Washoe officials and attorneys urge Nevada Education Department not to repeal rules for students with unique needs

The Nevada Department of Education on Aug. 13 held a workshop on proposed rule changes that would repeal Nevada Administrative Code sections 388.46 through 388.488 and adjust regulations tied to the Contingency Account for Special Education (CASE), prompting strong objections from the Washoe County School District.

Washoe County’s chief general counsel, Neil Lombardo, told the department that NDE’s plan exceeded the posted agenda and "is a violation of the open meeting law," and he said a recent court order issued in Second Judicial District Court (case CV25‑01018) concluded NRS 388.5223 through 388.5243 and NAC 388.46–388.488 still apply to the program for persons with disabilities with unique needs. Lombardo said the department ‘‘has done nothing to meet this judge’s order’’ in a pending residential‑placement matter and accused NDE of using the CASE process to exercise control without appeal for districts.

Julie Bowers, director of the Office of Comprehensive Student Services at NDE, presented the department’s rationale for the changes, saying the agency proposes repeals to "eliminate regulations tied to non existent statutory authority, ensuring consistency with current law and preventing delays from districts seeking reimbursement." Bowers described three goals: remove outdated NAC sections tied to repealed statutes, align the remaining regulations with NRS 388.5243, and update the CASE application process to make it more transparent and user friendly. She said the CASE application has "been implemented through an approved application process" and that "the account is replenished to $2,000,000 annually and the funds are only accessible to NDE to reimburse as requested through the application process."

Bowers also said NDE proposes clarifying student eligibility for reimbursement and defining fundable expenses, including "educationally necessary residential costs not covered by insurance or Medicaid," and creating clearer documentation and alternative reimbursement schedules (monthly, quarterly, or annually).

Washoe’s written public comment, submitted by Sarah Montalvo, deputy chief general counsel for Washoe County School District and read into the record, likewise urged NDE not to proceed. The written comment argued that repealing the NAC sections without proposing replacement rules addressing funding and facilitation for students with unique needs would "violate the constitutional and federal rights of Nevada students with disabilities" and urged the department to follow the court’s findings and prior testimony presented to the State Board of Education.

Neither the department nor the written comment removed a legal dispute from the record. Lombardo said that forcing districts to rely on CASE "is arbitrary and capricious" and expressed concern that CASE has become underused because of procedural burdens; he also noted that districts have sought public records on how CASE funds have been expended. The department framed the repeal as a cleanup intended to reduce confusion created by statutes moved or amended in 2015 and said it will work with community partners on aligning language and improving the CASE application.

The workshop record shows the department received both oral and written objections; the department closed the item after comments and invited further written feedback. There was no vote at the workshop; any formal rule changes must proceed through the department’s rulemaking process with additional notice and opportunity for comment.

What happens next: NDE indicated it will post revised language and accept further stakeholder feedback. Opponents, including Washoe County attorneys, signaled they will continue to press the legal and procedural arguments raising questions about whether repeal would remove an existing mechanism for funding residential placements for students with significant disabilities.