable affordable housing models available,” Page said.
The division’s presentation also described a confidentiality provision for division investigations and a purchaser-notification requirement that would obligate the buyer of a manufactured-home community to notify the division of the sale. Committee members asked clarifying questions about outreach and the division’s educational programs: Senator Ellison asked whether the division still offers owner/manager education classes; Acroft confirmed an annual park-owner and manager education program remains in place.
There was no opposition testimony in the room or on the phone. The committee closed the hearing on AB38 after receiving the presentations and supportive testimony; no committee vote or formal action was recorded at the hearing.
The committee moved next to a separate bill hearing after closing AB38.

