Bill
AB 490
Expands venue for petition/signature verification appeals to any “qualified district court” with electronic filing capabilities and at least five judges, not just the First Distric
Status
- Passed both houses and enrolled (delivered to the Governor 5/27/2025).
- Vetoed by the Governor 6/2/2025 (returned to Assembly with veto message).
- Fiscal committees reported: no state or local fiscal effect.
Purpose / intent
- To expand where certain time‑sensitive judicial petitions and challenges connected to initiative/referendum signature gathering and signature‑verification decisions may be filed. The bill moves venue away from being limited to the First Judicial District Court in specified statutory processes by allowing filing in other “qualified district courts.”
Scope / key provisions
- Revisions are made to statutes governing:
- Designation and use of public buildings for gathering signatures on petitions (NRS 293.127565), and
- Appeals from the Secretary of State’s verification decisions on petition signature counts (NRS 293.12795).
- Instead of permitting judicial review only in the First Judicial District Court, the statutes are amended to allow those petitions/appeals to be filed in a “qualified district court.”
- Definition of “qualified district court” (final/enrolled version):
- The First Judicial District Court, but only if it has established and maintains:
- electronic filing, storage and reproduction processes, and
- electronic access to its documents and hearings; or
- Any other district court that (1) has at least five district judges and (2) has established and maintains the electronic filing/storage/reproduction processes and electronic access described above.
- Existing timing/procedural rules are retained:
- Appeals to the Secretary of State from a local decision about use of public buildings must be filed within 3 working days of the decision.
- Judicial appeals from the Secretary of State’s final decisions must be filed within 7 days of that decision.
- The Secretary of State retains authority to adopt regulations to implement the review process.
Who would be affected
- Petitioners and proponents of initiatives/referenda (who gather signatures).
- County clerks and the Secretary of State (signature verification and recertification responsibilities).
- District courts and litigants in related review proceedings — particularly those in judicial districts that meet the “qualified” criteria.
- Potentially reduces geographic and logistical burdens on petitioners who previously had to file only in the First Judicial District.
Other notes / impacts
- Committee analyses indicated no fiscal impact to the State or local governments.
- The bill narrows access to alternate venues by requiring courts to have electronic filing and access capabilities and, for non‑First‑District courts, a minimum number of judges (5 in the enrolled version).
- Earlier drafts and amendment history: earlier versions debated broader language (including other causes of action and different judge‑count thresholds such as three judges); Amendment No. 533 and later reprints produced the enrolled language focusing on signature‑gathering and verification appeals with the electronic‑access and judge‑count criteria described above.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
