Connect with us

Nevada

How public charter schools in Nevada can become private when building their facilities

Published

on

How public charter schools in Nevada can become private when building their facilities


Charter schools are using a loophole to bypass Nevada prevailing wage laws, allege an alliance of building trades unions and one state lawmaker, who says he wants the state agency tasked with overseeing the majority of the charter schools to crack down on the practice.

But the Nevada State Public Charter School Authority and Academica Nevada, the largest educational management organization in the state, argue prevailing wage laws don’t apply to construction projects included within lease agreements that charter schools enter into with private companies.

The differing interpretations of state law raises questions about just how public charter schools are. Proponents of charter schools often stress they are public entities subject to many of the same requirements of traditional district schools, but opponents argue charters see themselves as public only when it is convenient to their bottom line, which they see as making profit for their out-of-state for-profit operators.

Advertisement

In Nevada, any public project with a contract price of $100,000 or greater that is wholly or partially funded by public dollars is subject to prevailing wage law. Rates for prevailing wage are set annually by the Nevada Office of the Labor Commissioner, which compares similar projects in the region.

Prior to 2019, charter schools were explicitly exempt from prevailing wage requirements. That exemption was put into place by the Republican-controlled Nevada State Legislature in 2015. After Democrats regained control of the Legislature and secured the governorship, the charter school exemption was removed.

Since 2019, charter schools that have directly built or renovated their own facilities using public dollars have been subject to prevailing wage law and have adhered to it, says Charter School Authority Executive Director Melissa Mackedon. That includes major construction projects undertaken by Beacon Academy in Southern Nevada, Oasis Academy in Northern Nevada, and Elko Institute for Academic Achievement in Elko.

But not all charter schools directly own their buildings. Many, if not most, lease privately owned space, especially in their first few years of operation.

Advertisement

The charter schools who fall under this category aren’t confined to those renting space inside an existing recreation center or church, as some do. It also includes charter schools who have standalone buildings that were essentially built for them.

Mackedon confirmed it is the Charter School Authority’s position that the state cannot force the construction of those charter school buildings to pay prevailing wage.

“The Nevada and U.S. constitutions guarantee private actors contracts without government interference,” she told the Nevada Current. “We cannot infringe or coerce the private actors’ right to contract.”

Democratic state Sen. Skip Daly of Reno believes this is willful evasion of state law by the charter schools and the companies they lease from, which they typically call “facility partners.”

“They say, ‘No, no, no, we’ll magically just build a building on a piece of land that will match your needs. We’ll build it to your specifications — right down to the flagpole out front — meeting all your requirements. Miraculously we’ll have this building on spec right here for your school and we’ll lease it to you.”

Advertisement

Academica Nevada, the educational management organization associated with more than half of all charter school students across the state, disagrees with Daly’s characterization.

“In order to obtain a facility to open a charter school, most Nevada charter schools find it necessary to enter into rental or lease agreements with a private property owner, who constructs and owns the facility, and then rents the facility to the school on a standard, long-term facility lease,” Academica Nevada Chief Operating Officer Ryan Reeves said in a lengthy statement to the Current. “Since these are private dollars, developing private property, with the school having a standard lease agreement … there is no applicable law requiring the payment of prevailing wage on the construction.  The selection of contractors is the purview of the private developer of the property.”

Often, the lease agreements include a provision allowing the charter school to purchase the building after a set number of years. Reeves noted these provisions “are not rent-to-own contracts where monthly payments apply to the purchase price” and therefore don’t change the applicability of prevailing wage law.

Daly points to Senate Bill 226 of the 2023 Legislative Session which put into law that “careful scrutiny of novel leasing and financing arrangements” is necessary to ensure prevailing wage is paid on public works projects. That bill was sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro, passed on party lines and was signed by Gov. Joe Lombardo.

