►
From YouTube: 2/25/2021 - Assembly Committee on Government Affairs
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.
C
D
C
D
D
F
E
Assembly
assemblyman
matthews.
G
H
I
A
Present,
thank
you.
I
let
the
records
reflect
all
members
are
present.
We
have
a
quorum
members.
I
want
to
remind
you
to
please
keep
your
microphone
on
mute.
Unless
you
are
speaking,
please
keep
your
cameras
on
unless
you
have
an
emergency,
you
have
to
do
something
real,
quick,
just
give
me
a
heads
up,
please,
if
you're
going
to
turn
it
off.
A
I
want
to
remind
those
of
you
who
are
going
to
be
presenting
this
morning
for
you
to
please
state
your
name
for
the
record
after
each
question.
That's
not
for
our
purposes,
that's
to
make
the
life
of
our
staff
easier.
I
want
to
remind
those
of
you
watching
online
and
following
along,
thank
you
for
being
here
with
us
this
morning.
Everybody
has
a
very
unique
different
setup
in
their
office,
which
is
why
you'll
see
people
looking
in
different
directions.
That's
just
the
way
they
have
it
structured
in
their
own
office.
A
I
want
to
remind
folk
who
are
wishing
to
speak
in
public
comment
that
we're
going
to
be
saving
that
to
the
end
of
the
meeting
and
that
we
ask
that
you
keep
your
comments
to
two
minutes.
Please,
with
that
we're
going
to
take
the
agenda
in
the
order
it
appears
we
have
two
bills.
For
this
morning
we
have
assembly
bill,
100
and
assembly
bill
139
and
we'll
start
off
with
assembly
bill
100
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
100.
good
morning
welcome.
C
It
was
my
pleasure
to
serve
as
the
vice
chair
of
that
committee
during
the
2019-2020
interim.
As
you
may
or
may
not
know,
the
committee
was
created
in
2019
by
assembly
concurrent
resolution
4..
It
was
tasked
with
considering
methods
of
reducing
wild
wildfire
fuels,
issues
related
to
early
responses
to
wildfires
and
the
economic
impact
of
wildfires
on
the
state
and
local
communities.
C
C
Several
agencies
share
responsibility
for
wildfire
prevention
and
suppression
in
the
state,
while
it
is
often
local
governments
that
respond
first
to
wildfire,
wildfire
prevention
and
suppression
is
usually
done
in
coordination
with
state
and
federal
partners.
The
division
of
forestry
provides
fire
protection
and
implements
fire
suppression
and
prevention
programs,
as
well
as
related
emergency
services.
C
Throughout
the
interim,
the
committee
heard
testimony
and
received
written
recommendations
from
the
division
regarding
its
various
wildfire,
related
programs
assembly
bill.
100
is
the
result
of
those
recommendations
to
codify
and
statute
the
division's
wildland
fire
protection
program,
the
nevada
network
of
fire
adapted
communities
program
and
the
nevada
fire
board
of
directors.
C
Ms
casey
will
provide
you
with
details
on
how
these
programs
help
the
division's
mission
in
keeping
us
safe
from
wildfires.
She
will
also
explain
the
objectives
and
concept
of
a
fire
board
of
directors,
which
is
a
cooperative
agreement
with
federal
state
and
local
agencies
to
prove
to
improve
our
collaboration
on
all
levels.
C
The
committee
also
heard
testimony
from
the
division
of
insurance
on
wildlife-related
insurance
issues.
Specifically,
we
learned
about
the
impact
of
wildfires
on
insurance
rates,
the
difference
in
commercial
versus
personal
insurance
products,
the
lessons
learned
from
the
california,
pacific
gas
and
electric
wildfire
incident,
and
how
livestock
and
grazing
grounds
are
treated
within
a
wildfire
insurance
policy.
J
Good
morning,
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
casey
casey
state
forester,
fire
warden
for
the
nevada
division
of
forestry.
Thank
you
for
having
me
here
today.
I
will
provide
background
for
the
sections
being
proposed
in
ndf
statute.
Nrs472
section
2
allows
the
state
forester
fire
warden
to
enter
into
cooperative
agreements
each
year
with
state,
federal
and
local
agencies
to
ensure
communication
and
coordination
on
fire
suppression,
assets
and
safe
and
effective,
wildfire
response
across
all
jurisdictions
in
nevada.
This
is
currently
facilitated
through
the
nevada
fire
board
of
directors.
J
Section
2
would
codify
that
participation
in
statute
to
ensure
that
coordination
among
federal
state
and
local
jurisdictions
remains
a
top
priority
to
ensure
the
closest
available
wildfire
assets
respond
as
quickly
as
possible
via
coordinated
dispatch,
are
trained
to
the
highest
standards
and
communicate
in
a
timely
and
appropriate
manner.
Each
season
section
three
would
establish
nevada's
wildland
fire
protection
program
in
statute.
J
Ndf
has
the
authority
to
initiate
these
agreements
on
local
fire
jurisdictions
under
nrs
472-050
and
the
division
began.
Building
these
agreements
following
legislative
approval
in
the
77th
session
of
the
nevada
legislature,
participating
counties
and
fire
protection
districts
from
the
interim
committee
requested
that
this
program
be
specifically
expected
in
statute
to
provide
program,
stability
and
longevity
for
participants
to
maximize
the
value
of
the
weld
and
fire
protection
program.
It
is
important
that
all
eligible
jurisdictions
come
from
the
participants.
A
Fires,
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt
you.
I
I
do
know
that
some
members
are
having
a
difficult
time
hearing
you
if
there's
any
possibility
to
get
slightly
closer
to
the
microphone.
Maybe
that
would
help.
A
J
Okay,
thank
you
again
for
the
record
casey
casey.
If
I'll
go
back,
one
sentence,
if
nevada
is
going
to
get
ahead
of
the
catastrophic
loss
of
property,
lives,
infrastructure
and
ecosystem
resulting
from
wild
and
fire
from
all
four
areas
must
become
the
focus
of
work
at
a
landscape
scale
to
change
fire
behavior.
J
J
Section
5
allows
the
state
forest
or
fire
warden,
to
provide
meals
to
employees
on
certain
critical
natural
resource
projects
and
wild
and
fire
responses.
This
would
not
apply
to
all
natural
research
projects.
This
would
apply
only
to
projects
that
are
so
distant
from
an
ndf
office
that
an
unreasonable
amount
of
time
is
wasted
each
day
in
travel
status,
delaying
work
and
resulting
in
unnecessary
per
diem
and
overtime,
cost
section
5
would
allow
ndf
to
camp
on
site
and
provide
mobile
kitchen
units
when
deemed
more
economical
for
the
project
to
provide
meals.
J
In
addition
to
being
more
fiscally
responsible,
this
proposal
will
increase
the
production
rate
of
conservation
crews
and
enhance
staff
safety,
which
otherwise
greatly
decreases
because
of
drive
times
to
and
from
projects.
Section
5
also
provides
ndpf
mobile
kitchen
unit
staff,
additional
training
that
is
necessary
for
them
to
provide
meals
during
emergency
responses.
J
J
A
A
A
I
know
the
the
connection's
been
a
little
faulty
this
morning,
so
it
may
be
that
she
actually
got
kicked
off
senator.
I
don't
know
if
you'd
like
to
continue
on
to
some
questions
on
the
sections
we've
already
covered
and
or
we
can
take
one
a
quick
one
minute
recess,
so
you
can
give
her.
You
know
reach
out,
give
a
quick
call
whatever
you
prefer.
A
Sounds
good.
Thank
you.
Senator
members.
I
apologize
with
the
connection
this
morning,
technology.
It
is
what
it
is
we
got
to
power
through
with
that
said,
I
would
like
to
open
it
up
for
questions
with
the
understanding
that
we'll
have
somebody
else
joining
us
in
a
bit
and
and
continuing
to
cover
some
of
the
sections
that
were
not
touched.
Yet
members
who
would
like
to
start.
K
Thank
you
senator
schaible
and
thank
you,
ms
casey,
for
the
presentation,
said
a
quick
question
section
four,
and
I
noticed
that
the
the
operative
word
and
the
introduction
says
that
the
state
forester
firework
warden
shall
and
then
one
of
the
things
that
includes
is
working
collaboratively
with
various
agencies
and
then
property
owners.
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
might
elaborate
a
little
bit
on
that
property
owner
facet
of
it.
Presumably
that's
private
property
owners,
but
since
it
the
word
shall
suggest
it's.
It's
mandated
I'm
just
kind
of
wondering.
K
Are
there
specific
property
owners
in
mind
how
that
how
that
would
work?
You
know
what
would
kind
of
constitute
fulfilling
that
that
mandate
to
work
with
private
property
owners
that
potentially
could
be
a
little
bit
broad
or
vague.
Thank
you.
J
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblyman
matthews
for
the
record
again
kckc
state
forester,
fire
warden
from
the
nevada
division
of
forestry.
We
currently
do
work
with
private
landowners.
It
is
already
in
our
statute
and
part
of
our
charge
is
to
provide
technical,
forestry
and
natural
resource
assistance
to
all
landowners
in
the
state
who
choose
to
participate.
J
So
this
is
just
an
extension
of
that.
So,
if
they
choose,
we
aren't
mandated
to
go
out.
However,
under
you
know,
certain
circumstances
we're
looking
to
participate,
so
we
might
actually
seek
out
homeowners
who
live
in
the
wild
under
interface,
who
have
high
wildfire
potential
working
with
our
state
and
local
partners
to
try
to
reduce
risk
in
those
communities.
It
doesn't
mean
that
they
are
forced
to
participate.
J
It
means
that
we
ask
and
if
they
choose
to
participate
in
the
programs
that
we
might
have,
such
as
hazardous
fuel
reduction,
forest
health
programs,
we
have
urban
and
community
forestry
programs.
We
have
a
multitude
of
programs
that
can
help
assist
landowners
in
trying
to
reduce
risk
on
their
property.
K
Thank
you
and
mr
chair,
may
I
be
permitted
a
a
second
question.
Please
thank
you
section,
nine
subsection
one
where
it
says
that
the
commissioner
may
create
a
program
for
insurers
to
provide
incentives.
K
I'm
just
wondering
what
is
there
anything
in
place
that
sort
of
prevents
those
prevents
insurers
from
perhaps
providing
those
incentives?
Already
I
was
trying
to
get
an
understanding
of
why
why
a
program
may
be
needed.
You
know
what
the
impediments
may
be
to
insurers
sort
of
already
providing
such
incentives
on
their
own.
Thank
you.
J
So,
thank
you
again
for
the
record
casey
casey.
