►
From YouTube: 3/3/2021 - Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
C
D
A
A
Here,
thank
you.
Madam
secretary.
Please
indicate
all
committee
members
are
present.
Welcome
everyone
tuning
in
over
the
internet.
I
would
like
to
get
started
with
just
our
normal
housekeeping
items.
Please
remember
all
exhibits,
written
testimony
and
amendments
must
be
submitted
by
noon
on
the
business
day
prior
to
the
committee
meeting.
A
A
Asm.State.Nv.Us
zoom
chat
is
reserved
for
committee
business.
Only
members,
please
remember
to
keep
your
camera
on
at
all
times.
This
will
ensure
that
we
have
a
quorum
unless
you
are
stepping
away
for
non-committee
related
business
members
and
presenters.
Please
remember
to
be
muted
at
all
times
and
simply
unmute
yourself
prior
to
speaking,
and
then
promptly
mute
yourself
when
you
are
done.
Thank
you,
everyone
and,
let's
begin
with
our
first
agenda
item.
A
The
measure
addresses
that
and
certifies
or
provides
that
certain
employees
with
the
right
to
use
sick
leave
to
assist
certain
family
members
with
medical
needs.
Remember
that
a
vote
in
favor
of
introducing
a
bill
draft
does
not
imply
a
commitment
to
support
the
measure
later
pursuant
to
assembly
standing
rule
57
sub
7..
A
E
D
D
F
D
D
D
A
Yes,
motion
carries.
Thank
you,
madam
secretary
okay
committee
members.
We
can
now
move
on
to
the
next
item
on
our
agenda,
which
is
bill
hearings.
Today
we
will
be
hearing
assembly,
bill,
152
and
senate
concurrent
resolution
number
one.
I
will
be
taking
them
out
of
order
and
I
will
start
with
opening
the
bill
hearing
on
scr1,
which
urges
employers
in
this
state
to
provide
personal
protective
equipment
to
employees
to
prevent
the
spread
of
kobe
bid
19..
I
believe
I
have
senator
harvey
here
with
us.
Welcome
to
the
committee
senator
hardy.
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
appreciate
your
indulgence.
I
am
grateful
for
the
opportunity
to
talk
to
the
assembly,
and
particularly
commerce
and
labor
committee,
so
thank
you
for
allowing
us
to
do
that.
I
had
the
opportunity
to
present
this
in
the
senate
and
when
the
testimony
was
done,
the
entire
committee
requested
to
be
co-sponsors
and
that's
why
we
have
the
co-sponsors
all
included
there.
This
was
passed
by
voice
vote
because
it's
a
senate
concurrent
resolution
number
one,
as
it
were
unanimously
off
the
floor
of
the
senate.
G
So
it
comes
to
you
in
that
way.
I
appreciate
vice
chair
carlton
and
all
of
the
members
of
the
committee
appreciate
being
able
to
talk
to
you.
The
resolution
itself
addresses
the
need
for
businesses
who
have
want
to
protect
their
most
valuable
asset,
that
is
their
employees,
and
even
though
there
are
debates
going
on
who's
supposed
to
wear
a
mask,
for
instance,
who's
supposed
to
do
when
are
they
supposed
to
wear
a
mask?
Do
they
really
have
to
the
reality?
Is
we
still
have
covid19?
G
It
still
is
infectious.
It
still
has
the
ability
to
make
people
very
sick,
in
fact
make
people
die,
and
so
this
bill
will
urge
and
and
hopefully
inspire
people
to
continue
to
be
vigilant
and
to
protect
their
employees,
and
so
the
the
masks
have
become
almost
the
new
socks
or
the
ties,
and
you
see
people
doing
different
kinds
of
statements
with
them.
G
You
go
to
the
gift
shop
downstairs
and
you
see
the
battleborn
mask.
You
see
the
one
that
I
like
the
best
with
the
state
seal
and
it
fits
me
better
than
anything
else,
and
I've
got
a
lanyard
now.
So
it's
never
far
from
me
and
I
can
put
it
on
and
and
take
it
off
and
not
lose
it.
So
when
you
get
as
old
as
I
am
it's
good
to
have
something
tied
to
you.