Daly also pointed to another law, passed as Assembly Bill 190 in 2019, which clarified that prevailing wage laws apply not just to the public body itself but also to the contractors and subcontractors acting on their behalf. Daly, a retired building trades union member, sponsored that legislation.

Advertisement

The charter schools and their private facilities partners are not following the spirit of the state’s prevailing wage laws, argues Daly, though he acknowledged the matter has not been litigated in court.

Mackedon suggested the issue might best be decided by a judge.

“If the trade unions want to talk, if they think the private actors are doing something wrong and out of the confines of (Nevada Revised Statute), I think they should absolutely file a complaint with the Labor Commissioner,” she said. “There are entities that are in the position to deal with this and make judgments, but it’s not the SPCSA.”

When asked about the legality of these types of agreements between public charter schools and private facility partners, Labor Commissioner Brett Harris referenced last year’s SB226, saying it closed such loopholes.

“Prevailing wage, the apprenticeship and payroll requirements, those all apply,” she said.

Advertisement

Harris noted that, in 2020, Laborers International Union Local 169 — then headed by Daly — sued the City of Sparks over prevailing wage issues stemming from the below-market-value transfer of land from its redevelopment agency to a private developer. The Office of the Labor Commissioner determined the workers on that parking garage-condominium project should have been paid prevailing wage. The city and developer appealed.

That case is still awaiting a decision from the Nevada Supreme Court.

“In the meantime, SB226 explicitly says purchase property lease agreements and there is some agreement with the land,” she said. “This applies to all of them.”

Academica Nevada disagrees, saying SB226 revised a portion of the law (NRS Chapter 354, on local government finance) that charter schools are exempt from by NRS 388A.366(1)(n). Furthermore, Reeves argues, the legislative intent of last year’s law was to address situations “where public resources contributed directly to a private development.”

“Standard charter school development involves a private developer purchasing land at market value, developing a building with private dollars, and then renting it to the school with no certainty whether the school will eventually be in a financial position to purchase the project,” he said. “This type of project does not fit within the intent or language of SB226.”

Advertisement

Who’s supposed to be watching?

Prevailing wage and other labor violations are not confined to the charter schools, and Daly acknowledges there have been cases of university foundations and redevelopment areas attempting to skirt prevailing wage laws under similar grounds.

“It’s a lease paid for nearly 100% by public funds,” said Daly. “Liars are gonna lie, that’s what they do. Cheaters are going to cheat.”

For building trades professionals, the skirting of prevailing wage requirements by a charter school is uniquely egregious because many of them approach unions for guidance inside the classroom.

“They ask us for pre-apprenticeship curriculum,” said Southern Nevada Building Trades Union Executive Secretary-Treasurer Vince Saavedra. “You want us to train your students to be pre-apprentices, to get them ready. You want our curriculum to use; but you don’t want us to build your schools.”

Charter schools are granted wide autonomy by the state, and the nature of their oversight in Nevada lends itself to increased confusion, says the labor commissioner.

Advertisement

“There tends to be confusion because (charter schools) are individually operated,” Harris said. “It seems like the (Authority) is confused about being a central body because they are not fronting the money for a project.”

But the labor commissioner says oversight is the responsibility of the Charter School Authority and “they should be driving the compliance portion.”

State agencies overseeing qualified public works projects are supposed to collect payroll breakdowns from contractors and subcontractors and review for potential violations. If they find them, they are supposed to submit a complaint to the Labor Commissioner, which conducts their own investigation.

But in reality, state agencies across the board are understaffed when it comes to compliance officers, says Harris. Most complaints about prevailing wage violations are initiated by third-party observers — typically labor unions who fund their own compliance officers to seek out bad actors.

SNBTU notes they have found prevailing wage violations on projects that are clearly subject to public works laws, including at Clark County School District.

Advertisement

“If it happens on CCSD projects, it’s likely happening on charter schools that aren’t subject to the same scrutiny,” said Aaron Ibarra, chief of staff at SNBTU.

