►
From YouTube: 3/9/2021 - 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.
A
C
F
D
A
Thank
you.
There
is
one
there
are
13
members
president
and
one
that
is.
If
we
could
just
make
mark
chair
flores
present
as
he
arrives,
we
will
we
do
have
a
quorum.
So
we
may
begin
the
meeting.
I
would
like
to
welcome
everyone
to
today's
assembly
committee
on
government
affairs.
We
will
be
here
holding
a
hearing
on
exactly
one
bill
today.
A
As
you
know,
the
legislative
building
remains
close
to
the
public,
and
so
all
committee
meetings
will
be
held
virtually
committee
members
staff
and
everyone
else
will
be
participating
either
through
zoom
or
by
telephone
for
cut
for
committee
members.
I
would
just
like
to
remind
you
to
silence
or
turn
off
all
electronics
and
phones
during
the
meeting
and
mute
your
microphones.
While
you
are
not
speaking
to
minimize
background
noise,
please
leave
your
cameras
on
so
that
we
maintain
a
quorum
throughout
our
meeting
today
and
please
state
your
name
for
the
record.
A
Every
time
you
unmute
your
mic
to
sleep
to
speak,
it
does
help
our
secretaries.
Keep
accurate
records
of
the
meeting
minutes.
Members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
testify
or
present
public
comment
will
have
the
option
to
call
in
or
submit
written
testimony
or
comments.
I
would
encourage
those
wishing
to
offer
testimony
on
a
measure
do
so
in
writing
to
ensure
that
we
receive
your
full
statement
in
the
interest
of
time.
Testimony
and
support
opposition
and
neutral
will
be
limited
to
two
minutes.
A
A
Those
are
all
sufficient
options
and
please
avoid
reading
long
testimony
instead
summarize
and
focus
on
the
key
points
of
your
testimony
and
provide
your
written
testimony
to
committee
staff
within
48
hours
of
today's
meeting.
I
would
like
to
now
open
the
hearing
on
ab99
assemblyman
lsn.
Please
begin
when
you're
ready.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record
or
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
I'm
john
ellison
representing
assembly
district
33..
I
am
here
today
to
represent
to
present
ab-99.
E
If
I
screw
up,
please
bear
with
me
here's
the
problem
we're
facing
right
now.
As
you
know,
prevailing
wages
paid
on
public
fund
projects
are
determined
through
the
survey
conducted
by
the
nevada,
labor
commission
rates
are
determined
by
region
which
separates
between
rural
and
urban
counties.
The
third,
the
current
threshold
for
prevailing
wage
on
a
project
is
a
hundred
thousand
and
applies
to
all
counties
regardless
of
the
size,
and
that's
one
of
the
problems
we
have
in
some
of
our
communities
throughout
rural
nevada.
Public
agencies
are
struggling
to
get
single
public
work.
E
Projects
completed
from
very
small
budgets
such
as
construction
projects,
maintenance,
repairs,
rebuilding
such
which
include
parks
or
libraries
or
publix
buildings,
sidewalks
replacement,
asphalt,
replacements
or
maintaining
when
things
that
cost
a
hundred
thousand
or
less
is
almost
impossible
to
consider
the
actual
start
of
the
construction
project.
These
counties
or
cities
must
save
for
long
periods
of
time
for
large
projects
making
the
people
of
these
communities
wait
for
which
could
be
essential
services.
It's
even
harder
to
get
larger
companies
to
bid
a
project
in
some
of
these
rural
areas
under
250
000
dollars.
E
I'll
give
an
example:
eureka
county
one
of
the
projects
they
were
doing.
The
motels
are
full
there's
only
one
one,
one
motel
and
rv
park
and
they're
full
with
the
mines
and
with
the
cobiah
there's
no
restaurant.
So
you
got
to
drive
90
miles
each
way
every
day,
if
you're
going
to
work
in
that
community.
E
So
if
you
consider
some
of
the
small
communities,
they
have
a
total
public
working
budget,
a
sum
of
200
000
and
less
the
city
of
wales.
Give
you
an
example.
The
city
of
wales
is
still
rebuilding
after
the
earthquake
that
devastated
the
town
and
an
operating
budget
of
450
000
a
year.
That's
on
public
works
money.
E
Some
cities
and
counties
have
been
hit
so
hard
during
the
coved
pandemic,
but
lower
sales
tax
in
room
stack
has
put
a
burden
on
all
communities
in
nevada,
no
matter
where
you're
at.
If
you're
in
las
vegas,
elko
or
washoe,
every
county
of
nevada
is
different
by
nature,
size,
population,
industry,
gaming,
mining,
recreation
or
agriculture,
there's
no
two
counties
alike
in
nevada.
E
This
is
why
I
propose
an
amendment
which
would
limit
the
provisions
of
this
field
to
apply
only
to
rural
counties
with
the
population
100
000
or
less,
with
the
approval
of
every
with
approval
of
the
amendment,
the
project
located
in
the
counties
with
a
population
100
000
or
less.
If
the
cost
construction
project
is
less
than
250
thousand
dollars
in
prevailing
provisions,
do
not
apply.
Please
see
the
copy
of
the
conceptual
amendment
on
nellis
and
I
think
that's
important
because
we're
not
trying
to
change
the
state
we're
just
trying
to
help
the
rural
communities.
E
I
believe
this
a
very
responsible,
balanced
proposal.
This
bill
will
allow
for
more
necessary
projects
to
be
completed
and
more
jobs
to
be
created.
More
people
will
be
put
to
work.
It
would
essentially
more
citizens
to
put
food
on
their
table
and
care
for
their
families,
pay
their
mortgage
and
continue
the
everyday
life
without
worries
of
losing
everything,
and
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
feel
very
passionate
about
this
and
you're
going
to
hear
a
testimony
in
opposition
to
this
bill.
E
E
This
includes
my
remarks
and
I
would
like
to
have
daniel
with
nevada
policy
npri
research
to
provide
additional
testimony,
and
thank
you
very
much
and
if
you
would
want
to,
we
can
wait
until
the
end
for
answers,
because
we
have
several
people
from
around
the
counties
that
are
going
to
testify.
Thank
you,
madam
chairman.
G
G
G
G
G
With
that
background,
I'll
reaffirm
assemblyman
ellison's
primary
purpose
for
bringing
forth
this
bill
to
ensure
our
tax
dollars
are
spent
more
wisely
and
go
further,
as
introduced,
ab-99
proposes
to
increase
the
threshold
at
which
prevailing
wage
mandates
apply
for
ng
construction
projects
from
100
thousand
to
two
hundred
fifty
thousand
dollars
an
action
which
would
partially
undo
the
changes
made
under
ab136
of
the
2019
session
sections.
Two
and
three
of
this
bill
illustrate
the
mandatory
language
or
nrs
chapter
3,
338
required
replacing
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
statute
with
two
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
section.
G
G
G
G
Quite
frankly,
npris
supports
the
complete
abandonment
of
prevailing
wage
laws
in
nevada,
but
marginal
progress
is
progress.
Nonetheless,
regarding
potential
taxpayer
savings,
it
is
difficult
to
provide
detailed
estimates
here,
largely
because
future
projects
have
not
yet
been
contemplated,
but
the
taxpayer
costs
incurred
by
modestly
increasing
prevailing
wage
mandates,
as
with
ab-136
of
2019,
are
instructive.
G
To
conclude,
these
are
not
small
dollars
at
stake
and
prevailing
wage
laws
result
in
our
tax
dollars
being
used
in
unwise
and
inefficient
ways,
ways
that,
for
example,
seem
to
impeach
any
claim
that
nevada's
schools
are
underfunded.
G
I
urge
this
committee
to
follow
the
trend
of
states
which
have
recently
abandoned
their
prevailing
wage
laws
and
adopt
these
in
comparison
very
modest
reforms.
Again,
I
thank
this
committee
for
allowing
me
to
present
today
we
strongly
support
assembly
bill
99
at
the
nevada
policy
research
institute.
H
And
thank
you
for
co-presenting
briefly,
I
wanted
to
say
thank
you
to
madam
vice
chair
for
taking
care
of
the
committee.
While
I
was
presenting
a
different
committee,
assemblyman
allison
is
there
anybody
else
that
you
wish
to
co-present
with
you?
I
know
that
you
indicated
there
were
several.
E
We
have
several
people.
I
know
that
del
mondrosi
is
on
the
phone.
He
is
a
county
commissioner,
from
elko
county
he's,
a
previous
assistant
county,
a
city
manager
of
the
city
of
elko,
so
he's
got
some
knowledge
of
the
prevailing
wage
and
the
effects
it
has
on
some
of
the
rural
communities.
Elk
is
kind
of
better
than
most.
E
The
funding
that
they
have
for
public
works
is
a
lot
better
than
some
of
the
smaller
communities,
but
it's
still
it
it's
not
enough
to
get
projects
done
and-
and-
and
mr
anderson
can
address
that-
and
I
don't
know
if
he's
on
the
phone
or
not.
Mr
androzy,
are
you
there.
H
Before
we
go
to
assemblyman
allison,
just
for
the
sake
of
clarity,
these
are
all
individuals
that
are
co-presenting
with
you
and
will
be
on
the
line
available
for
questions,
or
are
they
individuals
that
will
be
supporting
your
bill
and
you
wish
for
them
to
speak
during
the
support
portion
of
the
bill.
Presentation.
E
H
Understood
so
we'll
go
to
the
line
so
that
we
could
have
your
co-presenter
address
the
concerns
and
or
material
prepared
for.
H
E
I
E
Broadcasting
and
further,
mr
chair,
I
appreciate
you
for
allowing
me
to
present
the
bill
today.
Also,
I
knew
that
you
were
busy
and
you
you
had
a
bill
to
present.
I
hope
it
went
well.
I
appreciate.
H
That
I
appreciate
that
just
because
we
are
in
one
minute
recess.
I
know
that
none
of
this
is
going
to
the
record.
So
I
thank
you
for
that.
Assemblyman.
H
And
we
thank
you
all
for
for
being
available
to
join
us
this
morning,
and
I
know
madam
vice
chair-
send
some
intimidating
fists
via
video
to
you
all.
E
H
Well,
we
could
open
up
the
hearing
again
and,
and
we
could
go
into
questions
and
answers
now
and
then
all
those
wishing
to
testify
could
then
do
it
in
the
support
column
of
the
bill
presentation
and
that
may
work,
if
that,
if
that's
to
your
pleasure,
if
you
feel
confident
that
both
yourself
and
your
co-presenter
could
could
address
bulk
of
the
questions,
and
we
would
gladly
do
that
and
we
could
call
the
meeting
back
toward
her.
Are
you
comfortable
with
that?
Yes,
sir,
all
right,
thank
you.
H
The
assembly
committee
of
government
affairs
will
come
back
to
order.
Thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison,
for
your
presentation
this
morning
and
again
on
the
record.
Thank
you
to
madam
vice
chair
for
taking
care
of
the
committee
at
this
time.
We're
going
to
go
ahead
and
open
it
up
for
questions.
I
recognize
that
there
is
a
host
of
individuals
wishing
to
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill.
99
know
that
you
will
have
an
opportunity
to
speak
during
support
to
put
your
comments
on
the
record.
C
I
do
have
a
few
questions,
but
I'll
just
stick
to
two
at
this
time.
The
first
one
I
just
need
a
little
bit
of
clarification
as
to
what
exactly
these
projects
apply
to,
because
assemblymember
allison
you
brought
up
restaurants
and
hotels,
and
yet
I
I
reading
it,
I
thought
it
was
for
public
works.
So
could
you
clarify
that
please
for
exactly
which
projects
this
would
be
dealing
with.
E
Yes,
that
was
that
was
to
describe
how
one
of
the
projects
they
did
in
eureka.
E
E
Everything
that
we're
talking
about
here
is
public
works
project.
I'll,
give
you
an
example:
eureka
county
just
did
a
great
job
on
the
courthouse,
and
that
was
a
union
project.
The
job
went
great.
They
had
motels,
they
had
the
restaurants
open;
they
they
did
a
wonderful
job,
that's
what
we
want,
but
we're
talking
about
the
little
bitty
projects
like
right
now
in
in
the
city
of
elko.
E
Could
you
know
testify
to
that
when
they
get
on
there
to
do
sidewalks
right
now,
they
could
probably
do
three
quarters
of
a
project
on
sidewalks
curb
gutter
and
sidewalks
what
they
could
if
the
prevailing
wage
wasn't
there
and
that's
some
of
the
issues
that
they're
having
they
need
to
get
these
projects
done,
but
they're
limited
with
the
amount
of
money
they
do.
E
They
just
replaced
all
the
air
conditionings
on
the
the
school
there
in
elko
in
the
gymnasium,
and
that
was
all
prevailing
wage
because
the
project
was,
I
don't,
know
three
quarters
of
a
million
dollars,
so
we're
talking
about
the
little
projects
that
are
really
hurting,
not
the
big
ones
and
we
support
the
big
ones.
