Latest news with #AssemblyBill44
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Attorney general blasts governor's veto of bill to rein in price fixing
Attorney General Aaron Ford and Gov. Joe Lombardo. (Photo: Richard Bednarski/Nevada Current) Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford said Monday that Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo's veto of Ford's legislation to crack down on price fixing 'means fewer protections for your wallet.' Lombardo, in his veto message last week, blasted the bill as 'a striking case of government overreach' and 'inherently broad and open to wide interpretation, likely making enforcement subjective and inconsistent.' Assembly Bill 44 sought to expand the state's existing Unfair Trade Practice Act to include knowingly deceptive price fixing of essential goods and services, defining those goods as things 'needed on a daily or recurring basis for the livelihood of a person.' The list of essential goods defined by the bill included housing, food, internet service, ground transportation, and pharmaceutical and other medical products. 'Let's be clear about what this veto means,' said Ford, who has indicated he hopes to take Lombardo's job away from him in next year's election, in a statement Monday. 'It means fewer tools to hold bad corporations accountable. It means fewer protections for your wallet. And it means more power for the people who rig the rules against all of us in the Nevada family.' During his presentations of AB 44, Ford told lawmakers the legislation was designed to bolster consumer protections and wouldn't apply to businesses if they weren't engaging in fraudulent practices. The legislation passed the Assembly 24-18 in April with three Democrats, Assemblymembers Joe Dalia, Duy Nguyen and Venise Karris, joining Republicans in opposing the measure. AB 44 passed the Senate 14-7 in late May, with Republican state Sen. John Steinbeck joining Democrats. The veto showed Lombardo sided 'with corporations that cheat and deceive to make a buck,' Ford said Monday, adding that Lombardo's decision was 'disappointing, but not surprising.' While the bill encompassed several categories of goods and services, perhaps its most notable feature was an attempt to rein in price fixing in the rental market. Landlords and property owners across the country, including in Nevada, have come under fire in recent years for using rent-fixing software to artificially raise the price of rents. Real estate software companies, like RealPage, have been sued by several state attorneys general and the federal government in the last year, though the companyRealPage has denied wrongdoing in these cases. During the legislative session, rental property owners and real estate groups likened the bill's efforts to address price fixing as 'rent control.' 'This bill does not cap in any kind of way how much someone can charge for something as long as they aren't knowingly, fraudulently or deceptively engaging in conduct,' Ford said in a March bill hearing. 'You can charge what you want to charge.'
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
16 new vetoes boost Lombardo total to 49; HOA limits, price fixing bill rejected
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed 16 more bills on Monday, including two that would have reined in powers wielded by HOAs — homeowners associations. He also vetoed a price-fixing bill. The Republican governor has now vetoed 49 bills passed by the Democrat-controlled Nevada Legislature, which adjourned in the early morning hours of Tuesday, June 3. Lombardo has 10 days after adjournment (excluding Sundays) to veto bills. Lombardo set a record after the 2023 legislative session, vetoing 75 bills. Veto messages reflected Republican principles — smaller government and pro-business laws — as Lombardo his decisions. Here's a closer look at some of the vetoes issued on Monday: PRICE FIXING: One of the vetoed bills, Assembly Bill 44 (AB44), was singled out as 'a striking case of government overreach.' AB44 would have granted the Nevada Attorney General the authority to investigate and prosecute pricing decisions involving an 'essential good or service,' a definition that Lombardo said threatened to cripple a wide range of businesses. Notably, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, who presented the bill to lawmakers, is a Democratic candidate seeking to challenge Lombardo in 2026. When prices go up, whether it's eggs, gasoline or electricity, there is often a public outcry for government action. But Lombardo attacked the language of AB44 as subjective and a threat to free markets. JUNE 4: Lombardo vetoes 33 bills in days following Nevada Legislature, 229 signed HOA POWERS: Two bills that Lombardo vetoed involved HOAs. AB185 would have required HOAs to allow in-home daycare businesses to operate inside communities. Democrats who sponsored the bill said community rules were preventing