The 36th Special Session of the Nevada Legislature is over, and by all accounts, this special session was special indeed.
It was among the longest in state history at seven days. It was also among the most prolific, with lawmakers passing more than a dozen bills. And for the first time, two-thirds of the state's lawmakers petitioned to add items to the special session agenda.
So, what came out of Carson City?
Well, lawmakers put in place a system to fund SNAP benefits in the event of another shutdown. They also passed a pair of bills aimed at improving traffic safety and protecting kids as they head to and from school.
And the governor got his crime bill, which imposes stricter penalties for retail theft and reestablishes a tourism corridor court — albeit with an amendment that aims to prevent immigration officials from entering schools without a warrant.
However, this special session may be best remembered for what didn't pass — most notably, a $1.8-billion film tax deal and a measure aimed at limiting corporate home ownership in the state.
Democratic Assemblymember Selena La Rue Hatch, from Reno, was among the state lawmakers who were perhaps most critical of the special session.
"I've been calling it the special-interest session," La Rue Hatch says. " It was not an emergency. It was not necessary. And, ultimately, I don't think it was successful. I think that it wasted a lot of taxpayer time and dollars on issues that weren't immediate emergencies."
La Rue Hatch also does not mince words as to who she believes is responsible for the session's failures.
"I think that this is hugely embarrassing for Governor Lombardo to put [the film tax bill] on the agenda without having the votes," she says. "I think it shows assembly leadership trying to force the issue. And I think the biggest thing it shows is that the governor and leadership were willing to allow corporate interests to come in and bribe and bully their way into getting this bill passed."
Former Republican state Senator turned lobbyist Warren Hardy also questions the timing of the session. He says the administration and legislative leaders may have been better served if they had held the special session in the day immediately after the regular session in June.
"One could argue that you really shouldn't call a special session until there's agreement, because bills don't hold," he says. "I know everybody says, 'Well, we've got an agreement in place on the crime bill or the health care bill,' but those don't hold in special sessions. Sometimes budget deals hold where we go into special session because there's a budgetary need; those deals oftentimes hold, and you go in for a quick special session and resolve them. But bills on policy issues never hold. Something always comes up."
He's also concerned about the amount of time lawmakers spent debating issues such as SB7, which requires cities and counties to assume responsibility for heart and lung conditions related to first responders' service. He says lawmakers could not truly study the impact of the issue.
"I've been involved with [this issue] since the early 2000s," he says. "If the governor decides to sign that bill, it could actually create a fiscal emergency for local governments."
Guests: Selena La Rue Hatch, democrat assemblymember, Reno; Warren Hardy, lobbyist, Hardy Strategies
