Assemblymember Anderson presents constitutional amendment to reset property depreciation on sale; supporters cite school funding gains

CARSON CITY — Assemblymember Natalie (Nathan) Anderson introduced Assembly Joint Resolution 1 (AJR1) on March 26, 2025, asking the Assembly Committee on Revenue to send a constitutional amendment to voters that would reset the depreciation clock used in Nevada property taxation when property transfers to a new owner.

Anderson and policy consultant Dylan Shaver said the current formula reduces taxable value of structures by 1.5% per year and results in lower tax bills for long‑held property. Shaver summarized the calculation used under current practice: assessed value is multiplied by 35% to compute taxable value, depreciation of structures is applied, and the result is multiplied by the tax rate which is capped at 3.64%.

"The constitution, Article 10 requires this body to impose a uniform and equal assist system of property taxation," Dylan Shaver told the committee while describing how Nevada calculates taxable property value. He and the bill team argued AJR1 would reduce a structural shortfall that, they said, leaves local governments and schools without adequate and predictable revenue.

Why proponents say it matters

Supporters—including the Nevada State Education Association, local firefighters’ organizations, city associations and labor groups—said AJR1 would provide a stable revenue base for schools, public safety and local services without raising tax rates. Dawn Echeverria of the Nevada State Education Association said a similar change would have produced an estimated $330 million for school operations and $240 million in capital funds in a single recent year, citing a 2017 study commissioned by the Legislature.

Assemblymember Anderson described the proposal as a single, focused ballot question after she removed a separate provision from an earlier draft. "This was done after lengthy conversations... so it is only 1 decision to be made," Anderson said.

Concerns and questions from the committee and public

Committee members asked whether the proposal would raise the cost of homeownership. Anderson and Shaver replied that current homeowners would not experience an immediate change; the depreciation reset would apply to a property at the point of sale, so a new buyer would see a tax base that reflects the purchase price rather than a long‑running depreciation schedule. "If you chose to stay where you are, nothing would change about their tax bill," Shaver said.

Opponents and neutral witnesses urged caution. Nevada Families for Freedom and other speakers said more revenue would mean higher costs for some residents and urged fiscal restraint; county officials and assessors expressed concerns about administrative complexity and implementation workload. The Nevada Assessors Association testified from a neutral position, noting the state uses a "modified cost approach" and cautioning that the measure would add complexity and require additional assessor resources if enacted. Chris Sarmer, president of the Nevada Assessors Association, told the committee that "without a doubt, we're gonna absolutely need to expand our staff in order to administrate this provision." He cautioned that removing depreciation in some cases could produce new inequities between neighboring properties.

Process and next steps

AJR1 would amend the Nevada Constitution and, if passed by the Legislature, go to voters. Anderson outlined a multi‑step process: the Legislature would adopt the resolution in two consecutive sessions and then the public would vote on the amendment. She said more technical questions—such as precise definitions of "transfer" and exemptions—would follow in later legislative work or implementing statutes.

What the record shows

- Proponents cited a 2017 applied analysis study commissioned by the Legislature to estimate impacts by taxing district and to show potential revenue to schools and local governments. - Supporters presented estimated long‑term revenue increases across multiple local jurisdictions (examples included millions for some fire districts, library and senior services in specific localities), and said the change could help close gaps identified by the Commission on School Funding. - Neutral testimony from assessors and Nevada Taxpayers Association requested clear definitions, administrative funding for assessor offices and careful drafting to avoid unintended effects.

Ending

The committee received broad public testimony in support and opposition and kept the record open for written comments on NELIS. No final committee vote on AJR1 was recorded at the hearing; the item remains scheduled for further legislative consideration and potential amendment.

Selected direct quotes (from committee hearing)

"AGR 1 is trying to address this issue by asking voters to amend the constitution to reset the depreciation clock of the fiscal structures when property is sold to a new owner," Assemblymember Nathan Anderson said when introducing the resolution. (Transcript block s=1038.205)

"The constitution, Article 10 requires this body to impose a uniform and equal assist system of property taxation," Dylan Shaver said while describing the tax formula. (Transcript block s=1189.775)

"If you chose to stay where you are, nothing would change about their tax bill," Dylan Shaver said in response to a question about homeowners. (Transcript block s=2895.375)

Evidence (selected transcript excerpts)

Topic intro: "So with that, I will go ahead and open up the hearing for assembly joint resolution 1..." (Chair Backus) (Transcript block s=969.475)

Topic finish: "Thank you... Nevertheless, we do appreciate the opportunity to present today and help take a step forward to solving some of these really challenging problems that have grown over the years." (Dylan Shaver closing remarks) (Transcript block s=5740.415)