In a January 23rd letter to its members, the Nevada Faculty Alliance expressed deep concern about escalating violence and apparent lawlessness associated with recent ICE actions in Minneapolis. The NFA highlighted the killing of poet and immigrant rights advocate Renee Good, reports of warrantless home entries, assaults on peaceful protestors, and troubling incidents involving children and families—developments that point to a broader national pattern of harm.

"Our students and their families are understandably experiencing heightened fear, vulnerability, trauma, uncertainty, and even physical and medical harms because of these ongoing assaults.”
— NFA Letter to Members

The NFA emphasized in its letter that immigration enforcement is not solely a political issue but also an education issue, with well documented impacts on student attendance and academic performance, especially within targeted communities. These effects are being felt directly across Nevada’s higher education system.

In alignment with its partners, including the AAUP and fellow labor organizations, the NFA continues to call for:

• Accountability for the killing of Renee Good
• Immediate withdrawal of ICE operations from Minnesota
• No additional federal funding for ICE in the upcoming Congressional budget
• A full investigation into ICE’s human and constitutional rights violations
• An end to business and logistical support for ICE by Minnesota and national companies

Individuals seeking additional background can visit the AAUP’s page on “Political Attacks on Higher Education.”

The NFA remains steadfast in standing with its members, students, and all those affected by these ongoing injustices.

READ MORE >>
Do ICE Officers Have ‘Immunity’? - The Atlantic

ICE says its officers can forcibly enter homes during immigration operations without judicial warrants - NBC News

The Supreme Court clears the way for ICE agents to treat race as grounds for immigration stops - NPR

ICE Detains 5-Year-Old Boy and His Father Returning Home from Preschool, then Uses Boy 'as Bait' to Find Relatives - People

Detained Immigrants Detail Physical Abuse and Inhumane Conditions at Largest Immigration Detention Center in the U.S. - ACLU

Federal immigration enforcement near schools disrupts attendance, traumatizes students and damages their academic performance - The Conversation

At the January 20th meeting of the Nevada Public Employees’ Benefits Program (PEBP) Board, the Nevada Faculty Alliance highlighted several concerns about the program’s long‑term financial outlook based on new data from PEBP's actuary, the Segal Group.

The Segal report shows that PEBP’s reserves are tens of millions of dollars lower than recommended, as has previously pointed out by NFA. Future revenue projections for FY2028–29 appear flat while healthcare costs continue to rise, anticipating a potential funding crisis at PEBP if trends continue.

Segal also outlined an employee premium increase of 84% that would be needed to rebuild reserves in a single year in FY 2027. The NFA suggested that a gradual, multi‑year approach would help avoid large swings in participant premiums.

The report further noted long‑standing pricing inconsistencies among PEBP’s three health plan options. Recent enrollment shifts should have been revenue‑neutral under Board policy, but the report indicates they were not. The NFA encouraged a closer look at how these discrepancies developed.

Other trends—such as enrollment growth influencing revenue figures—indicate that more time is needed to fully understand the program’s current trajectory. Comparisons with other Western states show Nevada’s benefits are generally middle‑of‑the‑pack, though family‑tier premiums remain notably high.

The NFA emphasized that rebuilding reserves and realigning plan pricing will likely require coordination with the Governor and Legislature and recommended continued discussion in upcoming committee meetings.

PEBP will report to the legislature at the Interim Retirement and Benefits Committee on January 27 and a special PEBP Board meeting to consider additional changes in plan benefits is tentatively scheduled for February 18. Public comments from members are encouraged at both meetings.

Contacts for additional information: Kent Ervin, kent.ervin@nevadafacultyalliance.org; Doug Unger, doug.unger@nevadafacultyalliance.org

The Nevada Faculty Alliance (NFA) urges the Nevada Board of Regents to scrutinize conflicting budget narratives emerging from institutions within the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE), citing widespread confusion and concerns about how proposed cuts and fee increases are being justified.

In a letter sent to the Board, NFA leaders say faculty across the state are hearing dramatically different accounts of the system’s financial condition—ranging from warnings of deep academic cuts to assurances that no budget crisis exists.

According to the letter, administrators at the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR) have suggested that as many as 90 academic faculty positions may be eliminated if student fees are not raised. Meanwhile, faculty at the College of Southern Nevada (CSN) and Truckee Meadows Community College (TMCC) report being told by their administrations that no budget emergency is underway.

