Nevada

Looking back, Richard Bryan recalls more genteel era in politics in Nevada and the nation

Published

12 months ago

December 23, 2024

Looking back, Richard Bryan recalls more genteel era in politics in Nevada and the nation

LAS VEGAS (KTNV) — Richard Bryan won the first political contest he ever ran, for 8th grade class president at John S. Park Elementary School.

That was his first entry into a political career that would take him from the Nevada Legislature, to the office of the attorney general to the governor’s mansion and finally to the United States Senate.

He recounts that storied career in a new book, “My Life in Nevada Politics,” penned with award-winning Nevada writer and columnist for the Nevada Independent John L. Smith.

Longtime locals will recognize many famous names, the people behind streets, schools and government buildings, and newcomers will learn that many of the things they take for granted started with the ambitious Bryan, who says he set his sights on the governor’s mansion early in his grade-school career.

In an interview, Bryan recalls arriving in Carson City as a Democrat in 1968 to an Assembly newly controlled by Republicans. But the experience was not partisan.

“Part of the general collegiality, I believe, was derived from the building itself,” Bryan says in the book. “It was crowded, and we had no offices to retreat to. Only the leaders of each house had them. Legislators did not have a personal staff. You brought your work with you to your desk on the floor and shared from a pool of secretaries after the morning business was concluded. Everyone had to work around everyone else’s schedule. There was no cafeteria. That meant there was mingling on the floor during breaks.”

That meant getting to know other lawmakers, ones from other parties and from other parts of the state, which led to genuine friendships between lawmakers and cooperation in solving the problems the state faced.

But that collegiality faded over time, in Washington, D.C. and, to a lesser extent, in Carson City. In an interview, Bryan traces the unraveling to the election in 1994 of Georgia Congressman Newt Gingrich as Republican speaker of the House of Representatives. Gingrich discouraged Republicans from socializing with Democrats because he considered them rivals and not friends.

“The scholars I’m sure have their view,” Bryan said. “Mine is Newt Gingrich, by the way, a very intelligent and capable guy. But his predecessor … was of the old school, let’s work together. Gingrich believed that what was needed was not some modification but to take the structure down and build it again. And that was very partisan.”

The partisanship is part of the reason that Bryan decided after two terms in the. U.S. Senate not to run for re-election in 2000. His replacement? One of Gingrich’s House revolutionaries from the 1994 election, Republican John Ensign.

During his career, Bryan faced the bitter sectionalism that has plagued Nevada for decades. In college, he was initially rebuffed as his fraternity’s pledge president because he was from Las Vegas. But by making incessant trips to rural Nevada — and participating in traditional rural Nevada events — Bryan won over northern constituents. In his 1986 bid for governor, Bryan won every county in the state, something unprecedented in present-day Nevada politics.

In his time, Bryan also assembled an impressive list of firsts:

He was the first lawyer to head up the then-newly created public defenders office.
He was behind some of the state’s first conflict-of-interest laws.
He signed the bill creating the Nevada Film Office.
He opened a state trade office in Japan.
He hired the first woman to serve as chief of staff in the governor’s office, Marlene Lockard.
He brought the National Finals Rodeo to Las Vegas.
He got the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act passed.

Key to getting many of those things done was compromise, which Bryan considers a lost art because he says too many modern politicians think it requires you to surrender your principles.
“I never felt that,” Bryan said. “I guess among my critics I might have been too much of a pragmatist. What does it take to get this done? How can we work this out? Now, I wasn’t always successful. Sometimes, I mean, you had people kind of dug in and boy, there was not ability to do that.”

Bryan traces his path into public service to his father, who also held office.

“I think every citizen has an obligation, as he [Oscar Bryan] said, to pay your civic rent, to be involved. I like public service. Not everybody needs to do that. I think there’s something that’s fundamental. One, set your goal. Set your goal, work to it. … The point there is that everybody’s had a setback in their life, whatever it is, that could be a learning experience. It was for me.”

Bryan acknowledges that it would be difficult to campaign today as he did in the 1970s and 1980s, with the advent of social media, the 24-hour news cycle, the explosion of Nevada’s population and the increased partisanship that shuts out centrist candidates in favor of louder, more strident members of the fringe.

“I must say, it’s such a sad thing because it’s really harder today to get good people to run, Republican, Democrat, independent, whatever, because they’re saying, ‘I just don’t want to go through that.’”

Source link

Click to comment

Nevada

Nevada nonprofit, BCP challenging PUCN over NV Energy’s daily demand charge

Published

10 hours ago

December 13, 2025

Press Room

Nevada nonprofit, BCP challenging PUCN over NV Energy’s daily demand charge

LAS VEGAS (KTNV) — A Nevada nonprofit organization and the Attorney General’s Bureau of Consumer Protection are challenging the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada in court after the organization approved new NV Energy policies.

Vote Solar is a nonprofit advocacy group that focuses on state policies affecting solar and clean energy solutions.

WATCH | Darcy Spears breaks down challenge against PUCN

Nevada nonprofit, BCP challenging PUCN over NV Energy’s daily demand charge

According to their petition for judicial review, they are questioning the PUCN’s decision to approve two separate policies:

A new daily demand charge for residential and small business customers in Southern Nevada
A new 15-minute net metering policy for rooftop solar customers in Northern Nevada

In the petition, Vote Solar officials claim the PUCN’s final decisions are:

In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions
In excess of the statutory authority of the Commission
Made upon unlawful procedure
Affected by other error of law
Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the record
Arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion

“The PUCN’s decision is a major step backward for Nevada’s clean energy future,” said Chauntille Roberts, Regional Director at Vote Solar. “Nevada deserves energy policies that protect consumers, expand access to solar, and move our state forward—not backward.”

