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

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.