G
The
face
shields
are
interesting
because
they're,
technically
speaking
their
personal
protective
equipment,
but
you
can
get
them
in
all
shapes
and
sizes.
This
one
I
got
in
truckee
during
the
last
special
session
and
they
they
all
make
a
statement.
My
son-in-law
makes
one
that
is
cute
and
I
got
a
son
that's
made
over
a
thousand
that
he
gives
out.
G
We
have
become
a
culture
of
face,
masks
and
personal
protective
equipment,
obviously
we're
familiar
with
the
hand
washing
stations
at
every
store
that
we
go
into
now,
and
the
construction
industry
has
started
off
with
the
n95s,
and
now
it's
become
commonplace
to
see
a
good
n95
mask
wherever
you
go.
G
I
will
point
out
also
the
interesting
fact
that
people
talk
about
knotting
their
face
mask
and
that
will
allow
them
to
have
a
tighter
fit
on
the
face
mask.
So
those
are
all
things
that
we
see
and
employers
will
have
an
opportunity
to
protect
their
employees.
Now.
Texas,
just
recently
said
you
don't
really
need
to
wear
face
masks,
and
so
what
happened?
When
you
take
off
a
mandate
as
it
were,
their
people
become
more
comfortable
and
they
say
well,
I
don't
need
to
but
bottom
line
is
you
still
have
to
avoid
getting
sick?
G
You
still
have
to
avoid
getting
other
people
sick,
so
in
texas,
even
though
they
took
off
the
protocols,
the
mandated
protocols,
general
motors
toyota,
target
and
macy's
all
said.
We
want
to
continue
to
protect
our
employees,
so
this
senate
concurrent
resolution
one
is
designed
to
continue
and
to
urge
our
employers
to
protect
our
employees.
G
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
have,
and
I
know
we
have
osha
people.
Victoria
carrion,
I
know
is
here
and
don't
know
if
you
would
like
to
have
her
speak,
but
shannon
is
here
with
us
from
the
osha
or
the
the
state.
Labor
commission,
shannon
chambers
is
here
if
you
would
like
to
hear
from
her.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
Thank
you
senator
hardy,
and
I
did
see
that
they
have
registered.
Were
they
part
of
the
presentation?
Are
they
just
here
to
answer
any
questions
that
committee
members
may
have.
G
I
think
shannon
was
registered
and
but
they
are
able
to
answer
any
questions
and
they
they
serve
at
your
pleasure.
As
do
I.
A
Okay,
thank
you
and
I
think
we
can.
We
can
go
to
the
committee
committee
members.
Do
you
have
any
questions
for
our
presenter
or
commissioner
chambers,
and
we
also
have
the
division
of
industrial
relations
on
the
line
to
answer
questions
as
well.
A
D
Hi
good
afternoon,
this
is
shannon
chambers,
nevada
labor,
commissioner,
for
the
record,
madam
chair,
madam
vice
chair
members
of
the
assembly,
commerce
and
labor
committee,
shannon
chambers,
testifying
in
support
of
senate
concurrent
resolution
number
one.
We
will
make
every
effort
to
communicate
this
to
nevada
employers
and
thank
senator
hardy
for
bringing
it
to
the
committee.
A
A
H
1910.132A,
some
of
the
face
coverings
that
senator
hardy
was
showing
you
don't
technically
qualify
as
personal
protective
equipment.
However,
as
face
coverings,
our
osha
guidance
that
we
have
distributed
as
part
of
the
governor's
directives
does
require
employers
to
provide
face
coverings.
So
our
safety,
consultation
and
training
section
does
provide
information
out
to
employers
about
safety
requirements,
and
we
are
happy
to
complement
the
efforts
of
this
bill
by
providing
information
over
our
email
list.
We
have
2500
members
of
our
scats
email
list
that
goes
out
to
employers
and
employees
who
are
interested
in
safety.
H
We
also
have
access
to
the
silver
flume
database,
which
has
over
32
000
businesses
on
it.
We
also
have
a
monthly
class
that
we
do
on
personal
protective
equipment.
That
class
is
totally
free,
it
goes
for
three
hours
and
we're
happy
to
advertise
all
of
those
things
and
all
the
requirements
as
a
compliment
to
this
bill.
Thank
you.