Robert Diaz is one of those union reps who has been looking into the prevailing wage violations at charter schools. He says the Charter School Authority and individual charter school operators have outright ignored him or shuffled him around to different people in hopes he drops the issue.

“The intent seems willful but nobody will tell me that outloud,” he said. “You get the vibe of it when you get told, ‘Oh, visit this office, or this office.’ Then you’ve visited every office. Then, it’s, ‘Speak to our attorneys.’”

Diaz and half a dozen representatives of building trade unions appeared before the interim Sunset Committee on Legislative Commission in April to urge lawmakers to investigate the matter and potentially take action.

“We support charter schools but we want to make sure they are following the law when building new schools,” Saavedra told the subcommittee, which Daly chairs. “We’re calling for more transparency.”

Advertisement

Studies have shown that skirting prevailing wage law typically results in the developer making a bigger profit, said Saavedra. Labor cost savings aren’t passed onto the public.

Harris acknowledges the enforcement of prevailing wage issues is reactive and says her office is currently considering sponsoring legislation in the 2025 session to move away from being complaint driven and become proactive with compliance. One idea being floated is to create a centralized reporting system for prevailing wage projects and add additional compliance officers, which could be funded through a small fee charged to contractors.

“If they could set up projects in the same place, the Labor Commissioner can audit,” said Harris. “We can pull data and do compliance ourselves and not rely on these awarding bodies.”

In the meantime, agencies across the state may be confused about what labor laws apply and when. Harris emphasized she’s seen nothing nefarious from the Charter School Authority.

Daly is less forgiving.

Advertisement

“In my view, they are intentionally ignoring (the issue), failing to put (charter schools) on notice, and allowing them to continue skirting, if not flat out violating, requirements,” he said.

Mackedon told the Current the Charter School Authority doesn’t get updated of schools’ maintenance projects, regardless of how costly they might be.

“Obviously, if they’re building a brand new school and location, we would know,” she said of the authority’s role, “but if something happens with the HVAC and it’s over $100,000 and hits that threshold, they don’t notify us of all their maintenance everytime they do it.”

The longstanding facilities funding debate

“It’s important to understand that charter schools not receiving the same funding that traditional schools are is the root cause of this entire problem and argument,” said Mackedon, who was appointed executive director of the Charter School Authority in October.

Charter schools would prefer to own their own buildings because it would save them money, she said. That they can’t is a byproduct of the lack of dedicated facilities funding, which Mackedon says is an estimated $1,200 per pupil that traditional school districts receive from counties on top of the base per pupil funding they receive from the state.

Advertisement

“If charter schools were getting facilities funding, this would be a non-issue,” she added.

Reeves in Academica Nevada’s statement agreed with that sentiment, saying the company “would welcome” paying prevailing wage with dedicated facility funding.

“Instead of providing equal funding to charter schools, discrepancies in funding between school districts and public charter schools have been expanded,” he added.

Reeves pointed to the exclusion of charter school teachers in a bill designed to fund educator pay raises: “You can’t oppose equal funding for charter school teachers and facilities, while simultaneously demanding that charter schools incur the costs that would be applicable only if they received equal public funding.”

The Nevada Facilities Fund, which is partially seeded by the Nevada State Infrastructure Bank and administered by the non-profit Opportunity 180, is designed to provide a below-market rate financing option for charter schools. According to the State Treasurer’s Office and Opportunity 180, any charter school borrowing from the fund will be subject to prevailing wage.

Advertisement

Opportunity 180 declined to speak to the Current more broadly about charter schools and prevailing wage laws, sending only this statement: “The Nevada Facilities Fund is a public-private partnership and does not play a role in the construction or contracting process for school buildings; it is a loan fund dedicated to helping charter schools access low-cost capital for their campuses, providing opportunities for more students to have access to an education that fits their needs.

