►
From YouTube: 5/6/2021 - 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
A
Present,
madam
secretary,
please
let
the
record
reflect.
Vice
territories
is
absent
excused
and
please
mark
her
president.
She
makes
her
way
into
the
committee
room
and
members
good
morning.
We
will
be
taking
the
agenda
out
of
order
we'll
be
doing
some
excuse
me,
senate
bill
254,
first
followed
by
senate
bill
150..
A
I
also
want
to
remind
folk
who
wish
to
participate
in
public
comment
will
be
doing
that
at
the
conclusion
of
today's
meeting,
and
with
that
I
am
reminding
myself
to
sign
into
my
cell
phone.
If
you
could,
please
do
so
yourselves
and
with
that
we'll
go
ahead
and
open
up
the
hearing
on
senate
bill,
254
senator
neil,
whenever
you're
ready.
B
Thank
you
good
morning,
assembly,
government
affairs
and
chair
flores.
Thank
you
for
scheduling
this
bill
for
hearing
sb
254
has
been
a
journey
to
say
the
least.
So
there
is
a
lot
going
on.
B
I
never
imagined
that
housing
and
trying
to
protect
housing
and
trying
to
give
equal
rights
and
status
to
individuals
would
give
me
such
pause
for
concern
about
all
of
the
entities
who
care
and
who
oppose-
and
this
is
one
of
these
bills
that,
as
I
picked
up,
an
adopted
source
of
income
caused
an
even
wider
strain
on
who
was
opposed
and
then
who
is
no
longer
in
support,
and
so,
as
you
guys
go
through
this
bill
and
as
you
listen
to
who's
in
opposition,
I
need
you
to
listen
clearly
on
why
they're
in
opposition,
because
there
are
certain
amendments
that
were
made
that
made
them
go
into
opposition
when
we
think
about
housing
and
we
think
about
housing
vouchers
and
we
think
about
what
they
mean
right.
B
B
But
yet
it
has
been
going
on
for
50
years
or
more
right,
but
it
is
one
of
the
key
provisions
that,
in
my
proposed
conceptual
amendment,
I
excluded
in
the
protected
source
of
income
because
it's
already
going
on.
But
the
folks
who
are
in
opposition
are
just
like.
I.
They
believe
that,
because
I
put
in
the
exclusion,
if
anything
happens
at
the
federal
level
that
may
make
the
fed
see
the
state
statute
right
as
something
that
is
a
barrier
and
and
prevents
them
and
prevents
us
from
being
in
alignment
with
any
additional
changes.
B
B
So
I'm
saying
all
of
this,
because
it's
very
very
important
because
sometimes
when
we,
when
we
hear
opposition,
we're
like
oh
my
god,
she
hasn't
really
worked
out
all
the
issues
with
this
bill.
But
I've
worked
out
95
of
the
issues
with
this
bill.
That
is
a
key
provision
that
I
think
is
is
subject
to
debate.
B
It's
always
been
subject
to
debate,
but
the
majority
of
the
bill
that
you
have
in
front
of
you,
I
think,
gets
at
the
place
of
creating
stability
for
ex-felons
people
who
have
served
time,
people
who
have
been
burdened
with
an
arrest
and
trying
to
at
least
allow
the
conversation
and
the
statutory
protection
for
stability
to
find
housing.
It
is
the
most
important
thing
in
the
world
to
be
able
to
have
a
roof
over
your
head.
B
It
can
be
the
most
unimaginable
experience
to
be
able
to
have
to
exit
from
a
facility
and
then
find
out
that
you're
in
a
re-entry
program,
but
and
all
of
the
and
all
of
the
the
grace
and
the
love
that
people
have
for
you
upon
your
release
and
then
you
find
out,
you
cannot
put
in
an
application
and
you
cannot
have
an
apartment.
We're
not
even
talking
about
a
mortgage,
we're
just
talking
about
an
apartment,
and
so
this
bill
does
that
it
has
some
exclusions.
B
It
excludes
all
sex
crimes
and
when
I
talked
to
the
women
who
were
ex-felons,
who
I
had
meetings
with,
they
agreed
with
that
it
excludes
all
violent
felonies.
B
I
understood
that
I
recognized
that
and
when
I
talked
to
professor
pindell
and
he
talked
to
his
senior
parents,
he's
probably
going
to
be
mad
at
me
for
saying
this,
but
one
of
the
things
that
they
said
were
what,
if
you
know
such
and
such
was
living
next
door
right,
you
know
the
serial,
rapist
or
serial
murderer.
That's
a
problem.
It's
a
problem
for
all
of
us
because
you
don't
know
who
it
is.
I
also
included
arson
and
here's
the
reason
why,
at
first
I
was
totally
like
yeah.
B
I
don't
know
if
that's
a
big
deal
right,
second
third,
fourth
degree,
but
then
over
like
right
before
I
think
my
bill
here
or
right
yeah,
either
right
before
my
bill
hearing
or
right
after
my
bill
hearing
in
the
senate,
some
lady
burned
down
her
apartment.
I
was
like
okay.
That
might
be
a
real
thing.
I
don't
know
why
she
did
it,
but
apparently
she
put
everybody
else
in
harm's
way
because
she
set
a
match
burned
up
her
place.
So
that
is
a
problem
right.
B
You
don't
ever
want
to
be
anywhere
and
the
smoke
alarm
is
going
off
and
it's
two
apartments
down
the
way
you're
trying
to
figure
out.
I
don't
let
me
grab
the
cat
and
a
bottle
of
water,
make
it
out.
So
the
bill
is
a
good
bill,
and
so
I
want
to
I'll
get
into
I'll.
Let
professor
pindell
go
because
he
is
my
co-presenter,
but
the
bill
also
aligns
us
with
hud.
B
If
you
knew
the
journey
in
this
legislature-
and
you
guys
will
know
because
a
lot
of
you
guys
is
your
first
session.
But
as
you
go
and
spend
your
12
years
in
this
body
of
awesomeness,
you
will
go
through
so
much
struggle
on
your
legislation,
but
believe
it
or
not.