A
C
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
just
appreciate
the
process
that
we
go
through
and
I
recognize
that
if
there's
any
doubt
about
protecting
your
employee
or
how
it
is
mandated
or
not
mandated,
I
always
want
the
employer
to
protect
the
employee,
and
I
think
that's
the
critical
part
of
this
that
we
just
need
to
not
fail
to
encourage
protection
for
our
employees.
A
Thank
you
senator
hardin.
Thank
you
for
joining
us.
I
will
now
close
the
hearing
on
scr1.
Our
next
bill
is
ab152.
I
will
open
the
bill
hearing
on
assembly
bill
152,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
the
collection
of
certain
debts.
I
believe
we
have
assembly
member
krasner
here
with
us,
welcome
to
the
committee
assembly
member
krasner
and
I
believe
you
have
a
presenter
jamie
cogburn
with
you
as
well.
Yes,.
I
I
Here
to
present
the
bill
is
attorney.
Jamie
cogburn.
I
do
want
to
say
on
the
record
that
I
have
received
phone
calls
from
stakeholders
and
I
am
willing
to
work
together
with
all
stakeholders
after
the
presentation
of
the
bill,
to
make
this
the
best
legislation
possible.
So
here
to
present
the
bill
is
attorney
jamie
cogburg.
Thank
you.
J
J
Thank
you,
the
the
bill.
The
goal
of
the
bill
is
to
level
the
playing
field
for
consumers,
not
only
with
debt
collection
companies,
but
also
with
original
creditors.
So
under
federal
law
and
certain
state
law,
debt
collection
companies
must
follow
certain
guidelines
when
they're
collecting
debts.
This
would
expand
that
law
and
make
where
original
creditors
have
to
follow
the
same
guidelines.
For
example,
you
can't
call
somebody's
employer
and
harass
them
to
collect
a
debt,
whether
you're,
a
debt
collector
or
the
original
creditor.
J
Currently
we're
helping
a
client
pro
bono
that
he
was
laid
off
during
covid.
He
has
now
got
a
job
back
and
he's
laid
on
some
bills
throughout
that
period
and
he's
getting
called
at
his
new
employer
and
they're,
calling
him
daily
and
saying
hey.
We
need
to
speak
to
you
about
this
dad.
We
need
to
speak
to
you
about
this
debt
and
obviously
that's
causing
issues
with
his
employer
and
he
doesn't
want
to
lose
his
job
since
he
just
got
a
new
job
after
the
coven
or
during
this
period.
J
The
other
thing
it
will
do
is
it
will
require
debt
buyers
to
verify
information.
So
the
best
example
I
can
give
you
a
personal
one.
I
have
a
business
line
of
credit
that
I
was
renewing
a
couple
of
years
ago
and
they
run
your
credit
to
make
sure
that
everything's
still
fine
and
they
said
hey
this
thing's.
Coming
up
on
your
credit
that
says,
you
owe
a
pest
control
company
120,
I
didn't
know
what
they
were
talking
about.
J
I
finally
got
a
hold
of
the
debt
collection
company
after
multiple
calls
and
letters,
and
they
said:
oh,
we
have
the
wrong
person.
So
what
the
bill
will
do
is
require
debt
buyers
to
verify
the
information
before
they
start
calling
people
sending
letters
and
definitely
before
they
start
suing
or
reporting
on
their
credit.
J
J
The
other
thing
is:
it
requires
consumers,
if
you're
gonna,
if
you're
applying
for
credit
and
something
material
changes
such
as
your
employment
or
your
address,
then
you
need
to
update
that
creditor
during
that
application
process,
and
with
that
I
would
leave
it
open
to
any
questions
or
concerns.
Anyone
has.
A
Okay,
there
we
go
sorry,
I
was
still
muted.
Thank
you,
mr
cockburn
and
assembly
member
krasner.
I
am
going
to
open
it
up
to
questions
from
the
committee
committee
members.
I'm
going
to
start
with
assembly
member
considine.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
assemblywoman
krasner,
for
bringing
this
bill.
I
see
that
there
are
some
suggested
amendments,
but
my
question
right
now
is
the
the
changes
to
this
to
this
bill.