At the same time, the letter states that both Western Nevada College (WNC) and UNR are exploring new infrastructure investments even as they consider reductions to lower‑level positions. The NFA argues that these mixed messages have left faculty uncertain about the true state of NSHE finances.

“There seems to be some disagreement across institutions about what the state of the budget is and whether it is considered a fiscal emergency,” the letter notes. The organization is asking Regents to press for clarity and consistency in budget reporting and decision‑making.

The NFA also raises concerns about the systemwide budget proposal submitted to the Board of Regents. According to the letter, the plan does not eliminate any executive‑level positions across NSHE, even as it proposes cuts to administrative faculty earning between $40,000 and $80,000 annually.

“If a goal of the Regents is to tackle administrative bloat and unnecessary projects, it does not appear that NSHE’s proposed budget cuts are in alignment,” the letter states.

The faculty group argues that without transparent and consistent information, it is difficult for employees, students, and the public to understand the rationale behind proposed fee increases, staffing reductions, or new capital projects.

The Board of Regents is expected to continue budget discussions in the coming months as institutions prepare for the next legislative cycle.

The Public Employees’ Benefits Program (PEBP) Board met on December 12, 2025, to make decisions about plan design changes for Plan Year 2027, beginning 7/1/2026. Benefits are being reduced, but not uniformly by plan option. The following are the major changes from the current plan year for the self-funded PEBP plans.

High-deductible (“consumer-driven”) health plan with Health Savings Account:

• Increase the annual deductible from $1650/$3300 (individual/family) to $1700/$3400, the new IRS minimum for plans eligible for Health Savings Accounts.
• Increase the annual out-of-pocket maximum from $4000/$8000 (individual/family) to $5000/$10000. This will increase the costs for the 7% to 10% of participants who meet the out-of-pocket maximum, after which coinsurance does not apply.
• These changes decrease the expected actuarial value of the high-deductible plan from 79.0% to 77.0% (percent of covered charges paid by the plan, the remainder paid by the participants).

No action was taken on increasing the employer contributions to HSAs for the high-deductible plan to offset the higher deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums, but that can still be considered at the January or March board meetings.

Low-deductible PPO health plan:

• Increase the annual deductible from $0/$0 (individual/family) to $300/$600.
• Increase the annual out-of-pocket maximum from $4000/$8000 (individual/family) to $5000/$10000.
• These changes decrease the expected actuarial value from 85.1% to 83.0%.

Exclusive Provider Organization plan (northern Nevada):

• Decrease the annual out-of-pocket maximum from $5000/$10000 (individual/family) to $4000/$8000.
• This change increases the actuarial value from 88.7% to 89.1%.

These changes will make the three self-funded plan options more differentiated, with a larger range of actuarial values. Not considering medical inflation, these changes are expected to reduce the total plan expenditures by $4 to $5 million—by shifting charges to participants who are meeting the current deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums. The PEBP Board modified the actuary’s proposal to increase the out-of-pocket cost on the high-deductible plan even more to $6000/$10000. The high-deductible plan is already subsidizing the other two plan options. The new actuarial values will directly affect total plan rates and employee premiums, which will be determined at the March board meeting. Total rates scale with actuarial values, so significant changes in employee premiums for the three plan options are to be expected. The board also was presented with but did not act upon proposed changes to the employer contributions from flat-dollar amounts across to the three plan options to a system with employed contribution percentages varying by plan option and dependent tier, which would also significantly affect employee premiums for play year 2027. Further consideration is expected in January or March.

A new pharmacy coupon program for in-hospital drugs, promoted to save money for both the plan and patients, was approved. Diagnostic breast imaging and colonoscopies will be covered at 100% (as for preventive services). Prior authorizations will no longer be required for biopsies, MRIs, and dialysis. The Board considered but did not approve enhancements to vision benefits and restoration of long-term disability insurance.

In good news for state employees, Carson Tahoe Hospital and UMR have finally agreed to extend their contract for in-network services for PEBP participants through 7/30/2027.

Kent Ervin and Doug Unger provided public comments at the board meeting. Kent’s written comments, including a discussion of PEBP’s deficient reserve levels, are available at the https://pebp.nv.gov/Meetings/archived-board-meetings/PEBP website.