more child care businesses from setting up. In his veto message on AB185, Lombardo said: 'It is important to note that people choose to live in HOA communities with the clear understanding that certain activities are governed by agreed-upon rules designed to protect the consistency of the neighborhood. AB 185 undermines that mutual understanding by allowing some owners to bypass long-standing community standards through legislative action.' Senate Bill 121 (SB121) was also rejected, with Lombardo stating that the choice to buy within an HOA community comes with responsibilities to maintain community standards. The bill would have limited landscaping and parking restrictions. It also would have given homeowners at least three years after purchase to bring landscaping up to community standards. The same bill would have prohibited fines for some oil stains. CAMPAIGN FUNDS: AB79 would have toughened restrictions on how campaign funds could be used and required reporting on how that money is spent. But Lombardo said he was vetoing it for other reasons. 'Though ensuring transparency in elections is an important goal, AB 79 contains provisions, some vague, that would make political involvement less feasible for many and lack sufficial judicial oversight,' according to his veto message. He said the bill needed to do a better job of defining what constitutes a 'spent' or 'unspent' contribution. PROTECTING PROSTITUTES: AB209 would have set up protections for sex workers meant to encourage them to report violent crimes. It hinged on the prostitute asking for medical attention. But Lombardo said the wording of the bill could create a loophole that gives them immunity for more than is intended. A sex worker could actually use a request for medical attention to invoke immunity. Further, AB209 undermines law enforcement and assumes police aren't trustworthy. ICE ACCESS IN SCHOOLS: Lawmakers sought to keep immigration enforcement out of schools, but Lombardo vetoed AB217. The bill would have prohibited school employees, public schools or school districts from allowing access for ICE agents. Lombard called it well-intentioned, but attacked it as an overreach on a number of levels, even saying the bill would make school grounds into 'sanctuary zones' 24 hours a day. SUMMARY EVICTIONS: AB283 would have changed the summary eviction process, requiring landlords to file the initial court complaint. Similar attempts during the 2023 legislative session were vetoed, and Lombardo held firm with a veto on Monday. He called it 'lopsided, red-tape laden' and predicted disastrous consequences on Nevada's housing market if it were to become law. EXECUTIONS IN NEVADA: SB350 would have extended the time frame for executing a prisoner who was sentenced to death from the current 90 days to a full year. The bill sponsor argued that 90 days wasn't enough time to properly challenge court rulings. 'Since rather than promoting fairness or finality, SB 350 threatens to undermine the very foundation of justice by creating endless delays that retraumatize victims' families and erode public confidence in our legal system, I cannot support it,' Lombardo said in his veto message. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Once Legislature adjourns, all eyes will be on Lombardo's veto pen
(Photo by Trevor Bexon/Nevada Current) As of late Sunday, 223 bills were listed by the Nevada State Legislature as being in Gov. Joe Lombardo's office, and dozens more are headed his way. So far, the first-term Republican governor has vetoed just one bill and signed 169. For comparison, Lombardo vetoed 75 bills in 2023, setting a single-session veto record. He signed 535 bills. Nevada governors usually have five days, excluding Sundays, to veto a bill after it gets to their desk. Legislative rules extend that timeframe to 10 days in the waning days of the session. That means vetoes could be announced into next week. So what might Lombardo veto this year? Below are the bills the Nevada Current has covered that are now on veto watch. We've organized them by how bipartisan their journey through the Legislature was. That said, Lombardo last session did veto bills that passed unanimously, and he signed bills that the Republican caucuses voted against. Assembly Bill 44 (Attorney General Aaron Ford, D) seeks to crack down on 'knowingly deceptive' price fixing. All Republicans opposed the bill, as did a few Democrats. Assembly Bill 201 (Assemblymember Erica Roth, D) would expand efforts to automatically seal eviction records. Assembly Bill 209 (Assemblymember David Orentlicher, D) would grant sex workers immunity from criminal liability from prostitution-related offenses if they call 911 seeking medical assistance. Assembly Bill 223 (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) would give tenants more power to hold landlords accountable for failing to provide livable conditions. Assembly Bill 280 (Assemblymember Sandra