Will
this
help
protect
seniors,
who
are
often
victims
of
original
creditors,
debt
collect
debt
collectors,
fraudulent
callers
who
are
continuously
harassed
for
debts?
They
may
not
even
owe.
I
J
J
So
if
their
only
income
is
social
security
and
other
things
like
that,
they're
exempt
from
creditors,
meaning
a
creditor
can't
get
a
judgment
and
collect
on
them,
because,
basically,
those
are
essentially,
they
came
from
government
funds,
so
those
funds
are
exempt
and
they
can't
garnish
their
wages
or
not
wages,
but
their
bank
account
and
things
like
that.
The
one
thing
this
bill
does
not
do
is
stop
the
the
calls
that
we
all
get
that
we
don't
know
where
they
come
from.
J
I
know
the
ftc
is
looking
at
things,
but
I
get
a
call
nearly
every
day
to
sign
up
for
solar
and
I
already
have
solar,
so
I
don't
know
why
they
keep
calling
me
but-
and
I
know
have
no
idea
who's
calling
every
time
I
answer
the
phone.
They
hang
out,
but
if
I
don't
answer,
I
get
a
message,
but
it
does.
The
bill
does
protect
the
elderly,
people
that
are
vulnerable
and
it
also
clarifies
the
law
that
we
already
have
in
nevada.
J
It
basically
explicitly
states
all
the
things
that
are
not
allowed,
rather
than
just
referencing
the
federal
statute,
so
the
federal
statute
originally
came
out
in
1977
and
went
into
effect
in
1978,
so
we're
looking
at
43
years
ago.
J
This
bill
clarifies
all
the
different
techniques
and
things
that
have
happened
over
the
years
that
have
created
some
loopholes.
A
You're
welcome
assemblymember
considine
and
mr
cogburn
and
miss
krasner.
I
have
had
a
few
requests
from
the
committee,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
them.
Is
it
possible
because
I
know
there
was
the
bill
that
was
introduced
and
then
also
an
amendment
that
was
provided
making
changes?
Can
you
walk
us
through
the
amendment.
J
Yes
sure,
how
do
you
I
can
the
and
I'll
I'll
just
back
up
one
one
bit.
The
original
bill
went
into
chapter
649,
which
governs
only
debt
collection,
companies
and.
J
The
the
proposal
is
to
create
a
whole
new
chapter,
because
it's
very
hard
to
modify
that
chapter.
That
only
applies
to
debt
collection
companies,
because
most
of
that
chapter
other
than
two
provisions
of
it
are
for
licensing
of
debt
collection
companies,
and
it
would
make
it
would
make
it
very
difficult.
J
It
was
unclear
and
it
would
make
it
very
onerous
for
original
creditors
such
as
banks
or
credit
card
companies,
and
things
like
that
to
have
to
comply
with
a
statute.
That's
really
meant
for
debt
collection
companies,
so
the
amendment
was
to
create
its
own
chapter,
make
it
very
crystal
clear
what
is
allowed?
What
is
not
debt
collection
companies
will
still
have
their
licensing
requirements,
as
required
under
nrs
649
and
banking
institutions,
and
other
financial
institutions
would
still
have
their
same
requirements
as
they
always
have.
It
would
just
create
a
new
chapter
that
says:
hey.
J
J
Yes
sure
how
to
get
that
they're
kind
of
in
interchangeable
debt,
a
debt
collector.
The
new
definition
of
the
debt
collector
in
in
this
proposed
amendment
would
be
anybody.
That's
collecting
the
debt,
that's
in
default,
so
any
if
you're,
late
on
a
credit
card
statement,
whether
you're,
the
original
creditor
or
a
collection
company
and
then
but
the
in
practice.
A
debt
collector
is
a
company
that
purely
all
they
do
is
collect
debts.
So
if
I
have
a
an
account
with
t-mobile,
I
shut
down
my
phone,
I
don't
pay
my
bill.
J
There
are
also
what's
called
debt
buyers
that
are
usually
larger
companies
that
buy
what
they
call
tranches
of
debt,
millions
and
millions
of
dollars
of
bad
debt,
and
they
try
to
go
collect
that
so
they
buy
it
for
pennies
on
the
dollar
and
try
to
collect
whether
it's
10
cents,
50
cents,
whatever
it
may
be
on
that
and
that's
their
business
model,
and
that's
where
the
verification
process
that
I
spoke
about
earlier
comes
into
play
that
debt
collectors
would
now
have
to
verify
when
they
are
assigned
a
collection
hey.
