Nevada bill would tighten SPCSA board eligibility, clarify LEA role and streamline renewals

Assembly members heard testimony on Assembly Bill 39, a package of changes to Nevada’s charter school law that would revise State Public Charter School Authority (SPCSA) board membership rules, require each sponsor to act as the local education agency for its charter schools, and alter charter renewal paperwork. Melissa Macadine, executive director of the SPCSA, told the committee the changes are intended to reduce redundancy in the renewal process and strengthen governance and conflict-of-interest protections.

Macadine said the bill would raise the minimum age for voting members to 21 and add criteria preventing anyone with a financial interest in any Nevada charter school from serving on the SPCSA board. The proposal also would allow teachers and administrators from charter schools that are “in good standing in the SPCSA performance framework” to serve on the board, replacing a previous rule that excluded employees of any school that had ever been a 1-, 2- or 3-star school. Under the proposed eligibility test, “good standing” means a current 3-star or higher performance rating and no financial or organizational notices of concern or breach, Macadine said.

Macadine described another key change in Section 4: clarifying that each charter school sponsor — including cities and counties that became authorizers during the 2023 session — will serve as the LEA for the schools it authorizes. She said the existing statute as amended in 2023 created an ambiguity that could leave the SPCSA identified as the LEA for schools authorized by municipalities, which Macadine called an “oversight” needing correction so that the entity with authority and oversight remains the LEA.

The bill’s renewal provision would remove a statutory requirement that schools re-submit performance data already provided to sponsors and instead let renewal applicants submit other narrative and supporting data; sponsors would continue to have access to performance data and that data would remain the primary factor in renewal decisions, Macadine said.

Multiple local governments and education groups filed or delivered support. Nicole Rourke (City of Henderson) and Wesley Harper (City of North Las Vegas) said their cities have begun building authorizing infrastructure and support AB 39’s requirement that sponsors serve as the LEA. Advocacy and charter-sector groups — including TriStrategies, Opportunity 180, Silver State Government Relations’ coalition of independent charters, and the Charter School Association of Nevada — testified that the changes would improve clarity, reduce duplication, and allow experienced educators from schools in good standing to serve on the authority.

Dr. Steven Nelson of UNLV, who has worked on special-education litigation, told the committee that the existing mismatch between legal accountability and authorizing authority can create confusion for families about where to lodge complaints, and that clarifying LEA responsibility should reduce that confusion.

Assembly members asked SPCSA staff to clarify details, including the practical effect of limiting board members’ business interests “in this state” (Assemblymember Lourie Hatch), when a board member with an out-of-state charter interest would need to recuse or resign, and the mechanics of the new eligibility criteria for educators. SPCSA staff responded that recusal or resignation would be required well before any vote on an application, and that the eligibility standard focuses on current school status rather than historical ratings.

The committee held public-comment testimony in support but did not take a formal vote on the bill during this hearing. Macadine and Samantha King Powell, SPCSA general counsel, remained available to answer additional committee questions.

The hearing record shows broad institutional support from local governments and charter-sector organizations; stakeholders asked follow-up questions about implementation details and recusal timing.

Provenance: The committee opened the hearing on AB 39 and SPCSA Executive Director Melissa Macadine presented the bill and fielded questions; testimony in support followed from municipal representatives and charter groups. The presentation and the support testimony are contiguous in the transcript and were the basis for this article.