Jauregui, D) proposes rent stabilization for seniors. Assembly Bill 283 (Assemblymember Max Carter, D) would restructure the eviction process. Assembly Bill 411 (Assemblymember Sandra Jauregui, D) would allow prescriptions for drugs used for medical abortions and miscarriage management to list the name of the prescribing health care practice, rather than the name of the specific individual providing the prescription. Assembly Bill 441 (Assemblymember Daniele Monroe-Moreno, D) would change how Opportunity Scholarships are administered. Senate Bill 350 (State Sen. James Ohrenschall, D) would extend the time period the state has for carrying out an execution of someone on death row. Assembly Bill 398 (Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, D) would provide additional pay for public school district teachers in hard-to-fill positions and establish a fund for broader charter school raises. Yeager amended the charter school provision into the bill after Lombardo threatened to veto the K-12 education budget over the issue. AB 398 passed the Legislature with broad bipartisan support, with only Democratic Assemblymember Natha Anderson opposing. After its final vote, Lombardo signed the K-12 budget bill, a strong sign he will likely sign AB398. Assembly Bill 555 (Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, D) would prohibit private insurance companies from charging people more than $35 for a 30-day supply of insulin. The bill received broad bipartisan support, with only Senate Republicans John Ellison and Robin Titus opposing. Assembly Bill 452 would ensure customers receive full refunds with interest for overcharges and extend regulatory timelines for rate case reviews. The bill received bipartisan support, with eight of 15 Assembly Republicans supporting the bill. All eight Senate Republicans voted for the bill after an amendment. Assembly Bill 96 would mandate that cities and counties with populations exceeding 100,000 people include 'heat mitigation' as part of their master plans. The bill passed with some bipartisan support. Three of 23 Republicans supported the bill. Assembly Bill 457 (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) originally sought to close a potential loophole that can be used by corporate landlords to avoid paying the state's commerce tax. It has now been amended into a study on the issue. Only one Republican, Assemblymember John Steinbeck, supported the bill. Assembly Bill 217 would prohibit school employees from granting permission to immigration officers to enter a school, or provide student records, including information on a student's family, without a warrant. Six of 23 Republicans joined Democrats in support. Assembly Bill 185 (Assemblymember Natha Anderson, D) would bar most HOAs from prohibiting licensed home-based childcare operations within their communities. Fourteen of 23 Republicans opposed. Senate Bill 69 (Storey County) would require companies seeking massive tax abatements to enter into agreements to defray the costs of the government-provided services they would require. Seven of 23 Republicans opposed. Assembly Bill 215 (Assemblymember Daniele Monroe-Moreno, D) would prohibit high school teenagers from working between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. before a school day. The bill received broad bipartisan support, with just three Senate Republicans voting against it. Assembly Bill 502 would boost the state's ability to investigate and enforce prevailing wage violations. The bill received broad bipartisan support,with only two Assembly Republicans opposing. Assembly Bill 112 (Assemblymember Duy Nguyen, D) would allow workers covered by collective bargaining agreements to use their accrued leave to care for family members. The bill passed the Legislature with some bipartisan support. Senate Bill 121 (State Sen. Dina Neal, D) changes what homeowners' associations are allowed to require of new residents. Eight of 23 Republicans supported. Senate Bill 348 (State Sen. Julie Pazina, D) would increase the fee hospitals pay the Nevada State Public Health Lab for a newborn screening panel to expand newborn screenings for rare diseases. Thirteen of 23 Republicans supported. Assembly Bill 241 (Assemblymember Sandra Jauregui, D) would require counties to speed up the process to rezone land currently designated commercial use into residential or mixed use. Three Republicans supported. Assembly Bill 121 (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) would require all non-optional fees, such as sewer and water, be listed in advertisements for rental properties. It would also require landlords to offer a way for tenants to pay rent without added processing fees. Three Republicans voted for the bill. Assembly Bill 211 (Assemblymember Venicia Considine, D) would allow a third party to take over the property until repairs are made and living conditions improved. The bill passed with broad