Housing
has
been
a
part
of
the
nevada
legislature
trying
to
get
to
a
place
of
substantial
equivalence
with
hud.
Since
2009..
B
There
are
portions
of
the
bill
that
35
other
states
have
done.
They
have
accepted
hud's
willingness
to
partner
and
willingness
to
investigate
and
and
resolve
housing
discrimination
at
a
state
level
and
so
I'll
get
into
those
provisions
of
the
bill.
But
I
wanted
to
say
that,
because
there's
a
history
of
this-
and
there
is
no
state
that
has
moved
in
the
position
for
the
ban-
the
box
provision-
that's
in
the
bill,
there
have
been
cities
that
have
passed
ordinances
related
to
ban
the
box,
but
they
have
not
been
at
a
state
level.
B
So
this
is
a
big
deal,
and
I
I
I'm
carrying
this
because
I
ran
into
so
many
women
who
are
think
are
part
of
the
underground
of
ex-offenders,
who
literally
there's
one
woman.
She
hadn't
she
had
been
out.
She
had
been
released
for
seven
years
and
she
had
not
been
able
to
get
an
apartment
in
her
name,
his
apartment
in
her
child's
name,
which
you
know,
is
potentially
illegal,
because
it's
a
minor
apartment
in
her
mother's
name
and
then
prior
to
that
she
was
couch
surfing
right.
So
she
was
on
someone
else's
couch
after
release.
B
This
bill
will
allow
people
like
her
to
be
able
to
exit
and
then
put
in
an
application
and
be
viewed
equally
as
you
and
I
to
say
that
I
have
an
equal
right
to
put
in
an
application
and
potentially
be
housed.
The
bill
does
not
exclude
if
you
go
in
the
apartment,
start
being
rowdy,
acting
like
a
crazy
person
and
you
violate
the
rules
of
the
apartment.
You
will
be
evicted.
The
bill
doesn't
touch
that
or
get
into
any
of
that
at
all,
and
so
I
will
leave
that
re.
B
I
will
leave
the
remarks
right
there,
because
I
just
I
woke
up
with
opposition.
I
went
to
sleep
with
opposition,
and
now
I
will
turn
it
over
to
professor
pindell
of
boyd
law.
A
A
I'm
not
looking
at
matthews,
but
I'm
looking
at
matthews,
I'm
kidding
I'm
kidding
professor
good
morning
just
some
light.
Hearted
humor
professor,
whenever
you're
ready.
C
Okay,
good
morning,
everyone,
let
me
share
my
screen,
so
I
have
a
powerpoint
to
present.
C
Okay,
so
my
name
is
nagai
pindell.
C
N-G-A-I-P-I-N-D-E-L-L,
I'm
a
professor
of
law
at
the
boyd
school
of
law
at
unlv,
and
I
wanted
to
make
clear
that
I'm
also
a
nur
commissioner
nevada,
equal
rights
commission,
but
my
comments
today
are
as
professor
and
not
as
nur,
commissioner
in
the
last
wanted
to
say
hello
to
all
the
void
alums
on
this
assembly
committee.
It's
good
to
see
all
of
you,
so
I
wanted
to
talk
mainly
to
senator
neil's
bill,
the
portions
that
point
to
fair
chance,
housing
and
the
opportunities
for
those
formerly
incarcerated.
C
C
Well,
we're
talking
about
those
formerly
incarcerated,
and
what
I
wanted
to
emphasize
is
the
effects
of
mass
incarceration
on
communities
of
color.
This
is
a.
There
is
a
book
that
was
just
published
this
spring
that
emphasizes
the
timeliness
of
this
issue,
so
reuben
miller,
who
is
a
university
of
chicago
professor
talks
about
the
effects
of
mass
incarceration
on
families
and
communities
of
color,
and
you
know
one
of
the.
I
guess
two
kind
of
pointing
examples.
C
One
is
you
know
he
mentions
the
number
of
people
that
live
with
the
felony
record
and
you
know
their
their
racial
composition,
but
second,
he
also
mentions
that
his
inability,
as
an
accomplished
person,
to
help
his
brother,
who
has
a
criminal
record,
find
housing.
His
brother
couldn't
live
with
him
because
he
lived
in
faculty
housing
that
didn't
allow
people
with
criminal
records
to
to
live
there
and
he
had
trouble
finding
other
places
for
his
brother
to
live.
C
So
again,
the
effects
of
the
criminal
justice
system
are
disproportionately
born
by
communities
and
people
of
color,
so
seattle,
another
city
that
is
considered
the
fair
chance
housing
ordinance
rooted
a
lot
of
their
discussion
and
then
the
reason
for
passing
it
on
the
disparate
impact
on
racial
minorities,
that
a
ban
on
people
with
criminal
records
and
housing
would
have
we're,
not
a
ban
but
landlords
being
able
to
consider
that
this
disproportionate
impact
on
communities
of
color
has
also
been
recognized
by
hud,
so
the
office
of
general
counsel.
C
This
is
guidance
to
landlords
about
how
they
might
take
into
account.
Criminal
records
in
their
admissions
process
acknowledge
that
criminal
records
based
barriers
are
going
to
have
a
disproportionate
impact
on
minority
home
seekers.
C
We're
under
the
fair
housing
act,
what
we're
concerned
about
is
a
disproportionate
effect
on
racial
minorities.
Right
so
does
the
application
of
a
law
or
a
practice
have
a
disproportionate
impact
on
racial
minorities,
and
if
it
does,
it's,
perhaps
a
violation
of
the
fair
housing
act
and,
of
course,
intentional
discrimination
is
a
violation
of
the
fair
housing
act,
so
we're
looking
for
disproportionate
effect
or
intentional
discrimination.
C
Senator
neil
gave
you
one
or
two
examples
of
people
that
she
talked
to
that
had
served
their
time
and
paid
their
debt
to
society
and
nonetheless,
were
hampered
in
their
ability
to
find
housing
after
conviction.