Submitted by Kent Ervin 12/23/2025

At the September Quarterly meeting, the Board of Regents will decide on proposed changes to Title 4, Chapter 4 of their Handbook that govern the right for academic and administrative faculty to collectively bargain. NFA has long criticized that this internal system means that management gets to make the rules we bargain under and then decides to approve contracts or not. This is one reason why we have been working to obtain collective bargaining rights in state law (as we tried again this past legislative session with AB 191 to do), so that faculty have a level playing field to negotiate.

 The Regents voted to oppose AB 191 in the legislature, citing that complying with state granted rights and legal requirements (that other public state employees have in statute) would increase legal and other costs on NSHE (a claim NFA has refuted). Regents also justified that faculty do have the right to collectively bargain—under the Regents’ own rules in Title 4, Chapter 4 (T4C4). Even with the legislative set back of AB 191, the Regents have chosen this first Quarterly Board meeting under the new leadership of Chancellor Matt McNair along with Board of Regents Chair Byron Brooks and Vice Chair Stephanie Goodman to amend T4C4.

These changes come at a time when our colleagues at CSN and WNC have been in contract negotiations since November 2024, and when TMCC and NSU will be starting contract negotiations. In short, NSHE is changing the rules and processes by which negotiations occur in the middle of negotiations already taking place.

 NSHE is also choosing to amend individual sections of T4C4 one by one, with, according to their own briefing paper, more proposed changes to come. This means more potential rule changes throughout the year, resetting and delaying contract negotiations further for our institutions. The piecemeal approach makes this problem worse by creating ongoing uncertainty—negotiating parties cannot know what other rule changes might be coming, making it impossible to negotiate in good faith or plan strategically.

 The most troubling sections NSHE has proposed to update first are Sections 9 and 10 related to how contract items are funded—which constrains how and what faculty can negotiate for in the contract. Previously, Section 9 recognized that external funding (the state portion of our overall budgets) is part of the overall financial picture that negotiating parties on both sides should keep in mind. In the past, that means that faculty recognized those limitations and negotiated items that could be achieved through prioritizing other internal funds (student fees, etc.) that are under the control of the institution. If anything  might require more funding, NSHE could then account for and factor contracts into their budget request to the legislature.  The change in Section 9 assumes that all contract items that have costs have to be approved and funded by the State Legislature. Section 10 changes indicate that Regents cannot ratify contracts that do not have approved Legislative funding. Any item not funded by a legislative appropriation will be void and unenforceable (even if an institution might have the funds to internally provide it).

 In NFA’s interpretation, we highlight the following problems with the changes in Section 9:

• Section 9 fundamentally misapplies NRS 218D.430, which governs fiscal notes for legislative bills—not NSHE policies or collective bargaining agreements.
• The language of this NRS sets a threshold of $2000 to seek legislative appropriation. This means institutions would have to seek legislative approval for routine contractual items. Suddenly previous items in contracts (first aid kits paid for by administration, professional development funds, compensation for extra work calculations, etc.) would all need legislative oversight.
• This limits the ability of institutions to negotiate meaningfully on anything with the uncertainty of what could be (might be) funded by the legislature.
• This change also contradicts the 2025 Legislature's directive for NSHE to address its own revenue sources. The Legislature specifically conditioned AB 568 funding (to bridge budget deficits from the previous biennium’s COLA) on NSHE increasing non-state revenues. The proposed changes do the opposite by forcing NSHE to seek legislative appropriations rather than consider how student fees or other revenues are currently allocated or to consider the need to raise fees as needed to address budget needs.
• This forces contract negotiations to follow legislative session timetables instead of academic or contract cycles if they are dependent on legislative funding. If these changes pass, this means some contracts being negotiated now might not get ratified until after the 2027 legislative session.

NFA has consistently supported the right of faculty to collectively bargain; faculty retention and morale is higher when faculty have a say in their own working conditions as achieved through collective bargaining processes. NFA has also supported shared governance processes and seeking ways to have collegial negotiations with institution administration, based on known budget outlooks and conditions. The proposed changes to T4C4 would disrupt current and signal that Nevada is moving away from established labor rights, making our institutions less attractive to excellent faculty. At a time when Nevada's higher education needs to compete nationally for top talent, these changes send exactly the wrong message about our commitment to faculty stability and shared governance.

