I'm looking forward to the new year — but I’m not talking about 2026. I'm looking forward to 2027. Will that be the year the Nevada Legislature amends the state Constitution to allow for annual legislative sessions? It should be.

Special sessions are anything but special anymore. What we witnessed in November was more the norm than the exception. Since 1867, the Legislature has held 36 special sessions, including the recently completed session.

Special sessions are often chaotic, inefficient and opaque, an opinion held by the public and legislators themselves. Surprise items are introduced, deadlines constantly shift and the public has fewer opportunities for input amid the mad rush.

That might be an ideal setting for legislators to push through pet bills, but it’s bad for sensible, transparent policymaking.

The last-minute introduction of the bill to limit corporate homebuying, SB10, is just the latest example of legislation being introduced and discussed out of public view. Special sessions are usually focused on what is addressed in the proclamation, making the introduction of SB10 a rarity. 

However, even during regular sessions, “behind the bar” committee meetings and votes — especially during the last two weeks of session — are the norm. The public is not allowed on the floor of either legislative chamber. This is made possible because of the Legislature’s exemption from open meeting laws. Annual sessions could make this practice unnecessary. 

(Given the anger at this lack of transparency, perhaps the 2027 session could also look at eliminating this exemption, making statute comply with the state Constitution.)

Why annual sessions? You could argue that a better solution is to move toward a costly and bureaucratic professional legislature that gets better compensation, but simply switching to annual sessions is much more feasible — and it wouldn’t compromise our state’s core lawmaking structure as a citizen body run by people who live, work and raise families alongside their constituents. With annual sessions, lawmakers would be able to better plan for the interim period knowing they would not have to unexpectedly adjust work and personal schedules amid a fast-flying special session.

We've been at this crossroads before. The history of lawmaking in Nevada embodies a tension between our decidedly Western suspicion of big government and a common-sense pragmatism that realizes that a dynamic, fast-growing state requires a responsive government. 

In other words, we want annual sessions and yet we don't want annual sessions. In 1958, voters approved a constitutional amendment to have the Legislature meet every year. In 1960, however, voters reversed that decision and returned to biannual sessions. (The Legislature did meet in 1960, making it the only year when an annual session was held.)

But that wasn't the end of it. Since 1960, there have been 33 attempts to amend the Nevada Constitution to switch to annual legislative sessions. Of those attempts, 27 died in committee, five died on the floor and one was rejected by the voters after being passed twice by the Legislature in 1967 and 1969.

It's too bad because it would have saved us from a long list of special sessions that were productive but unpredictable. The average length of a special session is about eight days. There have been 10 sessions that lasted two weeks or more (with the longest being 27 days); five that lasted seven to 14 days; and 10 that lasted one day. The remainder lasted between two and six days. Eighteen of the sessions were called to address a myriad of issues that were not completely addressed during a regular session.

The length of regular sessions of the Legislature has been a topic since the state’s founding. Voters removed any length limit in 1958. This resulted in sessions frequently lasting more than 160 days. The current 120-day limit was not added to the state Constitution until 1998. However, even with longer sessions, legislators were only paid for 60 days. These seemingly arbitrary limits only put more pressure on lawmakers, leading to burnout and brain drain.

It doesn’t have to be this complicated. Nevada is a different state from when it was founded. Our population is larger and more diverse; the issues we face are more urgent and complex. By meeting annually, we can honor our independent streak and remain a citizen legislature while also evolving to meet the needs of today’s Nevada. 

Doug Goodman is founder and executive director of Nevadans for Election Reform.