C
C
Senator
neil
and
I
and
when
I
talk
to
others,
you
know
we
have
a
justifiable
concern
about
who's
living
next
door
to
us
or,
if
you
think,
about
parents
right,
it's
who's,
living
next
door
to
their
children
right
when
they
are
in
an
apartment
somewhere,
and
so
you
know,
after
thinking
about
those
kinds
of
concerns,
senator
neil
said
she
excluded
violent,
felony,
sex
crimes
and
arson
from
the
from
the
bill.
But
this
is
good
policy
right.
C
It
increases
racial
equity
and
housing,
keeping
families
together,
lowering
the
risk
of
reoffense
for
those
that
have
again
paid
their
debt
to
society,
and
we
know
from
the
last
year
that
stable
housing
is
the
center
of
a
strong
and
inclusive
community
and
central
and
our
public
health
response
to
covet.
So
today,
more
than
ever
we're
aware
of
the
importance
of
housing
and
shelter
not
only
to
families
but
to
our
communities.
It's
a
public
health
issue.
So
again,
I
think
fair,
fair,
fair
chance.
Housing
is
good
policy
and
I
hope
the
legislature
passes
this
bill.
A
And
thank
you
for
joining
us
this
morning,
professor
we'll
come
back
to
senator
near
neil.
Excuse
me.
B
Thank
you,
chair,
flores,
all
right,
so
now
I'll
go
through
the
bill.
I'm
sure
you
guys
have
questions
so
the
sections
one
through
I'll
pretty
much
say
all
the
way
up
to
probably
32.
B
those
codify
the
hud
provisions.
Nerc
is
currently
statutorily
unable
to
enter
into
certain
agreements
with
u.s
hud
for
the
commission
to
investigate
and
enforce
laws
relating
to
fair
housing
as
a
certified
agency
under
federal
law.
The
provisions
that
we
are
placing
in
here
helps
to
allow
them
to
do
that
and
places
them
in
a
position
to
not
only
receive
support
from
hud.
B
It
would
allow
them
to
receive
an
additional
investigators
and
and
an
attorney
that
would
help
them
handle
cases
at
hud
and
so
those
provisions-
and
we
can
go
through
those
if
you
guys-
have
questions
on
those,
but
it
helps
us
to
get
into
a
position
as
a
state
to
number
one
number
one
align
to
get
support
three
update
our
laws
so
that
we're
in
compliance,
if
you
notice
in
the
provisions
we're
literally
this
bill,
is
adding
familial
status
and
religion
you're
like
okay,
I
thought
that
was
already
in
well,
apparently
not
in
nevada
and
so
we're
able
to
adopt
this
language.
B
And
so
I
was
willing
to
take
that
on
to
be
able
to
assist
nerc
in
trying
to
get
to
the
place
of
substantial
equivalence,
so
that
hud
would
come
in
and
support
the
state
of
nevada
with
some
financial
support
and
also
just
to
simply
get
us
in
alignment
when
we
get
to
section
31,
32
and
33.
B
I
would
say
the
felony
provisions
or
the
ban.
The
box
provisions
that
I
that
I
have
been,
which
was
the
heart
of
my
reason,
for
bringing
this
bill.
So
in
section
31,
you
have
the
aggrieved
person
in
section
32,
what's
unlawful
discrimination
and
then,
when
we
get
into
section
33,
this
is
where
we
have
some
amendments.
B
So
in
section
33,
everything
is
the
same,
except
for
when
you
get
to
section
33,
subsection,
2.,.
B
So
the
amendment
of
the
provisions
is
set
forth,
where
I
think
you
guys
have
this
in
nellis
to
provide
that
a
person
who
inquires
into
or
conducts
a
background
check
in
accordance
with
subsection
2
is
authorized
to
refuse
to
rent
or
lease
or
refuse
to
negotiate
for
the
rental
or
lease
of
or
otherwise
make
unavailable
a
dwelling
on
the
basis
of
an
arrest,
record,
conviction,
record
or
record
of
criminal
history
only
to
the
extent
authorized
by
federal
law.
So
there
are
already
things
in
place
in
federal
law,
and
so
we're
not
we're.
B
Not
we're
not
messing
with
that,
but
we
are
creating
some
caveats
within
the
state
that
don't
get
into
preemption
or
don't
get
into
other
issues
where
we
violate
already
established
federal
rules.
Once
you
get
into
the
it's
sub
after
that
sub
two
and
you
get
into
d
no
a
b
c
and
d.
B
This
lays
out
the
first
degree
arson,
the
first
second
and
then
the
violent
offenses
that
I
spoke
to
as
you
go
further
down.
B
B
The
only
thing
I
believe
what
I
excluded
was
so
whatever's
in
place
for
at
the
federal
level,
that's
a
revolving
hud
or
the
housing
assistance,
but
I
did
do
a
carve
out
for
marijuana.
That's
in
the
state
of
nevada,
because
we've
legalized
marijuana
and
so
because
we've
legalized
marijuana,
I
didn't
want
anybody
to
be
denied
on
a
drug
offense
if
it
was
marijuana
and
we
had
made
it
legal
in
the
state
of
nevada
and
so
marijuana
is
in.
B
But
if
there
are
other
drug
related
offenses,
if
you
guys
are
familiar,
there
are
drug
related
offenses
that
you
cannot.
You
cannot
get
into
public
housing
on
certain
drug
related
offenses,
because
that's
federal,
so
that's
what
that
provision
speaks
to
and
then,
when
you
get
into
sub
three.
B
This
is
the
person
who
makes
the
dwelling
available
for
rent
or
lease
and
is
subject
to
this.
Provision
shall
provide
to
each
applicant,
and
so
this
is
the
provisions
of
118
and
180
nrs,
118
and
110,
but
it
basically
talks
about
how
the
applicant
may
appeal
a
denial
or
rent
a
denial
for
a
rental
or
lease
of
a
dwelling
in
a
public
housing
or
public
housing
authority.
B
B
And
I
want
to
make
this
clear:
it
doesn't
apply
to
single
single-family
residences,
it
doesn't
apply
to
manufactured
homes
and
it
doesn't
apply
to
dwellings
that
are
smaller
than
four
units.
We
were
trying
to
make
sure
we
were
going
after
the
larger
apartment
complexes
and
trying
to
make
sure
that
the
door
was
open.