Throughout the session, NFA was tracking bills that had any and all NSHE connections.  Some bills (not listed here) were related to teaching or other professional licensure or practice compacts, or had very specific connections to specific programs (meat harvesting anyone?). We focused mostly on issues that impacted most institutions or that helped with educational access and attainment.

Notable bills that made it through the session include:

• AB 153: Offers financial aid information and assistance with filling out the FAFSA for incarcerated persons.

• AB 269: Student loan repayment for providers of health care in underserved communities.

• AB 286: Establishes pilot programs for NSHE institutions to assess competencies of teachers using alternative licensure paths.

• AB 289: “The Board of Regents may establish a course in financial literacy.” This single sentence bill indicates a curricular priority of the legislature. Most institutions testified in support as they already provide financial literacy education in some form (specific course at UNLV, programming in orientation weeks by other institutions, elective courses, etc.).

• AB 345: Assemblymember Mosca’s constituent interest bill requires NSHE to develop policies around open education or low-cost course resources (a priority of NSHE student government leaders), study food insecurity issues experienced by students, and for NSHE to create data dashboards to track Nevada high school student success in NSHE institutions including whether they enroll in co-requisite courses, find employment after graduation, and completion rates.

• AB 394: NSHE institutions must create emergency plans for addressing opioid overdoses. This type of program is already available at some institutions, so this would help bring similar resources to all institutions.

• AB 462: Creates a Career Pathways Oversight Committee that includes NSHE members with one charge to evaluate dual enrollment programs offered by institutions; another part of the bill provides for financial aid and scholarships for teachers of dual enrollment programs to pursue graduate education in NSHE institutions. 

• SB 266: Providers of behavioral health services in underserved areas offered student loan repayment.

• SB 293: Allows institutions to directly compensate student athletes for name, image, and likeness or enter into other contracts related to NIL with the athletes.

• SB 406: NSHE cannot be sued for issues related to education delivered in Spring 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Governor Vetoes Bills Related to Freedom to Read and Research

Governor Lombardo issued a lot of vetoes this session, including other bills supported by NSHE and NFA. AB 416 would have prevented banning or labeling books in NSHE libraries that Regents found offensive and would have required a developing policy to prevent limiting access to library resources. The bill also had similar provisions for K-12 and public libraries and would require anyone who wants to ban a book to go to court to make this request. The Governor vetoed this bill on the basis that it takes decision making out of parents and school district hands. Notably, Regent Boylan stated in the June quarterly meeting that he was very opposed to this bill (as he claimed it was nasty towards Regents), and was glad of the veto.

Lombardo vetoed two bills that were specifically brought forth by UNLV students (SB 156) and initiated by UNLV faculty (AB 328). SB 156 would address gun violence prevention and education by allowing the Attorney General to receive funds and provide grants for research on gun violence and prevention. This bill was amended over the course of the session with gun rights advocates first opposed for the state funding anything that might highlight negative impacts of guns and then opposed that funding would come from outside groups (such as Moms Demand Action) to fund gun violence prevention research. Knowing this bill was initiated by UNLV students and would support research efforts, NFA supported. Similarly, AB 328 would create a commission to study the impact of race and discrimination in Nevada and offer policy recommendations. The bill was also later amended to include a different committee related to Juneteenth. The Governor vetoed this bill solely due to the Juneteenth committee as that included a provision that local governments that celebrate Juneteenth should contribute to a Juneteenth Educational and Economic Fund. We wonder if the Governor would have still allowed the Racial Justice Study Committee to move forward.

Still Debating NSHE as the 4th branch of government

A last-minute bill (AB 600) aimed to clarify that different state agencies and boards are directly under a specific branch of government even though they might live in different parts of state statute. NSHE is one of those agencies that does have its own constitutional provision, so by a ruling of the Nevada Supreme Court, NSHE does technically operate autonomously from the Executive branch. Although the bill would not affect NSHE’s status, because the Nevada Supreme Court had not directly ruled on other agencies, the Governor vetoed this bill worried that it might be unconstitutional (and, we guess, affirms he sees NSHE as a fourth branch of government?). 

***

Articles in this series:

• A Recap of the 83rd Legislative Session by the NFA Government Relations Team
• The 83rd Legislative Session and the NSHE Budget: The Bills, Blow-Ups, and What Died
• [PREVIOUS] NFA's Report and Outlook on the 2025-2027 NSHE Budget 
• Higher Education Legislation of the 83rd Session
• [NEXT] The Board of Regents Vote to Suspend Merit for the Next Biennium
• Legislative Wins for Public Employees in the 83rd Legislative Session
• The Many Vetoed Collective Bargaining Bills by Governor Lombardo

This session was full of many election reform bills (most vetoed), education related bills (lots happening in that K-12 space), and public worker/labor related bills. Although there were not many successes for public sector workers (as there never are in bad budget years), there were a few notable wins:

• AB 232: School district employees will now get a full year of credit towards their Public Employee Retirement Systems (PERS account) as long as they work 900 hours a year. For some education paraprofessionals or other workers (bus drivers, office administrators, etc.), their full workday might be less than 8 hours, so they previously only received a partial year credit.

• SB 418: provides more mechanisms to collect delinquent PERS payments when agencies or schools do not pay their share. Charter schools have been one of the main culprits of delinquent payments, with some charter schools closing before they pay up on these accounts. Our own Kent Ervin gave notable testimony on this issue as covered in the Nevada Current. 

• AB 356: Changes the timelines for collective bargaining by public employee groups so that contracts can be finalized before the Governor finalizes the executive budget proposal. If the Governor cannot budget for the agreed upon contract terms, rationale also has to be provided. This should prevent problems as we saw this legislative session when bargaining agreements for AFSCME and other public workers were not approved until near the end of the legislative session and where the Governor did not include anything in the executive budget related to expected contract salary increases that might result from the negotiations. As we can attest, the Governor not anticipating outcomes of the CBA negotiations did not sit well with quite a few members of the Assembly Ways and Means committee.

• AB 596: This bill funds appropriations for state public workers in collective bargaining units. Although the negotiations and approved contracts for these groups included cost of living and other funding asks, given the budget constraints, the state was not able to fund the full negotiated contract amounts. For these workers, they still will receive a small cost-of-living increase and retention bonuses. If NSHE faculty and professionals were in state-recognized bargaining units, we, too, might have been able to get contracted raises from the legislature. Without our collective bargaining rights in statute, we rely on NSHE and our institutions to budget in raises (as with merit pay).

One bill we aren’t really sure whether to see this as a full win is SB 161 that was brought forward by the Clark County Educators Association (CCEA). We should note that the Nevada State Education Association (NSEA) was opposed to this bill in all its iterations as it leaves out different educator and education worker groups they represent. The bill was originally introduced as a compromise: instead of CCEA sponsoring a ballot initiative to make it legal for some K-12 teachers to go on strike, the bill initially limited strike rights to being court approved. It also changes processes related to arbitration to hopefully allow those to be resolved more quickly. Somehow the bill was amended to remove the court approval  part, which basically allows some teachers and employee organizations representing teachers to engage in strikes, as long as they are not district wide. We’re still not sure how this one got signed by the Governor, but as these changes are now part of the same state law that covers all other public employee collective bargaining (where we are trying to get into), we will have to see how these provisions play out.

***

Articles in this series:

• A Recap of the 83rd Legislative Session by the NFA Government Relations Team
• The 83rd Legislative Session and the NSHE Budget: The Bills, Blow-Ups, and What Died
• NFA's Report and Outlook on the 2025-2027 NSHE Budget 
• Higher Education Legislation of the 83rd Session
• [PREVIOUS] The Board of Regents Vote to Suspend Merit for the Next Biennium
• Legislative Wins for Public Employees in the 83rd Legislative Session
• [NEXT] The Many Vetoed Collective Bargaining Bills by Governor Lombardo

As previously reported, the main NSHE budget (base and main enhancements) approved left funding mostly flat in comparison to the previous biennium. We avoided some of the negative budget impact proposed by the new funding formula (as that was not implemented) and the legislature did include the small institution factor funding and research space funding for our research institutions. 

THe One-SHot APpropriations

The more positive budget news from this legislative session was extra one-shot appropriations added in addition to the Governor’s recommended one-shot appropriations benefiting institution infrastructure, specific education programs, and research. Some one-shots that really are continuing costs to our institutions (such as the salaries covered by cost-of-living increases) were initially in the base NSHE budget, but changed to one-shots to reconcile the Governor's original budget that came to the legislature with a $335M deficit.

In addition to the $11M campus safety funding (AB567) and COLA backfill funding AB568:, this included:

• SB 498: Nursing Expansion: This continues the $10M/year to support nursing education at all our institutions. Additionally, the legislature amended it to add another $1.5M for WNC and $2.5M to NSU to support their facilities related to their nursing programs.

• SB 427: NSHE Capital Improvement Projects: This bill began as planning funding for the UNR Life Sciences Building ($6.2M) and the UNLV Business Building ($6.2M), and the legislature amended it to add in $1.1M for WNC’s Observatory, $300K for CSN’s Northwest campus, $3.5M for TMCC building improvements, and $2.4M to GBC for building improvements and HVAC systems.

• SB 119: NV Grow Program, $1.2M to CSN to continue to implement the program.

• SB 486: $10.7M to the Promise Scholarship Account 

Funding was also appropriated for grant funding related to the Youth Behavioral Risk Survey (AB 331); Funding for the UNLV Law School pro bono work (AB 476); Funding for NSHE programs offering degrees in behavioral health and wellness practitioners (SB 165); Graduate Medical Education grants (SB 262), DRI’s Cloud Seeding Program (SB6); UNLV Dental School funding for cleft and craniofacial care (SB280); and NSU license plates with proceeds going to athletics and student food and basic needs programs (SB181).

THe Blow-UP

We should note that although NSHE and institution lobbyists coordinate, they are not always in lockstep or fully sticking to the Regent approved funding priorities. As example, we watched AB 379 that would appropriate funds for CSN’s Northwest campus. Curiously, this bill only listed a $1 appropriation and passed out of Assembly Ways and Means with still that $1 appropriation. It was only during the Senate Finance hearing that the actual intent of the bill was made known. In the hearing, CSN VP of External Affairs Clarissa Cota asked to amend the bill to be a $500,000 appropriation and that the $1 appropriation was just a placeholder until end of session appropriations could be doled out. The Chair and Vice Chair of the Senate Finance Committee were not very happy about this surprise (as you can see in the hearing here), and based on the other NSHE representative in the room in Carson City, they didn’t know this bill was still out there nor that they would do a surprise appropriate ask in the hearing. Although this particular $1 wonder bill died, CSN still got some appropriation in SB 427.

What Could Have Been (But Died in the Process)

Throughout the session, there were a number of other bills with financial benefits (or impacts) to NSHE that did not make it through the session. Those include:

• SB 472: This bill would have increased the weighted-student-credit hour amounts adjusted for inflation and given additional appropriations to institutions with increased enrollments. This bill got lost in the 11th hour shuffle, where the Assembly tried to amend the bill to reduce appropriations and delay the implementation until 2026, but the Senate did not agree. As the clock struck midnight, this difference was not reconciled and the bill died

• AB 397: This bill originally started out as just requiring fee waivers for homeless students, but later was amended to help standardize most of the current fee waivers offered by NSHE. The Native Student fee waiver was only amended to update some language on tribes eligible, but other waivers were all made to be “last dollar” waivers–meaning students would first apply any federal aid, scholarships, or grants before the waiver would be applied. The Governor vetoed this bill specifically because he did not want the “last dollar” provision to be applied to waivers related to veterans or the National Guard. This was one of two other fee waiver bill casualties of the session.  SB 237 was a fee waiver for dependents of deceased first responders that never made it out of committee. AB 532 was the first bill to attempt standardizing fee waivers, which brought lots of opposition from tribal communities as it would reduce the current waiver provisions for them. 

• AB 139 never had a hearing, but would have provided funding to subsidize schools to pay for dual/concurrent enrollment programs. SB 181 (NSU’s license plate bill) also originally had language about appropriations for dual enrollment that was amended out.

• SB 429 would have provided scholarships for those pursuing social work degrees, but this bill died early on in the session.

We note these failed bills only because we are sure that fee waiver bills will come up again next session, and certainly we can track other grant or scholarship programs proposed for different professional or degree areas.

***

Articles in this series:

• [PREVIOUS] A Recap of the 83rd Legislative Session by the NFA Government Relations Team
• The 83rd Legislative Session and the NSHE Budget: The Bills, Blow-Ups, and What Died
• [NEXT] NFA's Report and Outlook on the 2025-2027 NSHE Budget 
• Higher Education Legislation of the 83rd Session
• The Board of Regents Vote to Suspend Merit for the Next Biennium
• Legislative Wins for Public Employees in the 83rd Legislative Session
• The Many Vetoed Collective Bargaining Bills by Governor Lombardo

Just as our national organizations of AAUP and AFT advocate on behalf of all faculty on legislation, initiate lawsuits, and support faculty at member institutions, your membership in the Nevada Faculty Alliance also comes with advocacy for faculty at our Nevada State Legislature. Yes, NFA, you have lobbyists in Carson City!  