J
This
is
the
right
person
we're
calling.
This
is
the
right
person
we're
suing
and
things
like
that
before
they
report
it
on
their
credit
or
sue.
A
J
Is
correct,
and
and
under
this
statute
it
would
be
and
then
yeah
the
original
creditor
which
which
grants
credit.
So
I
apply
with
bank
of
america.
They
give
me
a
loan
they're,
the
original
creditor,
but
if
my
loan
went
into
default
they
could
be
considered
a
debt
collector
under
this
statute.
If
they're
trying
to
collect
that
debt
when
it's
in
default.
K
Thank
you
chair,
and
by
following,
along
with
the
same
lines
of
of
the
chair,
I
appreciated
that
that
clarification.
K
So
if
I
understand
you
correctly,
you
know
we
it
made
the
most
sense,
because
in
this
case
a
debt
collector
could
be
a
bank
or
as
opposed
to
a
collection
agency,
and
so
we
needed
to
create
its
own
separate
chapter
to
apply
these
regulations
around
conduct.
You
know
to
make
sure
that
they
were
approaching
the
individual.
Like
the
example,
you
said,
verifying
information
before
contacting
them
and
not
harassing
them
or
recording
or
any
of
those
activities
that
would
be
otherwise
prohibited
for
collection
agencies.
K
So
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understood
you
correctly.
What
impact
does
this
have?
To
put
it
under
the
you
know,
the
deceptive
trade
practices
versus
putting
it
under,
let's
say
a
banking
chapter
or
some
other
original
debtor
chapter.
J
J
The
problem
with
putting
it
under
the
debt,
collection
or
collection
agency
statute
is
all
the
all
the
licensing
regulations
which
the
majority
of
that
statute
covers.
There's
essentially
two
provisions
under
that
statute
that
cover
what
you
can
and
cannot
do,
and
they
really
just
reference
the
federal
law
for
debt
collectors,
which
is
the
federal
debt
collection
practice
act.
J
J
The
thought
for
the
deceptive
trade
practice
is
under
chapter
598
and
I
do
not
have
an
authority,
so
I
apologize
the
first
one
is
the
deceptive
trait,
but
then
there's
598
a
b
c
and
d,
and
I
want
to
say
c
and
d
are
ones
that
unfair
trade,
one
is
a
a
consumer
reporting
statute,
and
so
they
kind
of
fall
in
that
category
of
consumer
protection
statutes,
and
that
was
my
only
rationale
for
putting
it.
There.
K
Go
ahead,
thank
you
and
I
know
looking
at
the
amendments
that
you
provided
and
I
printed
out
a
copy
of
the
fair
debt
collection
practices
act,
and
so
I
know
in
nrs
649.370
for
collection
agencies.
It
just
refers
to
the
fair
debt
collection
practices
act,
and
I
presume
that
that
that
makes
it
easy
it's
just
because
if,
for
some
reason
that
gets
updated,
then
we
automatically
presume
that
gets
updated.
We
don't
have
to
keep
going
back
to
nrs
statute.
K
Are
you
hoping
to
put
all
of
this
language,
which
is
quite
lengthy
into
a
new
chapter,
or
will
you
also
just
refer
under
the
deceptive
trade
practices,
the
definitions
around
a
debt
collector
and
then
just
reference
that
it
will?
J
Yes,
the
answer
is
both,
so
there
is
a
provision
that-
and
I
apologize-
I
did
not
have
it
directly
in
front
of
me,
that
does
say:
hey
we're,
referencing,
the
federal
debt,
federal,
fair
debt
collection
practice
act,
but
the
fair,
the
fair
debt
collection
practice
act
was
drafted
back
in
1977.
J
J
I
took
a
lot
of
the
provisions
from
the
fair
debt
collection
practice
act
and
then
ultimately
took
some
provisions
from
other
states
that
have
have
passed
a
similar
law
that
just
clear
and
make
it
a
little
bit
clearer
to
be
updated
with
technology
and
other
things
where,
for
example,
the
fair
debt
collection
practice
act,
because
it's
a
federal
statute
in
if
you're
in
the
second
circuit
court,
they
may
say
hey.