So
if
you
look
at
sub
c,
do
not
apply
to
any
of
the
actions.
B
This
is
where
it
says
any
of
the
actions
taken
by
the
person
pursuant
to
any
federal
law
or
regulations
that
require
the
person
to
inquire
into
the
conduct
or
background
check,
to
determine
arrest,
record
conviction,
record
or
criminal
history
of
an
applicant.
It
excludes
this
is
where
we
get
into
the
sex
offenses,
which
are
all
sex
offenses.
We
just
kind
of
just
put
that
all
the
way
in
there,
and
it
also.
These
are
where
the
exclusions
that
I
just
mentioned
about
the
manufactured
home,
single-family,
housing,
etc.
B
B
And
then,
when
you
turn
the
page,
we
get
into
background
checks,
which
means,
in
a
report
regarding
the
arrest
record,
conviction
record
a
record
of
criminal
history
of
a
person
related
intended
to
obtain
a
person's
record
of
criminal
history,
conviction,
record
and
then
the
definition
of
dwelling.
And
then
we
have
public
housing
and
then,
when
we
get
into
33.5,
which
is
another
amendment,
33.5
gets
us
into
the
source
of
income
which
some
folks
are
neutral
and
then
because
of
the
amendment
which
you
guys
have
on
nellis.
B
So
the
amendment
that
you
guys
have
on
nellis,
which
amends
section
33.5,
basically
says
that
the
for
the
purposes
of
the
prohibition
on
discrimination
based
on
source
of
income,
the
term
source
of
income
is
not
limited
to
income
from
a
federal
law
passed
for
the
purposes
of
providing
relief
for
covet
19..
Instead,
the
definition
of
the
source
of
income
would
include
such
federal
funds
just
as
one
example
as
a
source
of
income.
Specifically,
it
revises
the
definition
to
mean
housing,
assistance
or
benefits
paid
by
any
federal
state
or
local
government
entity.
B
Before
june
30
2022,
including
without
limitation,
any
rental
assistance
funds
provided
pursuant
to
a
pursuant
to
a
federal
law,
passed
for
the
purposes
of
providing
relief
for
covet
19
pandemic.
B
The
amendment
continues
to
say
it
removes
section
45,
subsection
3,
so
the
provisions
of
section
33.5,
prohibiting
discrimination
based
on
the
source
of
income
do
not
expire
on
june
30
2022
and
will
continue
to
operate
beyond
the
date.
So
what
does
all
that
mean?
What
I
tried
to
do
working
with
stakeholders
was
to
find
a
very
unhappy
medium,
where
we
could
get
to
the
place
of
at
least
protecting
existing
activities
that
were
already
going
on.
B
So
for
me,
that
sentence
where
it
says
specifically
revise
the
definition
to
mean
housing,
assistance
or
benefits
paid
by
any
federal
or
state
or
local
government
entity.
Before
june
30th
2022,
we
already
have
people
going
to
seek
assistance
from
help
right
if
you've
ever
gone
and
tried
to
get
a
voucher
from
help
for
first
month
month,
deposit
and
then
first
month's
rent.
I
wanted
to
protect
what
was
already
going
in
the
space.
B
Because
of
the
statement
that
I
made
earlier,
which
they
felt,
if
I,
if
I
do
the
exclusion,
how
will
the
federal
government
see
that
exclusion
in
state
law
and
then
view
it
negatively?
Where
then
we're
maybe
in
conflict?
And
now
the
statutory
provision
is
telling
the
feds
what
we're
doing
in
the
state
and
then
there's
some
kind
of
okay?
B
Well,
we're
not
going
to
necessarily
apply
this
or
we
get
into
a
conundrum
where
we
are
where
we
are
where
we
are
being
asked
the
question:
do
you
support
section
8
or
not
right,
and
I
think
that
that
that's
a
valid
point
that's
being
made
my
hope
was
or
what
my
intent
was
in.
Excluding
section
8
was
it's
already
going
on.
I
didn't
go
into
the
statutory
provisions
to
eliminate
it.
It's
already
a
practice,
it's
already
happening,
and
so
it'll
be
this
committee
to
determine.
B
If
that's
true,
I
did,
I
don't
know
if
I,
if
that's,
hopefully
I'm
trying
that's.
That
was
my
intent.
Let's
try
to
get
there
not
to
codify
section
8
and
state
statute,
but
to
leave
it,
as
is
as
to
how
it's
currently
functioning
right
now.
B
So
the
rest
of
the
bill
is
pretty
much
the
from
38
to
30
to
the
rest
of
the
bills,
the
hud,
conforming
pieces
and
so
I'll.
Just
open
myself
up
for
questions.
The
bill
is
a
lot
and
there's
a
lot
of
backup
that
I
have
associated
with
it.
So,
mr
chair,
let's
rock
and
roll.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you
good
morning
senator
appreciate
the
presentation
on
the
bill.
You
noted
in
your
introductory
remarks
that
initially
arson
was
not
among
the
exclusions
or
the
exemptions
in
this
bill,
and
then
there
was
this
incident
and
that's
what
sort
of
sparked
its
inclusion,
and
so
you
know
my
question
would
be.
D
D
You
know
every
circumstance
and
after
all,
if
this
incident
hadn't
occurred,
you
may
be
sitting
here
today
with
that
exclusion,
not
in
the
bill,
and
it
would
seem
to
me
that
this
would
sort
of
highlight
the
folly
of
especially
at
the
state
level
government
trying
to
impose
sort
of
a
top-down,
one-size-fits-all
approach
and
substitute
its
judgment
for
perhaps
local
governments
or
better
yet
property
owners
who
have
more
practical
experience
with
with
these
things
and
and
the
challenges
that
arise,
who
are
closer
to
the
situation
locally
and
ultimately
do
bear
the
risk
you
know
for
for
the
problems
and
the
challenges
that
may
occur,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
could,
if
you
could
speak
to
that
in
light
of
that,
that
incident
and
the
history
of
this
bill.