I
think
that
probably
would
be
a
better
question
for
the
insurance
commissioner
on
that
section,
that's
not
in
in
my
statutory
area.
I
think,
though,
having
participated
in
the
program.
One
of
the
reasons
behind
this
is
there
are
other
incentive
programs
for
other
natural
disasters
like
earthquakes
and
and
floods.
J
A
I
just
hear
commissioners
on
assemblyman,
so
thank
you,
commissioner,
for
joining
us.
I
know
I
know
there
was
you
had
reached
out
that
we
were
going
to
be
jumping
on
a
few
minutes
late.
We
completely
understand
if
we
could
go
back
and
allow
for
the
presentation
to
flow
as
originally
intended
senator.
I
know
the
commissioner
was
going
to
cover
a
few
sections
and
that
that
may
help
with
assemblyman
matthew's
question
and
then
could
also
address
some
of
preemptively.
Some
of
the
questions
that
we
we
have
from
the
other
members.
L
Good
good
morning
for
the
record,
this
is
barbara
richardson,
commissioner
of
insurance,
and
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
to
join
you
late.
I
apologize.
We
were
doing
our
budget
hearings
and
that,
unfortunately,
that
took
precedence
this
morning,
so
I
I
do
want
to
thank
fireward
and
casey
and
make
sure
that
she
gets
a
lot
of
credit
for
going
through
this
bill
and
doing
the
presentation.
L
We've
been
working
with
the
industry
and
with
the
fire
wardens
area
for
years,
and
it's
great
to
to
be
able
to
bring
this
type
of
bill
forward.
So,
basically,
I'm
gonna
focus
on
specifically
on
section
nine
and
it's
it's
going
to
allow
the
commissioner
insurance,
in
this
case
our
our
division,
discretion
to
create
an
incentive
program
to
to
quote,
promote
and
encourage
property
owners
to
take
measures
to
mitigate
risk,
the
risk
of
property
lost
and
or
damage
caused
by
wildfires.
L
I
want
to
make
sure
that
that
to
put
on
the
record
that
the
division
had
some
concerns
about
this
section
of
the
bill,
not
that
we
wanted
to
make
any
changes.
But
I
want
to
put
on
the
record
that
we
believe
that
that
the
the
bill
focuses
on
individuals
taking
mitigation
steps
to
help
curb
devastating
effects
of
wildfire.
However,
the
concerns
that
we
have
is
that,
most
of
the
time,
the
efficacy
of
solely
focusing
on
individuals
doing
mitigation
isn't
enough.
L
So
we're
we're
trying
to
make
sure
that,
on
the
record,
we're
going
to
say
that
we
want
to
put
forth
the
mitigating
efforts
taken
by
the
whole
community
will
likely
be
needed
to
have
a
statistically
impactful
decrease
in
the
damage
wildfire
causes.
So
that
does
not
require
a
change
in
the
bill
it
just.
I
just
want
to
put
on
the
record
that
that's
where
our
focus
would
be.
So
while
we
stand
neutral
and
if
you
want
to
make
changes,
that's
up
to
you
all.
L
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
science
doesn't
support
doing
mitigation
on
a
one-off
basis.
It's
really
a
community
effort.
L
There
are
mitigation
opportunities
that
some
insurance
carriers
already
take,
but
what
we've
seen,
though,
in
the
last
few
years,
when
there's
been
these
large
devastating
fires
that
have
really
wiped
out
large
communities
there
weren't
enough
in
you
know,
incentives
during
the
time
period
where
the
community
could
have
taken
action
and
put
something
forward
and
what
so?
We
don't
really
want
to
leave
this
solely
in
the
hands
of
the
insurance
carriers,
not
that
they're
already
not
doing
a
good
job.
L
But
again,
their
concern
is
usually
the
particular
homeowner
rather
than
the
community
as
a
whole.
So
that's
what
we're
trying
to
sort
of
focus
on
and
there
have
been
science
that
shows
that
community
efforts
work
much
better
for
all
kinds
of
disasters
and
specifically
fires.
So
this-
and
this
has
been
around
for
quite
some
time
and
there's
different
programs
that
are
being
offered
and
sort
of
started
throughout
the
country.
A
And
thank
you
again,
commissioner.
I'd
like
to
first
give
assemblyman
matthews
an
opportunity
to
revisit
the
conversation
he
initiated
if
you
still
have
any
concerns
or
questions
regarding
that
section.
K
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I'm
good
at
this
time
appreciate
it.
A
Perfect
with
that
we'll
go
next
to
assemblywoman
consonant.
D
Thank
you
chairman,
and
my
question
is
more
towards
a
fireward
in
casey
in
the
initial
part
of
the
bill.
It
says
that
this
will
allow
for
the
creation
of
a
fire
board
of
directors
and
then,
in
your
testimony,
you're
saying
that
the
this
is
currently.
J
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblywoman
again
for
the
record
kckc
state
forester,
fire,
warden
yeah,
the
the
board
is
already
in
place.
The
board
currently
consists
of
nine
or
so
members.
It
is
the
fire
management
officers
of
all
the
federal
agents,
land
management
agencies,
the
state
land,
us
ndf
and
local
government
fire
chiefs,
who
are
all
jointly
responsible
for
wildfire
response
in
the
state.
The
purpose
of
this
was
to
continue
that
effort
over
history.
J
J
I
think
commissioner
richardson
made
a
very
good
point,
and
that
was
the
point
of
putting
all
of
these
things
kind
of
collectively
together,
it's
not
one
of
these
things.
That's
going
to
solve
this
problem
that
we
have
across
in
nevada
and
across
the
west
and
into
the
rest
of
the
united
states.
It's
all
of
these
parts
that
are
going
to
come
together
to
reduce
risk,
and
so
our
job
together,
state
and
federal
and
local
government
land
management
agencies
is
to
create
that
safe
halo
around
these
communities.
J
The
communities
to
do
their
part
to
create
fire
resistance,
resistant
structures
in
landscapes,
and
then
we
will
see
changes
in
fire
behavior.
We
will
never
not
have
fire
in
our
landscapes,
we're
just
hoping
to
affect
how
fire
works
in
these
landscapes.
C
H
H
First
of
all,
though,
I
also
want
to
do
a
quick
compliment
coming
from
the
north
about
how
much
emphasis
there
is
with
the
lake
tahoe
basin,
as
well
as
the
lake
mead
basin.
I
greatly
appreciate
already
the
existing
language
and
the
attention
to
these
natural
forces
and
how
difficult
it
can
be,
sometimes
with
having
to
go
across
state
lines
and
who's
in
charge
and
all
that
stuff.
H
So
I
really
appreciate
that,
but
my
question
has
more
to
do
with
section
five,
a
little
bit
more
clarification
on
what
is
what
would
be
the
critical
natural
resource
projects
that
you
would
be
speaking
about
where
somebody
would
need
to
stay
after
or
stay
home.
Excuse
me
where
food
would
need
to
be
provided
based
upon
the
location.
Can
you
expand
upon
that
phrase?
A
little
bit.
J
Further,
yes,
thank
you
for
the
question
again
assemblywoman
for
the
record
kckc
state
forester,
fire
warden
for
india.
I
could
give
you
a
good
example.
We
had
a
project
where
we
collaborated
with
the
forest
service
and
local
government
and
local
homeowners
in
the
ruby
mountains,
and
we
had
the
project
was
about
a
two
and
a
half
hour
drive
one
way
to
and
from
the
project.
So
it
was
a
critical
project
that
we
all
identified
as
an
area
of
high
fire
risk,
and
it
was
our
goal
to
reduce
that
risk.
J
On
about
4,
000
acres
of
land
for
phases,
one
and
two
our
crews
were
hired
to
do
the
work.
Our
crews
are
camped
out
of
wells
in
parliament.
That
was
the
closest
response
that
we
had
to
this
site.
So
you
know
the
primary
cause
of
injury
in
our
industry,
both
from
a
natural
resource
perspective
and
from
a
firefighting
perspective,
is
actually
travel
to
and
from
project
or
emergency
response.
So
we're
always
looking
for
ways
to
reduce
that.
J
J
So
we
actually
have
three
kitchens
run
out
of
our
camp
that
do
provide
meals
on
smaller
emergency
response
all
across
the
state.
If
we
had
been
able
to
take
that
kitchen
up
to
this
project
camp,
our
cruising
site
which
was
used
for
piracy
anyway,
we
would
have
increased
production
decreased
the
amount
of
time
on
the
road,
so
it
would
have
been
much
safer
and
we
would
have
actually
gotten
a
lot
more
work
done.
H
Thank
you
so
much.
I
think
I
that
clarifies
a
large
amount
and
that
work
would
be
kind
of
the
undergrowth
removal
et
cetera,
is
that
is
that
kind
of
those
sort
of
projects
that
you're
speaking
about.
J
Thank
you
again
for
the
question
casey
casey
again
for
the
record.
Yes,
that
actual
project
was
the
was
a
thinning
project,
pin
pinion,
juniper
removal,
piling
and
burning.
So
we
were
out
there
actually
taking
out
some
trees,
some
of
the
understory
growth
and
piling
it
for
burning.
They
still
are
necessary
for
burn.
Following
that
project
we
did
have
a
fire
that
came
through
and
actually
slowed
in
some
of
those
areas
and
picked
up
where
some
of
those
piles
had
not
yet
been
burned.
D
Thank
you
for
that
great
presentation.
My
question
might
be
a
little
bit
out
of
the
language
that
you're
looking
to
change,
I'm
wondering
if
you
can
help
to
clarify
section
six.
It
looks
like
sub
six.
It
says
any
person
violating
any
of
the
provisions
of
sub
section
one
as
guilty
of
a
misdemeanor
and
at
first
I
was
just
confused
in
that.
It's
it
only
references
subsection
one,
but
I'm
thinking
that
it
will
bring
us
back
to
section
six.
D
But
then,
when
I
read
six
sub
one,
it
says
the
state
forced
fire.
Warden
may
prohibit
or
restrict
the
following
activities.
So
it
says
that
the
fire
warden
may
prohibit
the
activities
that
are
then
listed,
but
then
it
says
that
the
person
violates
any
of
those
provisions
is
guilty
of
a
misdemeanor.
D
J
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblywoman
again
for
the
record.
Kckc
state
forester
fire
warden.
Yes,
there
is
a
way
for
everyone
to
know
if
we
have
gone
into
restrictions.
I
am,
I
think,
that's
the
question.
So
if
I
don't
answer
it,
please
let
me
know
we
post
publicly
all
of
our
fire
restrictions.
