Overview

Why is the Nevada State Board of Regents in the constitution?

• The Nevada Constitutionestablishes the Nevada State Board of Regents, which controls eight public institutions of higher education in Nevada, including the University of Nevada System.
• The original New Mexico Constitution included language that established “a State University which shall embrace departments for Agriculture, Mechanic Arts, and Mining.” This language was included to make Nevada eligible for the federal Morrill Act. The Morrill Act provided states with federal land to sell for the purpose of financing colleges. The Nevada Constitution also required the board of regents to invest proceeds from land sales.^[1]

What would Question 1 change about the board?

• Question 1 would repeal the constitutional provisions concerning the Nevada State Board of Regents. Removing the constitutional status of the board would allow the state legislatureto review and change the governing organization of the Nevada System of Higher Education.^[1]
• Question 1 would also require the state legislature to make laws providing for the “reasonable protection of individual academic freedom” for students, employees, and contractors of state universities to encourage the promotion of “intellectual, literary, scientific, mining, mechanical, agricultural, ethical and other educational improvements.”^[1]
• Question 1 would put the State of Nevada, rather than the Nevada State Board of Regents, in charge of investing federal land grants.^[1]

Overview

What would Question 2 change?

See also: Text of the measure

Question 2 would repeal Question 2 (2002), which amended the Nevada Constitution to state that marriage between a male and female was the only type of marriage recognized by the state. Question 2 (2020) would instead define marriage as between couples regardless of gender. It would also state that religious organizations and clergypersons have the right to refuse to solemnize a marriage.^[2] The proposed amendment would have no practical effect on which couples could receive marriage licenses due to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which rendered laws defining marriage as between one man and one woman unconstitutional.

What states have repealed constitutional bans on same-sex marriage?

See also: Constitutional bans on same-sex marriage

Nevada is the first state to ask voters to repeal a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage and/or defining marriage as between one man and one woman. As of May 2020, Nevada was one of 30 states with this type of constitutional amendment. Between 2015 (when Obergefell was issued) and 2019, none of the 30 states had referred ballot measures asking voters to repeal their constitutional amendments.

How did Question 2 get placed on the ballot?

See also: Path to the ballot

According to Section 1 of Article 16 of the Nevada Constitution, an amendment proposed by the legislature must be approved by a majority in both the House and Senate in two consecutive legislative sessions. Question 2 was introduced as Assembly Joint Resolution 2 (AJR 2) on February 1, 2017. In the first legislative session, the Nevada State Assembly approved the measure in a vote of 27 to 14, and the Nevada State Senate approved the measure in a vote of 19 to 2. In the second legislative session, the Nevada State Senate approved it again by the same margin. In the second legislative session, the Nevada State Assembly approved the measure in a vote of 37 to 2. In the first session, one Republican and all 28 Democrats voted in favor of it. In the second session, nine Republicans and all 28 Democrats voted in favor of it.

Overview

What would Question 3 change about the pardons commission?

Question 3 would make changes to the constitutional structure and duties of the State Board of Pardons Commissioners (SBPC). The SBPC has the power to remit fines and forfeitures, commute punishments, and grant pardons, except for treason; impeachments; and death sentences or life sentences without possibility of parole.^[1][2][3]

The SBPC consists of the governor, attorney general, and the seven justices of the Nevada Supreme Court. Currently, to grant a pardon to an offender, a majority of the board must vote in favor, and the governor must be included in the majority that voted in favor. The ballot measure would eliminate the requirement that the governor be included in the majority to grant a pardon.^[1][2]

As of 2019, state statute requires the SBPC to meet twice per year. The ballot measure would require the SBPC to meet four times per year. The ballot measure would also allow any member of the board to submit an issue for the full SBPC’s consideration.

Overview

What would Question 4 do?

Question 4 would add the state’s declaration of voters’ rights, which was passed as a statute in 2002, to the Nevada Constitution. The amendment would provide qualified persons who are registered to vote with a constitutional right to receive and cast a ballot that is written in a “format that allows the clear identification of candidates” and “accurately records the voter’s preference in the selection of candidates.” It also would provide registered voters with other constitutional rights, including:^[1]

(a) to have questions about voting procedures answered and have voting procedures posted in a visible location at the polling place;

(b) to vote without intimidation, threats, or coercion;

(c) to vote during any early-voting period or on election day if the voter is in line at the time polls close;

(d) to return a spoiled ballot and receive a replacement ballot;

(e) to request assistance in voting if necessary;

(f) to a sample ballot “which is accurate, informative and delivered in a timely manner;”

(g) to receive instruction on how to use voting equipment;

(h) to equal access to the elections system without discrimination, including on the basis of “race, age, disability, military service, employment or overseas residence;”

(i) to a “uniform, statewide standard for counting and recounting all votes accurately;” and

(j) to have “complaints about elections and election contests resolved fairly, accurately and efficiently.”

Overview

What would the ballot initiative change about energy policy in Nevada?

See also: Text of the measure

The amendment would add language to the Nevada Constitution requiring the state’s (RPS)) to increase to 50 percent by 2030. An RPS is a mandate that electric utilities acquire a minimum amount of electricity from renewable energy sources. The constitutional amendment would increase the RPS to 50 percent by 2030. The amendment would also define renewable energy to include sources such as solar, geothermal, wind, biomass, and hydroelectric. Specifically, it would require an increased RPS each year until reaching 50 percent in 2030.^[1]

On April 22, 2019, Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) signed Senate Bill 358 (SB 358), which was designed to require the same RPS percentage by 2030 as the amendment on the ballot. The chart below illustrates how law before SB 358 compares to the RPS adopted by SB 358 and the RPS proposed by the amendment.