B
B
I
guess
apartment
complex
to
deal
with
or
have
the
discretion
that
they
would
like
to
keep
because
I
feel
like
it
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
state
to
engage
in
this
public
policy
and
to
take
state
action
in
regards
to
fairness
and
fundamental
access
to
the
ability
to
have
a
roof
over
your
head.
So
when
we
talk
about
fair
housing,
we
talk
about
the
right
to
housing.
B
Take
advantage
of
government
services
to
take
care
of
them
so
that
I
felt
like
in
the
circular
argument
that
we
actually
win
and
we
are
actually
better
able
to
take
care
of
our
citizens
by
providing
a
pathway
for
individuals
to
get
housing.
One
thing
I
know
for
sure
federal
programs
right
now.
We
currently
are
putting
millions
and
millions
of
dollars
into
re-entry
programs
in
order
to
allow
those
persons
in
order
to
get
back
into
society
and
get
a
second
chance
supposedly.
B
We
believe
in
a
second
chance,
and
we
have
put
that
out
as
a
public
policy
purpose
of
the
state.
We've
also
put
millions
of
dollars
behind
that
purpose,
but
at
the
end
of
it
we've
said
oh
yeah,
but
you
don't
get
a
second
chance
at
a
house.
You
actually
don't
get
a
roof,
and,
and-
and
that
is
disingenuous
to
me-
and
I
felt
that
the
state
needed
to
get
in
a
position
where
we
were
going
to
speak
on
that,
because
it
also
is
a
good
investment
to
put
our
dollars
in
the
right
place.
B
Because
what
we're
saying
is
that
we'll,
we'll
we'll
give
you
job
training,
we'll
spend
hundreds
of
dollars
on
you
to
get
a
job,
but
you
got
to
live
on
the
street.
I
it.
It
doesn't
logically
connect
to
say
that
that
is
what
the
purpose
of
government
is
to
say
that
it's
all
right
to
release
you.
It's
all
right
to
arrest
you
and
then,
if
you
don't
even
have
a
conviction,
use
that
arrest
against
you
and
then
say,
but
not
this
apartment,
not
that
apartment
you
you
go
live
with
your
mama.
B
You
go
live
with
your
cousins.
That
is
not
what
I
felt.
What
should
be
going
on,
because
what
I
found
out
in
the
space
was
that
that
is
what's
going
on
and
I
was
just
like.
So
what
are
we
spending
this
money
to
do
if
ultimately,
they're
not
going
to
find
a
house,
and
so
these
concerns
that
I'm
listening
right
now
were
my
overriding
concerns
where
I
felt
I
will
step
in
on
the
discretion
because
of
the
greater
service
and
public
policy
purpose
that
I
felt
needed
to
be
established
around
housing.
D
Oh
thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
happy
to
see
you
again.
Miss
neil
I've
been
trying
to
get
down
there
to
say
hello,
and
it
was
a
great
honor
to
see
him
show
respect
to
your
father
on
the
floor.
Thank.
D
Good
morning,
hey,
I
got
a,
I
got
a
question
and
we
both
know
that
there's
a
shortage
of
public
housing
out
there
right
now
and
and
actually
it's
it's
kind
of
a
in
some
areas.
It's
critical
something
one
of
the
questions
I
have
is.
I
understand
when
I
read
some
of
these
reports
right
here
of
of
the
requirements
that
some
of
these
people
or
apartment
complexes
have
and
but
my
biggest
thing
is-
is
the
single
mothers
and
the
mothers,
the
children,
and
that
should
be
priority
in
every
public
housing.
D
I
don't
care
what
it
is
that
that
should
be.
First
come
first
served,
I
think,
because
it's
kind
of
rough
on
some
of
those
that
that
might
have
three
or
four
little
kids
and
trying
to
get
them
to
school,
try
to
work
it
so
in
trying
to
find
a
place
to
live.
I
I
think
that
should
be
the
number
one,
but
then,
when
it
gets
down
to
you
said
this
now
that
everybody
once
they
pay
their
debt
to
society.
D
That
should
be
done,
and
I
agree
with
that,
but
I
think
they
still
need
to
go
through
a
process.
A
small
process
and
and
get
there
and
I
did
have
an
apartment,
complex
burnt
down
by
a
woman
that
was
getting
section,
8
money
because
she
got
mad
at
her
boyfriend
and
took
it
out
on
my
building.
D
She
did,
I
think,
a
month
in
jail
for
total
destruction
of
a
building
and
it
almost
killed
10
people,
but
that's
not
the
issue.
The
issue
is,
I
think
we
need
to
prioritize
some
of
the
people
that
get
to
go
in
there,
and
maybe
I'm
I'm
wrong
for
saying
this,
but
I
still
think
that
they
should
prioritize
the
mothers
first
and
then
come
down
from
there
and
look
and
see
if
they
can
help
those
individuals
but
you're
right
there.
D
There
is
a
shortage
of
housing
and
I
don't
know
what
they're
going
to
do
to
eventually
get
there,
but
I
do
believe
that
people
do
pay
their
their
their
debt
to
society.
I
believe
that,
but
it,
but
I
still
think
it
has
to
go
through
a
process,
but
I
looked
at
some
of
these
that
were
in
here
that
that
restricted
them
child
molester.
You
took
that
out
and
some
of
them
should
be
eventually
they
still
need
to
their
debts
paid
to
society
and
they
got
to
be
watched.
B
So,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison
and-
and
I
and
I
respect
your
opinion
on
this,
but
so
you
said
you
said
a
couple
of
things
and
I
understand
the
thought
couple
things
when
you
said
prioritize
and
I'm
kind
of
work
backwards
and
get
into
a
lot
of
it.
So
number
one.
You
said:
prioritize
single
mothers
and
and
give
them
a
priority.
Here's
the
reason
why
we
can't
do
that
and
why
and
why
the
bill
won't
do
that,
because
we
only
have
certain
classes
of
people
in
which
we
give
priority
to
right.
B
We
don't
want
to
ever
get
into
an
equal
protection
issue
where
number
one
we're
giving
a
class
of
people
a
higher
priority
over
others.