We
interpret
it
this
way
because
stuff
is
unclear
if
you're
in
the
ninth
circuit.
J
We
may
interpret
this
way,
so
this
would
clarify
that
make
it
clear.
This
is
what
the
the
rules
are
for
nevada,
and
these
are
the
protections
allowed
in
nevada.
J
J
Much
of
those
provisions
are
from
case
law
that
has
come
out
of
the
fair
debt
collection
practice
act
and
from
other
states
that
have
passed
similar
laws.
D
He
just
answered
my
question:
it
was
concerning
verifying
the
person
if
it
was
who
that
person
may
be.
There
may
be
five
b
durans
in
there,
so
they
kind
of
have
to
go
after
the
the
right
one.
But
can
I
have
a
follow-up
question,
though,
with
that,
so
if
they
have
the
wrong
person,
how
do
they?
How
does
that
person
clear
her
name
or
get
off
that
election
or
their
credit?
It
ruins
their
credit
score?
How
would
they?
How
would
that
happen?
How
would
that
be
best
with
this.
J
They
would
go
through
the
process
of
they
would
dispute
the
debt
with
the
collection
company
and
they
can
dispute
the
debt
with
the
credit
bureaus
that
it's
reporting
on,
so
if
they
have
proof
that
it's
not
theirs,
the
example
I
gave
earlier
was:
I
had
a
collection
from
a
pest
control
company
that
I
I
haven't
used.
J
I
sent
them
proof.
Little
did.
I
know
there
was
another
jamie
cogburn
out
there
that
they
were
reporting
this
on,
but
I
guess
they
were
and
they
removed
it.
Sometimes
that
can
be
harder
than
other
times.
There's
no
doubt
about
that,
but
the
the
hope
is
of
the
bill.
Is
that
up
front
the
original
creditor
if
they
assign
it
to
a
debt
collection
company,
has
to
provide
the
verification,
paperwork
and
things
like
that.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
one
of
the
terms
that's
actually
included
in
the
amendment
it's
under
the
definition
of
consumer
debt
and
consumer
credit,
a
consumer
credit
transaction.
D
J
The
the
definition
as
it
stand
it,
that
is
a
good
question
and
it
probably
needs
some
clarification.
A
consumer
credit
transaction
would
be
for
anything
that
is
consumer
related,
including
mortgage
debt.
J
I
I
honestly
did
not
think
about
landlord
tenant
in
that
aspect,
but
the
way
the
bill
is
written,
I
think
it
would
so
it
could
be
defined,
meaning
obviously,
in
a
landlord-tenant
situation,
many
times
there's
an
eviction
process,
but
if
they
were
to
try
to
collect
the
remaining
debt
outside
of
the
eviction,
they
would
still
have
to
abide
by
these
laws,
but
it's
meant
to
cover
any
consumer
transaction,
so
it
would
not
cover.
J
D
And
thank
thank
you,
mr
cogburn.
When
I
saw
a
mortgage,
it
peaked.
My
curiosity
so,
and
we've
all
heard
stories
of
what's
going
on,
so
I'm
just
curious
if
this
would
apply.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
A
Section
34,
where
it's
referencing,
the
statue
of
limitations,
expiring.
What
is
the
statue
of
limitations?
How
long
is
that
period.
J
Chair
heidegger,
it
is
one
year
from
the
date
of
the
violation,
so
that
mirrors
the
federal
law.
Other
states
have
expanded
that
to
three
years,
but
as
it
stands
under
federal
law,
it's
one
year
from
the
violation.
K
Thank
you
for
the
the
final
follow-up.
I
just
think.
Perhaps
it
would
be
helpful
in
distinguishing
which
parts
of
the
amendment
come
from
the
fair
debt
collection
practices
act
and
which
ones
come
from
court
cases
and
which
ones
come
from
other
states.
Could
you
perhaps
put
together
put
that
into
a
table
or
a
chart
for
us
so
that
we
can
distinguish?
K
What
are
we
adding
from
federal
law
versus?
What
are
we
adding
from
other?