So
I
hope
that
answered
your
question.
C
C
C
My
other
question,
though,
has
to
do
with
the
way
that
some
of
the
items
are
brought
forward,
because
I
have
been
intimate
with
some
of
the
different
construction
sites
on
school
projects,
in
particular,
where
sometimes
you'll
start
off
with
one
element,
and
then
you
go
to
the
next
element
and
then
you
go
to
the
next
element,
and
these
are
all
three
different
contracts,
but
it's
for
the
same
building
with
this.
Let's
just
say
that
you've
got
one
portion
of
that
contract
is
for
190
190
000.
C
E
E
So
if
they
went
in
and
tried
to
repair
to
extend
the
life
in
wells
nevada
that
project,
if
it
goes
to
rebuilt,
they
could
probably
repair
the
building
for
for
150
200
000,
but
if
it
goes
to
a
new
building,
it'd
have
to
go
out
to
one
well
there'd,
both
be
one
project,
but
it
it
it'd,
be
so
big
that
it
it
opens
up
to
everything.
So
I
hope
that
that
explains
it,
but
trying
to
say
that
they
can't
bundle
projects.
E
E
But
if,
if
it
wasn't,
they
could
probably
get
that
roof
done
for
less
than
a
hundred
thousand
or
right
at
a
hundred
thousand,
and
that
would
be
one
project.
C
J
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
appreciate
this
time
to
speak
about
this
and
thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison.
J
I
am
a
novice
and
I
am
really
concerned
when
I
hear
about
you
know
prevailing
wage
and
and
with
my
understanding
after
reading
this
and
after
hearing
the
gentleman
from
npri
and
we're
talking
about
prevailing
wage
and
we're
talking
about
the
requirements
to
increase
the
threshold
to
250
000
and
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
how
does
this?
J
How
does
prevailing,
raising
the
prevailing
wage
stimulates
our
economy,
and
when
I
read
about
it
and
I
go
to
the
federal
rate,
I'm
seeing
two
thousand
dollars
and
that
we
have
a
lot
of
states
in
the
union
that
are
following
the
federal
rate.
So
why
are
we
in
nevada
when
we
are
at
a
I
mean
a
pandemic
as
far
as
our
economy
is
concerned?
J
Why
are
we
now
introducing
raising
when
we
should
be
stimulating
our
economy
and
why
not
lower
to
coincide
with
the
federal
rate
of
two
thousand
dollars?
That's
my
first
question.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
you,
madam.
I
might
be
able
to
get
npri
to
answer
that,
but
I
can
tell
you
an
example
of.
If
say,
a
project
is
150
000
right
now
it
has
to
be
prevailing
wage
and
say
they
only
have
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
or
less
than
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
do
this
project
because
of
the
funding.
There's
real,
tiny
community
so
say
they.
They
only
have
80
to
100
000
period
to
do
this
project.
If
it
was
the
prevailing
wage
went
come
in
it
had
taken
over.
E
That's
the
issue,
it's
not
because
we
don't
support
prevailing
wage,
it's
because
they
have
to
be
within
a
zone
or
amount
that
the
communities
can
afford
to
do
it.
So
you
can
either
do
the
project
or
wait
and
extend
it
out
by
then
you've
got
other
problems
in
these
small
communities.
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
say
at
250
000.
We
can
maintain
a
lot
of
these
projects
and
keep
a
good
wage
out
there,
but
not
be
in
the
prevailing
wage
rate.
That's
the
problem
and
daniel.
G
Yes,
through
chair
flores,
back
to
assemblyman
ellison
addressing
the
assembly
woman's
concerns
regarding
federal
prevailing
wages.
G
These,
of
course
involve
exclusively
state
funded
projects
and
prevailing
wages
are
intended
to
or
ostensibly
intended
to
represent
local
labor
markets.
And,
of
course,
we
know
that
labor
markets
very
dramatically
across
across
the
country
and
so
applying
the
same
standard
to
new
york
city
as
we
would
in
elko,
would
seem
to
be
a
severe
misstep
and
and
and
that's
my
my
best
response
to
that
question.
J
You,
sir,
you
know
when
I,
when
I
see
on
the
chart
that
union
workers
are
making
sixty
one
dollars
an
hour
reference,
the
prevailing
wage,
or
sometimes
seventy
five
dollars
per
hour
in
our
community,
to
me
that
addresses
our
economy
because
they
are
living
in
our
economy
in
the
state
of
nevada.
J
G
Mr
ellison,
I
I
will
take
this
one
if
you'd
like
daniel
andrew
again
for
the
record
in
in.
In
brief
terms,
I
think
I
think
this
is
the
worst
time
to
to
to
the
worst
time
to
to
be
inefficient
with
spending
money
during
pandemic
crime.
During
the
pandemic
we've
seen,
you
know,
people
across
the
state
suffering
to
degrees
never
seen
before
in
this
state.
G
It's
it's
best.
I
think
that
we
keep
more
money
in
the
pockets
of
the
people
already
suffering
prevailing.
Waging
prevailing
wages
function
to
benefit
a
very
specific
certain
group,
typically
union
labor,
while
kind
of
sacrificing
the
remaining
population
who,
who
is
who
has
been
tasked
with
kind
of
making
up
the
rest
of
the
revenue
discrepancy,
and
so
I
think
again,
if
you're
talking
about
ways
to
improve
our
economy
going
forward.
G
I
think
our
best
approach
is,
you
know,
lower
taxes,
lower
spending,
keep
more
money
in
the
pockets
of
people
and
allow
the
state
to
reopen
as
soon
as
possible,
thereby
driving
up
revenues
to
the
state
et
cetera.
Again,
I
think
increasing
taxpayer
costs
for
everybody
else,
but
a
select
few
will
benefit
the
select
few
at
the
expense
of
the
remaining
populists.
J
Thank
you,
sir
again,
and
this
is
from
economy
economic
101
when
we
put
money
into
the
economy
that
helps
our
state
that
helps
our
schools
that
helps
just
about
everyone
consume
consumer
in
this
state.
It
helps
our
food
banks.
It
helps
just
about
everyone
that
that
lives
in
the
state
of
nevada.
Again,
I
cannot
understand
why
a
person
making
x
amount
of
dollars
over
31
versus
61
the
person
making
61
is
able
to
spend
more
in
the
economy.
J
I
mean
they
have
what
we
like
to
say
in
nevada,
expendable
money
so
that
it
helps
our
economy
so
to
tell
me
that
raising
the
prevailing
wage
stimulates
the
economy.
J
E
E
If
it
goes
to
bid
at
a
hundred
thousand,
you
could
do
the
project,
but
if
it
goes
over
a
hundred
thousand,
then
what
you
have
to
do
is
is,
if
you
can't
come
up
the
money,
then
that
job
goes
away
and
then
people
don't
work
and
that's
the
problem
we're
having
in
these
small
counties,
we're
trying
to
get
people
to
work
and
we're
trying
to
do
this
in
a
very
fast
way.
E
But
if
it
goes
over
that
that
that
in
the
prevailing
wage,
then
that
project
goes
away
and
then
people
don't
work
and
and
that's
what
we're
saying
we're
trying
to
get
these
people
to
work
and
anything
over
250
000.
It's
got
to
be
prevailing
wage
anyway
and
it
could
be
bonded
or
whatever
it's
got
to
be.
That's
not
the
issue.
The
issue
is:
is
these
small
jobs
in
these
small
communities
and
that's
what
we're
trying
to
do?
Thank
you.
G
Mr
mr
ellison,
may
I
may,
I
also
say,
weigh
on
your
comments
here
again
daniel
andrew
for
the
record
assemblyman
thomas,
you,
you
referenced
economics
in
your
in
your
economics
101
in
your
response
to
me.
G
I'll
simply
point
out
that
macro
economics,
also,
you
know
seems
to
you
know,
operates
on
supply
and
demand
principles
as
well,
and
so
the
price
of
labor
should
reflect
the
value
of
that
labor
and
what
I
hope
this
chart
that
I
that
I
presented
during
my
original
presentation
portrays
is
that
we
are
way
overpaying
tremendously
overpaying
for
the
value
of
labor
versus
what
we
get
in
return
and
in
response
hurting
the
broader
taxpayer
base.
G
So
I
I
I
it
seems
we
we
disagree
on
this
issue,
but
I,
but
I
fully
assert
that
macroeconomic
principles
in
this
area
rely
on
supply
and
demand
principles
just
like
everywhere
else
in
consumer
society,.
K
J
Thank
you,
sir
basic
economics
for
me
with
this,
as
I
stated
before,
detailed
to
me
that
if
we
lowered
the
prevailing
wage,
then
assemblyman
ellison
and
the
communities
in
the
rule,
it
sounds
like
to
me
that
they
could
assess
what
he
wants
to
in
the
rules.
J
What
I'm
also
saying
is
that
those
same
workers
that
work
in
the
wolves
they're
able
to
stimulate
the
economy
by
making
the
money
that
they
do
make,
and
we
must
say
that
just
in
the
south,
in
las
vegas
particular
that
we
have
buildings
and
just
almost
cities
in
the
gaming
industries
that
go
up
that
that
these
unions,
the
work
is
exceptional.
J
J
I
understand
you
know
basic
economics,
and
I
see
your
point
and
I
respect
your
point,
but
I
am
still
believe
that
raising
the
prevailing
wage
will
not
stimulate
our
economy
and
that's
what
we
need
to
do
right
now.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
assemblyman
ellis
for
bringing
this.
I
just
had
a
couple
of
questions.
L
It's
my
understanding
that,
beyond
the
the
thresholds
that
we've
been
talking
about
part
of
prevailing
wage
is
that
it
encourages
the
work
to
be
done
locally,
so
that
it's
not
folks
that
are
you
know
coming
from
out
of
state
or
that
the
pay
is
kind
of
leaving
the
state,
because
people
are
just
coming
in
to
do
small
jobs
and
you
know,
and
then
they're,
leaving
and
they're,
taking
all
of
that
funding
out
of
the
state
and
also
you
know
that
there
is
accountability,
because
if
it's
locally
built-
and
it's
done
by
your
neighbors
and
people,
that
you
know
that
there
is
more
accountability
for
the
buildings
and
the
things
that
they're
doing,
because
it's
not
only
a
matter
of
pride
but
also
they
live
in
it
and
they
they
are
still
there.
L
If
something
goes
wrong,
so
I
didn't
see
anything
about
potentially
adding
protections
or
anything
on
your
amendment
to
make
that
happen.
So
I
guess
that's
kind
of
my
first
question
and
then
my
second
is
understanding
how
expensive
things
are.
I
mean
you
mentioned
that
just
adding
air
conditioning
units
to
a
building
was
over
250
000,
how
many
jobs
or
how
many
contracts
are
you
talking
about
between
that
100,
000
and
250
000
threshold.
E
I'll
give
an
example
say
you
have
a
project
right
now
in
in
in
eureka
or
battle
mountain
or
wales
in
these
areas
and
and
you
put
a
project
out
to
bed
and
say
you're,
going
to
add
commercial
air
conditionings
on
on
whatever
buildings
or
whatever
you
got
to
do
whatever
the
problem
is
you
lost
power?
All
the
water
system
is
going
to
the
bathrooms
in
a
park
and
let's
say
it
comes
over
200,
000
or
100
000.
E
So
what
they
got
to
do
is
they
have
to
bid
it,
and
if
it
goes
over
that
rate,
then
people
still
have
to
charge
prevailing
wage,
no
matter
what
that,
if
they
don't
have
the
money
and
it's
over
their
budget,
then
it
has
to
drop
down
and
90
of
the
people
that
come
in
they're.
Not
outside
state
contractors,
they're
they're,
licensed
contractors
in
the
state,
nevada,
and
I
don't
know
they
probably
got
seven
or
eight
plumbing
contractors
and
elko.
They
probably
got
10
electrical
contractors
in
elko
and
and
they
can
make
to
these
areas.
E
But
a
lot
of
people
don't
come
in
for
that
smaller
project
they
just
don't
because
of
the
time
by
the
time
they
travel
they
bring
all
their
equipment
in
and
if
we
can
get
the
projects
done
under
that
that
rate,
we
can
get
the
project
done,
quick,
fast
and
and
stay
within
budget
right
now.
The
problem
is,
is
the
cost
of
material
and
labor
has
gone
up
so
high
and
they've
got
such
limited
amount
of
funds?
If
it
goes
over
the
100
000
right
now
that
that
project
don't
get
done
for
a
while.
L
Thank
you.
If
I
may
just
ask
a
follow-up
chair,
hello,
I
guess
I'm
now
just
a
little
bit
confused,
because
I
I
hear
that
you're
saying
that
you
can't
get
people
to
come
in
to
do
it,
but
at
the
the
same
I
guess
I'm
sort
of
confused
about
what
you're
saying
is
that
nobody
it's
hard
for
you
to
get
people
to
come
in
to
do
it
because
of
the
pay
or
that
the
the
the
the
jobs
are
too
small
to
get
most
people
to
come
in?