We
have
already
established
in
law
around
ex-offenders,
and
I
and
and
we
have
dedicated
funding
and
resources
to
ex-offenders
and
I'll
make
one
give
you
one
example
on
how
we
have
focused
on
rehabilitation,
even
when
they're
in
ndoc
right.
B
There
were
millions
of
dollars
being
spent
in
ndoc
right
now,
in
order
to
do
re-entry
work
before
release,
and
typically
the
most,
I
would
say,
the
most
strenuous
activity
happens
within
that
six
months
right
because
you
could
have
within
the
system
a
re-offense
that
rolls
your
release
date
back,
but
within
that
six
months,
when
you
know
that
you're
getting
ready
to
get
released,
there
are
monies
that
are
being
spent
federal
and
state.
B
In
order
to
get
you
ready
to
exit,
we,
then,
in
the
south,
have
casa
grande,
which
is
a
housing
stat,
where
they're
in
a
kind
of
like
a
halfway
house,
and
then
they're
allowed
to
be
in
that
halfway
house
and
then
try
to
get
on
their
feet
at
the
same
time
that
that's
happening.
We
are
using
wioa
dollars
and
workforce
dollars
to
help
these
individuals
get
trained
and
then
re-establish
themselves
we're
doing
soft
skills,
we're
doing
hard
skills.
B
We
are
trying
to
do
some
level
of
mental
health
preparation,
but
we
are
putting
millions
of
dollars
into
this
category
of
individuals
in
order
to
help
them
get
their
second
chance
on
life
and
then
be
able
to
live
with.
That
said,
those
individuals
have
already
gone
through
a
process
and
we
have
paid
for
it
as
the
government.
B
B
If
the
idea
of
the
state
is
that
we
should
spend
all
of
these,
these
monies
and
these
services
wrap
around
services
around
ex-offenders
and
re-entry
persons
and
then,
when
they
get
out
of
these
programs,
where
we
are
helping
and
assisting
then
tell
them,
go
get
your
sleeping
bag,
pull
up
a
couch
or
go
sleep
over
at
a
friend's
house,
but
never
allow
them
to
use
the
money
which
we
said
that
they
have
the
right
to
earn
and
and
and
paid
money
in
order
to
get
them
ready
for
the
work
that
they're
doing
and
then
tell
them.
B
B
A
D
Well,
what
I'm
trying
to
get
to
is
is
right.
Now,
our
one
of
our
most
critical
deal
is
senior
citizens,
our
age,
there's
more
senior
citizens
out
there
looking
for
housing
than
I
think
than
than
anything,
then
the
second
is
is:
is
families
that
are
trying
to
get
in
there?
So
if
they
don't
have
a
place
to
stay
and
and
we
open
it
up
for
anything
and
anybody
we're
going
to
run
out
of
housing
right
off.
Are
we
not
that's?
D
My
biggest
fear
is-
and
I
can
understand
the
restrictions
on
some
of
these
because
they
just
come
out
and
they're
trying
to
get
back
in,
but
maybe
they
need
to
look
at
it
if
nick's
building
housing
they
they
need
to
start
in
smaller
units
and
and
more
of
them
for
for
reasons
for
this,
but
I
still
think
in
my
heart
that
it
should
be
seniors
first
mothers
and
with
children
second
and
then
down
the
line.
B
B
B
Are
it
it
should
not
be
the
state's
position
to
say
that
an
individual
is
less
than
because
you
have
a
record,
because
if
we
are
saying
that,
then
we're
in
a
whole
other
category.
That's
of
issues,
because
we
did
pass
ban
the
box
for
jobs
in
2015
under
assemblyman
tyrone
thompson.
We
did
do
that
and
the
reason
why
we
did.
That
is
because
the
state
made
a
public
policy
decision
that
re-entry
persons
were
not
less
than
that.
B
This
is
the
same
thing
in
terms
of
you
can
apply,
but
don't
don't
use
my
criminal
background
against
me
and
then
tell
me
that
I
am
not
allowed
to
live
in
a
place
and
therefore
I
am
unequal,
because
if
we're
saying
that
we
we
have
some,
we
have
some
really
moral
questions
that
I
think
we
need
to
ask
ourselves
about
who
is
equal
and
who
we
have
designated
as
less
than
in
the
state
of.
E
E
B
E
So
fabulous
I
mean,
I
think,
access
to
fair
housing
is
is
very
important
and
I've
heard
a
couple
of
comments,
so
I
just
really
want
to
clarify
my
colleagues
stated
public
housing.
This
is
not
relative
to
public
housing.
It's
my
understanding.
This
is
like
all
housing
all
apartment
complexes.
All
renters
is
that
correct.
B
E
B
I
I
personally
had
a
group
that
I
met
with,
but
I
don't
have
the
direct
statistics,
but
I
had
a
group
of
women
20
ex-offenders
that
I
met
with
over
the
over
the
summer
and
that's
when
I
understood
the
global
part
of
this
in
terms
of
who
was
affected
in
this
underground
group,
but
the
direct
stats
professor
pindell
may
have
it
or
we
may
be
able
to
get
that
back
to
you
in
terms
of
who
are
the
ex-offenders,
because
there
I
did
have
that
number
ready
in
the
senate
ga
hearing,
but
I
could
not
find
my
bag
of
notes,
and
I
I
do
have
that
number
and
probably
could
be
able
to
get
that
to
you
in
about
an
hour,
because
there
is
a
set
number
of
re
re-entry
persons
who
are
who
are
in
the
state
of
nevada
who
this
could
affect.
E
Thank
you
senator
and
then
one
last
I
heard
you
say
in
your
in
your
comments,
arrest
and
then
conviction
and
it's
been
a
while,
since
I
filled
out
a
an
application
for
an
apartment,
although
not
very
long
and
you've
said
banned
the
box
now
a
couple
of
times,
and
I
appreciate
that
I
just
want
to
be
really
clear:
the
box
on
that
rental
application
that
we're
talking
about
what
is
that
state?
Does
it
stay
erected
arrested?
Does
it
stay
convicted
of
a
crime?
Can
you
just
clarify
that
so
so.
B
F
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
senator
neil.