So
this
is
a
collaborative
effort
again
between
state
government
federal
agencies
and
our
local
government
agencies.
This
year
we
were
successful
in
going
in
and
out
of
restrictions
together.
J
Historically,
we
have
gone
separately
and
it's
very
confusing
for
people
who
may
or
may
not
know
whose
land
they're
on
and
what
the
restrictions
may
be.
So
it
was
our
goal
this
year
to
have
restrictions
that
were
at
least
very
consistent
across
all
of
those
land
management
partners.
So
I
my
restrictions
actually
apply
to
all
state
lands
in
the
state,
and
so
we
post
them
very
publicly.
J
State
parks
are
allowed
by
our
restrictions
to
to
further
restrict
if
they
feel
in
certain
parts
of
the
state.
This
year
kind
of
unprecedented.
We
went
into
full
statewide
restrictions.
Usually
we
go
into
restrictions
that
are
more
localized,
but
because
of
the
risk
and
the
covet
19
issues
that
we
had
with
getting
ground
crews
for
firefighting,
we
all
went
into
statewide
restrictions
and
so
that
it
was,
it
was
a
lot
easier.
I
think,
for
people
to
understand
this
year.
J
So
it's
very
well
published
people
know
exactly
what
those
restrictions
are
they're
published
across
all
of
our
websites,
and
we
do
press
releases
to
make
sure
it's
very,
very
clear.
N
Good
morning
and
mr
chair,
thank
you
so
much
for
allowing
me
to
ask
this
question
of,
and
I
I'm
not
sure
who
I'm
directing
this
to,
and
I
first
I
want
to
say
that
I
thank
you
so
much
with
the
women
that
have
been
able
to
the
senator
commissioner
and
the
fire
warden
to
present
this
bill,
which
is
really
important
to
the
state
of
nevada
entirely.
N
My
question
actually
is
in
section
nine
and
it
it
concerns
the
language,
especially
when
we've
seen
in
california,
where
we've
lost
whole
towns,
for
you
know
with
requires
that
we've
been
extremely
fortunate
that
it
hasn't
happened
to
us
in
nevada.
Yet
so
my
question
actually
is
it
says
it
reads.
The
commissioner
may
create
a
program
for
insurers
to
provide
incentives,
incentives
to
promote
and
encourage
property
owners
to
take
measures
to
mitigate
the
risk
of
property
loss
or
damage
caused
by
wildfire.
N
The
question
is:
why
may
and
then
in
sub
section
two
says:
if
the
commissioner
creates
a
program
again,
those
ambiguous
words
in
there
can
we
make
it
stronger
and
if
you
didn't
make
it
stronger,
why
not.
L
So,
for
the
record,
this
is
barbara
richardson,
the
insurance
commissioner,
and
I
actually
would
leave
that
up
to
ms
scheible
to
respond.
I
I
I
don't
think
it
would.
It
would
make
any
difference
to
us
at
the
insurance
division
if
it
was
stronger,
but
there
may
have
been
some
argument
at
some
point
from
either
the
industry
or
as
per
the
creation
of
the
bill.
So
I'll
leave
that
to
her.
N
No
ma'am,
it's
section:
nine
substitution,
one
and
two,
the
ambiguous
words
of
may
and
if.
C
I
think
that
the
intention
was
to
allow
for
flexibility.
I
think
that
there's
also
always
a
fiscal
concern,
especially
in
the
current
economic
climate.
We
didn't
want
to
tie
the
hands
of
any
agency
that
might
not
be
able
to
afford
to
implement
new
regulations
right
now
or
develop
new
programs
right
now,
but
I
don't
think
that
it.
It
was
not
intended
to
signal
to
anybody
that
we
don't
want
them
to
create
this
program
or
that
they
shouldn't
create
the
program.
It
was
just
an
effort
to
try
to
be
to
provide.
N
Flexibility,
so
is
that
I'm
sorry
yeah,
chair
follow-up.
N
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
in
an
agreement
with
the
fire
warden
miss
casey,
casey.
J
Thank
you
assemblywoman
for
the
question,
casey
casey
for
the
record
yeah.
I
I
agree
with
that.
It
is
our
hope
that
we
could
create
a
program
like
that
and
and
incentivize.
We
have
found
that
you
know
trying
to
mandate.
These
types
of
things
has
not
always
been
the
best
way
of
getting
things
done,
providing
consent
and
hopefully
give
us
a
better
way
of
completing.
A
Thank
you
assemblywoman.
Next,
we
have
assemblyman.
A
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
checking
with
some
people
that
was
on
that
committee.
I
just
have
a
couple
questions
that
I'd
like
to
ask.
If
I
may
and
number
one
you
know
the
difference
between
the
nevada,
forestry
and
in
blm
and
and
the
u.s
forest
service,
they
got
a
lot
of
different
guidelines.
As
far
as
you
know,
like
first
responders,
the
ranchers
are
usually
the
first
responders
on
the
ground
that
they
allowed
them
finally
to
to
get
on
the
fire
before
we
get
help
there.
The
other
thing
was
the
grazing
tactics.
F
You
know
we
blm
and
in
the
counties,
use
grazing
tactics
as
much
as
they
can
to
reduce
wildland
fires,
and
then
then
the
other
thing
is
pruning.
The
blm
is
doing
a
lot
of
pruning
up
in
in
some
of
these
areas
like
in
eureka
and
italy,
and
up
in
them
areas
to
reduce
wildland
fires,
but
I
know
the
forest
service
in
some
of
their
guidelines.
F
Don't,
and
then
there
was
a
fine
or
a
bill
where
ndf
hit
one
county
for
over
a
million
dollars
to
do
the
jobs
that
they
should
been
helping
to
do
to
begin
with.
So
can
you
answer
any
of
these
and
hope
I
didn't
go
too
fast,
but
I
remember
that
when
they
had
the
meeting
with
this
on
the
fire
safe
council,
I
was
trying
to
follow
as
much
as
I
could
you
know
by
by
talking
to
people.
So
could
you
answer
some
of
them
questions
and
I
appreciate
it.
J
Thank
you
for
the
questions
assemblyman
again
for
the
record,
casey
casey.
I
will
hope
to
try
to
answer
some
of
those
questions.
There
are
differences
in
the
ways
that
we
implement
projects
across
across
agencies.
J
The
federal
agencies
obviously
go
through
a
nepa
process
and
some
other
processes,
so
they
are
held
to
the
standards
in
which
that
public
process
has
gone
through,
but
we
do
work
collaboratively
on
large
landscape
scale
projects
to
try
to
ensure
that
we
are
kind
of
implementing
the
same
kind
of
practices,
you're
always
looking
at
current
science.
This
is
what
is
effective
for
fire
mitigation
or
for
faith
habitat
or
whatever.
J
It
is
that
our
resource
objectives
are
for
the
project,
so
we
are
working
together
on
that
grazing
is
a
tactic
that
all
of
us
implement
in
different
manners.
Obviously,
the
federal
agencies
permit
grazing
on
their
land.
The
state
doesn't
have
that
necessarily,
but
we
do
use
goats
to
try
to
reduce
cheatgrass
in
areas.
So
we
worked
together
on
those.
The
state
was
very
successful
in
getting
five
pilot
projects
for
looking
at
how
the
federal
agencies
permit
grazing
in
these
ecosystems.
J
So
so
there
is
the
work,
nation
and
collaboration,
but
we
are
kind
of
held
to
the
standards
of
of
whatever
the
practice
needs
to
be.
I'm
not
sure
what
the
million
dollar
bills
was.
I'm
wondering
if
that's
the
wildland
fire
protection
program
and
also.
F
Yeah,
mr
mr
chairman,
I'm
I'm
really
having
a
hard
time.
It's
breaking
up,
really,
really
bad
and-
and
I
I
I
can't
make
out
most
of
what's
being
said-
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
having
that
problem
but-
and
I
don't
want
to
be
disrespectful-
I
just
can't
hear
it
and
I've
got
my
speakers
up
to
90
so
and
it's
breaking
up
real
bad.
A
I
don't
know
if,
if
it
would
be
worth
the
effort,
my
team
reached
out
and
mentioned
that,
maybe
if
we
could
have
you
quickly
log
out
and
then
try
to
reconnect
just
to
see
if
that
provides
some
resolution
here,
that'd
be
helpful.
We
could
go
into
one
one
minute
recess,
while
we
allow
miss
casey
to
do
that,
one
minute
recess.
A
Unfortunately,
it
sounds
very
similar,
however,.
A
This
casey,
if
I
could
just
have
you,
do
a
quick
one,
two
three
to
see
if
it
sounds
better
on
our
end.
D
I
have
a
question
and
a
broadcast:
is
there
a
way
for
them
to
just
switch
to
phone
audio,
so
she
could
call
in
because
I
know
that
it
appears
on
my
end
next,
if
you
just
click
the
little
arrow
and
then
switch
to
phone
audio,
I'm
not
sure
if
that
would
be
sufficient
and
I'll
offer
a
more
clear
connection,
since
it
would
be
based
off
phone
and
not
internet.
O
D
Know
broadcast
hi,
yes,
charitor,
I
mean
sorry
vice
territories.
This
is
an
option.
Would
you
like
to
call
in
and
said
miss
casey.
D
I
will
throw
it
in
the
chat.
Give
me
one
second.
A
Thank
you
for
your
flexibility,
miss
casey.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
everybody's,
getting
the
the
full
account
of
your
testimony
and
and
the
knowledge
you're
bringing
to
this
bill.
So
thank
you
for
working
with
us.
J
A
A
I'll
call
the
meeting
back
to
order.
Thank
you
for
those
of
you
following
along
virtually
members.
Thank
you
for
your
patience
as
we've
worked
through
those
tech
issues
that
tend
to
occur
during
this
age.
With
that
miss
casey,
we'll
go
back
to
you.
Miss
casey
is
now
on
on
the
phone
and
miss
casey.
A
If
you
could
in
a
sincere
manner-
and
I
know
that
that's
difficult,
because
you've
had
a
lot
of
questions,
but
maybe
go
back
a
question
or
two
and
and
respond
to
the
members
questions
so
that
I
want
to
make
sure
everybody
had
an
opportunity
to
get
that
on
the
record
and
that
it
was
clear
what
your
response
was.
O
Thank
you,
chair
again
to
assemblyman
ellison's
question,
I'm
casey
casey
for
the
record,
just
just
to
answer
the
question.
There
are
differences
between
sometimes
how
we
implement
projects
across
different
landscapes,
the
blm
and
the
forest
service
go
through
a
public
meepa
process,
so
their
process
is
dictated
by
what
comes
the
results
of
this
public
process.