E
Well,
I
was
hoping
we
can
get
the
labor
commission
in
today
to
testify
on
that.
To
give
you
example,
it's
not
that
they're
not
qualified
people,
they
are
highly
qualified,
but
the
problem
is
is
true.
Most
of
these
projects
over
a
hundred
thousand
are
union
labor
and
you
can't
get
them
there.
E
E
So
we're
trying
to
separate
the
difference
between
contractors
and
union
labor
contractors
and
the
labor
rates
are
quite
a
bit
of
difference
and
while
we're
saying
if
we
can
do
that
in
a
budget
and
still
get
the
job
done,
we
can
but
trying
to
get
a
union
contractor
when
they
did
the
schools
in
wendover.
They
got
no
bids
from
nevada
contractors,
none,
and
that
was
a
over
a
million
dollar
project.
E
I
hope
that
I
hope
that
answered
your
question.
What
we're
trying
to
say
there's
two
different
types
of
labor
base:
the
local
labor
base
that
can
go
in
and
do
the
job
and
say
they're
char,
they're,
they're
charging
50
60
an
hour
for
for
their
plumbers
or
whatever,
but
if
it
goes
to
prevailing
wage-
and
that
goes
way
out
and
that's
the
problem
we're
trying
to
get
resolved
to
get
these
people
to
work.
A
Thank
you
something
else,
and
I
apologize
for
cutting
you
off.
I
just
see
in
the
chat
here
that
miss
chambers,
the
labor
commissioner,
is
here
with
us
today
and
she
would
like
to
try
it
so
go
ahead
and
chime
in
mr
chambers.
B
So
good
morning,
members
of
the
committee
madame
veister,
torres
chairman
flores.
This
is
shannon
chambers
for
the
record
nevada
labor.
Commissioner,
so
I
can
speak
to
the
issue
of
how
many
projects
that
we've
issued
public
works.
Project
numbers
are
during
the
past
two
fiscal
years.
We
do
not
have
visibility
of
product,
I'm
sorry
projects
under
a
hundred
thousand
because
they
do
not
require
a
public
works
project
number.
B
So
I
can
tell
you
for
reference
that
in
fiscal
year
2019
2020
there
were
848
public
works
projects
which
we
issued
public
works
project
numbers
on
going
into
2021.
We
are
already
at
628,
so
by
the
time
we
get
through
fiscal
year
2021
my
estimate
is,
we
will
be
over
a
thousand
now.
These
are
all
projects
over
a
hundred
thousand
dollars,
because
that
is
the
public
works
project
amount.
We
don't
have
visibility
of
those
smaller
projects
because
again
we
don't
issue
the
public
works
project
number.
B
What
I
will
also
tell
you
that,
in
terms
of,
and
I
have
great
respect
for,
assemblyman
ellison,
there
is
still
the
exemption
in
the
law
for
normal
maintenance,
so
nevada,
revised
statutes,
section
338.011
still
has
an
exception
for
normal
maintenance,
so
an
awarding
body
in
a
public
body
can
use
that
exception.
They
can
also
use
an
exception
for
emergencies,
so
there
are
exemptions
to
even
the
hundred
thousand
dollar
amount.
Again.
Those
have
to
be
justified
by
the
awarding
body,
but
I
can
tell
you
from
the
labor
commissioner
perspective.
I
mean
obviously
taking
the
public
works.
B
Project
dollar
amount
back
to
100.
000
has
certainly
increased
projects,
but
we
have
not
seen
a
delay
in
projects
in
the
rural
areas
or
in
the
what
they
call
the
urban
areas.
There
seems
to
be,
if
anything,
an
expansion
of
public
works
projects
and
what
I
you
know,
what
I
want
to
say
is
no
matter
what
this
legislative
body
does.
The
labor
commissioner
always
adjusts.
We
adjust
to
250,
we
adjust
to
100,
but
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
a
clear
perspective.
B
On
kind
of
you
know
where
the
law
stands
and
and
the
numbers,
if
anything,
projects
the
amount
of
projects
and
as
the
economy
gets
better,
we
expect
them
to
increase.
So
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
E
Thank
you,
miss
chambers.
Madam
chair,
may,
ask
a
question.
E
B
So
again,
for
the
record:
shannon
chambers,
nevada
labor,
commissioner,
madame
vice
chair
through
you
and
mr
chair
through
you
to
assembly
women
ellison.
So
the
majority
of
the
pro
projects
are
in
the
urban
areas,
but
I
will
tell
you
assemblyman
ellison
in
elko
county
eureka
county.
We
have
seen
a
big
increase
in
projects.
B
E
And
yeah-
and
I
appreciate
that
and
and
elko
and
eureka
is
probably
the
best
in
the
city-
is
probably
the
best
that
could
handle
some
of
the
project.
It's
some
of
the
ones
like
wells,
carlin
e
lee
toneab,
the
small
small
communities
that
we're
really
concerned
about
getting
these
projects
out
and
I've
never
seen
them
ever
use
to
go
back
in
and
ask
for
an
exemption.
E
And
I've
been
into
this
for
30
years
and-
and
I
didn't
even
know
that
exists
and
if
they
could
apply
for
it
and
if
they
did
what
would
be
the
process
they
went
through.
But
I
know
that
some
of
the
projects
that
we're
trying
to
do
now
like
in
in
wells
and
maybe
jackpot
that
they
still
can't
get
the
projects
done
under
the
prevailing
wage
rate.
I
just
don't
think
they
can
we're
trying,
but
the
the
projects
that
are
funded
like
ely
when
they
just
did
the
new
courthouse.
E
If
it
wasn't
for
my
colleague
from
district
one
helping
we'd
have
never
got
that
courthouse
built
because
we
got
it
through
the
state
funding
at
the
legislature
and
and
they
they
matched
half.
And
then
the
state
stepped
in
matched
the
other
half,
but
but
if
that
wouldn't
have
happened,
that
project
would
have
never
got
done
and
they
would
end
up
condemning
that.
Courthouse
of
insulin.
H
Thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison,
my
understanding
is,
we
were
with
assemblywoman
considine,
but
that
there
is
no
longer
a
follow-up
there
and
we
next
we
have
assembly
woman
martinez.
Is
that
correct,
madam
vice
chair?
Thank
you.
If
we
could
please
go
next
to
the
assemblywoman
martinez.
B
Thank
you,
chair
flores,
thank
you
assemblyman,
so
I
have
a
few
questions
for
you.
So
what
impact
will
raising
the
threshold
have
on
any
entry
projects
in
the
future.
E
Well
it
what
did
it
do?
Is
it
helped
these
small
projects
get
through?
Like
I
said
it,
you
know
you're
set
by
limited
funds,
and
what
this
would
do
is
let's
these
projects
go
forward
and
get
get
completed,
but
if,
if
they
got
to
comply
to
the
prevailing
wage
rate,
some
of
these
will
have
to
dis
be
extended
out.
That's
the
only
thing
they
can
do.
E
They
don't
have
the
funding
and
and
when,
when
the
testimony
comes
into
some
of
these
counties,
to
tell
you
what
they're
facing
right
now
yeah
you'll,
probably
understand
a
little
more,
but
it's
not
that
they're
trying
to
not
a
skirt.
What
they're
trying
to
do
is
get
the
projects
done
and
if
the
people
get
out
and
looked
at
some
of
these
rural
counties,
you'd
understand
what
I
I
meant
by
what
they're
receiving
and
and
and
they
they
save
for
public
fund
budgets
and
is
this
short
they
got
to
live
within
their
budget.
E
Mr
chair,
I
think
the
labor
commission
wanted
to
weigh
in
on
that.
I
think.
B
So
good
morning
this
is
shannon
chambers
again
for
the
record
nevada
labor.
Commissioner,
mr
chair,
through
you
to
assemblywoman
martinez,
I
can't
speak
for
enshi.
I
have
not
had
that
conversation
with
them.
I
will
tell
you
again
back
to
my
original
kind
of
answer
to
your
question.
Assemblyman
considine,
the
labor
commissioner,
will
adjust
no
matter
what,
in
my
opinion,
as
of
today,
the
amounts
don't
stop
the
projects.
What
stops
the
projects
is
potentially
the
economic
situation
and
sometimes
weather.
B
B
E
That's
correct,
but
it's
it's
like
if
you
go,
buy
a
car
and
you
want
a
a
new
cadillac
and
you've
got
20
000
you're,
going
to
end
up
with
a
smaller
car,
and
that's
that's
the
problem.
We
have
we're
trying
to
get
these
small
projects
done
and
and
anymore,
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
nothing
on
a
construction
project.
E
So
what
they're
trying
to
do
is
just
try
to
stay
within
their
budget
and
get
the
projects
done.
That's
what
they're
trying
to
do
nothing
more,
nothing
less
and,
and
then
I
mean
if
they,
if
you
don't
get
a
union
contractor
down
there,
which
most
likely
they
won't
on
a
small
project,
they
still
have
to
pay
prevailing
wage
rates
to
them.
Individuals,
no
matter
what
they
do.
E
B
E
Yeah
anybody
can
benefit
from
it,
but
if,
if
the
project
runs
up
over
and
then
I
think
you'll
get
the
school
board,
that'll
testify
on
on
the
difference
between
the
projects
and
and
you'll
see
some
of
their
testimony.
That's
in
there
that's
already
on
on
ellis
how
how
some
of
these
projects
could
be
so
high
that
it
it
extends
it
out
and
you're
talking
a
lot
of
this
stuff,
but
250
000,
there's
nothing
so
we're
trying
to
save
maintenance.
E
If
this
was
a
half
a
million
dollar
million
dollar
project,
we
want
pervading
wage
on
them
projects.
We
definitely
do
but
we're
talking
the
small
things
and
that's
the
difference
and
that's
what
this
is
about.
It's
not
the
larger
projects
at
all
and
they
can
still
collect
prevailing
wage,
but
that
doesn't
mean
the
project
will
go
through.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison
for
your
presentation
and
good
to
see
you,
mr
pantry,
a
few
questions
for
mr
honshu.
F
You
spoke
a
little
bit
about
the
disparity
between
prevailing
wages
and
market
rates.
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
discuss
the
trend.
Has
that
disparity?
Is
that
something
that's
increased
in
recent
years?
Has
it
remained
flat?
What's
the
trend
we're
seeing
in
that
disparity.
G
Daniel
honshu,
for
the
record,
through
the
chair
to
assemblyman
matthews
great
question,
npri
performed
the
same
analysis
back
in
2011
as
we
submitted
for
today's
committee
hearing.
What
we
found
back
then,
was
that
prevailing
wages
were
only
about
45
higher
than
market
rates,
whereas
today
again,
that
number
is
more
like
60
percent,
so
in
terms
of
a
widening
disparity
in
recent
years,
between
market
rates
and
prevailing
weight
and
prevailing
wages.
F
Thank
you
and
I
wanted
to
ask
specific
to
a
recent
large
project
here
in
the
state.
Do
you
have
an
estimate
of
what
prevailing
wage
mandates,
the
extent
to
which
those
may
have
increased
costs
for
las
vegas
stadium,
construction.
G
For
the
record
daniel
honshu,
through
chair
flores
to
the
assemblyman
matthews,
I
have
not
personally
conducted
any
analysis
of
that
sort,
but
if
I
recall
correctly,
taxpayers
borrowed
about
750
million
dollars
worth
applying
prevailing
wages
would
certainly
increase
the
cost
of
stadium
construction
by
tens
of
millions,
if
not
by
nine
figures.
Again,
you
know
the
the
disparity
between
what
is
the
market
rate
and
what
is
the
premium
rate
is
so
large
that
big
dollar
items
and
the
labor
costs
associated
with
them.
G
You
know
it,
it
makes
big
dollar
items
even
more
expensive,
and
so
certainly
I
understand
assemblyman
ellison's
approach
here
regarding
only
the
smaller
ones.
But
our
point
of
view
generally
is
that
prevailing
wage
rates
of
all
kinds
are,
are
overly
expensive
and
and
are
a
detriment
to
taxpayers.
F
Thank
you
a
couple
of
follow-ups,
if
I
may,
mr
chairman,
please
assemblyman
all
right.
Thank
you
thanks
for
that
answer.
Mr
andrew
we've
heard
some
some
discussion
this
morning,
some
questioning
along
the
lines
of
economic
stimulus.
F
I
guess,
based
on
the
presumption
that
these
higher
rates
would
result
in
more
money
in
the
pockets
of
of
these
workers.
Who
would
then
you
know
be
spending
that
money
to
stimulate
the
private
economy?
Just
the
point
of
clarification,
could
you
just
let
the
committee
know
where
it
is
that
that
those
funds
originate?
You
know
where
they,
where
they
come
from
originally
to
get
into
this,
this
private
economy,
stimulus.