This year we were working with an expanded team with Kent Ervin leading as our Legislative Director, Amy Pason as the chair of the state Government Relations Committee, and Doug Unger and Ian M. Hartshorn as co-Vice Chairs of the state NFA Government Relations Committee. With the addition of Amy and Ian this session, we are building capacity to be able to lobby for sessions to come.

Over the past 120 day session, we:

• Testified at 80+ bill and budget hearings.

• Met individually with legislators over 95 times.

• Collaborated with other public employee and labor groups on legislation.

• Coordinated with NSHE and institution lobbyists on shared priorities.

• Handed out numerous one-pagers of legislative priorities, end-of-session priorities, and information specific to AB 191 and AB 188. 

• Sent weekly email updates to members signed up for legislative updates.

• Sent action alerts related to bill hearings and Board of Regents meetings.

• Wrote op-eds (This is Reno; the Nevada Independent) and press releases related to collective bargaining.

• Analyzed data and created charts related to budget and benefits (you can review on NFA Headlines).

• Enjoyed solidarity and strategizing at AFL-CIO sponsored events.

To sum up the 83rd Session, we offer:

• The Good: Passage of mandatory Regent training, and one-shot money appropriations for our main priorities of campus safety and to backfill budget deficits from last session’s historic cost of living increases.

• The Bad: Collective bargaining for NSHE professionals (faculty and graduate assistants) died in committee; bill to restore retiree health benefits for state public employees was gutted, passed both houses, but then vetoed.

• The Ugly: Governor Lombardo breaks his own veto record, much of it targeted at pro-worker and pro-education legislation.

Our Legislative Wins:

• SB 322 Regent Training was signed by the Governor on May 31, after unanimous support in both houses. Working with bill sponsor Senator Angie Taylor, we modeled this legislation after similar legislation for K-12 Boards of Trustees, and even helped facilitate adding bipartisan sponsorship with the addition of Assemblymember Alexis Hansen. Although the required training is minimal (open meeting law and anti-discrimination every other year), the bill also includes a list of other necessary topics and a reporting requirement to hold Regents accountable to this training.

• AB567: $11M towards campus security funding. Following the events at UNLV, ensuring that all our institutions are safe for faculty, staff, and students has been a priority of our advocacy. This funding was part of the Governor’s recommended budget, and although not the full $38M requested by NSHE to meet safety needs, NFA advocated for this as our top one-shot funding priority.

• AB568: NFA’s advocacy for the Regents to approve the historic 12% and 11% COLA raises last session meant that NSHE did have funding gaps to cover (as the legislature only funded around 60% of the total cost of those COLAs). Although we would have preferred the legislature to increase the NSHE base budget to make us whole from this increase, we advocated for the Governor’s recommended one-shot to help cover this continued budget gap in this biennium. We are grateful that the legislature provided this bridge funding and explicitly said it was for instruction and personnel costs.

Our Legislative Partial Win:

• SB 494: Nevada Health Authority. One of the Governor’s priorities was to reorganize state health agencies to create the Nevada Health Authority that would oversee the Public Employees’ Benefits Program (PEBP), the Silver State Health Exchange, and Medicaid. As this reorganization impacted PEBP (and had provisions in the initial draft related to the composition and function of the PEBP Board), NFA worked with other PEBP stakeholder groups and the Nevada Health Authority to amend the bill to clarify the independence of the PEBP Board under this new structure.  We also worked to include provisions related to customer satisfaction surveys and data collection to better understand retiree benefits and costs. The study components were also part of AB 188, so including them in SB 494 saved that part of the bill from the Governor’s veto pen.

