Commission raises concerns after program posts grant manual; deputy AG calls it guidance, not regulation

The Nevada Commission on Off‑Highway Vehicles on April 8 demanded a focused review after staff published a revised grant manual, application and proposed grant agreement that several commissioners said contained regulatory‑style changes they had not approved.

Commissioner John Glenn and others said the grant notice, the grant manual and the scoring criteria appeared to have been modified and posted without prior commission review, and that some items affect who may apply and how projects are evaluated. Commissioner Moe White said the changes “amount to the promulgation of regulations” and argued the commission has sole purview over such rules.

Program manager Caden Barmore defended the work as an effort to align the program with required federal and state grant management practices and to move the application process onto the Nevada Infrastructure Financial System (NIFS). Barmore said the manual and the application are functionally the same as previous rounds, that the program ported questions into NIFS, and that staff will host follow‑up meetings and revise materials where appropriate.

Deputy Attorney General Greg Ott told the commission he did not view the current document as having the force and effect of an administrative regulation (NAC) and described the manual as a guidance document meant to assist applicants. “This has not lived in regulation. It has not had the force and effect of regulation,” Ott said, and offered to provide further legal analysis and written guidance.

The exchange highlighted a longer‑running tension: commissioners said they must retain oversight of criteria that determine applicant eligibility and scoring; staff and deputy AG cited compliance requirements for state grant management and the TAC’s role in producing a ranked list for the program. Barmore said he would meet with commissioners who raised concerns and that staff will provide citations and supporting documentation for changes already made.

Several commissioners asked the chair to schedule a special meeting to review the grant manual, application, proposed grant agreement and scoring rubric. The commission agreed to convene a focused session and to hold preparatory, non‑quorum briefings with staff so commissioners could review materials before a public meeting.

After discussion, Commissioner Moe White said he would withdraw a formal request for an investigatory action and pursue the detailed review with staff and counsel.

What happens next: staff will compile the documents and legal citations, meet with commissioners in non‑quorum groups as allowed under open‑meeting law for preparation, and the commission will hold a special public meeting to consider any formal changes to the grant materials.