O
However,
we
are
always
looking
at
the
best
available
science,
we're
always
working
together
to
see
what
treatments
are
going
to
have
the
best
impacts
and
if
the
blm
is
implementing
a
way-
and
we
can
implement
that
way
on
direct
adjacency,
we
are-
we
are
working
together
through
those
processes.
I
I
spoke
to
grazing
tactics.
O
The
federal
agencies
are
the
ones
who
who
allow
or
or
permit
for
grazing
on
their
their
lands,
but
they
do
they
do
a
lot
of
that
and
and
nevada
was
successful
in
getting
five
pilot
projects
across
the
state
at
looking
at
how
we
permit
those
and
and
trying
to
create
more
flexibility
in
the
permitting,
as
a
lot
of
the
processes
of
the
past,
actually
were
hindering
us
in
meeting
resource
objectives
on
the
ground
and
so
by
being
a
a
forward-thinking
state
who
actually
has
been
working
together
for
quite
some
time.
O
F
Yes,
it
was-
and
I
know
I
know
it
was
over
a
million
dollars
and
I
I
just
was
handed
the
casualty
property
insurance
and
the
state
of
nevada
letter
from
the
state
nevada,
with
the
concerns
on
section
nine,
which
I
had
the
same
concerns,
and
so
the
other
colleagues
that
spoke
also
on
section
nine.
Was
there
any
way
to
amend
this
for
protection
to
these
small
counties?.
O
Thank
you
again
for
the
record
kckc
state
forester
fire
warden.
I
will
speak
to
the
wfpp
portion
when
the
wildland
fire
protection
program
began.
We
did
not
have
a
formula
that
could
be
given
to
participants
so
as
as
you
guys
may
or
may
not
be
aware,
we
began
the
program
in
state
fiscal
year,
14.
O
the
the
science
behind
how
they
they
spread.
The
the
cost
was
based
on
professional
knowledge
of
risk
and
cost.
However,
we
have
since
created
a
formula
that
was
done
in
the
last
session
that
actually
does
look
at
the
cost
to
the
state
for
these
fires.
So
we
take
out
everything
that
we
get
reimbursed
through
cost
share
through
our
federal
partners
through
fema
grants
all
of
those
things,
and
it's
only
the
cost
on
behalf
of
the
participating
jurisdiction
that
the
state
is
is
actually
expending
on
their
behalf.
O
In
addition
to
the
risk
that
is
on
their
state,
private
and
county
lands,
only
only
those
areas
that
those
jurisdictions
have
jurisdiction
over.
So
we
we
did
come
up
with
a
we
had
a
panel
of
local
government
fire
chiefs.
We
included
the
elko
county
fire
chief
in
the
creation
of
this
formula,
so
they
didn't
love
the
formula
outputs.
We
had
no
better
way
to
actually
assess
risk,
and
so
the
problem-
and
I
think
I
said
this
in
the
past-
was
for
elko
elko-
is
a
large
county
in
nevada.
O
However,
we
have
all
of
the
backup
documentation
for
the
past,
almost
nine
years,
to
show
that
the
state
on
behalf
of
the
jurisdiction
has
paid
well
above
that
every
year
for
wildfire
costs,
and
so
we
we
provide
that
to
them
every
year
they
have
a
and,
as
you
may
recall,
last
session,
we
were
asked
because
of
this.
The
steady
increase
to
break
them
in
slowly,
so
they
are
not
currently
paying
that
price
we
actually
contracted
at
a
lower
rate.
A
Thank
you
next,
if
you
can
go
to
madam
vice
chair,
I
don't
know
if
you
had
a
question.
I
know
you
previously
had
the
recommendation
of
switching
over
to
the
phone,
but
I
don't
know
if
you
also
had
a
question.
A
Okay,
if
I
can
go
to
assemblywoman
anderson,
please.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
was,
I
really
appreciate
that
little
bit
of
a
break,
because
actually
I
it
gave
me
an
opportunity
to
double
check
some
one
more
piece
of
information.
Is
there
a
reason
why
general
improvement,
districts
or
incorporated
cities
are
not
included
in
in
this?
The
interface
like
the
the
discussions,
or
is
there
a
plan
to
maybe
include
them
in
other
ways.
O
O
So
if
the
county
is
responsible,
then
the
county
is
the
participant
in
the
wildland
fire
protection
program
as
a
whole,
covering
the
entire
county
and
all
that's
within.
So
we
did
it
based
on
how
they
were
formed
and
at
their
request.
So
originally
we
had
looked
at
clark
county
as
an
entire
entity
and
they
asked
us
to
break
that
up
into
participating
entities.
So
it's,
however,
they
were
formed.
So
some,
as
you
will
see,
are
actual
counties
as
participants.
Some
are
cities
or
or
fire
protection
districts,
as
you
will.
H
A
H
O
Thank
you
for
the
question
again
for
the
record,
casey
casey
they
could
ask.
The
group
would
have
to
have
fire
jurisdictional
responsibility
for
the
land
that
that
are
within
that
particular
area.
So,
yes,
they
could
ask
and
we
have
looked
at
other
entities
but
most
of
the
fire
protection
districts.
Counties
or
you
know,
whatever
fire
entities
cover
almost
all
the
state
with
with
protection,
and
we
again
exclude
the
federal
land
management
agencies
as
they
have
their
own
process.
A
Thank
you.
I
don't
believe
we
have
any
other
questions,
however
miss
casey.
A
I
will
ask,
and-
and
I
hate
to
task
you
with
this
homework,
but
for
the
sake
of
clarity
and
and
so
that
I
know
that
all
the
members
have
an
opportunity
to
address,
have
their
questions
addressed
and
that
they
have
the
opportunity
to
hear
you
thoroughly
if
you
could
provide
our
committee
manager
miss
judy
bishop
with
an
email
just
with
those
clarifying
points
that
you
made
previously
and
then
we'll
disperse
those
amongst
the
members
and
that
way
everybody
will
have
your
responses
previously
indicated
and
again,
you
can
do
it
in
a
much
more
succinct
manner.
A
D
I
was
curious.
Firstly,
it
says
the
fire
warden
shall
cooperate
with
federal
state
and
local
agencies
in
restricting
a
broad
base
of
activities.
If
there
is
risk
of
fire,
I'm
wondering
why
you
would
choose
to
lot
like
to
to
make
that
a
shell
versus
a
maid.
O
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblywoman
black
again
for
the
record
casey
casey.
The
reason
I
we
would
choose
to
put
it
as
a
shell
is,
as
I
kind
of
stated
earlier,
it's
it's
confusing
in
the
state
of
nevada
because
of
land
ownership
patterns
where
you
might
be
recreating
and
on
whose
land
you
might
be.
Given
that
we
have
a
lot
of
wide
open
spaces,
some
of
it's
public,
some
of
it's
private.
So
it
is
our
goal
to
work
together
to
try
to
implement
fire
restrictions
together.
O
There
are
times
when
we
cannot
come
up
with
the
same
answer,
and
so
the
blm
may
enforce
different
restrictions
than
the
state
and
that's
okay.
We
do
that
at
time
two,
but
the
the
shell
is
that
we
shall
at
least
coordinate
together
so
that
if
there
are
differences
that
we
put
out,
we
can
at
least
speak
to
that
difference
to
the
public
so
that
there
isn't
any
confusion.
Our
goal
is
to
try
to
reduce
confusion
for
those
who
are
recreating
in
the
state.
D
My
second
question:
it's
around
the
program
to
incentivize
people,
so
it
says
we
may
create
a
program
that
incentivizes
to
promote
and
encourage
property
owners
to
take
measures.
Yada,
yada
yada.
It
doesn't
define
what
those
incentives
are.
L
So
this
is
barbara
richardson
for
the
record.
Thank
you
assembling
one.
So
the
one
of
the
reasons
it's
not
specifically
laid
out
here
is
that
it
depends
on
the
area
that
you're
within,
for
example,
we're
talking
about
elko
or
the
great
plains
versus
the
tahoe
basin.
The
different
there
might
be
different
incentives
based
on
the
fire
lines
or
the
type
of
property
that
the
fire
protections
are
trying
to
take
into
account.
So
if
there's
not
a
one,
size
fits
all
that
that
covers
everything.
L
So
we're
trying
really
hard
to
use
the
science
of
the
the
area,
the
the
signs
that
we've
been
able
to
pick
up
working
with
the
fire
wardens
and
just
economists
and
fire
specialists
and
natural
disaster
specialists
who
put
out
predictive
models.
L
So
all
of
those
bits
and
pieces
are
put
together
and
as
far
as
incentives
go,
what
we're
hoping
to
do
is
is
work
with
the
insurance
carriers,
because
what
insurance
carriers
find
is
that
they'll
go
along
and
they'll
be
fine
in
a
particular
area
and
we
push
and
we
push
to
make
sure,
there's
coverage.
But
there
is
not
a
lot
of
protection,
then
for
the
insurance
carrier.
L
If
there's,
if
there's
a
fire
in
that
space
as
well,
so
the
consumer
consumers
harmed
and
the
carriage
harm
because
they
have
to
take
on
a
large
risk
all
in
one
shot.
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
figure
out
ways
to
balance
that
so
that
there's
more
insurance
opportunities
for
more
consumers.
A
Seeing
none
at
this
time
again
miss
casey.
I
would
appreciate
if
you
could
help
us
with
that
homework
I
assigned,
and
that's
not
intentional.
It's
just.
I
think,
it'd
be
very
helpful
to
clarify
any
lingering
questions
that
are
still
there
at
this
time.
I'd
like
to
go
to
those
wishing
to
testify
and
support.
A
My
understanding
is.
We
have
mr
mr
thompson
here
on
video
wishing
to
speak
and
support
and
we
can
go
to
you
first.
K
Yes,
sir,
mr
chairman,
I
appreciate
the
opportunity,
steve
thompson
clark,
president
of
the
clark
county,
firefighters,
for
the
record,
I'm
here
to
support
ab139,
I'm
not
for
sure
if
this
is
the
exact
meaning
or
if
we
were
in
the
other
one
still.
A
Understood,
did
you
indicate
ab-139?
Yes,
sir?
Okay,
if
we
could,
please
have
you
sit
tight,
we're
gonna
continue
with
assembly
bill
100
at
this
time.
A
Worries
no
worries
so
again,
if
there's
anybody
who's
on
video
wishing
to
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill
100,
if
you
could
please
unmute
yourself
now
and
state
your
name
for
the
record,
I
believe
only
mr
thompson
is
who
we
had
on
video
for
that
with
that
broadcast.
