Nevada bill would expand penalties for unlicensed contractors and protect witnesses from intimidation

CARSON CITY — Lawmakers weighing Senate Bill 16 heard testimony that the measure would give the Nevada State Contractors Board new tools to punish unlicensed contractors and to discipline people who threaten or intimidate witnesses in board investigations.

David Behar, executive officer of the Nevada State Contractors Board, told the Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor that SB 16 would let the board refuse to issue a license for up to one year to a person who submits a bid in violation of Nevada law when the value of work is $1,000 or more. "By authorizing our board the ability to refuse the issuance of a license to an unlicensed contractor for not more than a year after the date on which that bid is submitted, we'd be able to raise the level of accountability for those who profited from that unlicensed work," Behar said.

Behar said the bill would also amend causes for disciplinary action to make "interfering or attempting to interfere with the investigation or disciplinary proceeding of our board ... through threatening, harassing, or influencing a person who may provide evidence" a basis for discipline. He emphasized the language would not "prohibit somebody ... from engaging in lawful action in the course of ... presenting a position or a legal matter argument or defense for a case." He also said enforcing lien rights under Nevada law would not be affected.

Why it matters: Behar said the board issued 256 citations to unlicensed contractors in fiscal year 2023–24, including many out‑of‑state firms that bid on large commercial projects. He told the committee his investigators have seen instances where unlicensed contractors factored potential fines into their business models and continue to bid because it is lucrative. He described social‑media threats and videos in which individuals with drills threatened homeowners who filed complaints.

Committee members pressed the board on proportionality and discretion. Vice Chair Houdege asked whether a one‑year maximum ban would encourage out‑of‑state contractors to continue working unlicensed until the ban expired; Behar said the bill grants discretion "up to a year" and mentioned an informal citation conference process the board uses to consider first‑time or minor matters. Assemblymember Cole raised whether the bill’s "without limitation" wording could sweep in benign corrective actions — for example, a contractor returning to repair work — and Behar said the board would be open to refining the language to exclude legitimate corrective conduct.

Supporters from the construction industry testified in favor. Alexis Motarex of the Nevada Chapter of the Associated General Contractors said, "None of us want unlicensed contractors bidding on projects or doing work in this state," and Cade Grogan of the Nevada Contractors Association thanked the board for bringing the bill. Other supporters included the Nevada Subcontractors Association, the Sheet Metal Workers (Local 88), and the Plumbing, Heating, Cooling Contractors of Nevada.

No final action or vote was recorded during the hearing. Committee members did not adopt amendments on the floor; members asked staff and proponents to consider drafting clarifying language about corrective action and proportional penalties.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing on SB 16 after testimony from the contractors board and industry groups. Proponents said the bill would raise accountability for unlicensed contracting and provide stronger protections for vulnerable witnesses; committee members asked for clarifications on scope and remedies before further action.