Heard in committee for first time, Lombardo’s big crime bill landed with an audible thud

Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo’s wide-ranging crime bill was heavily criticized at its first hearing this week for not only seeking to undermine previous reforms passed in 2019, but for being crafted without any consultation with organizations involved in criminal justice reforms.

“With four days left in session, I don’t view this as being a sound approach to policy making,” said Athar Haseebullah, the executive director of the ACLU of Nevada to the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday.  “It’s just, I think we’re out of time.”

Lombardo was absent from Wednesday’s hearing of Senate Bill 457, which he has deemed the “Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act.”  

The legislation was presented by the Washoe County District Attorneys office and George Togliatti, the director of the Nevada Department of Safety.

The bill reduces the felony threshold for theft from $1,200 to $750, and proposes harsher punishment for a variety of crimes, including for people charged with repeated felony DUI offenses and those in possession of child pornography.  

The legislation would provide stricter punishment for youth who commit repeated crimes against teachers or social service workers, while also limiting eligibility for diversion programs for those convicted of felony abuse, neglect or exploitation of children or the elderly.

The Nevada Crime Statistics shows property crimes, violent crimes and domestic violence have all decreased from 2023 to 2024. 

In a presentation to state lawmakers in February, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department noted that property crimes had decreased nearly 13% since 2023. 

“When I look at some of these increases to the threshold for theft, I just think that we are putting more people into a situation which is going to really lead to higher recidivism rates,” said Democratic state Sen. Rochelle Nguyen.

In addition to not deterring crime, the legislation’s opponents said that move, along with other aspects of the bill, could drastically increase the prison population at a time the Nevada Department of Corrections is experiencing a budget shortfall. 

There is a $42 million fiscal note attached to the bill.

“We heard already at a (legislative) committee meeting of almost $60 million in overtime being paid out,” Haseebullah said, on top of lacking money to make needed repairs including to air conditioning systems. 

SB 457 was introduced April 7, roughly halfway through the session. 

Lawmakers questioned how a bill calling for substantial changes to the legal process has had so little input from anyone outside of the governor’s team, law enforcement and district attorneys. 

“It’s a lot to ask any organization to anticipate that the governor’s office is going to bring a bill of this magnitude,” Nguyen said. “I can’t believe that this wasn’t worked on during the last 18 months, since the last legislative session, since some of the provisions look very similar to what was presented in the last governor’s public safety bill.”

Tim Robb, the Homeland Security Adviser for the governor’s office, told lawmakers that “we worked with anybody that reached out to us” and said they made “every effort to work with as many” people who were available. 

That apparently didn’t include public defenders from Clark or Washoe County, the ACLU of Nevada, or any other groups involved in criminal legal reforms.

“We weren’t involved in this at all,” Angela Knott with the Washoe County Public Defenders Office. “We never received any other communication until yesterday, when we got the apology for not being included in this process. There has never been any genuine effort by the DA’s office or the governor’s office to hear from the people who are most directly affected by this bill.”

Republican state Sen. Ira Hansen, who said he supports several of the bill’s provisions, agreed that “people that sponsored the bill may have dropped the ball” and the discussion around the bill “should have been going on prior to the hearing in front of us with four or five days left.” The Legislature is scheduled to adjourn Monday.

Still fighting those 2019 reforms

On the campaign trail in 2022, Lombardo vowed to undo legislation passed in 2019 that brought modest reforms to the criminal legal process. 

“A lot of our laws in Nevada were changed” by that, Washoe County District Attorney Chris Hicks told lawmakers Wednesday. “I think there’s a lot of arguments in support and a lot of arguments that can be made negatively about that bill.”

He added the governor’s bill this session, “seeks to strike the balance.”

Clark and Washoe County public defenders, the ACLU of Nevada and the Nevada Fines and Fees Justice Center prepared a counter presentation not only to raise concerns about various aspects of the legislation but to remind lawmakers why they passed reforms in the first place. 

The 2019 legislation came together after years of data collection that began under Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval in 2018, said John Piro with the Clark County Public Defenders Office.

“It wasn’t just public defenders coming up with ideas,” Piro said. “The Department of Justice came here to Nevada to study ways to reduce crime, reduce recidivism, and improve outcomes while saving money.”

At the time legislation was being drafted in early 2019, “we were 15th highest in incarceration,” Piro said, adding that data showed “66% of first-time non-violent offenders entering into the prison system had no prior felonies.” 

The state’s legal process not only threatened to explode the prison population and significantly increase costs — a data analysis projected the current trajectory would increase the prison system’s budget by an additional 9 percent by 2028, costing an estimated $770 million – it also didn’t address root causes of why people enter prison or focus efforts on reducing recidivism. 

The legislation lawmakers ultimately passed in 2019, which lowered penalties for non-violent theft and drug crimes while increasing access to diversion programs and specialty court programs, had several iterations as it incorporated concessions based on input from district attorneys and police. 

Similar input from public defenders, the ACLU and other groups weren’t considered in the legislation Lombardo is proposing now, Piro said Wednesday. 

There are some provisions in Lombardo’s bill, such as those addressing DUI offenses, that those against the bill could support, he added. 

“These are things that we could have told them had they come and talked to us before,” Piro said. “We’ve been here the whole time.”

Lawmakers took no action on the bill.