Nevada educators urge AB155 to make class size a required bargaining topic

Assemblymember Selena LaRue Hatch, sponsor of Assembly Bill 155, told the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs that the bill would add class‑size ratios and licensed‑staff caseloads to the list of mandatory collective bargaining topics for Nevada school districts.

Hatch said the measure does not mandate specific ratios or outcomes; it would require school districts and employee organizations to negotiate pupil‑per‑teacher and pupil‑per‑specialist ratios during contract talks. "I'm not saying what the solutions need to be," Hatch said, adding the bill is intended as "a conversation starter" during bargaining.

Supporters filled the hearing room and described large classrooms and heavy caseloads as a statewide problem that undermines instruction and retention of teachers. Teachers and union representatives testified that Nevada has among the largest class sizes in the country and that many classroom teachers report routinely managing 30–40 students. Alexander Marks of the Nevada State Education Association cited NEA data showing a 2022–23 statewide average of about 25.4 students per teacher and said many individual classrooms exceed that figure.

Teachers described safety and instructional concerns in high‑enrollment classrooms. Laura Ellis, a veteran middle‑school science teacher, said managing lab activities with 30–36 students and multiple special‑needs designations posed safety and instructional problems. Several speakers said high class sizes contribute to teacher burnout and exits from the profession.

Union leaders and civil‑rights advocates supported AB155 as a way to ensure class size is part of bargaining trade‑offs with salary and benefits. Caelen Evans, president of the Washoe Education Association, said, "Negotiation does not equal obligation. There is no obligation of the district to set any sort of class size requirements. This is just about providing the opportunity for conversation." Several witnesses said the bill would allow local, district‑by‑district solutions such as stipends for teachers with oversized classes or targeted hiring plans negotiated at the table.

The Vegas Chamber opposed the bill's mechanism, saying in testimony that adding required bargaining topics could lead to significant increases in infrastructure and staffing costs and that the state has not yet had time to implement recent measures to build the teacher pipeline. The Nevada Association of School Superintendents testified neutral and said the sponsor had provided information the association would bring back to its members.

Committee members questioned the sponsor about staffing constraints, grade‑level differences and fiscal impacts. Hatch repeatedly emphasized that AB155 requires negotiation about class size but does not compel a particular outcome: "If the district doesn't agree in negotiating, that's not the ratio that they would have." The hearing record shows discussion and testimony; the committee took no final vote at the hearing.

The hearing record also includes specific examples and numbers supplied by witnesses: several teachers reported typical class sizes of 30–35 and occasional classes as large as 45; the NEA statewide average cited for 2022–23 was 25.4 students per teacher; witnesses repeatedly referenced staffing shortages and the effects on special education, counselors and mental‑health caseloads.

The committee closed the AB155 hearing and moved on to other bills. The bill remains under consideration in the legislative process; no committee vote was recorded during the hearing.