Bill would change Nevada HOA rules on landscaping, late fees, vehicle advertising and management transfers, sponsor says

Sen. Dina Neal, sponsor of Senate Bill 121, told the Assembly Judiciary Committee in Carson City that the bill would revise Nevada law governing common-interest communities to give homeowners more time and clearer rules on landscaping, late fees and vehicle advertising.

Neal said the measure would allow new homeowners to install a base layer of rock within 18 months of closing and require complete backyard landscaping within 36 months, rather than the 180 days many covenants now impose. "SB121 is basically an HOA bill. I'm making a baby step into trying to figure out how homeowners can have more of a say," Neal said.

The bill would also standardize late-fee timing so HOAs could not assess or report late fees before 30 days, and would bar reporting those delinquencies to a collections agency for the specified period. Neal said the change was intended to reduce inconsistent timelines across different communities and the risk of early credit reporting.

SB121 addresses several other recurring complaints, Neal told the committee: it would clarify that homeowners are responsible for oil stains only when the stain is "entirely in the driveway," create an exception to rules that require business signage on vehicles to be covered with magnets (but allow HOAs to prohibit pornographic or marijuana-related advertising), and require outgoing management companies to post a termination notice in a common area and transfer the association's books, records and accounts to the successor manager within 30 days.

Assembly members asked multiple clarifying questions. Vice Chair Marzola and Assemblymember Gray pressed Neal on the landscaping mandate, asking whether requiring an interim layer of rock (at 18 months) could force homeowners to pay twice if they later choose landscaping that removes the rock. Neal said the 18/36-month structure was a negotiated compromise with management companies, which had expressed concern about dust and unmaintained yards in the Las Vegas Valley. "They felt very strongly about that, and that was my negotiation," she said.

Assemblymember Cole asked whether the bill should address instances in which HOAs contract with affiliated collection companies; Neal said she had been alerted that some management firms use related-entity collection operations and would consider adding disclosure language after researching the issue further. Committee staff provided a statewide figure during the hearing: "Nevada has 3,711 HOAs, which represent the owners of 623,917 housing units, half of the state's 1,300,000 homes," Community Policy Analyst Cesar Mogarejo told the committee.

Support testimony in Carson City came from Zach Bucher, who said local governments frequently get calls about HOA problems, and from Garrett Gordon of Womble Bond Dickinson representing the Community Associations Institute, which said it stood down in formal opposition after negotiations with the sponsor but retained concerns about several sections. Kimberly Fergus, a retired real-estate professional, testified in opposition and told the committee that some development and financing structures impose landscaping timelines while the developer still owns the property and homeowners should be aware of recorded CC&Rs before purchase.

No committee vote was recorded at the hearing. Neal closed the SB121 hearing and said she expected further work with stakeholders before the bill would move to work session.

The committee hearing record shows the bill generated sustained discussion and multiple stakeholder offers to continue negotiations; the sponsor and several industry groups said they would keep working on language ahead of any work-session vote.