I
love
the
intention
of
this
bill.
I
really
really
do
I'm
confused
in
some
parts.
I
know
I
have
a
lot
to
to
kind
of
still
get
through
reading
the
amendment,
so
I
have
just
a
couple
of
questions.
F
Well,
none
of
these
issues
that
I
you
know
that
I
can
use
or
I
can
as
a
basis
to
cross
this
person
off
for
this
apartment,
but
there
are
other
things
now
that
I
see
like
an
arrest
or
something
that
shouldn't
be
allowed
under
this
this
bill.
How
do
you
enforce?
How
do
you
enforce
that?
I
guess
is
my
question:
is:
is
there
a
specific
way
that
you
can
background
only
for
the
things
or,
if
not,
how
do
you
enforce
it?.
B
So
in
in
regards
to
that-
and
I
think
that
this
is
probably
best
by
someone
but
the
way
that
I've
envisioned
it
is
that
you
just
run
a
background
check
and
then
the
exclusions
that
are
out
there,
so
they're
already
federal
rules
in
play
and
what
you
cannot
use
against
someone
already.
B
So
if
you
in
in
my
real
the
way
I
envision
this
happening,
you
run
the
background
check
which
they
say
is
all
electronic.
You
you,
you
get
this
sheet
and
they
say
that
the
the
and
then
you
see
these
exclusions
like
okay,
maybe
there's
a
sex
offender.
B
That
person
is
then
triggered
to
say
that
this
is
probably
going
to
be
a
denial.
You
see
a
violent
burglary
with
the
weapon
that
would
then
trigger
a
denial,
but
then
everything
else
is
not
going
to
be
a
part
of
that
right.
So
whatever
those
violent,
felonies
exclusions,
there's
going
to
be
some
level
of
education
around
apartment
managers
in
order
to
say
here
are
the
new
rules
that
we're
playing
by
here's.
What
the
feds
have
said,
and
then
here
are
our
practices
that
we
now
have
to
bring
in
that's
the
way.
B
B
This
circumvents
all
of
that
and
then
says,
here's
here's
everything
that's
out
and
here's
everything
that's
in,
and
so
I'm
the
way
I
assumed
that
this
was
going
to
happen
is
that
they
were
going
to
educate,
sit
down
with
their
apartment
managers
and
have
them
and
have
a
discussion
on
how
things
were
implemented
and
here's.
Why?
I
think
this
is
going
why
I
think
this
is
going
to
happen
this
way
when
I
had
another
bill
in
2017
that
pretty
much
went
after
workforce
agencies
and
it
changed
the
the
their
the
way
that
they
function.
B
We
all
got
in
a
room
and
we
talked
about
the
implementation
of
the
law
and
we
talked
about
how
it
was
supposed
to
work
and
what
then
are
the
requirements
of
them
now,
after
the
bill,
it
was
ab354
what
they
were
now
responsible
to
do.
They
got
all
of
their
questions
out
and
then
then
they
started
to
do
the
practice
of
implementation
of
that
bill.
B
I
don't
know
if
nerc
could
add
any
review
there
in
terms
of
like
if
there
is
an
appeal,
how
that
would
then
be
dealt
with,
because
it
does
speak
to
it
in
the
bill
like
if
there's
enough
complaint
and
you're
supposed
to
do
conciliation
first
and
then
that
backside
of
it.
B
If
that
is
also
something
you
want
to
try
to
examine
and
get
on
the
record,
I
think
that
nerc
would
be
able
to
explain
at
least
the
back
part
and
then
the
front
part,
the
apartment
association,
but
that's
how
I
envisioned
it
that
when
the
bill
passes,
you
then
put
little
regs.
F
There
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
and
if
ner
wants
to
answer,
because
what
I'm
envisioning
is,
let's
say
you
have
two
people
that
are
applying
for
for
an
apartment.
You
do
background
checks
on
both.
Neither
one
of
them
have
any
of
the
crimes
listed
in
there,
but
one
of
them
has
you
know
a
conviction
for
non-violent
crime
and
you're
looking
at
those.
If,
if
I
am
that
person-
and
I
am
not
picked,
how
do
I
then
contact
hud
or
nur
or
whoever
and
say
I
was
you
know,
discriminated
against
because
of
this?
B
So
I'll,
let
miss
jenkins
direct
that,
but
there
are
provisions
in
the
bill
but
I'll.
Let
her
talk
about
it
and
I'll
point
to
it.
Miss
jenkins.
So
if
you
get
a
complaint,
go
ahead.
G
All
right
well,
thank
you.
So
much
senator
neil
good
morning,
chair
flores,
the
members
of
the
committee.
It's
me
cara
jenkins,
k-a-r-a-j-e-n-k-I-n-s.
I
am
the
administrator
for
the
nevada,
equal
rights
commission
and
if
it's
okay,
chair
for
florida
through
you
may
address
the
committee
member
directly.
G
Okay,
perfect,
so
it
was
a
great
question
and
I
was
sitting
here
taking
notes,
as
senator
neil
had
mentioned,
because
we've
already
had
band
the
box
pass
through
a
prior
session.
Nerd
provides
training
to
employers
on
how
to
equitably,
reject
an
applicant
for
a
job
and
I'll
get
to
housing
in
a
minute.
I'm
just
going
to
run
a
parallel
real
quick
to
how
to
in
equity,
deny
an
application
for
employment,
even
though
we're
making
sure
that
we're
not
using
criminal
background
behind
them,
and
it
only
relates
nevada
to
public
employers.
G
Okay,
and
so
we
train
on
how
to
send
conditional
offers
of
employment
and
then
once
we
conduct
or
once
an
employer,
conducts
a
background
check
and
they
find
that
there
are
certain
elements
or
certain
crimes
that
are
not
within
the
protections
of
equity
and
and
nrs
statute.
There's
a
there's
a
way
that
you
can
let
them
let
them
down,
and
so
similarly,
similarly,
in
parallel
to
a
rental
application
for
an
apartment,
as
senator
neal
had
mentioned,
there
are
carve
outs
right,
sex
offenders,
violent
felonies.