G
For
the
record
daniel
honshu
through
the
chair
to
assembly
matthews,
I'm
not
sure
I
fully.
I
I
fully
understand
the
the
question:
can
you
can
you
rephrase
maybe.
F
Sure
so,
the
assumption
being
that
you
know
more
money
in
the
pockets
of
these
union
workers
is
money
that
will
end
up
in
the
private
economy.
Where
does
the
money
come
from
originally
to.
G
Yeah
certainly
well
through
through
the
chair
to
mr
sillaman
matthews.
Well,
the
money
comes
from
taxpayers
and,
and
that
and
that's
our
that's
our
prime
critique.
G
These
are
taxpayer-funded
projects
and
I
think
any
government
project
should
do
its
best
to
make
sure
that
it
doesn't
overspend
that
it
spends
reasonably
on
public
works
projects
and
again,
as
a
former
nevada
labor,
commissioner,
has
suggested.
G
These
laws
are
intended
to
to
make
labor
prices
higher
and,
as
I
mentioned
before,
the
result
of
that
is
that
you
have
a
small
class
of
society
that
reaps
all
these
benefits
of
dramatically
increased
wages
legally
mandated,
which
acts
to
the
detriment
of
the
remaining
tax
paying
populous.
And
so
you
know,
that's
that's
that's
the
argument
so.
F
G
Through
the
chair
to
assemblyman
matthews
daniel
andrew
for
the
record-
yes,
I
I
would
suggest
you
perceive
our
point
of
view
through
a
milton
friedman
lens
and
not
a
paul
krugman
lens.
We
agree
with
your
description
of
the
dynamics
there.
Yes
and.
F
Then
one
final
question:
if
I
may
you're,
obviously
someone
who
who
studies
these
issues
in
depth,
are
you
aware
of
any
statistical
evidence
or
data
suggesting
that
more
robust
prevailing
wage
mandates
lead
to
actual
increases
in
construction
quality.
G
I
I
know
a
pardon
me,
daniel
honshu,
for
the
record
through
chair
floors
to
assembly
and
matthews.
I
am
aware
of
certain
studies
on
the
topic.
Some
seem
to
suggest
that
prevailing
wage
rates
don't
dramatically
alter
the
the
size
and
amount
of
contracts
awarded
generally.
G
We
we
reject
those
kind
of
analysis,
but
if,
if
that's
the
case,
then
why
have
prevailing
wage
laws
at
all?
So
just
does
that.
Does
that
answer
your
questions,
mr
assemblyman.
F
C
C
G
G
What
the
davis
the
davis
bacon
act
did
was
effectively
require
union
wages
on
federally
funded
projects,
but
but
there's
more
to
the
story
here,
because
back
then
the
the
act's
intent
was
explicitly
racist,
essentially
preventing
unions
with
black
members
from
being
awarded
contracts,
and
so
I
think,
ultimately,
at
a
root
level.
J
G
Daniel
haunt
you
for
the
record
through
chair
floors
to
assembly
one
dick
dickman.
Yes,
since
1978
at
least
16
different
states
have
altogether
abolished
their
prevailing
wage
mandates.
It's
my
understanding
that
about
half
of
the
states
in
the
country
have
them
and
half
don't.
G
So
it
has
certainly
been
a
trend
and
perhaps
an
accelerating
one
in
recent
years
again
for
fiscally
conscious
motivations
going
forward.
C
C
E
Manner,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
to
miss
dickman.
Yes,
I
do
I
strongly
do,
and,
and
and
the
reason
is
I
mean
you
have
only
got
so
much
money
and
you
know
large
projects
is
not
an
issue.
You
can
bond,
you
can
fund,
you
can
do
all
kinds
of
things
with
larger
projects,
it's
the
smaller
ones
that
are
being
hampered
and
and
you
you
look
around
and
wait
till
you
talk
to
some
of
these
people
that
are
going
to
give
testimony
a
lot
of
these
projects.
E
That's
under
250
000,
it
used
to
be
we
used
to
say
hey.
We
have
to
keep
it
under
250
to
operate
right
now,
with
the
co-bed
and
and
the
amount
of
people
out
of
work
and
trying
to
get
people
on
this
on
projects
is
almost
impossible
right
now,
because
the
funds
are
even
less
and
so
it
I
say
some
of
these
projects.
If
we
don't
get
the
prevailing
wage
rate,
probably
several
years
before
they
get
done.
C
Thank
you
so
much
assemblyman
and
just
for
the
labor
commissioner.
If
we
could
get
a
breakdown
of
the
projects
that
we
talked
about
just
in
the
rural
communities,
it
would
be
really
helpful
if
we
could
all
all
the
members
get
a
copy
of
that.
Thank
you
so
much
and
thanks
for
your
indulgence,
mr
chair.
A
I
just
want
to
say
you
know
I
was
born
and
raised
in
las
vegas.
For
most
all
of
my
life,
I've
lived.
A
For
last
five
years,
served
on
a
city,
council
and
a
small
community,
and
there
are
certainly
different
problems
that
small
communities
face
and
we're
not
that's
just
not
even
restricted
to
prevailing
wage
jobs.
That's
that's
contractors
in
general,
so
there's
a
you
know:
you're
worrying
about
not
just
the
prevailing
wage
jobs,
but
the
regular
jobs,
as
well
as
what
I'm
trying
to
say
and
getting
people
to
travel
90
miles
from
las
vegas
to
do
prevailing.
Wage
jobs
in
mesquite
is
even
a
struggle.
A
So
I
imagine
for
these
other
communities,
it's
even
it's
even
more
difficult
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
think
what
the
heart
the
heart
of
the
matter
here
is
that
people
of
these
communities
are
the
ones
that
are
suffering,
and
I
wholeheartedly
would
love
to
co-sponsor
this
bill.
If
the
assembly
men
would
allow
it.
So
I
don't
any
questions,
but
those
are
my
comments.
Thank
you.
B
H
And
thank
you
assemblywoman.
We
always
like
a
quick
deal
here
in
this
committee.
If
I
could
please
go
to
assemblywoman
anderson,
I
think
she
had
a
follow-up
question.
C
Thank
you
and
it's
based
upon
some
of
the
answers
that
we've
been
hearing,
so
my
I
guess
it
has
more
to
do
right
now
with
the
the
phrase
that
was
being
kicked
around
for
some
time,
which
was
supply
and
demand.
When
I
look
over
some
of
the
other
data
that
we've
received
as
well
as
some
of
the
information
on
some
of
the
exhibits,
I
it's
more
of
a
comment.
C
Really
I
don't
know
if
it's
a
question
or
not,
I
am
I've
got
some
hesitation,
because
I
feel
that
many
individuals
in
the
construction
industry,
currently
it's
very
difficult
to
get
jobs
already,
or
it's
very
difficult
to
hire
enough
people
as
it
is,
and
so
lowering
the
amount
of
money
that
is
necessary
for
a
for
a
project
doesn't
quite
fit
the
supply
and
demand
item
of
how
we
are
going
to
be
helping
to
pay
these
individuals.
C
So
could
you
kind
of
expand
upon
that
a
little
bit
more
and
I'm
not
sure
exactly
who
that
would
be
directed
to
either
individual
that's
been
doing?
The
presentation
is
more
than
welcome
to
answer
the
question
about
the
supply
and
demand
when
it
comes
to
the
skilled
workers
that
we're
speaking
about.
E
Mr
chair
to
you
to
ms
anderson
she's
right,
but
here's
the
here's,
the
thing
of
it
is
is,
is
there's
people
out
there
want
to
go
to
work
right
now
they
want
to.
E
But
if
a
project
stops
because
of
funding,
there's
nothing,
we
can
do
about
it,
but
if
we
can
get
that
funding
tightened
up
just
enough
to
get
these
projects
going,
they'll
happen,
I
guarantee
it
they'll
happen
and
you'll
see
these
people
go
back
to
work,
but
you
got
people
right
now
that
is
set
in
a
home
and
and
the
small
contractors
are
busy
they're
they're
doing
their
jobs
every
day.
E
You
know
to
get
a
project
done
right
now.
It's
almost
impossible
and
prevailing
wage
doesn't
help.
So
what
we're
doing
is
just
asking
for
a
tool
in
the
toolbox.
That's
all
we're
asking
for
and
by
lowering
the
prevailing
wage
rate
and
some
of
these
and
we're
not
saying
take
it
away,
we're
just
saying
lower,
raise
it
up
to
250,
000
or
whatever
will
work
for
them
everybody,
but
right
now
at
100
000,
it's
not
working!
C
Thank
you
for
that
clarification
and
that
acknowledgement
of
where
it
was
coming
from
and
then
I
do
have
another
question.
I
believe
this
is
for
mr
anshu
and
I'm
sorry
if
I'm
mispronouncing
your
name,
sir
I'm
looking
at
an
exhibit
that
was
uploaded
from
mr
stanley,
I
believe
and
it,
and
he
refers
to
a
study
that
was
done
by
professor
wadips
of
unlv
and
professor
duncan
of
csu
pueblo.
You
referred
to
some
different
studies.
C
Can
you
expand
possibly
where
those
studies
are
from
and
if
there's
a
way
for
us
to
get
the
copy
of
those
studies?
So
we
can
compare
the
two
elements
because
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
come
from
a
balanced
point
of
view.
G
Daniel
andrew
for
the
record,
through
chair
flores
to
assemblywoman
anderson,
I
I
don't
have
any
of
that
information
to
offer
you
right
now,
but
I
would
certainly
be
willing
to
spend
some
time
after
this
committee
hearing
and
forward
you
everything
that
we
that
we
can
find.
C
I
think
that'd
be
wonderful
if
we
could
get
those
documents
and
especially,
if
they're
coming
from
universities,
colleges
other
areas
that
are
able
to
consider
the
studies
across
both
our
state
as
well
as
across
our
nation.
Thank
you
so
much
and
it
could
go
to
all
of
the
members
of
the
committee.
That
would
be
great
thank.
H
You
and
thank
you
assemblywoman,
just
as
a
point
of
clarification
to
assemblywoman
black,
you
expressed
your
desire
to
be
amended
as
a
co-sponsor
unbeknownst
to
you.
You
were
so
excited
about
it
that
you
signed
on
to
it
and
forgot
you're,
already
a
response
yourself,
no
need
to
amend
the
bill.
You're
already
listed
on
there
proudly
with
a
big
fist
up
so
next.
If
we
could
please
go
to
assemblywoman
thomas
thank.
J
You,
mr
chair,
I
just
have
a
point
of
clarification
during
the
conversation
with
assemblymen
matthews
and
mr
hancher
there
I
I
I'm
not
sure
I'm
I'm
flabbergasted
did
I
hear
that
prevailing
wage.
A
living
wage
is
racist
in
nature.
That
davis
bacon
act
was
a
racist
or
for
prevailing
wage
was,
was
racist
from
what
I've
read
about
davis
bacon.
J
G
G
But
I
am
quite
confident
in
asserting
that
the
davis
bacon
act-
and
I
think
this
is
general
consensus
that
it
was
originally
understood
to
be
a
racist
bill,
a
bill
that
sought
to
exclude
minority
workers
and
unions
from
getting
federally
funded
projects.
I've
seen
I've,
read
and
seen
tons
of
evidence
to
support
that
and
I'd
be
happy
to
to
submit
follow-up
information
to
you
if
desired
after
this
committee.
J
Please
do
because
from
what
I've
read,
it
is
not,
and
I
I
would
love
to
see
your
data,
especially
on
that
topic.
Thank
you.
So
much.
H
And
thank
you
assemblywoman
before
I
move
over
to
the
vice
chair.
I
did
want
to
put
on
my
on
the
record
kind
of
a
little
bit
my
sentiment
and
kind
of
what
I'm
hearing
here
and
I
know
I
had
an
opportunity
to
speak
with
assemblyman
ellis
and
I
appreciate
engaging
in
meaningful
dialogue
with
you.
H
I
think
there
is
a
a
philosophical
argument
that
is
rooted
both
in
data
that
folk
from
both
sides
bring
to
the
table,
and
you
know
it's
always
been
my
sentiment
that
when
we,
when
we
pay
prevailing
wage,
we
typically
tend
to
attract
local
talent
and
how
that
translates.
H
For
me,
through
my
perspective,
is
I'd
rather
hire
my
neighbor
to
help
build
a
school
that
their
kid
and
my
kid
might
go
to,
rather
than
somebody
that
comes
from
out
of
state
works
monday
through
thursday,
then
takes
that
paycheck
and
spends
it
elsewhere
in
a
different
state,
friday,
saturday
sunday
and
then
repeats
that
cycle.
I
I
I
appreciate
the
sentiment
brought
up
by
mpri
and
assemblyman
matthews
that
it's
our
money,
that's
paying
for
that,
and
I
think
that's
important
that
we
acknowledge
that.