If
we
could,
please
go
to
those
wishing
to
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill
100
if
we
go
to
the
phone
lines.
G
G
E
E
The
environmental
impacts
of
large-scale
wildfires
are
are
pretty
clear
at
this
point
and
the
the
devastation
that
it
does
to
native
ecosystems
to
our
wildlife
and
plant
populations
is
clear,
and
so
this
bill,
we
think,
offers
an
opportunity
both
to
better
prevent
wildfires
in
the
first
place
and
certainly
if
they
do
happen
to
to
be
able
to
better
fight
those
and
keep
them
from
becoming
as
devastating
as
we
have
seen
in
recent
years.
So
for
those
reasons
we
are
in
support
of
the
bill
appreciate
the
time.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
A
A
A
O
Thank
you
again
for
the
record,
casey
casey.
I
don't
have
any
closing
remarks.
I
just
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
for
well,
hopefully
that
you
heard
a
little
bit
of
it
today.
I
will
provide
what
you've
asked
for.
I
will
look
at
what
was
asked
and
then
provide
that
that
backup.
Thank
you
for
having
me
here
today.
A
And
thank
you
with
that.
I'd
like
to
close
out
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
100
and
we
do
have
our
chairman
here:
assemblyman
yeager
who's
going
to
be
presenting
assembly,
bill,
139
or
better
said
co-presenting.
I
Good
morning,
mr
chair,
may
I
proceed
with
the
presentation.
Please
do
thank
you
so
good
morning,
mr
chair,
chair,
flores
vice
chair
torres
and
members
of
the
assembly
government
affairs
committee.
My
name
is
steve
yeager
I
represent
assembly
district
9,
which
is
located
in
southwest
las
vegas.
It
is
my
pleasure
to
be
presenting
assembly
bill
139
to
you
this
morning,
and
it
is
a
pleasure
to
appear
in
front
of
this
committee
for
the
first
time
this
session.
I
I
Then
mr
todd
inglesby,
with
the
professional
firefighters
of
nevada,
to
discuss
what
the
bill
will
mean
for
the
public
and
his
members,
and
then,
after
that,
mr
matt
walker,
also
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada
hall
builders,
will
do
a
brief
rundown
of
the
bill
itself,
and
then
we
can
take
questions.
Does
that
work
for
you,
mr
chair.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
steve
yeager
for
the
record
every
once
in
a
while.
You
get
to
work
on
legislation
in
this
building
that
tangibly
and
directly
impacts
your
assembly
district
assembly,
bill.
139
is
one
of
those
bills,
and
I
feel
very
fortunate
that
the
proponents
brought
this
to
me
and
asked
me
to
sponsor
it.
You
will
also
note
that
assemblywoman
gorlo
is
a
co-sponsor
as
well
as
senator
scheible,
assemblywoman
gorlo,
and
I
are
nestled
in
senator
scheibel's
senate
district,
which
is
also
in
southwest
las
vegas.
I
E
Thank
you,
chairman
yeager,
chairman
flores,
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
nat
hodgson
h-o-d-g-s-o-n.
E
I
am
the
ceo
of
the
sub-nevada
home
builder
association
about
20
years
ago,
snhba
was
a
part
of
a
working
group
to
identify
funding
sources
in
the
southwest
valley
to
fund
public
infrastructures,
including
parks,
public
safety
transportation,
and
resulted
in
the
implementation
of
a
pfna
fee
for
fire
service.
After
the
great
recession,
the
fees
never
caught
up
with
the
inflation
and
the
accounting
industry
were
met
and
are
met
with
a
significant
gap.
E
In
fighting
this
critical
infrastructure
2019
under
the
under
chair
kirkpatrick
and
commissioner
jones's
leadership,
a
group
of
stakeholders
got
together
to
support
indexing
to
the
pfna
and
100
increase,
but
those
dollars
still
cannot
meet
the
need
for
the
gap
that's
existing
today.
The
bill
before
you
today
is
result
over
a
year
of
working
towards
creative
solutions
to
meet
the
need.
The
issue
lies
at
the
existing
gap
and
needing
two
fire
stations
very
very
soon.
E
As
you
will
see
in
a
powerpoint
presentation,
all
developer
fees
for
permits
and
plans
are
paid
into
the
building
enterprise
fund,
an
advisory
committee
of
county
staff
and
industry
representatives
oversee
the
fund
as
custodians
of
these
funds
and
as
an
industry
member
who
is
committed
to
funding
target
service
levels,
a
healthy
balance
of
these
funds
is
critically
important
to
me.
I
remember
my
staff
currently
sit
on
the
advisor
committees
of
clark,
county
city
of
henderson
and
the
city
of
las
vegas.
E
I've
served
on
the
county's
building
enterprise
fund
advisory
committee
for
about
eight
years,
and
I
still
currently
serve
on
it
as
well.
The
powerpoint
has
provided
you
a
map
of
the
targeted
fire
service
levels
in
unincorporated
clark
county.
We
wanted
the
committee
to
hear
from
an
expert,
so
todd
engelbees,
president
of
the
professionals,
firefighters
of
nevada,
will
now
talk
through
the
service
level
maps
and
provide
additional
comments
on
what
service
levels
mean
for
his
for
members
of
the
public
and
his
membership.
Afterwards,
mr
matt
walker
will
go
through
section
by
section
amendment.
B
Good
morning,
mr
chair
and
committee
members,
my
name
is
todd.
I'm
the
president
of
professional
firefighters,
nevada.
I
hope
you
are
doing
well
and
staying
safe
as
you.
You
have
heard
from
the
other
presenters
that
nevada
has
grown
and
continues
to
grow.
It
is
vital.
We
have
an
infrastructure
in
place
to
be
able
to
provide
essential
safety
services.
As
you
can
see
in
the
heat
maps
we
are
behind
in
the
southwest
valley
in
southern
nevada,
but
this
is
an
issue
for
the
entire
state.
We
are
here
asking
for
your
help
for
this
bill.
B
B
What
that
means
is
when
you
call
9-1-1
in
an
emergency,
we
should
have
fire
personnel
to
your
location
within
four
minutes.
If
your
mom,
dad
brother,
sister,
son
or
daughter,
is
having
a
heart
attack
or
drowning.
Four
minutes
is
a
long
time.
Imagine
if
it
was
six
eight
ten
minutes
before
you
have
fire
department
personnel
at
your
door,
starting
to
initiate
care,
I'm
not
sure
if
any
of
you
have
ever
called
9-1-1.
B
But
four
minutes
can
seem
like
an
attorney
everything
we
do
as
a
fire
department
is
based
on
getting
to
the
emergency
as
fast
as
possible
to
create
to
get
the
best
outcome.
We
are
taught
very
early
in
our
career
to
treat
every
person
as
if
they
are
family.
When
considering
this
bill,
I
would
ask
the
committee
to
do
the
same.
If
your
family
member
was
having
a
heart
attack,
your
son
or
daughter,
was
drowning
or
your
house
was
on
fire.
What
would
you
want
for
them?
A
four
minute
response
or
ten
minute
response?
B
The
state
continues
to
see
massive
growth,
especially
with
our
large
master
plan
communities
just
like
in
the
southwest
in
the
northwest
of
our
of
las
vegas
as
well.
In
the
reno
area,
people
are
buying
dream
homes
and
they
do
research
when
they're
buying
those
dream
homes
of
schools,
proximity
to
work
grocery
stores,
but
what
is
often
forgotten
is:
where
is
the
closest
fire
station?
Most
people
assume
that
the
city
or
county
is
ensuring
that
all
homes
are
only
built
if
the
basic
safety
infrastructure
is
in
place.
Unfortunately,
that
is
not
the
case.
B
B
We
we
wish
we
could
be
to
every
call
within
four
minutes,
but
anything
over
four
minutes
is
unacceptable.
Thank
you
again
for
your
time
and
consideration
on
this
bill,
and
hopefully
this
bill
gets
passed.
It
will
save
lives.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
If
you
have
any
questions,
I'll
remain
on
I'm
going
to
pass
over
to
matt
walker
now
to
go
over
the
bill.
Thank
you.
P
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
committee
members,
matt
walker,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada,
homebuilders
association.
I'm
going
to
do
a
brief
section
by
section
just
to
orient
the
committee
to
what
I'm
going
through.
I
am
presenting
the
bill
as
amended
by
the
amendment
that
was
also
submitted
for
nellis
for
folks
that
are
following
along
so
section
1
subsection.
P
One
subsection
two
makes
it
clear
that
funds
transferred
for
this
purpose
are
exempt
from
the
cap
and
nrs
354.59891
in
recognition
that
this
is
a
temporary
authority
granted
to
local
governments
with
the
intent
that
they
act
quickly
to
address
the
identified
need
for
fire
stations.
Section
1,
subsection
3
sets
timelines
for
the
transfer
of
funds
and
the
return
of
all
unused
funds.
P
P
In
closing,
I
would
like
to
thank
assembly
members,
jager,
gorlo
and
senator
schaible
for
helping
lead
this
important
public
safety
conversation
by
sponsoring
ab139,
I'd
like
to
thank
the
nevada,
resort
association,
mgm,
redrock,
resorts
neop
and
all
the
very
important
enterprise
fund
stakeholders
that
allow
this
conversation
to
progress
forward.
P
I
would
like
to
thank
commissioner
kirkpatrick
kirkpatrick
and
jones
clark,
county
building
official,
jerry
stevie
for
their
leadership
and
open
communication
on
this
proposal.
P
I
think
that
this
bill
is
a
real
credit
to
the
southern
nevada
development
industry
and
elected
representatives
from
this
area
that,
when
presented
with
a
a
challenge
that
was
compounded
by
the
crisis
that
that
we're
seeing
in
the
budgets
of
local
governments
due
to
covid,
they
invited
folks
to
the
table
and
were
willing
to
step
up
and
identify
an
outside
of
the
box
solution
and
we're
very
pleased
to
to
be
presenting
it
to
your
committee.
This
morning,
mr
chair,
and
with
that
I'll
conclude
and
stay
ready
for
questions.
A
And
thank
you.
I
appreciate
the
eternalness
of
the
presentation
and
and
the
amount
of
folk
we
have
on
here.
I
know
we
have
a
lot
of
bright
minds
here
that
can
walk
us
through
any
questions
we
may
have
at
this
time.
I'd
like
to
open
it
up
for
questions
and
we'll
start
off
with
the
assemblyman
matthews.
K
Mr
chairman,
thank
you
thanks
to
all
of
our
presenters
on
this
bill.