Reeves noted in his statement that the funds available through the facilities fund are limited “and ultimately the schools are still using operations and instruction funding to pay those loans.”

Diaz of SNBTU said union representatives have spoken to charter school advocates about the facilities funding issue, but he remains unconvinced that it matters.

“We’ve heard them,” he said. “My answer is, once you know the rules of engagement, the laws you have to abide by, the rules are there and prevailing wage is in place, then you can choose to build the school or not. I don’t know any other way to understand it.”



Source link

Advertisement

Nevada

How the strikes on Iran could impact gas prices in northern Nevada

Published

on

How the strikes on Iran could impact gas prices in northern Nevada


The United States and Israel launched targeted attacks on Iran on Saturday. The move brought new uncertainty into global energy markets, as northern Nevadans could be paying more at the pump in the coming weeks.

Following the strikes, oil prices increased. Brent crude, the international benchmark, jumped to roughly $73 a barrel, while the national benchmark, West Texas Intermediate, traded above $67.

Much of the concern centers around the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway between Iran and Oman. which carries about a fifth of the world’s oil supplies.

Patrick de Haan, head of petroleum analysis with GasBuddy, a price tracking company, spoke on the current questions in the region.

Advertisement

“The known would reduce oil prices if there becomes clarity, but it’s the unknown that is stoking fears…. If there is some sort of clarity in the days ahead, whether from Iran, the United States, or Israel, on how long this would last. We’d be able to put potentially an end date for the potential impacts that we’re seeing,” said de Haan.

Experts say for every $5 to $10 increase in oil prices, drivers could pay 15 to 25 cents more per gallon.

According to Triple-A, the average price of a gallon of gas in Nevada on Sunday comes in at $3.70, which comes in above the national average of roughly $2.98.

Over at the Rainbow Market on Vassar Street, prices sat just below four dollars a gallon on Sunday. Reno resident Abran Reyes talked about gas prices potentially going up.

“Whether it’s to work, to maybe run errands, to do stuff that helps you, gas is essential…. That gas price really hits, especially in today’s economy, where gas prices are extraordinary…. I just hope everyone’s safe. I hope our soldiers and all of our troops can be okay,” said Reyes.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Nevada

Nevada debuts public option amid federal health care shifts

Published

on

Nevada debuts public option amid federal health care shifts


More than 10,000 people have enrolled in Nevada’s new public option health plans, which debuted last fall with the expectation that they would bring lower prices to the health insurance market.

Those preliminary numbers from the open enrollment period that ended in January are less than a third of what state officials had projected. Nevada is the third state so far to launch a public option plan, along with Colorado and Washington state. The idea is to offer lower-cost plans to consumers to expand health care access.

But researchers said plans like these are unlikely to fill the gaps left by sweeping federal changes, including the expiration of enhanced subsidies for plans bought on Affordable Care Act marketplaces.

The public option gained attention in the late 2000s when Congress considered but ultimately rejected creating a health plan funded and run by the government that would compete with private carriers in the market. The programs in Washington state, Colorado, and Nevada don’t go that far — they aren’t government-run but are private-public partnerships that compete with private insurance.

Advertisement

In recent years, states have considered creating public option plans to make health coverage more affordable and to reduce the number of uninsured people. Washington was the first state to launch a program, in 2021, and Colorado followed in 2023.

Washington and Colorado’s programs have run into challenges, including a lack of participation from clinicians, hospitals, and other care providers, as well as insurers’ inability to meet rate reduction benchmarks or lower premiums compared with other plans offered on the market.

Nevada law requires that the carriers of the public option plans — Battle Born State Plans, named after a state motto — lower premium costs compared with a benchmark “silver” plan in the marketplace by 15% over the next four years.

But that amount might not make much difference to consumers with rising premium payments from the loss of the ACA’s enhanced tax credits, said Keith Mueller, director of the Rural Policy Research Institute.

Advertisement

“That’s not a lot of money,” Mueller said.