The Attorney General Office’s Bureau of Consumer Protection has filed a separate petition for judicial review.

“The demand charge rate structure (if permitted to be implemented), the 15-minute NEM netting methodology, and the approved affiliate charges result in rates that are unjust, unreasonable, and unlawful in contravention of NRS 704.040, and undermine the Commission’s fundamental duty under NRS 704.001 to provide utility ratepayers with just and reasonable rates,” the filing states in part.

The filing also states commissioners approved $2.7 million worth of affiliate charges that ratepayers would cover.

“The Commission’s decision concerning affiliate charges is belied by the record as the evidence in this docket demonstrates that NPC failed to provide any evidence, let alone substantial evidence, sufficient to support the recovery of an aggregate of $2.7 million,” the filing states. “Not only is the $2.7 million in affiliate charges unsupported by actual charges, it is also unreasonable and an unsupported monetary number, resulting in the Commission’s decision being arbitrary and capricious.”

No future court hearings have been scheduled for that case, as of Friday morning.

Channel 13 has reached out to NV Energy and the PUCN to see if they would like to comment on the petition.

NV Energy sent the following statement to us.

“NV Energy believes the changes that were approved and reaffirmed by the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada are consistent with state law, and we will be following this filing closely.
The demand charge more accurately captures the cost of energy delivery. It also helps to fix inequities between rooftop solar and non-rooftop solar customers. Because of the current billing structure, rooftop solar customers pay less than non-rooftop solar customers for the cost of service, shifting costs to non-rooftop solar customers.
Between 2018 and 2024, the total cost shift born by non-rooftop solar customers in Southern Nevada is $424 million. The total subsidy in Southern Nevada in 2025 is expected to grow by an additional $80 million, based on expected growth for the rest of the year.
The recently approved demand charge helps fix the inequities caused by the current system, and helps ensure that customer bills more accurately reflect the cost it takes to provide them with service.”

NV Energy Spokesperson

As of the time this article was published, we have not heard back from the PUCN.

In September, the PUCN approved the new rate model, which has sparked controversy among many Southern Nevadans who claim this will make their energy bills continue to go up.

“It’s painful. I just wanted to express concern as a private citizen that corporate America is going to do what it’s going to do to maintain profits and dividends,” Las Vegas local Joel Tauber told us in October.

“Why can a monopoly, a utility monopoly, dictate how I live in my residence,” retiree Jody Rodarmal told us in September. “If you believe there’s not going to be any increase, then why go to a new style of billing?”

SEPTEMBER 2025: NV Energy’s new billing structure sparks concern among Las Vegas residents

NV Energy’s new billing structure sparks concern among Las Vegas residents

How would the daily demand charge work?

According to NV Energy, the daily demand charge will be calculated by taking the highest amount of energy used in a 15-minute period each day and multiplying it by the current kilowatt-per-hour rate.

That charge will then be added to your bill. For the average customer, NV Energy estimates this will amount to roughly $20 per month.

WATCH: Ryan Ketcham explains NV Energy’s new daily demand charge

NV Energy is adding a ‘daily demand charge’ to power bills. What does that mean for consumers?

In past statements to Channel 13, NV Energy officials have stressed the rate increase requests are intended to recoup the costs of projects it undertakes to shore up the power grid.

However, there have been questions about that over the last year after scandals involving overcharging customers and trying to pass on the costs of things like luxury hotels, travel, and liquor to ratepayers, including a $1.2 million tab at Red Rock Resort.

According to NV Energy, Nevada customers already pay a lower average rate than the rest of the country. Through June 2025, the company says its rates were 22% lower than the U.S. average and 60% lower than in California.

Do you have a concern or question about something happening in the valley? Email Darcy.Spears@ktnv.com.

Source link

Nevada

DOJ sues Nevada for allegedly withholding voter registration information

Published

22 hours ago

December 12, 2025

Press Room

DOJ sues Nevada for allegedly withholding voter registration information

The Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit against Nevada on Friday, alleging that the state failed to provide statewide voter registration lists when requested, according to a news release.

Colorado, Hawaii, and Massachusetts were also sued, bringing the total to 18 states now facing lawsuits from the Justice Department. The department’s Civil Rights Division filed the complaints.

Francisco Aguilar, Nevada secretary of state, was charged with violating the Civil Rights Act after he responded on Aug. 21 to a letter from U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, saying there was no basis for her request for certain voter information, asserting privacy concerns, according to the lawsuit.

According to the complaint, Aguilar provided a link to the state’s computerized voter registration list. However, the version shared contained incomplete fields, including registrants’ full names, dates of birth, addresses, driver’s license numbers, and the last four digits of their Social Security numbers.

Aguilar’s Aug. 21 letter said his office would follow up, but the attorney general never received the list containing all the requested fields, the lawsuit said.

According to the news release, Congress assigns the attorney general primary responsibility for enforcing the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act, both enacted to ensure that states maintain accurate and effective voter registration systems.

The attorney general also has authority under the Civil Rights Act of 1960 to request, review, and analyze statewide voter registration lists, according to the release.

“States have the statutory duty to preserve and protect their constituents from vote dilution,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon said in the release. “At this Department of Justice, we will not permit states to jeopardize the integrity and effectiveness of elections by refusing to abide by our federal elections laws. If states will not fulfill their duty to protect the integrity of the ballot, we will.”

Contact Akiya Dillon at adillon@reviewjournal.com.

Source link