I
I
just
had
a
question
regarding
a
comment
that
was
made
and
I
apologize
for
I
forget
which
of
our
presenters
made
it,
but
I
talked
about
the
need
for
this
bill
in
the
context
of
rapid
growth
in
the
southwest
and
infrastructure.
You
know
not
being
sufficient.
You
have
to
keep
up
with
that
and
I
guess
the
question
would
be
and
it
sort
of
gets
to
the
the
slippery
slope
issue.
I
guess
do
you.
K
Are
you
aware
of
any
other
infrastructure
shortcomings
in
the
southwest
that
you
think
you
might
cause
you
to
sort
of
come
back
and
and
seek
additional?
You
know
transfers
from
the
enterprise
fund
in
the
future.
You
know
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
foresee
this.
I
know
that
the
bill
is
limited
to
fire
stations.
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
anticipate
this
as
a
potential
first
step
toward
additional
such
measures.
If
there
are
other
infrastructural
needs
that
you
identify
in
that
part
of
the
valley.
Thank
you.
P
Mr
chair
I'll
I'll
step
in
and
start
the
response
to
that
question
with
many
of
the
questions
that
I
anticipate
from
this
committee,
the
caveat
is
going
to
be
clark.
County
will
will
certainly
speak
for
themselves
when
it
comes
to
their
need,
the
their
budgeting
process
and
the
timing
of
transfers,
etc,
but
public
facilities
needs
assessment
are
a
powerful
tool.
Local
government
to
ensure
that
that
growth
and
demand
on
infrastructure,
driven
by
growth
across
a
wide
spectrum
of
categories
is,
is
addressed.
P
I
would
say
that
it
is
a
rapidly
growing
area
with
a
wide
variety
of
needs
and
we're
always
at
the
table
with
with
the
county
and
other
stakeholders
and
local
government
across
across
the
valley
that
are
seeing
similar
growth
patterns
to
ensure
that
we're
meeting
those
needs
as
part
of
every
community
we're
obviously
planning
for
fire,
hydrants
water
pressure
and
many
other
infrastructure
items
related
to
firefighting
capacity.
This
just
happens
to
be
one
where
I
feel
like
we
fell
short
when
it
came
to
future
planning
on
the
actual
physical
location
of
fire
stations
themselves.
A
Thank
you,
assemblyman.
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
for
the
members
that
we
understand
where
the
genesis
of
this
fund
started
where
the
conversation
started
where
this
money
is
coming
from.
I
don't.
I
don't
necessarily
think
that
the
members
have
a
full
grasp
on
that.
If
we
can
go
all
the
way
back
understand,
why
why
we
have
this
fund
where
we're
collecting
this
money
from
who's
paying
into
that,
and
then,
if
we
can
come
back
to
the
bill
just
so
that
we're
all
on
the
same
page,.
P
Mr
chair
matt
walker
for
the
record
I'll
again
start
start
the
response
here
and
we'll
hope
that
presenters
chime
in,
if
I
miss
anything
but
enterprise
funds
under
nrs
354,
are
something
that
local
governments
can
set
up.
Barricade
permits,
plan
fees
and
building
permits
those
revenues
accrue
within
that
enterprise
fund.
P
P
The
second
purpose
of
those
enterprise
funds
is
for
any
capital
needs
associated
with
the
building
the
processing
of
building
permits,
so
the
actual
building
itself
on
the
computer
equipment
and
other
physical
needs
associated
with
the
building
department
are
all
provided
for
by
the
enterprise
fund
in
jurisdictions
that
have
set
up
an
enterprise
fund
for
this
purpose.
So,
mr
chairman
statute
is
is
very
clear
that
this
money
code
goes
in
and
can
only
be
used
for
those
purposes
expressed
in
nrs
354.
P
Lastly,
I'll
conclude
by
saying
that
another
key
component
for
today's
discussion
is
that
nri
354
limits
how
much
can
be
held
in
reserve
for
these
building
enterprise
funds.
So
local
government
cannot
exceed
more
than
50
percent
of
the
annual
operational
needs
of
the
building
department,
plus
any
capital
expenditures
for
two
consecutive
years.
So,
typically
when,
when
you're,
you
have
an
overly
healthy
fund
reserve,
you
burn
that
the
additional
funds
off
by
increasing
the
amount
of
capital
improvement
projects
or
lowering
permit
fees
to
ensure
that
you
don't
hit
that
second
year.
P
Over
and
above
the
cap,
we
happen
to
be
in
that
fortunate
circumstance
in
clark
county
with
a
very
healthy
enterprise
fund
reserve,
and
we
simply
think
that
it's
a
better
use
of
the
money
than
burning
it
off
with
additional
capital
improvement
projects
at
the
at
the
building
department
or
lowering
permit
fees
in
a
future
year.
We
we
think
that
it's
the
highest
and
best
use
to
get
these
funds
over
to
start
construction
of
fire
stations
as
soon
as
possible.
A
Thank
you
if
we
could
go
next
to
assemblywoman
black.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Thank
you,
everyone
for
the
presentation.
You
know
I'm
familiar
with
the
fire
station
problem,
the
ambulance
problem.
I
was
on
city
council
in
mesquite.
We
have
this
exact
problem
with
a
fire
station
right
next
door
to
city
hall
and
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
upgrade
and
renovate
it.
D
My
concern
I
have
a
couple
one
is:
if
there's
so
much
excess
money
in
these
enterprise
funds,
is
it
possible
that
maybe
we're
charging
too
high
of
a
fee?
I
mean
that's
more
rhetorical
question,
but
that's
something
that's
popping
up
in
my
mind
as
we're
talking
about
this,
but
it's
my
understanding
what,
as
mr
walker
described,
that
these
enterprise
funds
are
set
aside
to
help
run
these
departments?
D
What
happens
if
we've
been
very
fortunate,
the
housing
markets
continue
to
go.
Developments
continue
to
go.
What
happens
if
we
don't
see
that
continue
like
if
there's
a
downturn,
what
happens
in
these
departments?
If
they
don't
have
money
to
continue
to
go
forward?
Do
they
have
to
be
paid
for
out
of
the
general
fund.
P
Matt
walker
for
the
record,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada,
home
builders
association:
again,
I
I
will
defer
on
the
portion
referring
to
what
would
local
governments
do
in
in
the
case
of
a
short
fall
in
the
enterprise
fund.
Just
for
clarity's
sake,
I
think
it's
really
important
for
them
to
make
the
record
on
that
issue,
but
I
will
say
that
a
healthy
fund
and
the
service
levels
associated
with
the
healthy
fund
are
critically
important
to
the
southern
nevada,
home
builders
and
other
members
of
the
development
community.
P
I
think
that
it's
fair
to
say
that
the
largely
the
excess
of
fund
reserves
in
clark
county
is
due
to
several
large
projects,
kind
of
creating
a
bubble
and
increased
revenue
that
kind
of
moved
its
way
through
the
chain,
as
you
can
think
of
some
large
projects
that
have
been
completed
and
unincorporated
clark
county
recently,
and-
and
I
think
that
over
and
above
anything
else,
a
change
in
staffing
level.
P
Change
in
capital,
expenditures,
change
in
the
levels
of
your
typical
development
activity,
with
smaller
shopping,
centers
and
homes
have
all
stayed
pretty
constant,
and
so
I
think
that
it's
fair
to
say
the
fun
balance
is
reflective
of
some
really
large
projects
working
their
way
through
the
pipeline.
D
P
Yeah,
thank
you,
matt
walker
again
for
the
southern
nevada,
home
builders
association.
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblywoman
black
again.
P
I
think
it's
important
to
highlight
that
there
is
a
public
facilities
needs
assessment
fee
for
the
southwest
area,
as
as
mr
hodgson
highlighted
briefly
in
his
testimony,
it's
been
in
place
for
about
20
years
now.
P
What
happened
is
that
they
were
put
in
place
in
the
early
2000s
pre-great
recession
and
the
area
really
exploded
in
growth,
post,
great
recession
and
those
fees
had
never
been
indexed
or
otherwise
adjusted
to
it.
Reflect
the
higher
construction
costs
that
we
that
we
see
today,
and
so
the
home
builders
came
to
the
table,
along
with
other
development.
Community
partners
increased
that
fee
by
a
hundred
percent
and
indexed
the
cap
in
the
fee
going
forward.
P
So
we
hope
to
never
be
in
this
position
again
in
the
southwest,
along
the
lines
of
where
we're
at
today
with
a
gap
in
fire
service
infrastructure
funding,
but
so
that
the
short
answer
is
that
this
bill
would
fill
that
gap.
But
we've
already
taken
steps
in
coordination
with
commissioner
jones
and
commissioner
kirkpatrick
and
staff
to
ensure
that
we
never
end
up
in
this
spot
again.
A
D
I
guess
I
don't
know
who
this
would
be
for,
but
it's
my
understanding
right
now
that,
as
it
stands,
enterprise
funds
can
loan
money.
Why
not?
My
first
question
is:
what
are
we
doing
in
the
case
of
a
downturn?
My
second
question
is:
why
not
loan
the
money
and
then
repay
it
that
way
we
are
not
rating
these
funds.
P
P
A
Thank
you.
We
could
go
to
clark
county.
I
think
the
the
sentiment
of
the
first
set
of
questions
we've
got
is
in
this
specifically
in
this
committee.
We've
heard
the
word
sunset
used
all
too
often,
and
there
is
a
concern
that
we
consistently
keep
moving
the
goal
post
and
we
set
these
sunsets
and
simply
come
back
every
session
and
and
keep
setting
new
sunsets
and
it
becomes
this
perpetual
cycle.
I
think
that
was
one
of
the
concerns
that
was
brought
up.
A
The
second
was
what
you
know
when
we
originally
talked
about
this
enterprise
fund
and
and
the
buy-in
from
from
folk
was
with
one
expectation
now
we're
talking
about
potentially
utilizing
in
a
different
way,
with
the
the
caveat
and
understanding
that
we
need.
We
need
these
things.
A
Obviously
we
need
fire,
but
if
you
could
just
get
into
that
and
clark
county,
if
you
could
kind
of
set
set
the
record
straight
on
the
intent
desire,
what
we're
going
to
be
doing
in
the
future
so
that
we
can
leave
a
paper
trail
on
what
the
intent
is
now
and
should
we
have
a
conversation
similar
to
this
in
two
years
or
four,
the
members
have
an
opportunity
to
come
back
and
say:
look
we.
We
had
a.
We
had
a
very
candid
conversation
about
this
and
it
was
put
on
the
record.
M
Sure,
chairman
flores,
this
is
joanna
jacob
government
affairs
manager
for
clark
county.
I
apologize
for
my
appearance.