Three of the eight insurers on the state’s exchange, Nevada Health Link, offered the state plans during the open enrollment period.

Insurance companies plan to meet the lower premium cost requirement in Nevada by cutting broker fees and commissions, which prompted opposition from insurance brokers in the state. In response, Nevada marketplace officials told state lawmakers in January that they will give a flat-fee reimbursement to brokers.

The public option has faced opposition among state leaders. In 2024, a state judge dismissed a lawsuit, brought by a Nevada state senator and a group that advocates for lower taxes, that challenged the public option law as unconstitutional. They have appealed to the state Supreme Court.

Federal Policy Impacts

Recent federal changes create more obstacles.

Advertisement

Nevada is consistently among the states with the largest populations of people who do not have health insurance coverage. Last year, nearly 95,000 people in the state received the enhanced ACA tax credits, averaging $465 in savings per month, according to KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

But the enhanced tax credits expired at the end of the year, and it appears unlikely that lawmakers will bring them back. Nationwide ACA enrollment has decreased by more than 1 million people so far this year, down from record-high enrollment of 24 million last year.

About 4 million people are expected to lose health coverage from the expiration of the tax credits, according to the Congressional Budget Office. An additional 3 million are projected to lose coverage because of other policy changes affecting the marketplace.

Justin Giovannelli, an associate research professor at the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University, said the changes to the ACA in the Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law last summer, will make it more difficult for people to keep their coverage. These changes include more frequent enrollment paperwork to verify income and other personal information, a shortened enrollment window, and an end to automatic reenrollment.

In Nevada, the changes would amount to an estimated 100,000 people losing coverage, according to KFF.

Advertisement

“All of that makes getting coverage on Nevada Health Link harder and more expensive than it would be otherwise,” Giovannelli said.

State officials projected ahead of open enrollment that about 35,000 people would purchase the public option plans. Of the 104,000 people who had purchased a plan on the state marketplace as of mid-January, 10,762 had enrolled in one of the public option plans, according to Nevada Health Link.

Katie Charleson, communications officer for the state health exchange, said the original enrollment estimate was based on market conditions before the recent increases in customers’ premium costs. She said that the public option plans gave people facing higher costs more choices.

“We expect enrollment in Battle Born State Plans to grow over time as awareness increases and as Nevadans continue seeking quality coverage options that help reduce costs,” Charleson said.

According to KFF, nationally the enhanced subsidies saved enrollees an average of $705 annually in 2024, and enrollees would save an estimated $1,016 in premium payments on average in 2026 if the subsidies were still in place. Without the subsidies, people enrolled in the ACA marketplace could be seeing their premium costs more than double.

Advertisement

Insights From Washington and Colorado

Washington and Colorado are not planning to alter their programs due to the expiration of the tax credits, according to government officials in those states.

Other states that had recently considered creating public options have backtracked. Minnesota officials put off approving a public option in 2024, citing funding concerns. Proposals to create public options in Maine and New Mexico also sputtered.

Washington initially saw meager enrollment in its Cascade Select public option plans; only 1% of state marketplace enrollees chose a public option plan in 2021. But that changed after lawmakers required hospitals to contract with at least one public option plan by 2023. Last year the state reported that 94,000 customers enrolled, accounting for 30% of all customers on the state marketplace. The public option plans were the lowest-premium silver plans in 31 of Washington’s 39 counties in 2024.

A 2025 study found that since Colorado implemented its public option, called the Colorado Option, coverage through the ACA marketplace has become more affordable for enrollees who received subsidies but more expensive for enrollees who did not.

Colorado requires all insurers offering coverage through its marketplace to include a public option that follows state guidelines. The state set premium reduction targets of 5% a year for three years beginning in 2023. Starting this year, premium costs are not allowed to outpace medical inflation.