H
So
I
think
what
we're
putting
on
the
pedestal
of
the
question
is:
if
it's
our
money
paying
for
it,
do
we
want
to
pay
a
wage
that
ensures
we
attract
local
talent?
We
have
the
position
and
perspective
that
we
build
and
construct
better
longer
lasting
projects.
We
have
folk
that
are
from
here
that
we
can
look
in
the
eye
when
something
is
wrong
or
we
need
corrections
that
they
have
to
be
held
accountable.
Should
there
ever
be
an
issue
versus
some
somebody
out
of
state
the
the
truth
of
the
matter?
H
If
it's
we're
using
our
money,
it's
our
state
money.
The
question
is:
do
we
build
as
cheap
as
possible
or
do
we
build
with
the
emphasis
of
quality?
H
And
I
think
that's
the
philosophical
debate-
that's
happening
here
in
this
committee
and
what
is
most
important,
reasonable
minds
can
disagree,
but
I,
but
I
thought
it
was
important
that
we
have
this
conversation
and
that
we
recognize
what's
happening,
and
I
know
assemblyman
ellison
has
a
rural
perspective
and
often
has
concerns
of
the
limitations
that
the
rurals
have
and-
and
I
and
I
appreciate
his
input,
because
I
know
that
he
comes
from
a
very
centric
rural
lands
that
often
some
of
us
in
the
south
don't
get
an
opportunity
to
interact
with
so
members.
H
I
appreciate
the
questions
today
and
everybody
engaging
in
that.
I
think
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
close
out
questions
with
the
exception
of
vice
chair.
I
think
she
had
a
couple
of
questions
she
wanted
to
do
and
then,
after
that
assembly,
nelson
we'll
go
ahead
and
move
on
to
support
we'll
have
your
folk
give
them
an
opportunity
to
speak
and
support
and
then
we'll
move
on
to
opposition
to
neutral.
Madam
vice
chair,
please.
A
Pikachu
and
thank
you
subliminal,
senator
mr
conjurer,
for
the
presentation
and
for
continuing
to
engage
in
this
dialogue
during
today's
well
presentation.
I
appreciate
it.
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
could
clarify
what
is
the
current
federal
threshold
for
prevailing
wage.
E
I
don't
have
that
in
front
of
me.
I
think
it's
like
60
some
dollars
65
dollars.
What
it
is.
I
can
get
that
for
you.
That's
that's
pretty
simple
and
I
I
know
that
it's
about
15
higher
npri.
Can
you
answer
that
question.
G
E
A
My
understanding,
though,
is
that
from
the
davis
bacon
act,
which
is
a
federal
law,
that
the
current
threshold
is
two
thousand
dollars
for
a
project,
so
that
meaning
you
know
when
we're
looking
at
this
legislation
that
the
public
work,
the
estimated
cost
is
less
than
two
thousand
so
that
that
number
is
two
thousand.
Could
we
just
get
clarification?
I'm
not
sure
if
maybe
our
policy
analyzed
or
legal
can
chime
in
here.
G
M
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
and
you
know
I
really
think
you
know.
Publix
works.
Construction
projects
have
the
responsibility
to
be
safe,
durable,
lasting
a
long
time
with
minimal
maintenance
and
repairs,
and
I
think
the
way
that
we
do,
that
is
by
ensuring
that
we
attract
local,
experienced
construction
workers
who
deliver
high
quality
work,
and
I
really
just
don't
understand
why
we
would
have
legislation.
That's
raising
the
prevailing
wage
to
250
000
when
the
federal
standard
is
2
000..
A
So
at
this
time,
and
I'm
not
sure
if
it's
appropriate
chair
so
feel
free
to
tell
me
that
it
if
it's
not
but
really,
I
would.
I
would
like
to
present
a
conceptual
amendment
that
would
require
that
we
change
this
threshold
and
meet
the
federal
standard
which
is
2000.
H
Madam
vice
chair,
so
what
we
can
do
is
to
to
so
the
record
is
properly
reflected.
H
A
madam
vice
chair
will
be
proposing
an
amendment
now
whether
or
not
the
committee
wishes
to
at
a
later
time
entertain
that
that
will
be
up
to
the
the
committee
to
debate,
but
so
the
the
property,
the
procedure
way
that
will
move
forward
with
this
and
and
it
won't
necessarily
be
necessary
for
us
to
debate
it
any
further.
H
Today,
madam
vice
chair,
will
be
proposing
an
amendment
to
the
committee,
send
it
to
the
committee
manager
and
policy
analyst
with
her
amendment
and
then
at
a
later
time,
during
a
work
session
document,
it
will
be
up
for
debate
for
the
members
to
engage
in
a
matter
of
vice
church.
Do
you
have
any
follow-up
questions.
A
No,
no
thank
you
chair.
I
appreciate
it
and
thank
you
for
indulging
me
in
that
amendment
I'll
I'll
make
sure
I
take
a
look
at
that
and
you
know
I
really
just
want
to.
I
call
my
appreciation
too,
for
the
unified
construction
industry
council,
who
shared
a
report
document
that
really
helped
me
improve
my
understanding
of
prevailing
wage
and
have
that
and
have
that
as
a
point
of
reference.
So
I
really
appreciate
it.
I
I
just
think
that
it's
important
that
we
ensure
that
we're
meeting
the
federal
the
federal
standard.
E
Mr
chair
to
madame
torres,
there
are
two
different
issues
here.
One
is
the
state
and
one
is
a
federal
two
different
projects,
two
different
funding,
two
different
things.
So
if
you
look
at
that,
but
you're
you'll
see
that
the
federal
issues
for
prevailing
wage
law
is
nevada
and
for
the
davis
bacon
act
is
federal.
Funding.
H
Thank
you
and
thank
you
for
that
clarification,
assembly
and
I'll
be
sure
to
ensure
that
madam
vice
chair
has
an
opportunity
to
speak
with
us.
H
Her
proposed
amendment
of
lowering
the
threshold
to
2000
and
with
that
I'd
like
to
at
this
time
invite
those
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
assembly
bill
99.
H
To
be
abundantly
clear.
We
are
speaking
in
support
of
assembly
bill
99
as
written
by
assemblyman
ellison.
The
conceptual
amendment
brought
up
by
vice
chair
torrez
will
be
up
for
debate.
Should
we
go
to
a
work
session
document,
as
other
members
are
all
allowed
to
bring
up
conceptual
amendments,
but
with
that
I'd
like
to
go
to
those
wishing
to
speak
in
support,
it
is
my
understanding
that
we
have
some
folk
who
are
on
on
our
virtual
zoom
that
will
be
joining
us
via
video,
I'm
just
looking
through
them
now
broadcast.
H
Am
I
correct
in
saying
that
we
don't
have
anybody
wishing
to
speak
in
support
via
zoom
and
just
the
close,
which
I
know?
Obviously,
we
still
have
our
co-presenter,
but
I'm
looking
through
the
video
chat
now
and
I
don't
believe
we
have
anybody
wishing
to
speak
in
support.
That's
waiting
on
video
is
that
correct
broadcast.
H
Yes,
that
is
correct.
Sure,
of
course,
thank
you.
So
at
this
time,
I'd
like
to
invite
those
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
assembly
bill
99
to
please
call
in.
I
ask
that
you
limit
your
remarks
to
two
minutes
in
the
interest
of
time
and
as
I
am
concerned
that
there
may
be
a
wide
range
of
folk
who
are
wishing
to
call.
I
ask
that
you
please
limit
your
remarks
to
two
minutes,
know
that
anybody
who
submits
any
written
document
will
be
sure
that
it
gets
uploaded
to
the
record.
H
Should
your
time
be
cut
off
prematurely
and
also
in
the
interest
of
time.
I
ask
that
we
allocate
an
equal
amount
of
time
both
to
support
and
opposition.
So
the
way
we'll
be
going
about
doing
that
is
two
minutes
per
caller,
and
then
we
ask
that
you
limit
the
blocks
of
support,
we'll
go
to
30
minutes
and
then
after
30
minutes
we'll
go
to
opposition
for
30
minutes
and
then
we'll
do
the
same
thing
for
neutral
so
broadcast
at
this
time.
K
E
Mr
chair,
I
just
got
a
email
from
or
a
text
from
the
city
of
elko
andrew
z.
He
said
he's
on
zoom.
I
don't
know
if
you
could
still
pick
him
up
on
that
or
not.
E
Is
county
commissioner
dale
mo
androzy.
D
E
B
I
B
Possibly
be
with
the
pc
line,
the
public
comment
line.
H
I
will
have
broadcast
message
your
attache,
the
proper
link
for
them
to
be
able
to
join
us
in
support
during
virtually
in
the
next
couple
of
minutes
here,
so
that,
while
those
are
folk
are
calling
in
in
support
and
to
your
bill,
we'll
give
them
ample
time
to
log
in
and
and
join
us
virtually
so
broadcasting.
H
Please
message
our
assemblyman
alice
in
the
attache
and
or
our
bishop.
If
you
could,
please
message:
assemble
assemblymanellis,
india,
the
proper
link,
so
that
those
wishing
to
speak
in
support
that
wish
to
join
us
virtually
can
do
so
and
in
the
meantime,
broadcast.
If
you
could,
please
go
back
to
the
phone
lines
and
continue
with
those
wishing
to
call
in
in
support
of
assembly
bill.
K
K
I
J-A-N-I-N-E-H-A-N-S-E-N,
I'm
the
state
chairman
of
the
independent
american
party
and
I'm
pleased
to
support
assemblyman
ellison's
bell.
He
is
my
own
assemblyman.
I
live
in
elko.
We
support
ab99,
which
raises
a
threshold
for
paying
the
prevailing
wage
for
the
nevada
system
of
higher
education
from
100
000
to
250
thousand.
This
will
enable
our
colleges
and
university
to
more
easily
pay
for
smaller
jobs.
We
also
support
the
amendment
which
would
apply
to
rural
counties.
It
is
important
in
all
government
projects
to
keep
the
taxpayers
in
mind,
especially
during
this
economic
crisis.
I
This
bill
is
a
very
reasonable
start
in
the
united
states
in
general.
According
to
the
institute
for
policy
innovation,
the
total
u.s
tax
burden,
including
federal
state
and
local
taxes
and
hidden
taxes,
is
equal
to
56
percent
of
annual
personal
consumption
spending.
In
other
words,
taxes
consume
56
of
all
the
average
person
spends.
This
includes
19
in
state
taxes,
13
and
local,
and
with
many
hidden
taxes
the
consumer
doesn't
see
we
pay
more
in
taxes
than
in
any
other
spending
category,
including
food,
shelter,
education
and
health
care.
I
We
must
give
real
consideration
to
those
who
cannot
bearing
more
taxes
and
recognize
that
there
are
places
we
can
economize.
This
bill
is
a
good
start
right
now.
Food
prices
are
soaring
faster
than
inflation
and
incomes
as
the
covert
19
pandemic
wreaks
havoc
on
the
economic
growth
concerns
about
hunger
and
malnutrition
are
rising.
We
are
concerned
about
the
opportunities
for
rural
counties
to
take
care
of
their
local
infrastructure.
I
H
And
thank
you
for
your
testimony,
ms
hansen.
It's
always
a
pleasure
to
have
you
if
we
could
please
go
to
the
next
caller
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
assembly
bill
99.
K
D
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
assembly
committee
on
government
affairs.
My
name
is
vincent
guthro,
that's
v,
like
victor,
I
n
s,
o
n
last
name,
guthro
g.
U
t
h.
D
D
If
you
consider
the
amendment
who
are
on
tighter
capital
improvement
budgets
and
it
will
allow
them
to
complete
smaller
routine
maintenance
jobs
and
put
more
people
to
work,
improving
our
parks,
libraries,
county
facilities
and
roads,
this
bill
will
maximize
public
tax
dollars
for
projects
that
improve
infrastructure
that
is
utilized
by
the
public.
D
We
thank
the
sponsor
for
bringing
this
bill
forward
and
we
further
echo
the
comments
that
are
on
nellis
from
commissioner
andrew
ozzy.
He
outlines
what
we
think
provides
an
excellent
perspective
and
good
examples
from
a
rural
county,
and
we
thank
the
committee
for
hearing
this
measure.
Thank
you.
H
Thank
you,
sir.
If
we
could
please
go
to
the
next
caller,
which
is
excuse
me
actually
before
we
go
to
the
next
caller.
My
understanding
is,
we
were
finally
able
to
get
the
commissioner
to
join
us
virtually.
O
Great
thank
you
good
morning,
mr
chairman
flores,
and
vice
chairman
torres
and
distinguished
members
of
the
assembly
government
affairs
committee.
My
name
is
delmo
andreozzi.
I
am
currently
a
county
commissioner
in
elko
county,
I'm
serving
in
my
second
term
but
prior
to
being
elected
as
a
commissioner.
I
worked
for
the
city
of
elko
for
nearly
31
years,
I'm
familiar
with
public
works
projects
nrs338
and
prevailing
wages.