bipartisan support, with only Republican state Sen. Robin Titus opposing. Senate Bill 88 would discharge medical debt from those incarcerated once they leave prison. The bill received broad bipartisan support. Senate Bill 54 would require the state's Department of Health and Human Services to apply for a federal waiver and amend the state Medicaid plan to cover medical respite care for people experiencing homelessness. Assembly Bill 321 (Assemblymember Jovan Jackson, D) seeks to establish a pathway for formerly incarcerated people to work as firefighters with the Nevada Division of Forestry. Assembly Bill 104 would establish the Nevada Voluntary Water Rights Retirement Program, which would allow willing landowners to sell their water rights back to the state through the year 2035. Assembly Bill 277 (Assemblymember Rich DeLong, R) would make the Net Proceeds of Minerals Bulletin public again. Assembly Bill 176 (Assemblymember Selena Torres-Fossett, D), known as the Right to Contraception Act, would strengthen protections against a state or local government burdening access to contraceptive measures. Senate Bill 353 (State Sen. Marilyn Dondero Loop, D) would increase Medicaid reimbursement for mental health providers.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Industries line up to tear down proposal to rein in price-fixing
"This bill does not cap in any kind of way how much someone can charge for something as long as they aren't knowingly, fraudulently or deceptively engaging in conduct" said the bill's sponsor, Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford. Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford this week said his proposed legislation to crack down on 'knowingly deceptive' price fixing would bolster consumer protections and that opposition from industry groups are relying on 'a bit of hyperbole' to attack it. 'If you're not being deceptive, if you're not being fraudulent, this bill would not apply to you,' Ford said. 'If you are using deceptive and fraudulent means to manipulate the price of necessities beyond those basic forces of supply and demand, this bill speaks directly to your activities.' Assembly Bill 44, heard Wednesday at the Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor, expands the state's existing Unfair Trade Practice Act to include knowingly deceptive price fixing of essential goods and services. The bill defines essential goods as those 'needed on a daily or recurring basis for the livelihood of a person,' including 'food, medicine and shelter.' An amendment proposed prior to the hearing tweaked the definition to include 'food purchased for off-premises consumption, clothing and footwear, gasoline and other energy goods, pharmaceutical and other medical products, housing, household utilities, ground transportation, telecommunication services, and internet access.' Ford told state lawmakers he was working on an additional amendment but didn't offer details of what it would include. He said the efforts to crack down on price fixing came from concerns about the increased cost of housing. Landlords and property owners have come under fire in recent years for using rent-fixing software to artificially raise the price of rents. Real estate software companies, like RealPage, have been sued by several state attorneys general and the federal government in the last year. RealPage has denied wrongdoing in these cases. Nevada has not taken action against RealPage. 'We learned of rental prices being increased by virtue of some unfair and illegal price fixing tactics,' Ford said. 'We learned about that through not only complaints from our constituents but also from other attorneys general who are prosecuting agencies and entities that are engaging in that in their practice.' The cost of living, the state's 'consistently high unemployment rate' and the potential of cuts to the federal social safety net programs such as Medicaid being considered by congressional Republicans are putting 'both the health and financial livelihoods of so many Nevadans at risk,' Ford said. During times of financial stress, he added, it's easy for people to be exploited through deceptive practices including price fixing. While the state does have a mechanism to go after some industries that engage in price fixing under the Nevada Unfair Trade Practice Act, he said the office was seeking more specific language to give them additional tools. 'This bill would fill current holes in statutes that have proven insufficient to stop these practices from occurring,' Ford said. Multiple times during the hearing, Ford reiterated the bill wouldn't apply to businesses that have to increase prices because of inflation, supply chain disruptions or operational costs. Still, many concerns around the bill stemmed from how the legislation would affect small businesses. Republican Assemblymember Melissa Hardy, a former small business owner, questioned how the bill would affect businesses that have to raise prices 'because our rent went way up, or our products increased substantially.' Ford said the scenario described was a basic instance of supply and demand. 