Advertisement

Though the insurers offering the public option did not meet the premium reduction targets, enrollment in the Colorado Option has increased every year it has been available. Last year, the state saw record enrollment in its marketplace, with 47% of customers purchasing a public option plan.

Giovannelli said states are continuing to try to make health insurance more affordable and accessible, even if federal changes reduce the impact of those efforts.

“States are reacting and trying to continue to do right by their residents,” Giovannelli said, “but you can’t plug all those gaps.”

Are you struggling to afford your health insurance? Have you decided to forgo coverage? Click here to contact KFF Health News and share your story.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Nevada

NEVADA VIEWS: Planning for a resilient economic future

Published

on

NEVADA VIEWS: Planning for a resilient economic future


Southern Nevada has a proud history of competing — and winning — through boldness and reinvention. We have developed a world-class tourism economy, built globally recognized brands and demonstrated our ability to rebound from significant disruptions. In today’s fiercely competitive global economy, however, we must intentionally design the next chapter of our economic story. Communities worldwide are continuously enhancing their sophistication, and we must keep pace.

Since joining the Las Vegas Global Economic Alliance in late August of last year, I have consistently heard from community partners that we must diversify and enhance Southern Nevada’s economy. Our goal is to build upon and complement the strengths we already possess.

To achieve this, the alliance, as Southern Nevada’s regional economic development organization and designated Regional Development Agency, is embarking on a comprehensive strategic planning process. This initiative will guide our economic development priorities both in the near and long term, ensuring that we focus on areas that will yield the most positive impact.

The alliance has a history of reinvention, having been established in 1958 as the Southern Nevada Industrial Foundation, later becoming the Nevada Development Authority, and since 2011, operating under its current name in partnership with the Governor’s Office of Economic Development.

Advertisement

Economic development extends beyond merely attracting companies. It encompasses the ability of local families to access high-wage careers, the opportunity for young people to build their futures at home and the resilience of our economy to withstand disruptions.

Over the past decade, Southern Nevada has made significant strides toward economic diversification, with investment outcomes in 2025 surpassing those of 2024. However, our work is far from complete. While tourism will always be a foundational strength and source of pride for our region, over-reliance on any single sector poses risks. A diversified economy enhances stability, and stability creates opportunities. We are united in our desire for more accessible housing, expanded health care and education, and greater upward mobility for our residents.

This strategic planning effort aims to ensure that the alliance and its partners concentrate on the right initiatives in the right manner. It will validate the region’s target industries and subsectors, narrowing our focus on areas where Southern Nevada has genuine competitive advantages and long-term potential. The planning process will include community interviews, focus groups and surveys to ensure our final strategy reflects the real opportunities and challenges facing Southern Nevada. We will establish flagship goals and a prioritized strategy matrix to direct our attention and resources toward meaningful outcomes.

A crucial aspect of this process involves clarifying roles within the broader economic ecosystem. Economic development is a team sport — when organizations replicate efforts, operate in silos or compete for recognition, the region loses valuable time and credibility, allowing opportunities to slip away. I have witnessed this behavior in various markets, serving as a red flag for prospective companies.

We have already made strides in building partnerships, exemplified by a Memorandum of Understanding signed in November 2025 with the Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada to jointly support economic development education and advocacy for community leaders statewide.

Advertisement

Our strategic work will also include a organizational assessment of the alliance, evaluating our mission, resource deployment and engagement model. Economic impact requires operational excellence and measurable execution. Most importantly, this plan — which we anticipate completing by late April — will feature a three-year road map with clear timelines, recommended actions and meaningful metrics to transparently track our progress. A longtime mentor of mine often said, “What gets watched gets measured, and what gets measured gets done.”

Las Vegas has always taken the initiative to shape its own future. This strategic plan presents an opportunity for us to do what we do best: come together, think bigger, act smarter and create something lasting. Together, we can build a purposeful and resilient economic future for Southern Nevada.

Danielle Casey is president and CEO of the Las Vegas Global Economic Alliance.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending