Bills must make it out of their First House by April 22, 2025.  This will be the next steppingstone for bills that may eventually become law.  The following legislation remains pending.

SB152, is sponsored by Senator Ohrenschall (D –Clark), would require associations to allow the installation of electric vehicle charging stations in the common area if, among other items, (1) the location is not being used for recreation, such as a park or playground, (2) a majority of the units’ owners, do not reject the installation, (3) the association complies with NRS 116.345 (which requires the written consent of a majority of unit owners and residents within 500 feet of the proposed location), and (4) placement would not increase the cost to any unit owner or any applicable zoning ordinance, permit or approval.

AB478, has been proposed by the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs. Current law provides that in a county with a population of 700,000 or more, must allow residential construction work to begin at 5:00 a.m.  If passed, the law would impose this requirement on all communities, regardless of any prohibition in the Association’s governing documents.

SB440, has been sponsored by the Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor and addresses regulations surrounding the installation of distributed generation systems (i.e., solar panels).  As it pertains to community associations, the legislation would:

• Prevent associations from prohibiting the installation of a distributed generation system withing a unit or limited common element so long as the unit owner has obtained the permits and approvals from any applicable governmental entity required for the installation.
• Prevent an association from prohibiting installation of a distributed generation system on a roof that covers only the unit of that owner, regardless of whether the roof is a common element. But an association may require the unit owner to:
  • Be responsible for the removal and reinstallation of the system when roof repairs or maintenance are required; and
  • To maintain insurance if the roof is a common element.
• An association would be precluded from:
  • Unreasonably restricting or prohibiting the installation of a physical barrier around the distribute degeneration system to deteranimals or to hide components for aesthetic purposes; or
  • Repair the installation of any particular type of physical barrier.

AB185, is sponsored by Assemblymember Natha C. Anderson (D – Washoe).If passed, common-interest communities would be prohibited from prohibiting the operation of certain licensed childcare facilities within their home.   Under the current iteration of the legislation, those childcare facilitieswould be for at least 5, but not more than 12 children. The legislation would exempt age restricted communities (50 years or older), and allows a child care facility to be barred by a rental agreement.  The home facility need not have an outdoor play space if it is located in a multi-family dwelling (e.g., condominium), and is located within 1 mile of a park, school or other space that is open for outdoor recreation.

CAI Nevada’s Legislative Action Committee has urged rejection of this bill as it would:

• Allow childcare facilities to utilize all community association common areas, including, pools, playgrounds, clubhouses, and parks. CAI’s LAC argues that this would place an added burden on all of the other Unit Owners to pay for upkeep, maintenance, and insurance.
• Associations would not be able to require insurance of childcare providers and therefore would shift the insurance obligation to the association.
• Many associations have limited parking and space. The legislation does not allow an association to protect its owners from possible nuisances created by these home-based businesses.
• May communities prohibit home-based businesses. Owners who bought in to a community expecting this provision to be enforced, would have this restriction removed.
  
  

AB396, proposed by Assemblymember Backus (D – Clark), has passed its first hurdle and made its way out of the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee.  This legislation seeks to make several changes that would require counties with populations over 100,000 (i.e., Washoe and Clark), and cities with populations over 60,000 (i.e., Las Vegas, Henderson, North Las Vegas, Reno,and Sparks), to adopt regulations allowing for the construction of accessory buildings.

As it pertains to community associations, the legislation seeks to clarify that if the boundaries of any unit are to be altered, in addition to unanimous consent of the affected unit’s owners, consent from a majority ofunits owned by individuals other than the declarant must be obtained.

The legislation would furtherallow an association to amend its CC&Rs to adopt restrictions on leasing so long as the restrictions are designed to meet the underwriting requirements of institutional lenders or insurance companies.Furthermore, if an association’s Declaration prohibits or restricts leasing, the association may adopt rules and regulations to prohibit or restrict leasing to the extent they are reasonably related to meet the underwriting requirements of institutional lenders or insurance companies.  Otherwise, AB396 seeks to eliminate other prohibitions on an association’s ability to restrict leasing within a common-interest community.

AB396 further seeks to clarify the requirements for terminating a common-interest community to provide that a vote from at least 80 percent of the units not owned by the declarant would be required.  A greater requirement may be imposed by an association’s Declaration.

Isaacson Law has long recommended that copies of an association’s insurance policies be included with a community’s resale package.  If adopted, AB 396 would codify this requirement.

Lastly, should the Commission for Common-Interest Communities find violations of the statutes or duties imposed upon Board members or Managers, the amounts of the fines that may be levied would be increased from $1,000 per violation to $5,000.