Hearing on AB 306: Sponsor seeks weekend drop boxes in Clark, Washoe to speed results; supporters cite access, opponents cite security and cost

CARSON CITY — Assembly Bill 306, a bill that would require a set minimum number of ballot drop-box locations in Clark and Washoe counties during the three days between the end of early voting and Election Day, received a full hearing before the Assembly Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections.

Assemblyman Steve Yeager, the bill’s sponsor, said AB 306 would require counties of 700,000 or more (Clark) to provide at least 10 drop-box locations open at least seven hours per day during the three-day gap and counties with more than 100,000 but fewer than 700,000 people (Washoe) to provide at least five such locations. “For the three-day period ... the county clerk in a county of 700,000 or more … must establish at least 10 locations where a voter can return their mail ballot in a drop box,” Yeager said during his presentation.

Yeager said the measure is a broad concept still under development and that he plans further refinement with elections officials. He told the committee the bill includes no funding and that he expects to bring a separate proposal to provide resources. “This bill doesn’t have any money attached to it,” Yeager said.

Yeager cited county data inserted as exhibits to the committee showing large numbers of ballots turned in at drop boxes on Election Day: Washoe County received about 11,500 drop-box ballots on Election Day in 2024, and Clark County had larger volumes — Yeager said Clark officials reported 56,000 ballots dropped off at drop boxes on Election Day, and 9,000 ballots were received after Election Day (about 2.1%). He argued that some of the ballots now turned in on Election Day would likely be returned during the preceding weekend if convenient drop-box locations were available, allowing county election offices to process more ballots before polls closed.

Supporters who testified in person, by phone and from Las Vegas framed AB 306 as an access and operations measure. Mark Velaschin, deputy secretary of state for elections, testified Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar supports the bill because it “increases the access to the ballot box [and] increases capacity to the counties, which will directly increase the ability for the counties to report results in a more timely manner.” Local and national advocacy groups — including the ACLU of Nevada, Silver State Voices, All Voting Is Local Action Nevada, Make the Road Nevada, NAACP chapters, Mi Familia Nación and several disability, conservation and civic organizations — urged committee support, saying additional drop boxes during the final weekend would reduce confusion and help voters who face transportation or work barriers.

Opponents raised concerns about security, chain of custody, unfunded mandates and erosion of local control. Brianna Cowan representing the Nevada Federation of Republican Women said she opposed the bill “due to the lack of provisions for monitoring of the drop boxes.” Janine Hansen, state chair of the Independent American Party, asked what security would be required at sites that are not staffed on a continuous basis. Jim DeGraffenreid, representing the Nevada Republican Party, described section 3 of the bill as allowing delivery by third parties to unmonitored drop boxes and urged the committee to focus on measures such as postmark requirements or voter ID to strengthen integrity.

County and elections officials offered neutral clarifications. Ashley Kennedy, representing Clark County, told the committee the county would need increased staff capacity and logistical planning to pick up and process ballots during the three-day period. “To implement this bill, we will need to increase our staff capacity and a little bit more logistics to ensure that we are able to pick up the ballots that are dropped off,” she said.

Several callers and witnesses raised broader distrust of mail voting or characterized the bill as enabling ballot harvesting; other callers and organizations pushed back and described such claims as misinformation. Yeager repeatedly said fraud in Nevada has been “almost non-existent” and called those who spread demonstrably false claims “conspiracy theorists.” He said some opposition emails contained “intentional misinformation.”

The committee did not take a final vote on AB 306 at this hearing. Yeager said he will continue to work with counties and stakeholders to refine the bill and expects to bring follow-up proposals, including funding, in later legislation.