The Work Yet to Do:

• AB 191: After a successful hearing in the Assembly Government Affairs committee, our collective bargaining bill died waiting for a hearing in the Assembly Ways committee due to the inflated fiscal note submitted by NSHE. We heard that the Governor would have likely vetoed our bill (again) and is principally opposed to collective bargaining by graduate student workers. As noted below, the Governor used many of his vetoes on collective bargaining or worker benefit bills. If nothing else, we have now four sessions of practice with running this collective bargaining bill, and we’ll be ready to bring this bill back for the 84th session.
• AB 188:  After a lot of amending to take out the meat of the bill (that all state public employee retirees should have state subsidized health insurance as all pre-2011 hires have), the Governor vetoed the amended bill that merely helped current retirees by raising the cap on their HRA and giving a $1 raise to the state contribution to the HRA for these retirees. PEBP claimed they would need to raise their reserves related to allowing retirees to save more in their own HRAs–and apparently the Governor believed PEBP’s fiscal concerns over those of our retirees. AB188 was one of many last minute veto dumps, so this bill gets automatically reintroduced next session.

***

Articles in this series:

• A Recap of the 83rd Legislative Session by the NFA Government Relations Team
• [NEXT] The 83rd Legislative Session and the NSHE Budget: The Bills, Blow-Ups, and What Died
• NFA's Report and Outlook on the 2025-2027 NSHE Budget 
• Higher Education Legislation of the 83rd Session
• The Board of Regents Vote to Suspend Merit for the Next Biennium
• Legislative Wins for Public Employees in the 83rd Legislative Session
• The Many Vetoed Collective Bargaining Bills by Governor Lombardo

The Governor surpassed his own record veto tally from the last session with 87 vetoes. Unsurprisingly, a number of those vetoes were bills related to collective bargaining and workers. Most of the veto messages noted something about not burdening any business in these bad budget times, but even before the May Economic Forum projections, most of our labor allies were predicting vetoes from the Governor on these bills presuming the Governor is looking ahead on stances beneficial to his re-election campaign. Casualties of the veto pen include:

• SB182: Would require certain staffing levels and health care provider to patient ratios in hospitals. The veto said this would not work without addressing health care worker shortages first.

• SB 301: The right to collective bargaining for unclassified peace officer groups. This veto worried that other distinctions between unclassified and state classified system officers would also be challenged. This does not signal that the Governor would be open for other unclassified groups (like NSHE faculty and professionals) to gain collective bargaining rights under his watch.

• SB 410: This bill would clarify that insurance benefits under collective bargaining agreements for local government employees also means dependent benefits. Lombardo vetoed this one because legislatively mandating subjects of bargaining “put the thumb on the scale” to the benefit of labor. 

• AB 155: Expands collective bargaining topics to include class size for K-12 groups; the veto message assumes this would require building new schools and be unfeasible.

• AB 112: Allows use of sick leave to care for family members without retaliation; Lombardo said that this would mandate a benefit and disrupt collective bargaining negotiations.

• AB 434: Prevents retaliation of employees who do not participate in meetings where political or religious views are promoted by the employer. The Governor was concerned about limiting free speech, even though the bill is clear it is just about not retaliating against employees who do not participate in such meetings. 

• AB 388: Would require employers with 50 or more employees to offer 12 weeks of paid family, medical, or safety leave; state workers currently receive 8 weeks of paid leave. This was one of the “no burden to businesses” veto messages, even though the bills would not go into effect for another two years.

The Governor’s veto arguments, especially against collective bargaining bills, echo a lot of what we heard in NSHE’s opposition to AB 191 (the right to collectively bargain for NSHE professions and graduate assistants). NSHE/Governor prefer limited mandated topics of bargaining because otherwise it get too complex; legislation should not allow the “thumb on the scale” in bargaining to be on the side of workers. Based on veto messages, we can also the Governor and NSHE also agree that we can’t affirm the rights of workers, because somehow that will impede the rights of management.

In the long list of vetoes (check out the Nevada Independent’s veto tracker), bills requiring prevailing wages for construction projects, workplace safety requirements, or mitigating heat or air quality hazards at work sites also got the veto treatment.  We assume many of these bills will come back next session, so their chances of passing will be largely dependent on who is in the Governor’s Office.

***

Articles in this series:

• A Recap of the 83rd Legislative Session by the NFA Government Relations Team
• The 83rd Legislative Session and the NSHE Budget: The Bills, Blow-Ups, and What Died
• NFA's Report and Outlook on the 2025-2027 NSHE Budget 
• Higher Education Legislation of the 83rd Session
• The Board of Regents Vote to Suspend Merit for the Next Biennium
• [PREVIOUS] Legislative Wins for Public Employees in the 83rd Legislative Session
• The Many Vetoed Collective Bargaining Bills by Governor Lombardo