You
know,
model
language
and,
and
then
the
last
piece
that
I
didn't
really
get
to
is
what
are
we
excluding?
You
mentioned
licensing
as
one
of
the
reasons
why
we're
putting
this
over
in
deceptive
trade
practices
versus
under
the
debt
debt
collection
chapter.
K
Are
there
anything?
Is
there
anything
else
that
we're
excluding
so
like
the
licensing
requirements
and
other
regulations
that
we
don't
want
to
apply
to
this
category?
And
you
don't
have
to
answer
that
here.
I
just
think
perhaps
some
follow-up
that
all
of
us
could
benefit
from
that
analysis-
would
help
us
break
down
this.
This
lengthy
amendment.
A
Thank
you
thank
you
and
mr
cogberg.
If
you
put
that
together,
if
you
could,
please
just
provide
it
to
our
committee
manager
so
that
she
can
make
sure
that
everyone
on
the
committee
gets
it.
A
C
C
E
E
B-E-T-E-R-A-L-D-O-U-S,
thank
you,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
this
opportunity.
I'm
a
staff
attorney
at
legal
aid
center
of
southern
nevada
and
I
specialize
in
bankruptcy
and
debt
collection.
I
support
ab152,
both
as
originally
introduced
and
with
the
proposed
amendments,
and
I
am
grateful
for
the
opportunity
to
testify
on
this
legislation.
E
E
Ab152
does
not
outlaw
debt
collection.
It
merely
imposes
uniform
guidelines
on
debt
collectors
to
ensure
they
maintain
a
minimum
level
of
respect
for
the
debtor
they're
trying
to
collect
from
it.
Also
standardizes
the
requirement
that
all
debt
collectors
be
accountable
for
the
accuracy
of
the
information
they
use.
E
The
events
of
the
past
year
thrust
thousands
of
nevadans
into
financial
uncertainty
through
no
fault
of
their
own,
with
businesses
closed
or
restricted
and
unemployment.
Surging
incomes
have
dropped
precipitously,
despite
the
best
efforts
of
dieter
unemployment,
assistance
came
too
late
or
not
at
all.
For
many
nevadans
and
basic
necessities
like
food
and
housing
have
been
unaffordable
for
many
were
previously
financially
secure.
E
It
will
take
years
for
the
after
effects
of
the
covid19
pandemic
to
shake
out
and
a
complete
recovery
will
take
even
longer.
The
incredible
stress
so
many
nevadans
have
been
living
with
will
continue
as
they
try
to
rebuild
their
financial
lives
and
the
stress
of
abusive
debt
collection
will
slow
that
recovery
and
compound
the
emotional
toll.
No
one
chose
to
lose
their
job
or
reduce
their
income
due
to
covid
and
its
related
shutdowns,
and
no
one
should
suffer
abuse
at
the
hands
of
debt
collectors
because
their
finances
were
destroyed
by
forces
outside
their
control.
E
The
copa
19
pandemic
isn't
the
only
source
of
involuntary
crippling
debt.
The
vast
majority
of
medical
debts
are
not
incurred
by
choice
when
a
client
comes
to
me
because
they
can't
afford
their
medical
debts,
they
haven't
been
irresponsible.
They've
had
bad
luck,
their
treatments
frequently
come
at
astronomical
costs
with
no
regard
for
their
ability
to
repay
the
debt.
A
C
C
A
C
C
E
Good
afternoon
chairs
and
member
for
the
record,
my
name
is
rob
wilson,
r-o-b
w-I-l-s-o-n
for
the
nevada
credit
union
league
just
wanted
brucey
thank
the
author
for
willingness
to
meet
with
all
stakeholders
and
sponsors
of
the
nevada
credit
union
league
slightly
concerned.
There
may
be
some
unintended
consequences
with
the
proposed
language
how
it
may
impact
our
current
federal
and
state
statutes
regulations
that
our
credit
unions
must
follow.
E
We
very
much
look
forward
to
reviewing
the
language
with
our
members
and
sharing
that
feedback
with
the
author
and
the
committee.
Just
by
way
of
mentioning
nevada
credit
unions
have
gone
out
of
their
way
to
help
their
members
through
this
pandemic,
by
offering
forbearances
on
mortgages
working
with
members
on
credit
card
and
auto
loans,
and
we
really
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
testify
on
this
bill
today.
