Nevada law (NRS 233B.100) gives owners the right to petition state agencies for rulemaking—the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any regulation. For HOA owners, the responsible agencies are the Real Estate Division (NRED) and the Commission on Common-Interest Communities, a seven-member body appointed by the Governor. One of the Commission’s primary duties is approving regulations affecting HOAs, yet it has not engaged in any rulemaking since 2022.
Below you will find a list of recent filings submitted. It is also unclear if NRED has ever acted on an owner submitted petition. To test the process and address long-standing ambiguities, NVHOAReform members have submitted multiple petitions.”
Petitions recommended and submitted
Director eligibility and conflicts of interest – Clarification of NRS 116.31034 and NRS 116.31084 to ensure directors with material conflicts are not permitted to serve or vote on matters where loyalty is divided.
Period of declarant control – Rulemaking under NRS 116.31032 to provide a consistent and enforceable standard for when developer control of an association ends.
Competitive bidding and procurement fairness – Guidance under NRS 116.31086 to ensure that associations comply with meaningful bidding requirements and avoid the appearance of favoritism or self-dealing.
Division confidentiality and post-investigation transparency – Reform of Division practices so that homeowners are not left in the dark after complaints are closed, while still protecting sensitive information during investigations.
Definition of “meeting” and “workshop” – Clarifying when board gatherings count as “meetings” under NRS 116.31083 and how “workshops” must comply with open meeting laws.
Virtual-only meetings – Rulemaking to ensure that owners retain meaningful access and participation rights when boards attempt to move exclusively to virtual formats.
Email approvals – Establishing bright-line rules for when board actions by email violate open-meeting requirements.
Candidate access to owner email addresses – Clarification of NRS 116.31034(17), which currently leaves candidate access to owner email addresses ambiguous and inconsistently enforced across communities.
Address board meeting agenda requirements. End agenda vagueness, boilerplate disclaimers, etc. so owners know what is to be discussed or acted on.
Enforcement Standards Under NAC 116.405- Fiduciary duty. Address the current ambiguity, how to apply the factors listed in the regulation, relationship the Business Judgment Rule (BJR), Nevada Supreme Court's Chur ruling, and more.
The full petitions, with appendices and explanatory memos where appropriate, can be found here. Draft petitions still under consideration are also listed.
Why These Petitions Matter
These proposals are offered to strengthen Nevada’s HOA regulatory framework, but their core purpose is simple: protecting the rights of homeowners. Too often, Nevada owners face uncertainty, inconsistent enforcement, or even outright abuse when they try to exercise their rights within their communities. These petitions are designed to restore balance and give owners clear, enforceable protections.
Resolve statutory ambiguities that leave boards, managers, and regulators guessing.
Close loopholes that allow selective enforcement and governance abuses.
Enhance transparency and owner protections, especially during elections and procurement.
Promote long-term governance stability by reducing litigation risk and increasing owner confidence in association leadership.
Call to Action
Homeowners should watch closely, demand workshops and hearings, and insist the Commission fulfill its duty to act.