As
a
member
of
local
government.
O
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
our
legislature
is
considering
changing
what
is
considered
a
public
works
project
and
raising
the
prevailing
wage
threshold
as
a
nation,
state
and
local
communities.
Our
public
infrastructure
continues
to
age
and
deteriorate
all
of
our
roads.
Water
and
wastewater
systems
have
designed
life.
They
require
maintenance
and,
ultimately,
will
require
replacement.
O
We
work
within
the
confines
of
our
budget
to
improve
the
public's
infrastructure,
despite
the
fact
that
it
costs
more
to
replace
infrastructure
than
it
does
installing
the
new.
I'm
not
saying
it's
good
or
bad,
but
it's
important
to
note
that
prevailing
wages
essentially
increase
the
cost
of
a
project
by
a
third
or,
alternatively,
reduces
the
scope
by
a
third.
This
threshold
is
extremely
limiting
in
rural
areas
of
nevada.
Not
only
has
it,
inflation
eroded
the
value
of
a
hundred
thousand
over
time.
O
Many
smaller
jurisdictions
and
cities
may
only
have
a
capital
projects
budget
of
two
or
three
hundred
thousand
or
maybe
even
five
hundred
thousand.
I
heard
mr
ellison
or
assemblyman
ellison
talk
about
the
city
of
elko.
As
an
example,
the
city
of
alco
capital
budget
for
their
public
works
department
is
annually
750
000.
O
They
usually
have
to
save
for
two
years
to
do
a
capital
project
elko
county's,
1.5
million
dollars,
so
our
our
large,
even
our
large
projects,
are
really
quite
small
in
comparison
to
the
urban
areas
of
the
state
and
when
we
think
about
doing
these
smaller
projects,
the
cost
of
mobilizing
equipment
and
manpower
to
do
projects
multiple
times
increases
the
cost
of
the
project.
Cutting
into
these
already
thin
budgets.
Economies
of
scale
are
not
as
likely
to
happen
in
rural
areas.
They
are
in
the
urban
area.
O
As
an
example,
many
many
of
our
communities
don't
even
have
the
basic
supplies
or
have
access
to
local
asphalt
or
concrete
batch
facilities.
These
items
must
be
shipped,
which
further
erodes
the
available
budget
for
context.
A
typical
street
project
here
in
elko
nevada,
cost
approximately
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
per
block,
which
is
roughly
100
350
lineal
feet.
This
would
be
a
basic
replacement
of
curb,
gutters,
sidewalk
and
asphalt.
Any
sub-grade
work
required
would
likely
result
in
each
block
being
in
excess
of
a
hundred
thousand
dollars.
O
So
it's
not
practical
to
do
less
than
a
than
a
block,
and
one
other
thing
that
I
would
like
to
point
out,
as
I
did
listen
to
some
of
the
testimony
maybe
can
provide
some
additional
context
or
background.
I
would
just
like
to
also
remind
that
all
all
projects
in
the
public's
right
away
are
required
to
be
done
by
a
licensed
contractor,
whether
it's
prevailing
way
project
or
not.
So
in
our
case
here
in
elko
county
we
have
as
assemblyman
ellison
stated.
O
We
have
many
of
the
trades
here,
but
some
of
some
of
the
ones
we
don't
we
actually
the
larger
buildings
like
a
school
project
or
something
like
that.
Most
often,
those
contractors
come
from
the
salt
lake
area
to
to
this
rural
area.
So
again,
I
am
in
support
of
this,
and
I
I
appreciate
the
labor
commission
being
on
there.
I
think
it's
valuable
to
have
some
information
to
really
look
at
what
the
projects
were
between
100
and
250
000.
O
I
think
there
could
be
some
good
evidence
and
a
compelling
story
to
assist
this
body
in
making
a
well-informed
decision.
And
again
I
want
to
thank
you
for
your
time
and
willingness
to
consider
alternatives
that
leverage
the
public's
resources
better
serving
our
citizens
to
improve
our
infrastructure.
H
H
It
was
originally
the
intent
of
assemblyman
ellison
to
have
the
commissioner
co-present
and
have
him
available
for
discussion,
questions,
etc,
and
so
in
the
interest
of
fairness-
and
I
know
we
had
some
technical
issues
getting
him
logged
in,
I
wanted
to
ensure
that
we
gave
him
the
full
breadth
of
his
testimony.
H
That
is
the
reason
why
I
did
that.
But,
however,
I
do
want
to
remind
those
wishing
to
call
and
support
opposition
or
neutral
that
you
do
refrain
from
exceeding
two
minutes
and
that
you
can
always
submit
your
testimony
and
writing
and
I'll
be
sure
that
it
gets
uploaded
to
another's
broadcast.
And
again.
Mr
commissioner,
commissioner,
thank
you
for
joining
us
this
morning,
broadcast.
If
you
could
please
go
to
the
next
caller
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
assembly
bill
99.
K
K
D
D
The
league
is
in
support
of
ab99
and
we
appreciate
the
work
of
the
sponsor
to
bring
this
bill
forward
and
the
distinguished
members
of
the
assembly
committee
on
government
affairs
for
hearing
it.
This
bill
is
a
practical
and
limited
adjustment
to
the
prevailing
wage
requirement
that
would
enable
rural
communities
to
move
forward
with
the
essential
construction
of
nevada
system
of
higher
education
infrastructure.
H
K
N
Good
morning,
this
is
warren
hardy
first
name
w-a-r-r-e-n
last
name
hardy
h-a-r-d-y,
calling
today
on
behalf
of
the
city
of
mesquite
and
the
associated
bills
and
contractors
of
nevada.
I
first
want
to
thank
the
chair
for
the
very
fair
and
equitable
manner
in
which
he's
allowed
this
hearing
to
proceed
today.
N
Many
years
ago,
there's
not
been
an
increase
in
the
minimum
wage
threshold.
It
was
a
very
interesting
dialogue
that
occurred
during
the
hearing
about
the
merits
of
prevailing
wage.
But
again
this
this
legislation
simply
proposes
to
increase
the
threshold,
which
is
probably
overdue,
and
so,
mr
chairman,
thank
you
again
for
the
time
and
thank
you
for
taking
the
time
to
fairly
and
equitably
have
this
hearing
today.
H
K
K
P
Leo
blundo
b-l-u-n-d-o
my
county
commissioner,
from
district
four,
I'm
also
the
regional
transportation
commission
chairman
for
nye
county
speaking
in
behalf
of
my
individually
elected
office,
I'd
like
to
thank
chairman
flores
for
for
allowing
me
the
opportunity
to
testify
on
this
and
the
assembly
committee
members.
I
appreciate
your
time
today.
P
I
just
want
to
present
a
real,
simple
equation
for
you.
If
I
have
300
000
in
my
budget
and
I
have
the
option
of
doing
250
000
projects,
would
you
prefer
me
to
have
two
projects
move
forward?
Or
would
you
like
me
to
say
I'll
only
do
the
one
because
of
the
100
000
threshold,
I
have
to
make
decisions
weekly
monthly,
on
which
projects
we
move.
We
decide
to
choose
to
move
forward
on.
We
currently
have
an
rtc
budget
of
2.2
million
dollars
approximately,
and
I
have
to
make
decisions
on
which
projects
move
forward.
P
P
Again,
I
have
to
ask
you
to
weigh
the
fact
that
would
you
consider,
would
you
allow
me
the
opportunity
to
have
and
and
finance
and
put
forward
another
project
that
continues
to
pay
wages
to
to
nevadans
and
to
continue
to
keep
good
people
working,
especially
in
these
dire
economic
times
where
people
are
struggling
just
to
have
work
and
keep
their
jobs
going?
Or
would
you
prefer
me
to
to
not
approve
projects
because
the
funding
just
isn't
there?
Now,
it's
easy
to
say
we
should
be
raising
taxes
or
looking
at
other
revenue
sources.
P
However,
I
have
to
make
the
fiscally
responsible
decisions
and
balance
and
execute
through
a
balanced
budget.
One
of
the
reasons
I
think
you
don't
see
this
drastic
drop
of
projects
is
because
we
just
don't
put
in
the
projects.
I
I
don't
make
the
irresponsible
decision
to
say
I'm
going
to
start
four
projects
fund
them
all
halfway
and
then
leave
the
taxpayers
and
say:
hey,
I'm
going
to
raise
taxes
on
you
or
these
projects
never
get
done,
and
we
have
a
constant
limbo
of
projects
sitting
there.
P
So
we
have
to
make
the
the
most
the
most
educated
decisions
and
we
have
to
continue
to
approve
projects
that
I
can
afford
to
do.
But
the
little
projects
and
raising
a
threshold
to
250
000,
I
think,
is
a
fiscally
responsible
way
of
saying.
We
have
issues
across
the
rules
and
the
rules
aren't
abandoned
as
well
and
we're
going
to
allow
them
the
same
opportunities
afforded
to
the
bigger
cities
to
be
able
to
execute
the
same
projects
and
be
able
to
continue
to.
H
Thank
you,
sir.
If
you
could
please
go
to
the
next
caller
wishing
to
testify
in
support
of.
K
Q
H
K
D
S-T-E-B-E-W-A-L-K-E-R
I
represent
douglas
story,
carson
city
and
lyon
counties.
We
are
in
support
of
the
amended
bill,
the
chairman
assembly
analysis
amendment
and
for
the
sake
of
time
I
we
I
will
not
go
in
any
further
I,
but
I
would
echo
the
statements
made
by
the.
H
I
I
know
it's
important
for
us
to
be
heard
and
I
want
you
to
know
that
you
you
are
being
heard,
but
but
I
do
want
to
remind
you
that
it's
perfectly
okay
to
say
that
you
echo
the
sentiment.
That's
been
stated
already
on
the
record
to
make
sure
that
your
name
gets
placed
on
it
and
and
we
can
move
on
to
the
next
color.
So
we
appreciate
that
always
in
this
committee.
So
with
that
I'd
like
to
continue
with
the
support
for
assembly
bill
99
next
caller.
K
K
N
H
And
thank
you,
mr
kat
saunders.
It's
always
an
honor
to
have
members
just
general
members
of
the
community
call
in
and
know
that
you
can
always
do
that,
and
you
have
a
place
to
speak
here.
Thank
you
for
calling
in
this
morning.
If
we
could
go
to
the
next
caller,
we
should
speak
in
support
of
assembly
bill.
K
K
R
W-O-O-L-D-R-I-D-G-E
with
the
city
of
elko,
the
city
of
elko,
is
in
support
of
this
bill
and
the
conceptual
amendment
in
an
answer
to
assemblywoman
considering
question
the
city
of
elkos
had
an
average
of
3.6
projects
that
would
fall
between
the
100,
000
and
400
000
or
excuse
me
250
000
thrust
threshold.
The
other
issue
that
we
would
have
liked
to
seen
addressed
in
this
is
the
apprenticeship
act.
R
It
has
been
very
difficult
with
kovitz
or
the
city
of
elko
to
meet
the
apprenticeship
act
and
we
had
a
contractor
that
was
four
hours
low
on
getting
an
apprentice
and
was
fined
nine
thousand
dollars
during
covet,
it's
been
difficult
to
get
apprentices
to
the
rural
area
and
once
they
get
here,
they
don't
often
stay
throughout
the
job
since
covered.
We've
also
seen
an
increase
in
the
cost
and
availability
of
materials
increasing
our
construction
costs
on
bids.
Thank
you
for
hearing
this
bill
today
and
thank
you
for
your
time.
H
K
I
I
Our
agencies
should
have
the
freedom
to
negotiate
the
best
rate
possible
to
get
the
job
done
and
also
be
incentivized
to
save
as
much
taxpayer
money
as
possible.
This
is
a
no-brainer.
We
have
a
budget
crunch.
This
saves
nevada
taxpayers
money
while
still
assuring
the
equality
without
the
added
60
markup.
That
is
a
hallmark
of
prevailing
wage
laws.
Please
vote
yes
on
ab-99.
I
I
would
also
like
to
note
that
it
is
inappropriate
that
several
members
of
this
committee
who
are
currently
under
litigation
for
violating
the
nevada
constitution,
have
not
recused
themselves
from
this
hearing.
Those
are
selena
torres,
nathan,
anderson
and
clara
thomas,
all
of
whom
have
concurrent
employment
with
the
state,
in
violation
of.
A
H
All
right,
so
this
is
how
we're
going
to
move
forward.
I
everybody
is
welcome
to
speak
on
on
a
matter
that
they
think
is
important
today
and
presently
we're
addressing
assembly
bill
99.
So
if
you
want
to
express
your
support
for
that
bill,
that
is
where
we
are
now.
H
You
can
get
on
the
record
state,
your
name
for
the
record,
ensure
that
you
are
being
heard
in
support
of
a
bill,
but
this
is
not
a
time
nor
will
ever
be
appropriate
in
this
committee,
for
you
to
ever
personally
attack
or
single
out
any
single
member.