Thank
you.
A
C
F
F
I'm
speaking
today,
in
the
capacity
of
president
of
the
nevada
collectors,
association,
nevada,
cultures,
association
is
comprised
of
about
30
licensed
collection
agencies
all
located
within
the
state
of
nevada.
We
are
not
debt
buyers.
We
are
completely
different
than
a
debt
buyer,
but
rather
professionally
licensed
brick-and-mortar
agencies
who
employ
nevadans,
who
are
consumers,
who
are
voters
and
work
on
behalf
of
nevada
businesses.
F
F
F
I
would
like
to
also
express
we
too
were
personally
hit
by
covid.
We
were
completely
shut
down
march
17th
and
told
not
to
collect
by
our
governor,
which
hurt
all
of
our
employees.
We
laid
off
47
employees
who
all
have
debt
and
have
to
pay
their
bills
and
went
on
unemployment,
so
it
does
directly
affect
us
as
well.
F
B
A
Thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you
for
calling
in
for
being
a
part
of
the
process,
and
I'd
just
like
to
remind
everyone
on
the
line
that
neutral
means
you're
not
taking
a
position
on
the
the
bill.
You're,
not
neither
opposing
it
or
supporting
it
as
well.
Thank
you
for
calling
in,
though
mr
myers
and
we
appreciate
you
being
a
part
of
the
process,
and
if
you
do
have
written
remarks,
please
feel
free
to
share
them
with
our
committee
manager.
C
M
Begin
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
this
is
andrew
mckay,
I'm
the
executive
director
of
the
nevada
franchise,
auto
dealers
association.
Briefly,
the
reason
why
we
are
speaking
to
you
in
a
neutral
position
with
respect
to
ab152.
M
As
drafted,
we
were
perfectly
fine
with,
and
then
it
was
brought
to
my
attention
and
in
full
transparency
haven't
had
the
the
complete
time
to
digest
all
of
the
language
in
the
proposed
amendment.
But
it
is
our
understanding
that
there
could
be
some
consequences
where
we
may
be
caught
up
in
that
I
don't
know
if
that's
the
case
or
not,
but
I
would
be
remiss
assemblywoman.
M
C
L
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
connor
kane
c-o-n-n-o-r-c-a-I-n
and
I'm
testifying
in
neutral
today
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
bankers
association.
I'll.
Try
try
not
to
be
repetitive,
but
but
I
do
want
to
echo
robert
with
the
credit
unions
and
just
say
that
during
the
pandemic,
I
think
the
banks
are
really
proud
of
the
work
they've
done
to
assist
their
customers
and
communities.
L
They've
also
been
waiving
fees
and
penalties.
Deferring
loan
payments
offering
mortgage
forbearances
participating
in
in
the
federal
ppp
program
where
they
have
been
lending
their
own
money
to
help,
keep
keep
business
and
businesses
in.
K
L
L
Our
technical
questions
are
centered
around
ensuring
ab-152
doesn't
create
any
conflicts
or
confusion
for
banks
between
state
and
federal
law,
similar
to
what
what
robert
mentioned
and
we're
hopeful
that
the
sponsor
again
based
on
some
of
our
recent
conversations
will
help
us
achieve
that
critical
clarity.
I
I
do
want
to
say
all
that
being
said.
L
You
know
we
have
not
been
contacted
to
this
point
by
the
proponents
and
we're
only
alerted
to
the
lengthy
amendment
last
night,
which
really
didn't
give
us
much
time
to
to
review
what
we
were
going
to
discuss
today
and
given
that
these
changes
are
highly
technical,
we
would
really
really
really
appreciate
improved
communication
moving
forward.
Thank.
A
A
A
A
A
Let
me
I'd
like
to
remind
everyone
that
we
may
limit
public
comment
to
two
minutes
and
please
remember
to
please
be
respectful
of
committee
members
and
other
witnesses.
Do
not
comment
on
testimony
provided
by
other
speakers
and
do
not
make
personal
attacks,
and
you
may
always
submit
written
remarks
or
inclusion
in
the
meeting
record
broadcasting.
Do
we
have
anyone
on
the
line
for
public
comments.