Lawmakers hear plan to issue bonds to help small Nevada districts replace century‑old school buildings

Assembly members on Monday heard from lawmakers, school officials, students and community leaders pushing Assembly Bill 224, a proposal to have the state issue general‑obligation bonds to credit a fund that assists small Nevada school districts in financing capital improvements.

"We like to refer to Ely as the middle of everywhere," Adam Young, superintendent of the White Pine County School District, said at the hearing, describing the district that prompted the bill. He and Assemblymember Erica Mosca said many White Pine school buildings date to the early 1900s and are costly to bring up to modern code.

Mosca told the Government Affairs Committee the bill is intended as a policy solution that differs from a straight appropriation: instead of a one‑time direct grant, AB224 proposes issuing up to $100 million in general‑obligation bonds to credit the Fund to Assist School Districts in Financing Capital Improvements. Paul Johnson, White Pine County School District chief financial officer, said local revenue capacity is constrained — the district is at its statutory tax cap and has limited population — making it mathematically infeasible to raise the roughly $98–100 million estimated for a replacement school.

Students and school staff described unsafe and inaccessible conditions. Sixth‑grade student Paisley Tallarico told the committee that the district cannot fund a new school because "the population and tax rate cannot accommodate for the amount of funds needed for a new school." Ty Wilman, a student who had recently broken his leg, said the school lacks accessible routes and that, as a result, he attended classes remotely during recovery.

"If someone entered our building with bad intentions, they could be downstairs to our classrooms within seconds before we would ever know they were on our campus," Christina Ernest, principal of White Pine Middle School, told the committee, citing stairwells that complicate campus security and a gym without a sprinkler system.

Historical context and prior state assistance: Paul Johnson reviewed past state efforts and studies dating to the 1950s that recognized limits on local ability to finance school construction in some jurisdictions. He said earlier programs and narrow emergency funds aided a handful of districts but did not create a durable, statewide financing mechanism; construction costs have risen sharply and local revenue has not kept pace.

Support and opposition: The Nevada State Education Association, the Nevada Association of School Boards, educators, local officials and community members supported AB224, saying it would be a lifeline for rural districts that cannot finance major capital projects. Opponents on the public line argued the amount requested is excessive or advocated for alternative approaches; no formal organizational testimony in opposition was recorded in person.

Process questions: Committee members asked how any bond proceeds would be repaid, which state sources would underpin repayment and how quickly construction could start following an award. Paul Johnson said awards would come through the existing fund application process (reviewed by agencies including Department of Administration and Department of Taxation) and that repayment mechanics would require coordination with the state treasurer. Committee members noted that a multi‑year timeline should be anticipated between award and completion.

Outcome: The hearing drew substantial public testimony but no committee vote. Mosca said the bill is intended as a statewide mechanism so that other eligible small districts may seek assistance if they meet statutory criteria.