Makes appropriations to the State Department of Agriculture for the purchase of software and the replacement of equipment. (BDR S-1210)
Summary
SB492 is an appropriations bill that provides one-time General Fund funding to the Nevada State Department of Agriculture for technology and equipment needs. It allocates $38,761 to the Veterinary Medical Services budget account for software, $51,485 to the Veterinary Medical Services budget account for equipment replacement, and $212,488 to the Administrative Services budget account for equipment replacement.
The bill does not create a new regulatory program or change substantive agricultural policy. Instead, it authorizes spending for internal operational support, likely to maintain or improve the department’s administrative and veterinary service functions. The appropriations are time-limited, with any unspent balances required to be committed by June 30, 2027, and reverted to the State General Fund by September 17, 2027. The act becomes effective July 1, 2025.
Impact
SB492 amends state spending law by directing $302,734 from the State General Fund to the Nevada State Department of Agriculture for software and equipment purchases. It affects the department’s Veterinary Medical Services and Administrative Services budget accounts and imposes standard reversion deadlines for unused funds. The bill primarily impacts the department’s operational capacity and state budget administration rather than private parties or regulated industries.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad bipartisan support and little controversy. The bill passed the Senate 21-0 and the Assembly 41-0, indicating unanimous approval in both chambers. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, but the recorded votes point to a generally favorable view of the measure as a routine funding bill.
Contention
There is no documented substantive opposition in the provided materials. Because SB492 is a narrow appropriations measure for software and equipment replacement, any discussion would likely center on budget priorities, the necessity of the purchases, and standard fiscal controls such as the reversion date. The unanimous votes suggest that, if any concerns were raised, they did not rise to the level of recorded dissent.