In Nevada, the right of the public to have access to the legislative process is clearly stated in Article 4, Section 15 of the state constitution: “The meetings of all legislative committees must be open to the public, except meetings held to consider the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of a person.”

Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 241, meetings of state and local agencies, commonly referred to as the open meeting law, paragraph NRS241.015 4(a) defines “public body” as “Any administrative, advisory, executive or legislative body of the State or a local government consisting of at least two persons …”

In fact, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have some kind of open meeting law.

Clearly the writers of the state constitution and the open meeting statute intended for Nevada’s major lawmaking body to conduct its business in clear view of the public. However, legislators expressed a different perspective in the next paragraph, NRS241.016, when they exempted themselves, the Legislature, from abiding by the open meeting law. 

While the Legislature has the authority to create policy, it lacks authority to go against our state constitution. Is the Legislature willfully ignoring the constitutional foundation of the open meeting law? Does the Legislature believe it is above following the constitution? We do not know the answers to these questions because the self-imposed exemption to the law has never, at least in searches I can find, been tested in court. 

During the legislative session, both chambers operate under rules they enact and these rules control each chamber’s functioning as well as overall legislative processes. However, almost like clockwork, legislators suspended all rules (see page 3) for the final two weeks of the session. 

Except for the last two weeks of the session, the Legislature strives to provide opportunities for the public to witness and be involved in the legislative process. Bills are available through the Legislature’s website. Agendas are posted and the public can testify in person or remotely and submit written testimony. A person can post their opinion on any bill through an online tool and members of the public are able to meet with legislators either formally in their offices or have an informal discussion in the hall. 

However, because there is no mandate to adhere to open meeting standards, opportunities for the public to witness and be involved in the legislative process during most of the session often fail because hearings do not start at the time stated on the agenda. The Legislature runs on “legislative time” that has, at times, added 30 minutes to the published start times.

And if someone was following election legislation, for instance, they would quickly discover individuals could not attend both meetings because the Senate and Assembly Legislative Operations and Elections committees meet on the same days one half-hour apart. Is this disregard for the public’s right to be civically engaged an extension of the legislative exemption from the open meeting law?

Suspending the rules in the session’s last two weeks on top of the exemption from open meeting law standards means no agendas or minutes are required. It means hearings are not required to be open to the public and there are often no opportunities for public comments. It means bills can be introduced well beyond statutory deadline and hearings held “behind the bar” (on the floor of the Assembly or Senate) may be called at any time during a floor session. Finally, it means bills can be totally changed even after both chambers have passed the original version, with no notice or public input.

“The meetings of all legislative committees must be open to the public ...” The state constitution cannot be overridden by statute. The Nevada Constitution is clear. Perhaps the people need to let our legislators know that they need to adhere to our constitution.  

Doug Goodman is the founder and executive director of Nevadans for Election Reform.