Committee debates AB303 amendment to require reporting for publicly funded broadband construction

Assembly Bill 303, presented to the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs, would require certain broadband, telecommunications and fiber infrastructure projects that receive public funding or substantial public oversight to comply with specified public works reporting requirements and submit records to a centralized repository at the Nevada Infrastructure Bank.

Assembly Member Denise Karas, the bill sponsor, said the proposal seeks transparency and accountability for public dollars used in broadband construction and would direct construction contractors to provide certified payroll reports and other records to the Infrastructure Bank in addition to other required filings. Andy Donahue, who spoke for the bill's proponents, said the sponsor and stakeholders were working on a conceptual amendment to narrow the bill to reporting standards contractors are already familiar with and to avoid turning privately funded projects into public works. "The bill will only concern reporting standards and is not intended to add private projects that do not receive public funding to the provisions of public works law," Donahue said.

Donahue told the committee that the bill's backers envision the Infrastructure Bank holding a centralized record set for projects that cross jurisdictions; he cited a planning figure of about 2,500 miles of network expansion and roughly $900,000,000 in planned construction as context for concerns about oversight.

Labor and contractor groups split on the measure. Tom Morley of the Communications Workers of America and other labor representatives testified in support, calling AB303 a "transparency bill" that would help ensure prevailing wage and local‑hire requirements are followed. The Associated General Contractors of Northern Nevada and the Builders Association of Northern Nevada urged caution. Dan Morgan of the Builders Association said applying public‑works requirements, including prevailing wage, to privately funded projects could increase housing and construction costs and undermine housing affordability; representatives of the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association made similar points.

Telecommunications companies and trade groups expressed concern about overly broad language in the original draft. Misty Grimmer of Cox Communications, Michael Alonzo of AT&T, and the Vegas Chamber expressed appreciation for the sponsor's willingness to seek clarifying amendments and said they remained engaged in negotiations over definitions of public funding and the scope of reporting. The Nevada Policy research group opposed the bill as written, arguing prevailing‑wage methodology produces a premium and citing a submitted exhibit that they said showed higher prevailing wages in some trades.

The sponsor and proponents told the committee they plan to continue working with stakeholders on the proposed amendment to limit the bill's reach to reporting obligations and to clarify that privately financed broadband projects without public funding are not covered as public works. No committee vote was taken; the hearing ended with the sponsor noting ongoing negotiations and a plan to return with amendments for further consideration.