I
wasn't
expected
to
be
on
the
zoom,
I'm
working
from
home
today,
so
I
can
speak.
I
think
that
the
concerns
were
adequately
addressed
by
mr
walker.
He
has
explained
that
I
think
part
of
the
reason
why
we
do
have
such
a
health
and
viability
of
this
fund
right
now
is
because
of
large
projects
that
he
has
identified.
M
The
reserve
requirement
that
is
in
statute,
is
there
for
a
reason,
because
the
building
department
at
clark
county
is
an
enterprise
fund
so
that
they
are
self-supporting.
In
that
sense,
assemblywoman
black.
I
I'm
trying
to
get
an
answer
for
you
on
what
would
happen.
I'm
not
sure,
and
I
apologize
I
will.
I
was
trying
to
get
an
answer
for
you
before
I
was
called
upon
to
see
if
we
would
have
to
what
we
would
have
to
do.
M
M
I
I
think,
mr
chairman,
if
I
may,
the
conversations
that
were
ongoing
during
the
interim
and
when
we
were
in
the
cycle
where
whether
we
did,
as
mr
walker
noted,
have
to
reduce
fees.
That
is
one
of
the
statutory
requirements
for
this
type
of
fund
and
we've
really
taken
a
look,
as
he
noted
on
the
on
a
needs
assessment
and
on
gaap
funding,
and
that's
really
where
the
genesis
of
these
conversations
came
and
because
it
is
limited
to
fire
at
this
time.
That
is
the
biggest.
M
I
know,
mr
inglesby,
I
thought
summarized
that
very
well
that
that
is
our
biggest
community
need
at
this
time
that
we
feel
that
was
identified,
that
public
facilities
needs
assessment
was
directed
by
our
board.
I
want
to
make
everybody
aware
that
our
board
does
not
want
to
kick
the
can
down
the
road
on
the
need
for
public
safety
on
a
county-wide
basis,
and
so
they
are
ongoing
monitoring
this
on
an
ongoing
in
an
ongoing
fashion.
M
But
the
reason
why
you
see
the
sunset,
mr
chairman,
is
because,
as
you
know,
we're
we're
watching
this
and
seeing
if
conditions
change,
then
we
would
maybe
that's
why
we
wanted
to
put
a
sunset
on
it,
because
we
do
have
the
fund
in
a
healthy
place
right
now
and
we
feel
that
we
could
divert
some
of
the
funding
there
to
meet
our
fire
station
needs.
P
Mr
chairman,
if
it
would
be
okay,
could
I
add
to
that
response?
Very
very
briefly.
Please
do
so.
I
I
didn't
want
to
step
on
toes.
P
So
thank
you
for
the
second
opportunity
to
answer
this
question,
but
I
am
aware
of
a
circumstance
and,
for
instance,
city
of
henderson
during
the
great
recession
where
the
general
fund
did
come
in
and
supplement
staff
levels
in
the
building
enterprise
fund
and
the
building
enterprise
fund
paid
back
the
general
fund,
as
it
emerged
from
as
permit
revenue
emerged
from
the
depths
of
the
great
recession,
so
that
that
certainly
is
the
mechanism
that
I'm
historically
aware
of,
and
I
I
imagine
that
local
governments
would
take
a
similar
approach,
should
the
pandemic
lead
to
similar
circumstances.
A
Thank
you
for
that,
and
that
was
assembly.
Excuse
me
that
that
was
mr
walker
for
the
record.
If
we
could
please
go
back
to
assemblywoman
black.
D
Thank
you
yeah.
I
mean
I
hate
to
harp
on
this.
I
know
that
miss
jacob
said
that
they're
contemplating
a
reduction
in
the
fee.
I
think
that
that's
really
if
this
is
a
problem
that
we're
going
to
have
more
than
the
amount
of
money
that's
allowed
to
carry
over
in
these
funds.
D
I
think
that
it's
really
important
that
we
lower
those
fees
and
it
I,
as
you
said
it's
the
need,
is
in
fire
right
now,
but
I
can
tell
you,
there's
always
going
to
be
a
need
where
you'll
solve
this
need
and
then
something
else
will
come
up.
So
as
long
as
there's
an
excess
amount
of
money
in
this
fund,
which
there
should
not
be,
then
I
I
just
there
will
always
be
something
to
spend
it
on
and
that's
my
concern.
Thank
you.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
so
I
have
two
questions.
The
first
one,
I
believe
is
for
mr
ingles
singles
the
excuse
me
inglesby
and
then,
or
maybe
for
mr
walker
too.
I
just
wanted
to
verify
that,
although
right
now
the
line
of
questioning
has
been
concentrating
on
in
clark
county,
this
is
for
any
city
or
county
government
that
has
a
building
enterprise
fund.
Is
that
correct.
P
Matt
walker
for
the
record,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada
home
builders
association.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
provide
that
clarification
of
silly
women
anderson.
P
So
if
you've
had,
if
for
members,
who've
had
the
chance
to
peruse
that
chapter
and
kind
of
refresh
their
their
memory
on
on
the
structure
that
is
in
this
section
associated
with
regional
planning
for
counties
whose
population
is
700
000
or
more.
H
H
Excuse
me:
is
there
any
sort
of
or
anybody
actually
has
there
been
any
sort
of
discussion
about,
possibly
changing
or
even
adjusting
section
one?
H
I
believe
it's
point
anyways
where
it
would
also
be
an
ability
to
utilize
these
funds
for
retrofitting
already
existing
buildings,
or
is
it
only
for
the
creation
of
and
the
building
of
new
stations.
I
This
is
steve
yeager
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
that
question
and
I'll
probably
hand
it
over
to
mr
walker,
but
I
I
think
this
just
contemplated
the
building
of
new
stations,
at
least
as
the
bill
is
presented
to
you,
but
mr
walker
has
been
a
little
more
intimately
involved
in
some
of
those
conversations.
So,
mr
chair,
if
you'll
allow,
maybe
he
can
explain
if
that
was
a
topic
of
discussion
for
now
or
later.
P
Thank
you,
mr
chair
matt,
walker,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada
home
builders
association
for
the
record.
I
have
had
a
discussion
with
mr
inglesby
and
other
pffn
stakeholders
that
suggested
that
similar
to
other
impact
fees
similar
to
to
the
residential
construction
tax
use,
that's
collected
in
a
similar
manner
that
infrastructure
generally
driven
by
the
need
for
new
development
may
be
appropriate,
inappropriate
use
of
these
transferred
funds,
and
we
will
engage
with
the
bill
sponsor
after
today's
hearing
to
see.
P
If,
if
there's
a
concept
we
can
land
on,
but
as
mr
yeager
as
assemblyman
yeager
indicated.
This
really
is
to
solve
a
pretty
specific
set
of
circumstances
and-
and
I
think
that
certainly
the
the
engagement
and
and
problem
solving
conversations
that
have
been
had
on
this
bill
have
been
really
centered
around
the
clark
county
context
and
in
this
particular
set
of
circumstances.
A
Thank
you
next,
we'll
go
to
subliminalist.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
mr
chairman,
I'd
like
to
open
up
with
the
question
a
couple
questions.
Mr
hudson
stated
in
his
testimony
when
he
opened
up
about
the
building
fund,
and
may
I
ask
him
that
some.
F
Yeah,
how
many
counties
that
actually
have
a
a
building
fund-
you
know
that's,
that's
it
would
fall
under
this.
Is
I
don't
know
of
any
very
many
counties
that
might
have
this
and
if
it
did
wouldn't
some
of
that
money
help
go
to
do
like
street
lightings
and
stop
lights,
and
some
of
these
new
subdivisions
that
are
out
there,
that
that
has
put
too
much
burden
on
them.
F
Could
you
answer
that
and
then
I
I've
got
I've
got
others,
because
I
know
our
enterprise
funds
do
waste
water,
landfills,
water,
airports,
this
kind
of
stuff-
and
I
know
that
our
building
permits
go
up
to
help
pay
for
some
of
these
other
things
which
goes
back
into
the
county
or
the
cities.
F
So
could
you
tell
me
how
many
buildings
funds
out
there
that
that
collect
his
funds.
E
Matt
hodgson
for
the
record,
with
something
about
homebuilder
association.
I'm
I
don't
know
100
of
particulars.
I
believe
the
way
the
bill
is
written.
The
enterprise
fund
that
would
be
applicable
to
would
be
only
clark
county.
I
know
that
as
far
as
enterprises
go
in
southern
nevada,
I'm
aware
of
three
municipalities
that
have
an
enterprise
fund.
E
That's
henderson
clark
county
in
city,
las
vegas,
and
it
is
to
pay
for
just
services
for
for
a
building,
as
mr
walker
indicated,
capital
improvements
to
the
building
which
houses
the
employees
that
the
enterprise
fund
pays
for.
F
Yeah,
I
appreciate
that,
but
it
didn't
say
strictly
clark
county
in
the
bill.
Maybe
I
misunderstood
and
looked,
but
I
I
didn't
see
that.
A
Assembly
in
alaska,
just
for
a
point
of
clarification,
I
think
mr
walker
addressed
this
in
in
by
referencing
back
to
the
the
and
I
can't
recall
the
section,
but
mr
walker
can
come
in.
There's
a
population
cap
and-
and
I
think
that's
also
what's
helping
trigger
narrowing
this
down
to
specific
predictions.
Mr
walker,
if
you
could
reference
that
that
section
again.
P
Sure,
thank
you,
mr
chair
matt,
walker,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada
home
builders
association,
for
the
record
that
that
section
that
you
referenced
was
nrs
278.02
591.
F
And
then
one
other
question
is
the
building
funds
that
it's
collected?
Does
that
help
go
to
help
set?
Some
of
the
offsets
for
like
street
lodge
stop
lights,
this
kind
of
things
or
because
I'm
not
familiar
with
that
fund.
I
know
that
they
got
problems
and
and
with
the
growth.
I
understand
that
quite
well
so,
but
could
you
answer
that
question.
P
Matt
walker,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada,
home
builders
association.
Thank
you,
mr
ellison,
for
the
for
the
question.
The
the
short
answer
is
no
building
enterprise
fund
funds
can
only
be
used
for
the
services
directly
associated
with
providing
permits,
barricade
permits,
building
permits,
etc.
P
Any
street
lights,
traffic
lights,
etc
are
very
typically
paid
for
by
the
developer
as
they
come
in
and
develop
a
parcel,
and
then
they
turn
it
over
to
the
county.
So
that
certainly
is
something
that
development
pays
for
along
the
way
it
just
doesn't
happen
to
be
through
the
building
enterprise
fund
structure.
