Counties push for role and cost recovery in large solar reviews under AB70

Vincent Guthrieau, executive director of the Nevada Association of Counties (NACO), told the Assembly Committee on Revenue that Assembly Bill 70 is intended to give counties a defined role and a mechanism to recover administrative and operational costs associated with large renewable energy projects.

"We are not trying to preempt conversations that happen at the local level," Guthrieau said, describing the amendment NACO submitted to the committee and noting the measure largely codifies existing language while adding a limited new provision to address solar generation facilities.

Under the amendment described to the committee, the bill would add a specific trigger tied to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process — in particular, when an environmental impact statement is prepared — and allow a county, unless it approves an alternative cost‑recovery mechanism, to assess a prepayment to offset administrative and operational costs associated with review of proposed solar energy facilities. Guthrieau said the change is targeted to renewable energy projects and is not intended to affect the current tax‑abatement process.

Supporters who testified included Olivia Tanager of the Sierra Club Toiyabe Chapter, who told the committee federal planning anticipates substantial solar development in Nevada: "12,000,000 acres of federal land in Nevada are being opened up for solar development under the 2024 Western solar plan." Joanna Jacob testified on behalf of Clark County in support of the amended bill, saying the amendment gives counties flexibility to design a structure that works locally. On the phone, Carrie Rohrmeyer of The Nature Conservancy said AB70 would provide counties "one more step towards greater participation" in decisions affecting local communities.

Industry groups and trade associations were neutral at the hearing while they reviewed the amendment. Kyle Davis of InterWest Energy Alliance and Jessica Ferrado of the Solar Energy Industries Association said they appreciated NACO's willingness to continue working and that they had not completed review of the new amendment language.

Guthrieau pointed the committee to existing statutory precedent, telling members there are similar provisions that require funding of some operational costs for state agencies in the energy‑application context, and he cited NRS 701.365 as a place where related law appears. He asked committee members to note the amendment is a targeted addition to existing law and said members did not intend to reach into abatement decisions.

No committee vote was taken at the hearing. Guthrieau and stakeholders said they would continue to work on amended language and clarifications before further committee action.

The committee closed the hearing on AB70 after receiving support, neutral testimony and no recorded opposition.