'The threshold question for this bill is whether there has been knowingly fraudulent activity,' he said. Ford used the example of a small business owner raising prices because the commercial space they occupy raised the rent. If the property owner colluded with other landlords or price-fixing algorithms to raise the rent for the small business owner, Ford said, the landlord 'might fall within the bill' but 'raising your prices because of your rent increase would not.' The Vegas Chamber, Retail Association of Nevada, T-Mobile, AT&T, Nevada Realtors and the Nevada State Apartment Association were among the many industry groups opposed to the bill. They labeled the legislation as overly broad, 'government price control' and government 'overreach.' One went as far as saying efforts to prevent deceptive price fixing would 'impose rent control.' 'The manipulation of price prevention, while it mentions fraudulent or deceptive conduct, will make normal, everyday market activities legally suspect,' said Miranda Hoover, a lobbyist with the Energy & Convenience Association of Nevada. The bill would mean 'raising prices for any reason could bring legal action and result in liability.' Ford called their statements hyperbolic. 'We are talking about engaging in knowingly and deceptive conduct,' he said. 'That's the threshold. We don't get to the question about how much the price has increased … This bill does not cap in any kind of way how much someone can charge for something as long as they aren't knowingly, fraudulently or deceptively engaging in conduct. You can charge what you want to charge.' He reminded lawmakers that some of the same groups against his bill also opposed efforts to restrict price gouging during a state of emergency. AB 44 also includes price fixing by utilities, but the legislation exempts utilities that are already regulated by the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada. Several Democratic lawmakers questioned the strength of the provision and whether all the state's utilities would essentially be exempt under this provision. 'I can't think of any that are not already regulated,' Democratic Assemblymember Elaine Marzola said. Ford said telecommunications providers, like AT&T and T-Mobile, were deregulated in the state. It is 'not beyond the pale of imagination that an entity that right now is regulated may no longer be regulated,' he added. The Nevada Coalition of Legal Service Providers was the lone organization to testify in support of the bill. 'This is about scammers trying to fleece Nevadans,' said Jonathan Norman, the coalition's advocacy, outreach and policy director. 'When I think of the consumers we see, the people coming into our offices, they almost uniformly, no matter the issue, had economic harm happen to them. We appreciate any bill that stands up for those consumers' The committee took no action on the bill.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Industries line up to tear down proposal to rein in price-fixing
"This bill does not cap in any kind of way how much someone can charge for something as long as they aren't knowingly, fraudulently or deceptively engaging in conduct" said the bill's sponsor, Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford. Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford this week said his proposed legislation to crack down on 'knowingly deceptive' price fixing would bolster consumer protections and that opposition from industry groups are relying on 'a bit of hyperbole' to attack it. 'If you're not being deceptive, if you're not being fraudulent, this bill would not apply to you,' Ford said. 'If you are using deceptive and fraudulent means to manipulate the price of necessities beyond those basic forces of supply and demand, this bill speaks directly to your activities.' Assembly Bill 44, heard Wednesday at the Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor, expands the state's existing Unfair Trade Practice Act to include knowingly deceptive price fixing of essential goods and services. The bill defines essential goods as those 'needed on a daily or recurring basis for the livelihood of a person,' including 'food, medicine and shelter.' An amendment proposed prior to the hearing tweaked the definition to include 'food purchased for off-premises consumption, clothing and footwear, gasoline and other energy goods, pharmaceutical and other medical products, housing, household utilities, ground transportation, telecommunication services, and internet access.' Ford told state lawmakers he was working on an additional amendment but didn't offer details of what it would include. He said the efforts to crack down on price fixing came from concerns about the increased cost of housing. Landlords and property owners have come under fire in recent years for using rent-fixing software to artificially raise the price of rents. Real estate software companies, like RealPage, have been sued by several state attorneys general and the federal government in the last year. RealPage has denied wrongdoing in these cases. Nevada has not taken action against RealPage. 