A
Thank
you.
If
we
could
next
go
to
assemblywoman
brown
may.
D
Thank
you,
sir
flores.
Thank
you,
mr
walker,
for
teaching
us
very
much
about
this
enterprise.
P
D
I
just
want
to
go
back
and
and
really
be
clear.
You're
representing
the
nevada
home
builders,
association
and
the
membership
is
that,
where
this
money
is
coming
from,
the
home
builders
are
they're
paying
into
this
enterprise
fund.
That's
that's
my
first
question
so
they're
the
ones
that
are
interested
in
utilizing
this
fund
to
be
able
to
develop
infrastructure
in
the
locations
that
they're
building
homes,
that's
sort
of
what
I'm
taking
away
here
and
then
what
can
you
talk
to
us
about
impact
fees?
Would
impact
these
be
more
appropriate
here?
Why
is
this?
D
P
Thank
you
for
the
the
questions:
brahmay
matt
walker,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada,
home
builders
association
and,
if
there's
any
clarity,
additional
clarity
needed
from
miss
jacobs
on
behalf
of
the
county.
I
welcome
that,
but,
generally
speaking,
home
building
industry
does
pay
into
this
fund.
There
are
several
other
key
stakeholders
in
commercial
development
and
gaming,
of
course,
that
also
pay
a
significant
amount
of
those
building
permit
fees.
P
It's
a
unique
set
of
circumstances
where
we
have
run
into
the
pandemic,
had
the
county's
budget
impacted
by
that,
while
also
having
had
several
large
projects
come
through
the
pipeline
that
have
created
a
significant
amount
of
excess
reserves.
So,
while
we've
increased
the
impact
fees
for
this
area
and
index
them
to
allow
for
further
growth
in
the
fees,
so
they
keep
up
with
construction
inflation.
P
The
other
option
would
be
to
further
increase
impact
fees
and
allow
those
funds
to
accrue
in
an
account
and
then
use
that
for
fire
infrastructure
funding.
That's
certainly
what
is
going
to
happen
with
the
remaining
public
facilities
needs
assessment
dollars
that
that
were
referenced
in
mr
hodgson's
testimony,
but
we
think
that
this
is
the
absolute
quickest
and
most
equitable
way
to
to
stand
up
this
infrastructure.
And
that's
that's
why
we're
here
before
you
today.
A
A
Seeing
none
members
I
want
to
thank
you
for
the
questions
we
are
engaged
in
a
rather
complex
conversation
that
dates
back
quite
a
bit
and
you're
raising
concerns
that
are
often
brought
forth
in
this
committee
when
we
talk
about
sunsets
and
when
we
talk
about
the
purpose
of
a
fund
and
then
potentially
using
it
differently.
So
I
appreciate
everybody
engaging
in
that
conversation
at
this
time.
A
K
clark,
county
fire
department
is
lacking
resources
in
the
southwest
part
of
the
valley,
as
mentioned
through
the
presentations
today
in
the
past
myself
and
the
the
previous
fire
chief
greg
castle
did
spend
some
time
with
all
the
commissioners
and
identified
a
need
in
the
southwest
area
for
additional
stations,
including
up
to
seven
stations,
to
make
the
coverage,
as
as
mr
inglesby
had
mentioned
earlier,
the
the
time
and
the
response
area
has
grown
so
much
in
that
in
that
region
with
the
amount
of
growth.
K
That
is
that
we
need
to
get
some
new
stations
in
that
area.
Our
resources
are
limited.
Our
ability
to
build
new
stations
is
limited
based
on
the
current
pandemic.
K
K
We
have
two
coming
online
this
year
and
the
other
two
are
in
question,
based
on
the
lack
of
funding
through
the
general
fund
based
on
this
pandemic
that
we're
experiencing
right
now,
if
there's
anything
that
we
can
do
to
help,
please
let
us
know
we
are
100
in
support
of
this.
We
need
resources
in
the
southwest
part
of
the
valley.
I
appreciate
your
time
today,
mr
chairman,.
A
And,
thank
you,
sir.
If
next
we
could
go
to
miss
jacob
wishing
to
speak
in
support.
I
know
that
we
brought
you
on
to
start
answering
questions,
but
the
original
intent
was
to
hopefully
get
your
testimonial
support,
so
we'll
go
to
you
next.
M
Thank
you
for
the
indulgence,
mr
chair
joanna,
jacob
clark,
county
government
affairs
manager
and
we
are
testifying
in
support
today
of
ab139.
I
wanted
to
put
some
timelines
on
the
record.
I
guess
on
construction,
as
as
the
gentlemen
who
have
testified
on
this
have
have
spoken
to.
We
are
in
support,
because
this
does
fund
a
critical
need
for
our
community
for
the
fire
stations
and
mr
thompson
noted
our
general
fund
challenges.
M
We
were
just
here
before
you
earlier
this
week
talking
about
talking
about
the
challenges
that
we
have
faced
with
the
county
budgets.
I
do
want
to
clarify
just
one
piece
of
testimony.
Mr
chair
also,
even
though
mr
walker
noted
that
the
city
of
henderson
has
supplemented
with
general
fund
revenues
that
it's
not
necessarily
a
decision
that
clark
county
may
make
really.
This
is
that
is
not.
The
purpose
of
an
enterprise
fund
is
to
be
self-supporting,
so
that
we
cannot
take
those
funds
for
general
fund
purposes.
M
That
is
that's
a
decision
for
the
clark
county.
We
do
have
a
different
enterprise
fund
to
mr
ellison.
Our
airport
is,
I
is
also
organized
as
an
enterprise
fund.
So
just
two
points
of
clarification
I
heard
from
mr
walker.
There
were
some
questions
about
timeline
to
construction
on
these
fire
stations.
As
mr
thompson
noted
there,
you
know
we
do
have
some
on
the
books.
M
M
The
average
timeline
for
construction
of
a
new
fire
station
from
design
through
construction
is
about
three
years
for
clark
county.
So
as
soon
as
these
funds
can
be
audited,
they
are
subject
to
audit
and
that's
why
we
asked
for
the
change
to
june
30th
of
next
year,
so
that
we
can
know
exactly
what
funding
can
be
transferred
and
then
we
can
uncertainty
once
those
funds
are
then
appropriated
by
our
board.
M
We
can
begin
design
that
should
take
about
a
year
and
we're
hoping
that
we
will
be
able
to
get
a
new
station
constructed
within
the
time
frame
presented
in
this
bill.
So
that
is
why
we
are
in
support
and
thank
you
for
bringing
me
on
I'm
happy
to
provide
clarification
to
any
committee
member
also
after
this
meeting.
Thank
you.
G
A
I
Thank
you
so
much,
mr
chair,
steve
yeager
for
the
record.
I
just
want
to
thank
the
committee
for
hearing
the
bill
today.
I
thought
they
were
very
good
questions
that
were
asked,
and
you
know
really
want
to
thank
those
who
are
on
the
zoom
with
me.
They
really
did
the
hard
work
of
talking
to
people
in
the
interim
finding
this
solution,
and
I
feel
fortunate
that
they
came
to
me
and
asked
me
to
carry
this
bill
so
certainly
willing
to
keep
working
on
anything
that
you
might
need.
I
A
A
Assemblyman
allison.
Yes,
please.
F
Mr
yeager,
thank
you
and-
and
I
think
it's
important,
that
we
look
at
the
districts
and
the
needs
for
each
district
and
that's
why
I
asked
what
bill
that
was.
So
I
really
appreciate
that,
because
if
we
can
address
each
districts
on
some
of
their
common
things
that
they
need
help
on,
I
think
that
that
is
supportive
for
the
people
in
that
district,
because
I
know
that
the
whole
state's
different
and
that's
why
you
know
you
don't
go
by
pike
top
caps
anymore,
but
we
can
go
by
problems.
We
have
so.
A
And
thank
you
again
and,
and
thank
you
all
who
co-presented
the
information
was
very
useful
and
appreciate
you
coming
ready
with
that.
We're
going
to
go
ahead
and
close
out
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
139
and
next
I'd
like
to
invite
those
wishing
to
speak
in
public
comment
broadcast.
If
you
could,
please
go
to
the
phone
lines.
A
Great,
thank
you
just
some
quick
cleanup
members.
I
want
to
remind
you
that
when
we
are
when
we
are
meeting,
although
we
are
doing
it
virtually
that
we
we
respect
the
quorum
and
that
we
treat
the
virtual
meeting
as
if
we
were
sitting
at
the
diocese
and
anything
that
we
wouldn't
do
at
the
dias
that
that
we
refrain
from
doing
on
camera,
for
both
for
the
respect
and
and
to
ensure
that
we're
focusing
our
entire
attention
to
the
presenters.
A
But
on
top
of
that
I
also
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we're
sending
a
very
clear
message
that
you
know
we
take
this
very
serious.
So
please,
anytime,
we
are
on
on
once
the
meeting
starts.
You
are
sitting
at
the
committee
meeting.
We
are
sitting
at
the
dias
and-
and
I
I
expect
us
to
continue
to
respect
that
and
and
for
our
broadcast
team.
Thank
you
today.
I
know
we
had
a
bunch
of
technical
issues,
that's
normal.
We
expect
that-
and
I
appreciate
you
working
through
that.
A
I
will
ask
that
moving
forward,
and
I
say
this
publicly
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
on
the
record
so
that
nobody
ever
takes
any
offense
to
this,
but
if,
if
broadcast,
if
at
any
time
you
ever
see
that
a
presenter
is
having
issues
with
their
sound,
although
it
is
the
preference
of
the
committee
to
have
them
appear
through
the
virtual
zoom
meeting.
A
If
we're
having
that
sound
issue,
I
ask
that
you
disallow
them
from
from
doing
the
actual
virtual
zoom
and
that
you
ask
that
they
do
the
phone
and
again
I'm
saying
that
publicly,
so
that
nobody
takes
offense
if
broadcast
ever
does
that.
But
it
is
to
your
benefit
that
the
members
can
hear
your
responses
so
moving
forward.
A
It
will
be
the
standard
of
this
committee
that,
if
we're
having
issues
with
audio
that
we're
gonna,
ask
that
you
call
in
instead
of
joining
us
virtually
and
again
it's
to
your
benefit
that
we
do
that
to
ensure
that
you
can
both
hear
us
clearly,
and
we
can
hear
you
moving
forward
with
that
members
again.
Thank
you
for
the
thoughtful
discussion
today.
I
I
really
appreciate
everybody
engaging.
I
look
forward
to
working
with
everybody
on
these
two
bills
and
with
that
this
meeting
is
a.