We
may
disagree
on
policy,
but
we
are
not
disagreeing
on
the
the
obvious
reality
that
we're
all
in
this
situation,
trying
to
improve
the
life
of
all
nevadans.
H
So
it
is
inappropriate,
always
wrong
and
it
will
not
be
tolerated
for
anyone
to
do
any
personal
attacks.
We
can
disagree
on
policy.
We
can
attack
policy,
but
we
will
remain
respectful
each
other
at
all
times.
If
any
other
caller
wishes
to
continue
to
engage
in
any
type
of
dialogue,
we
will
shut
you
up.
This
is
not
a
time
to
do
that.
It
won't
be
inappropriate
to
do
that
and
I
I
know
assembly
monado
saying
I
know
that
you
don't
have
control
who's,
calling
in
support.
H
So
don't
I
don't
want
you
to
feel
that
I
am
putting
this
on
you,
but
I
want
to
make
the
record
abundantly
clear
that
we
will
not
tolerate
that
ever
no
personal
attacks
attack
the
policy.
If
you
wish.
That's
perfectly
fine
with
that,
if
you
could
go
to
the
next
caller
wishing
speak
in
support
of
assemblybill99.
K
Q
Marcos
lopez,
m-a-r-c-o-s,
l-o-p-u-z,
american,
for
prosperity,
nevada.
Thank
you,
chair
and
members
of
the
assembly
committee
on
government
affairs
we
are
in
support
of
ab99
is
a
small
but
positive
change
that
will
help
rural
counties
and
cities
with
their
public
works
by
allowing
them
to
use
taxpayer
dollars
more
efficiently
and
effectively.
Q
At
a
time
when
our
budgets
are
squeezed,
we
should
be
looking
at
ways
to
use
our
money
more
efficiently.
We
shouldn't
be
paying
upwards
of
40
percent
for
public
works.
The
state
needs
to
act
like
it
has
a
fiduciary
interest
over
taxpayers
money.
The
research
is
clear:
prevailing
wages
needlessly
raises
the
cost
of
constructed
projects
by
billions
of
dollars
annually
around
the
nation.
We
are
literally
throwing
money
away.
Q
I
will
submit
some
prepared
statements,
but
I
do
want
to
address
some
of
the
comments
that
were
made
during
the
hearing.
No,
nothing
in
this
bill
is
saying.
If
you're
interested
in
you
know
stimulating
the
economy
that
you
can't
spend
the
same
amount
of
the
budget
on
projects.
What
we're
saying
is
that
you
can
use
that
money
to
build
more
projects.
You
can
have
more
workers
the
savings
for
examples
on
building
classrooms.
You
can
use
it
to
build
new
schools.
You
can
use
it
to
redirect
it
into
the
classrooms
into
teacher
pay.
Q
Secondly,
I
think
it's
a
false
dichotomy
to
say
that
you're
choosing
between
quality
and
quantity
here
in
the
work
there
are
23
states
that
do
not
use
prevailing
wages
and
there's
little
to
no
evidence
that
says
that
the
construction
of
those
23
states
is
any
less
good
or
any
less
properly
built
than
in
the
other
states
that
use
prevailing
wages.
Q
And,
lastly,
as
to
the
conceptual
amendment
of
law,
industry
2000,
I
mean,
if
you
want
to
blow
up
the
budget,
if
you
want
to
just
completely
just
disregard
judiciary,
interests
and
taxpayer
money.
I
think
that
you
should
totally
go
out
that
for
that
I
would
love
to
be
able
to
say
that
this
state
has
completely
forgotten
about
the
taxpayer
and
using
money,
especially
efficiently
and
effectively,
and
would
love
to
see
what
that
would
do
to
the
budget
it
is.
Q
It
is
almost
laughable
that
we
complain
about
not
having
revenue,
then
just
waste,
our
money
in
the
most
inefficient
ways
possible,
but
I
urge
you
guys
to
support
ab99,
and
this
is
a
small
but
positive
change.
Thank
you.
H
And
thank
you,
mr
lopez,
for
your
comments.
I
know
we
often
don't
have
an
opportunity
to
engage
in
meaningful
debate
in
this
committee
with
you
and
or
to
work
together.
So
it's
always
great
to
have
you
here.
If
we
could,
please
continue
with
those
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
assembly,
beau
99.
K
P
D
Works
director
here
in
carson,
we
are
in
support
of
the
bill
and
the
amendment,
as
has
been
stated,
and
I'll.
H
And
thank
you
for
joining
us
this
morning.
We
could
go
to
the
next
caller
wishing
to
speak
in
support
of
assembly
bill
99.
K
R
R
L-Y-N-N-C-H-A-P-M-A-N
we,
the
taxpayers,
are
very
concerned
with
the
cost
of
construction
projects.
Most
people
don't
know
about
prevailing
wages
and
they
don't
understand
it.
They've
never
heard
of
it.
But
what
is
it
for?
Well
it's
to
build
projects
in
our
communities,
however,
who
pays
for
all
of
the
projects
why
the
taxpayers,
whether
it
be
federal
state
county
or
our
city,
all
that
money
comes
from
the
taxpayers.
R
R
Also,
we
are
worried
about
the
workers
in
the
smaller
rural
areas,
the
smaller
projects,
the
workers
are
there
in
the
communities
they
would
be
put
to
work
and
they
would
take
their
money
home
with
them
in
the
communities
where
the
work
is
done
and
it
would
support
their
communities.
So
we
need
to
support
ab9.
H
You
thank
you
for
joining
us
this
morning.
We'll
continue
with
support
for
assemblyville
99
broadcast.
H
And
thank
you
and
I
want
to
thank
all
those
of
you
who
called
in
in
support
of
assembly
bill
99
at
this
time.
I'd
like
to
invite
those
wishing
to
speak
up
in
opposition
to
assembly
bill
99.
I
want
to
remind
those
of
you
who
intend
to
be
calling
in
that.
You
should
always
feel
comfortable
to
say
a
quick
title
primarily
from
those
of
you
that
are
members
of
our
lobbying
community.
H
We
love
you,
but
we
really
want
to
leave
the
platform
open
for
a
lot
of
members
of
the
community
who
don't
have
an
opportunity
to
engage
in
this
type
of
setting,
often
and
a
quick
title
from
our
lobbying
community.
We
appreciate
you
even
more
when
you
do
that
so,
but
with
that,
I
do
ask
that
you
you
try
to
limit
your
remarks
to
two
minutes.
We
try
to
be
flexible
when
we
can.
I
know
that
we
do
have
joining
us.
H
Mr
bill
stanley
who's
joining
us
virtually
wishing
to
speak
in
support,
I
mean
excuse
me:
opposition
to
assembly,
bill
99,
so
we'll
start
with
the
video
and
then
we'll
move
on
to
those
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
via
phone.
Mr
stanley
good
morning
welcome
whenever
you're
ready.
M
Good
morning
mr
chair
vice
chair
torres,
where
to
start,
we've
heard
a
lot
of
testimony
this
morning
and
I
have
been
around
here
for
a
long
time,
and
I
will
take
your
advice,
mr
floyers.
I
will
submit
my
otherwise
prepared
statement
and
try
to
address
a
couple
of
the
issues
that
were
raised
here
today
that
I
believe
absolutely
need
to
be
addressed.
M
I
think
it
is
absolutely
insulting
that
anyone
would
come
before
this
committee
and
offer
up
testimony
that
prevailing
wage,
whether
it
be
davis,
bacon
or
the
state's
pervading
wave
statute
in
and
of
itself,
was
ever
or
is
intended
to
be
discriminatory.
That
is
absolutely
insulting.
Let's
be
clear,
there
were
two.
There
was
two
folks
in
congress.
Senator
bacon
is
senator.
M
I
think
I
got
this
right
davis
who
introduced
a
bill
in
new
york
city
that
was
intended
to
prevent
workers
coming
in
from
outside
the
state
to
do
what
was
otherwise
public
work
being
paid
for
by
the
citizens
and
the
taxpayers
in
new
york.
There
was
a
contractor
who
was
wanting
to
exploit
and
import
workers
from
the
south
to
do
that.
Work
at
a
far
cheaper
rate
and
that
story
has
been
through
history
has
been
turned
on.
M
Its
head
that
has
been
interpreted
to
be
was
to
be
discriminatory
against
the
workforce
that
was
being
imported
from
the
south.
I
have
taught
labor
history
for
30
years
that
that
conversation
and
that
history
is
well
documented,
has
no
place
in
these
conversations.
So
let
me
move
beyond
that.
The
premise
of
of
those
that
are
arguing
here
today
is
very
basic.
The
premise
is
that
if
we
pay
construction
workers
less
money,
we
can
do
more
projects
and
it's
somehow
a
waste
of
money.
M
Well,
I
can
tell
you,
ask
the
construction
worker
in
rural
nevada,
if
he's
or
she's
willing
to
work
for
less
money,
so
that
you
can
do
more
projects
and
next
I'd
just
like
to
talk
about
in
2019
senator
hardy
and
the
building
trades
with
one
of
your
previous
speakers
warren
hardy
work
diligently
to
construct
a
bill
that
allows
rural
nevada
to
establish
a
prevailing
wage
rate.
That
is
not
the
same
as
rural
nevada.
M
There
are
four
prevailing
wage
zones
in
nevada
that
were
constructed
through
that
legislation,
washoe
county
clark,
county
being
the
two
metro
areas
and
the
rest
of
the
county.
The
southern
rule
is
made
up
of
lincoln
nye
esmeralda
counties
and
the
rest
of
the
state
is
in
the
northern
rural,
and
the
wage
rates
that
are
determined
for
the
prevailing
wage
in
rural
nevada
are
wages
that
are
earned
in
rural
nevada.
M
So
this
concept
that
somehow
the
wage
rates
in
rural
nevada
are
not
responsive
or
reflective
of
the
wages
raised
are
earned
in
rural
nevada
is
just
not
true.
Next
I'd
just
like
to
talk
about
unbundling
of
projects.
When
we
talk
about
bundling,
there
was
some
conversation
about
bundling
a
project.
Let's
talk
about
unbundling,
a
project.
M
What
we
really
see
happening
is
awarding
agencies
in
the
state
of
nevada
figure
out
a
way
to
unbundle
projects
so
that
they
can
escape
the
weight
of
the
prevailing
wage
rate
and
exploit
construction
workers
and
pay
them
less
than
is
surveyed
in
the
area
in
order
to
in
their
minds
complete
the
project
for
less
money.
Well,
unbundling
of
projects
is
a
problem.
We
fight
it
all
the
time.
M
The
labor
commissioner
gets
more
complaints
over
probably
over
unbundling
of
projects
from
a
warning
body
and
probably
any
other
complaints
that
she
gets
on
the
prevailing
wage
site,
so
lowering
the
threshold
to
two
thousand
dollars.
I
appreciate
the
conceptual
amendment
from
the
vice
chair,
I'm
in
favor
of
lowering
it
to
two
thousand
dollars,
which
is
the
federal
rate
making
and
lining
the
state's
prevailing
weight
with
davis
bacon,
which
is
the
federal
prevailing
wage
rate,
has
been
a
concept
that
the
building
trades
has
been
pushing
for
a
very
long
time.
M
H
M
H
H
I
apologize
to
to
interrupt
you
there's
two
two
questions
on
there
and
we
we
have
exceeded
the
two
minutes.
I
just
wanted
to
put
you
on
notice
of
that,
but
we'll
make
sure
that
your
comments
are
shared,
but
we
have
two
questions.
One
is
a
point
of
clarification
from
assemblywoman
dickman.
If
you
could
please
restate
who
are
you
with
in
representing
now,
and
the
second
question
is:
would
you
support
assembly
bill
99
with
the
conceptual
amendment
mentioned
by
vice
chair
torrez,.
M
So
I'm
sorry
for
the
record.
My
name
is
william
stanley.
I
represent
the
southern
nevada
building
trade
union
in
southern
nevada,
with
with
with
over
20
000
construction.
We
represent
over
20
000
construction
workers
throughout
southern
nevada,
including
the
rural
counties
that
I
mentioned
as
part
of
the
rural
zone,
southern
rural
zone-
and
I
am
not
in
favor
of
this
bill,
I'm
not
in
favor
of
the
bill
with
senator,
I
mean
with
assemblyman
ellison's
conceptual
amendment,
but
I
would
support
the
bill
with
the
conception
amendment
that
was
put
forth
by
assemblywoman
taurus.
M
I
will
I
appreciate
the
time
I
will
augment
my
comments
here.
There
was
so
much
raised
here
today
that,
and
I
would
just
wrap
up
by
saying
this-
the
2019
study
that
we
presented
to
this
committee
when
this
bill
was
heard
in
2019.
Similar
bill
was
heard
in
2019,
but
the
same
arguments
completely
refutes
all
of
these
arguments,
especially
the
npi
argument
and
and
the
study
that
they
had
brought
forth
and
going
back
many
many
sessions.
