WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 426

Revises provisions relating to the organization of large school districts. (BDR 34-1048)

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Natha Anderson and 4 co-sponsors

Strengthens transparency and stakeholder participation in large-district budgeting and SOT oversight by mandating budget briefings, advance notices, and public plan access.

(Pursuant to Joint Standing Rule No. 14.3.3, no further action allowed.)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 426

AB 426 — Revises provisions relating to the organization of large school districts (BDR 34‑1048)

Status snapshot
- Introduced: Feb 5, 2025 (Assemb. Karris et al.)
- Passed Assembly (April–May 2025); transmitted to Senate. Referred to Senate committees; as of 2025‑08‑29 the measure was held under submission.
- Fiscal note: May have local government fiscal impact; no state fiscal effect indicated.

Purpose
- Increase transparency, stakeholder participation, and oversight of school organizational teams (SOTs) and local school precinct operations in large school districts (statutory framework applies where a district enrolls >100,000 pupils — e.g., Clark County).

Key provisions and changes
1. Principal reporting and briefings
- Within 45 days after the district board files its annual budget/expenditure report, the principal must brief the SOT comparing the precinct’s approved plan‑of‑operation budget for the prior year to actual expenditures.

  1. Advance notice and document access

    • For any SOT meeting to vote on a proposed plan of operation, the principal must email members a copy of the budget at least 3 days prior.
    • At least 3 working days before a public meeting presenting a plan, the principal must send the agenda to parents/legal guardians (unless opted out).
    • Requirements to post agendas, minutes, and the plan of operation on the precinct’s and district’s websites (and related public sites) to increase public access.

  2. Budget adjustments and pupil‑generated funds

    • After a plan is approved, budget adjustments meeting or exceeding specified thresholds require notification and a meeting of the SOT and the associate superintendent:
      • Amendment adopted: ≥ $80,000 for elementary/middle schools; ≥ $125,000 for high schools.
      • Adjustments below those thresholds may be made after consultation and approval by the associate superintendent.
    • Any expenditure of money generated by pupils must be approved by the SOT; amendments call for regular Student‑Generated Fund reporting to the SOT and posting on the school website.

  3. SOT membership, vacancies, and procedures

    • The principal may not be elected to the SOT in any capacity other than as principal (with a clarification allowing a principal to serve on an SOT at a different school where they are a parent).
    • Vacancies on an SOT are to be filled from the next candidate on the prior election slate (next‑in‑line replacement).
    • The superintendent must maintain and provide staff with a directory of SOT member contact information.

  4. Principal vacancy hiring process

    • The SOT must hold a public meeting to gather input on a principal vacancy and prepare a list of recommended candidate qualifications.
    • The superintendent’s vacancy notice must include the SOT’s recommended qualifications.
    • Districts are to examine a larger candidate pool (amendments call for reviewing at least 5 but not more than 10 candidates) and provide application materials or written explanations when candidates are removed.
    • At least two SOT members must participate in final interviews with the superintendent; procedural safeguards and timing requirements for interviews and introductions are specified. The SOT may reject a superintendent’s selection if sufficiently supported by the team.

Who is affected
- Large school districts (those meeting the statutory enrollment threshold) and every local school precinct within them.
- School principals, associate school superintendents, SOT members (parents, teachers, support staff), district central office staff, and parents/guardians.
- Potential administrative workload increases at school and district level (hence possible local fiscal impacts).

Stakeholder positions recorded
- Nevada PTA: supportive (emphasizes transparency and family engagement).
- Nevada State Education Association: generally supportive but recommended broader inclusion of SOT seats in hiring interviews rather than specifying particular seats.
- Education Support Professionals (ESEA, Clark County): expressed concern about exclusion of support staff from certain hiring steps and about added administrative burdens on principals.

Procedural/timeline notes
- Multiple amendments were proposed and incorporated (e.g., thresholds for budget approvals changed from $1,000 to $80k/$125k; vacancy‑filling and candidate pool procedures clarified).
- The bill proceeded through Assembly committees (Education, Judiciary, Appropriations) and passed the Assembly unanimously. In the Senate it was referred to committees and placed on suspense/held under submission as of late August 2025.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.