'We learned of rental prices being increased by virtue of some unfair and illegal price fixing tactics,' Ford said. 'We learned about that through not only complaints from our constituents but also from other attorneys general who are prosecuting agencies and entities that are engaging in that in their practice.' The cost of living, the state's 'consistently high unemployment rate' and the potential of cuts to the federal social safety net programs such as Medicaid being considered by congressional Republicans are putting 'both the health and financial livelihoods of so many Nevadans at risk,' Ford said. During times of financial stress, he added, it's easy for people to be exploited through deceptive practices including price fixing. While the state does have a mechanism to go after some industries that engage in price fixing under the Nevada Unfair Trade Practice Act, he said the office was seeking more specific language to give them additional tools. 'This bill would fill current holes in statutes that have proven insufficient to stop these practices from occurring,' Ford said. Multiple times during the hearing, Ford reiterated the bill wouldn't apply to businesses that have to increase prices because of inflation, supply chain disruptions or operational costs. Still, many concerns around the bill stemmed from how the legislation would affect small businesses. Republican Assemblymember Melissa Hardy, a former small business owner, questioned how the bill would affect businesses that have to raise prices 'because our rent went way up, or our products increased substantially.' Ford said the scenario described was a basic instance of supply and demand. 'The threshold question for this bill is whether there has been knowingly fraudulent activity,' he said. Ford used the example of a small business owner raising prices because the commercial space they occupy raised the rent. If the property owner colluded with other landlords or price-fixing algorithms to raise the rent for the small business owner, Ford said, the landlord 'might fall within the bill' but 'raising your prices because of your rent increase would not.' The Vegas Chamber, Retail Association of Nevada, T-Mobile, AT&T, Nevada Realtors and the Nevada State Apartment Association were among the many industry groups opposed to the bill. They labeled the legislation as overly broad, 'government price control' and government 'overreach.' One went as far as saying efforts to prevent deceptive price fixing would 'impose rent control.' 'The manipulation of price prevention, while it mentions fraudulent or deceptive conduct, will make normal, everyday market activities legally suspect,' said Miranda Hoover, a lobbyist with the Energy & Convenience Association of Nevada. The bill would mean 'raising prices for any reason could bring legal action and result in liability.' Ford called their statements hyperbolic. 'We are talking about engaging in knowingly and deceptive conduct,' he said. 'That's the threshold. We don't get to the question about how much the price has increased … This bill does not cap in any kind of way how much someone can charge for something as long as they aren't knowingly, fraudulently or deceptively engaging in conduct. You can charge what you want to charge.' He reminded lawmakers that some of the same groups against his bill also opposed efforts to restrict price gouging during a state of emergency. AB 44 also includes price fixing by utilities, but the legislation exempts utilities that are already regulated by the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada. Several Democratic lawmakers questioned the strength of the provision and whether all the state's utilities would essentially be exempt under this provision. 'I can't think of any that are not already regulated,' Democratic Assemblymember Elaine Marzola said. Ford said telecommunications providers, like AT&T and T-Mobile, were deregulated in the state. It is 'not beyond the pale of imagination that an entity that right now is regulated may no longer be regulated,' he added. The Nevada Coalition of Legal Service Providers was the lone organization to testify in support of the bill. 'This is about scammers trying to fleece Nevadans,' said Jonathan Norman, the coalition's advocacy, outreach and policy director. 'When I think of the consumers we see, the people coming into our offices, they almost uniformly, no matter the issue, had economic harm happen to them. We appreciate any bill that stands up for those consumers' The committee took no action on the bill.