M
That
report
was
completely
refuted
in
2019
and
I
would
hope
that
you
would
look
at
the
the
study
that
was
uploaded
by
my
colleague
from
the
unified
construction
industry.
Council,
miss
wendy
newman,
and
she
will
testify
next.
So
thank
you,
chairman
flores
and
vice
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
allowing
me
this
time
to
testify.
Thank
you.
H
I
I
know
he
has
a
wealth
of
in
information
that
he
would
gladly
discuss
with
you
with
that,
we'll
go
ahead
and
go
to
the
phone
lines
and
invite
those
wishing
to
speak
and
support.
Excuse
me:
opposition
to
assembly
bill
99
again
I'd.
Ask
that
you
please
try
to
limit
your
remarks
in
two
minutes,
we'll
throw
some
flexibility
in
there
where
we
can,
but
please.
K
K
K
I
I
The
ucic
is
a
labor
management
cooperative
committee
composed
of
14
affiliated
skilled
craft
trades
unions
and
over
200
contractors
who
employ
the
over
20
000
skilled
trade
workers
in
nellis.
We
have
submitted
the
2019
study
on
the
impact
of
nevada's
90
prevailing
wage
policy
on
school
construction
costs,
big
competition
and
apprenticeship
training.
Contrary
to
what
the
proponents
may
have
said,
increasing
the
threshold
for
prevailing
wage
projects
does
not
save
taxpayers
money.
I
The
negative
effect
on
training
reduces
opportunities
for
construction
workers
in
nevada
to
increase
their
skills
and
earnings,
because
skilled
workers
in
construction
or
in
any
other
industry
are
our
state's
assets.
A
reduction
in
training
opportunities
and
resourcing
is
harmful
to
nevada's
economy.
I
K
D
Good
morning,
mr
chairman
and
members,
my
name
is
mike
west
m-I-k-e-w-e-s-t.
I
represent
the
women
and
men
of
the
international
union
of
painters
and
allied
trades.
We
stand
with
the
nevada
building
trade
in
opposition
of
ab-99
and
raising
the
threshold
of
prevailing
wage
from
100
000
to
250
thousand
dollars.
D
May
I
suggest
that
if
you
did
a
forensic
audit
of
a
public
works
project
and
get
the
entities
to
open
their
books,
that
you
may
find
that
many
take
profit
out
of
a
project
before
it
even
hits
the
construction
phase?
If
you
compare
the
delta
between
prevailing
wage
and
the
market
rate
that
it
is
potentially
much
smaller
compared
to
the
windfall
of
profit
that
is
taken
out
early
in
the
project,
yet
we
still
keep
trying
to
balance
the
budget
of
a
public
works
project
off
the
backs
of
the
workers.
D
H
K
D
D
F-R-A-N-K-H-A-W-K,
ironically,
republicans
offered
and
championed
the
davis
bacon
act
nearly
a
hundred
years
ago
and,
contrary
to
testimony
today,
it
wasn't
racist,
that's
insulting!
Yet
in
nevada
every
session,
there's
an
attack
on
working
people
by
coming
after
prevailing
wage
don't
be
fooled.
This
is
just
another
attack
on
nevada
working
people
by
tripping
away
at
wages
and
benefits.
D
Somehow
these
elected
officials
feel
that
nevada,
hardworking
men
and
women
that
you
know
they
become
experts
in
their
trade.
By
going
to
four
years
of
formal
training,
they
set
their
alarm
clocks
for
3
a.m.
They
work
in
the
elements
and
risk
their
lives
every
single
day
to
build
america's
infrastructure
are
somehow
worth
less
than
a
living
wage.
D
Don't
be
fooled
by
these
fictitious
scenarios,
flawed
data
or
the
false
argument
of
rural
versus
urban
think
about
far
away
areas
that
need
people
to
come
to
rural
areas.
There's
no
motels,
there's
no
restaurants.
It's
not
going
to
attract
skilled
workers
to
come
up
and
work
for
less
money,
just
not
going
to
happen.
D
D
They
they
were
replaced
with
out-of-state
workers
at
out-of-state
workforce,
and
that
was
unregulated.
It
bred
immigrant
abuse
and
it
was
undercutting
our
nevada
residents
on
behalf
of
our
9
000
carpenters
here
that
make
up
local
1977
and
971
and
the
apprentices
and
their
families.
I
urge
you
to
vote
no
on
this
bill
as
presented,
unless,
of
course,
that
I
would
be
in
support
of
vice
chairs
taurus's
amendment.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak
here
today.
H
And
thank
you
for
joining
us
this
morning.
If
we
could,
please
go
to
the
next
caller
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
assembly,
bill
99.
K
D
Good
morning
committee,
my
name
is
jim
sullivan
j-I-m-s-u-l-l-I-b-a-n
and
I'm
representing
the
culinary
workers
union
local
226.
We
are
opposed
to
this
bill
for
the
reasons
that
bill
stanley,
wendy,
newman
and
several
other
callers
have
expressed.
This
bill
is
bad
at
this
bill,
as
written
is
bad
for
working
nevadans
and
we
fully
oppose.
Thank
you.
H
And
mr
sullivan,
it's
not
often
that
we,
we
can
have
you
in
our
committee,
so
it's
great
to
have
you
join
us
this
morning.
Thank
you.
If
we
could
please
go
to
the
next
caller,
we
should
speak
in
opposition
to
assembly,
bill
99.
K
N
Hello,
this
is
richard
daley
r-I-c-h-a-o-d-d-a-l-y.
You
can
call
me
skip
representing
the
light
resume
local
169
here
in
northern
nevada.
N
Excuse
me
and
where
to
begin,
as
mr
stanley
said,
a
lot
of
either
intentionally
or
unintentionally,
untrues
were
stated
here
today.
Prevailing
wage
is
not
racist.
It
was
started
by
two
republican
senators
from
new
york,
davis
and
bacon
to
level
the
playing
field
for
local
workers
in
the
local
economy,
to
make
sure
that
the
local
workforce
and
contractors
employers
were
not
undercut
bottom
line.
Is
this
bill
is
going
to
lower
wages
for
workers
in
these
rural
communities,
which
is
the
testimony
we
have.
N
If
you
take
the
example
given
by
assemblyman
ellison,
if
we
have
150
thousand
dollars
and
or
we
only
have-
we
have
a
hundred
fifty
thousand
dollar
project,
we
only
have
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
and
somehow
this
measure
by
lowering
the
wages
of
workers,
would
save
you
the
fifty
thousand
dollars,
and
that
is
just
untrue.
The
other
statement
made
by
the
gentleman
from
elko
that
prevailing
wage
cost
makes
construction
costs
go
up
a
third.
N
We
presented
the
building
trades
as
presented
studies
to
this
committee
in
the
past.
That
shows,
depending
on
the
type
of
construction,
road
construction
versus
building
the
amount
of
cost
for
labor
for
the
project
is
as
low
as
16
and
it's
high
and
30
so
of
the
total
cost
of
the
project.
Only
30
is
labor.
So
in
order
to
save
a
third,
the
workers
would
have
to
pay
the
contractor
to
do
the
job
to
save
that
much
money.
So
that
is
an
untruth.
It's
untrue,
I'll!
N
Stop
short
of
saying
the
other
word
that
I
really
want
to
say.
So
I
oppose
this
bill.
It
does
cost
construction
workers
when
we
had
the
last
changes
on
the
school
construction
and
all
of
those
things
it's
wrong
thinking
and
to
make
a
recent
quote
from
the
president
biden.
N
In
my
opinion,
this
is
neanderthal
thinking.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
H
And
thank
you,
mr
daily.
It's
great
to
have
you
back
here
at
the
in
your
ga
committee.
You're
always
welcome
home
here
with
that
I'd
like
to
continue
with
those
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
assembly,
bill
99.
K
P
Good
morning,
chairman
flores
rob
benner
r-o-b
b-e-n-n-e-r
with
the
northern
nevada
building
trades.
We
strongly
oppose
av
99
as
written,
but
we
do
support
vice
territory's
amendment,
putting
nevada's
prevailing
wage
threshold
in
alignment
with
the
federal
level.
Last
time
we
raised
the
threshold
it
reduced
apprenticeship,
opportunities,
reduced
wages
and
reduced
jobs,
jobs
for
nevadans
as
written
this
bill
would
put
utah
workers
to
work,
not
nevadans
assembly
bill
99
would
hurt
nevada's
hardest
working
men
and
women
at
a
time
when
they
can
resupport
it.
P
H
And
thank
you
I'd
like
to
continue
with
those
wishing
to
speak
in
opposition
to
assembly
bill
in
99
broadcast.
Please.
K
D
Chairman
flores
and
committee
members,
my
name
is
james
halsey
and
I
represent
the
4
000
members
of
ibw
local
357
we're
the
ones
that
keep
the
lights
on
in
las
vegas.
Two
years
ago,
at
this
same
committee,
a
study
was
presented.
That
said,
a
strong
prevailing
wage
provided
value
to
our
community
that
that
bill,
the
strength
and
prevailing
wage
was
presented
by
the
speaker
of
the
house
and
when
it
became
law
it
helped
ensure
that
our
public
dollars
are
spent
on
the
most
qualified
workforce
available.
D
D
F
D
H
K
K
K
H
E
Yes,
mr
chairman,
I
do
number
one
I'd
like
to
know
of
the
contractors
that
spoke,
how
many
of
them
has
done
any
jobs
for
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
rural
nevada,
and
I
can
tell
you,
there's
gonna
be
none
if
they
would
have
been
small
projects
right
close
to
washoe
or
one
of
these.
E
That's
my
number
one
comment:
number
two:
the
davis
bacon
act.
I
guarantee
it
open
it
up
and
see
what
happens
because
I
guarantee
it.
California,
idaho
and
utah
will
swarm
this
state,
so
it's
crazy
and
ludicrous.
So
I'm
just
telling
you
you
want
to
throw
rural
nevada
under
the
bus
have
at
it.
But
I
tell
you
what
the
people
are
hard-working,
loving
people
in
this
state
and
care
about
this
state.
They
didn't
ask
for
anything.
They
just
asked
for
to
be
the
threshold
raised
where
they
can
do
some
projects.
E
Well,
then,
people
that
are
out
of
work
will
stay
out
of
work.
So,
mr
chair,
I
apologize
for
getting
upset,
but
I'm
disappointed
with
the
comments,
but
I
guarantee
it.
The
union
guys
from
las
vegas
had
never
been
to
rural
nevada
unless
it's
a
big
project
like
a
school
or
a
big
commercial
project.
E
H
And
thank
you
assemblyman
for
your
presentation
today.
I
think
reasonable
humans
will
often
disagree
on
policy
and
as
long
as
we
maintain
the
conversation
and
debate
there,
it's
fair
game
in
this
committee.
Again
members,
we
often
agree-
and
I
just
make
that
point-
because
just
because
we're
having
a
philosophical
debate
now,
disagreement
on
this
particular
issue
does
not
mean
that
we
cannot
continue
to
work
together
on
other
stuff.
H
Well,
actually,
before
I
do
this,
I
would
like
to
open
it
up
for
public
comment
and
invite
those
wishing
to
speak
in
public
comments.
Please
join
us.
I
want
to
remind
everyone
who
is
wishing
to
speak
in
public
comment.
This
is
not
an
opportunity
to
re-engage
in
a
debate
for
assembly
bill
99.
That
hearing
has
now
been
closed.
Public
comment
is
an
opportunity
for
you
to
speak
about
broad
matters
that
pertain
to
and
are
involved
within,
the
purview
of
this
committee.
H
We
want
you
to
be
heard,
but
if
you're
disrespectful
and
or
are
trying
to
reopen
a
debate
on
assembly
bill
99,
I
will
ask
that
we
go
to
the
next
caller
so
broadcast.
We
can
please
go
to
those
wishing
to
speak
in
public
comment.
K
H
Understood
thank
you
broadcast
at
this
time,
we'll
go
ahead
and
close
out
public
comment
and
members.
I
want
to
remind
you
that
tomorrow
we're
going
to
be
doing
a
work
session
document.
I
I
hope
you
have
an
opportunity
to
review
that
ahead
of
time.
Up
for
work
session
discussion
is
assembly,
bill,
14
assembly
bill,
22
assembly,
bill,
48
assembly,
bill,
63
assembly,
bill,
70
assembly,
bill,
77
and
assembly
bill
86.
H
Please
give
yourself
an
opportunity
to
review
your
notes
on
all
of
those
bills.
Make
sure
that
if
you
have
any
opposition
and
or
concerns
that
you
please
notify
myself
and
or
the
bill
sponsors
so
that
we
have
a
heads
up
as
to
where
you
stand
in
your
position
on
that
particular
vote
again,
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
everybody
for
engaging
in
meaningful
dialogue
today.
I
look
forward
to
continuing
this
conversation.