Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nevada elections office proposes rule to codify complaint-investigation process
Summary
The Nevada Secretary of State’s Elections Division proposed a regulation to codify how election-related complaints are filed, reviewed and investigated, saying two new compliance investigators need clear, public procedures. Public commenters urged narrow dismissal authority and plain-language explanations.
Deputy Secretary of State Mark Velaschin told a public workshop that proposed regulation R031-25P would formally set out how the office handles election-related complaints, aligning state practice with the Help America Vote Act complaint requirements and the office’s newly staffed compliance investigators.
Velaschin said the rulemaking responds to a gap: the 2023 Legislature funded two compliance-investigator positions, but existing regulations do not explain their duties. "We have a process and regulation that defines the regular...compliance process related again to HAVA, but not just in general," he said. The draft would require complaint forms, allow mail or electronic submission and preserve procedures for review, investigation and respondent notice.
Why it matters: The regulation would more clearly define when the secretary’s office reviews allegations of HAVA or other election-law violations and what standards apply. That clarity affects members of the public who file complaints and county election officials who may be asked to provide records or respond to inquiries.
At the workshop, public commenters urged caution. Matthew Winterhawk, who identified himself as speaking for Nevada parents, said the proposals "appear to expand and centralize the authority of the secretary of state over election-related complaints, voter-status notifications, and ballot...processing standards" and asked that dismissal authority be exercised "narrowly and heavily documented." Kayla Maese, policy manager with ACLU of Nevada, noted the organization submitted written comments and said it looks forward to working through specific concerns.
The draft retains that some complaint types remain governed by other statutory processes. Velaschin pointed to the candidate-challenge process as an example, saying statutory procedures would still take precedence where applicable. The office also plans to publish forms and any new data or procedures it will use, he said.
Next steps: The office accepted oral and written comments and said it will analyze suggestions and consult county clerks before making recommendations to the secretary. The adoption hearing for the package of regulations is scheduled for Jan. 21.