G
So
if
someone
had
committed
murder
and
then
wanted
to
rent
an
apartment,
I
would
imagine
that
that
apartment
complex
would
have
every
support
under
the
law.
To
just
say
sorry,
it's
not
you're
not
accepted
it's
similar
to
the
first
and
last
months
requirements.
So
just
want
everybody
to
just
think
about.
You
know
even
like
with
employment
when
you
apply
for
a
job
or
if
you
apply
for
apartment,
you
have
to
meet
certain
everybody's
got
to
meet
certain
elements.
G
First,
last
month's
rent
be
able
to
prove
that
you
can
afford
the
rent
and
then,
on
top
of
it,
you
have
to
just
basically
make
sure
that
you'll
be
a
good
tenant
right
or
a
good
employee.
So
if
someone
feels
like
and
I'm
going
to
take
a
seat
here,
if
someone
feels
like
they
have
been
they've
met
all
those
requirements,
they
do
not
have
a
serious
felony
criminal
background,
they're,
not
a
sex
offender,
but
they
otherwise
got
rejected.
Anyway,
they
would
file
with
the
nevada
equal
rights
commission.
They
could
also
file
with
hud.
G
Hopefully
that
will
change,
but
they
can
file
a
complaint
with
us
and
then
we'll
conduct
an
investigation.
I
hope
that
makes
sense,
and
so
the
investigation
would
probably
just
look
at
the
statute,
the
law
just
to
ensure
that
okay,
in
the
in
in
doing
the
background
checks
worse
were.
Was
the
law
followed?
G
I
don't
want
to
get
too
deep
with
this
there's
just
a
lot,
but
yes,
and
if
their
law
was
not
followed,
if
say,
someone
had
a
misdemeanor
or
an
arrest,
noting
that
an
arrest
is
not
a
conviction,
then
we
would
pursue
conciliatory
efforts
to
settle
and
it'd
be
a
quick
turnaround
because
the
longer
someone's
without
a
home,
the
more
detriment
to
that
person
to
that
nevadan.
G
So
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
Maybe
maybe
some
more
follow-up
or
if
you
have
any
more
in-depth
questions,
essentially
the
person
could,
if
they
felt
like
the
laws
weren't
followed.
Should
this
bill
become
law
that
they
had
a
non-violent
felony
or
maybe
they
had
an
arrest,
but
yet
they
still
and
they
could
still
meet
all
the
other
requirements
of
the
apartments
complexes,
rental
application.
Yet
they
still
can
get
in
and
they
feel
that
it's
because
of
their
criminal
background
that
they
were
denied.
B
B
What
happens
at
the
hearing?
If
you
go
to
it
continues
on
section
15.
It
talks
about
probable
cause
to
believe
that
you
are
unlawfully
discriminated
against
in
housing.
It
talks
about
the
role
of
the
attorney
general
in
section
15
sub.
Three.
It
talks
about
the
proponents
preponderance
of
the
evidence
standard
in
sub
five.
B
Then
it
talks
about
the
injunction
when
you
go
to
sub
five
sub
c,
and
then
it
continues
if
the
court
rules
and
then
when
you
turn
and
go
to
section
16,
it
talks
about
the
power
of
the
order
and
how,
when
the?
Even
when,
if
you
do
the
alleged
complaint,
the
order
is
issued
it
talks
about
then
your
ability
to
deal
with
the
final
decision
and
requesting
judicial
review,
and
then
it
goes
on
to
talk
about
pretty
much
kind
of
like
the
civil
procedure.
B
That
would
happen
the
cross
petition
for
judicial
review
and
then
on
section
7.
What?
Then,
the
commission
is
responsible
for
doing
after
that
judicial
review,
and
then
it
continues
on
in
section
16,
on
page
nine,
where
there's
a
full
full
laid
out
about
what
happens
with
the
petitioner
cross
petitioner
seeking
judicial
review.
How
they
serve
and
file
a
memorandum
of
points
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
so
the
bill
is,
I
would
say,
very
prescriptive,
and
these
provisions
were
get
us
into
the
substantial
compliance
which
miss
jenkins
was
talking
about.
B
That
gets
us
to
the
place
where,
instead
of
going
hud
san
francisco
nerc
las
vegas,
and
so
we
adopt
these
provisions,
which
is
very
important
for
us
to
get
an
alignment
with
hurt
with
hud
to
get
a
nerc
to
get
on
the
same
page
as
hud.
That
then
allows
the
person
who
was
affected
to
have
the
statewide
ability
within
nevada,
just
las
vegas
and
then
whatever
nerd
offices,
which
are
in
the
north
as
well
to
be
able
to
bring
this
complaint.
B
F
Thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
for
that
explanation
as
well.
My
other
question
is
on
the
amendment
the
additional
language
in
the
amendment.
Nothing
in
this
section
requires
a
landlord
to
qualify
the
subject
property
to
accept
federal,
et
cetera,
that
last
line
that
says,
use
a
particular
form
of
rental
agreement.
If
you
can
explain
what
that
means
or
why
that
was
put
in
here,
I'm
just
a
little
confused
on
that
and
that's
my
last
question.
Thank
you.
F
So
I'm
looking
at
the
amendment,
the
language
in
blue
and
it
starts
with
it's
under
your
subsection
or
section
two.
F
Changes
so
it's
at
least
on
the
one
that
I'm
looking
at
that's
on
the
one
I
got
on
nellis
subsection,
two
second
paragraph
or
section
two
second,.
B
Oh
that
part
nothing
in
the
section
required
that
came
from
the
realtors
association.
They
asked
for
this
change,
so
nothing
in
the
section
requires
a
landlord
to
qualify
or
accept.
B
So
they
wanted
that
they
literally
wanted
that
carve
out
to
because
they
felt
that
they
needed
a
little
bit
more
security
to
make
sure
that
if
they
were
going
to
qualify,
said
property
to
accept
federal
or
state
of
local
funding
or
to
create
a
duty
on
the
landlord
to
perform
any
kind
of
reporting
or
a
particular
form
of
the
rental
agreement,
they're
trying
to
make
sure
that
they
don't
have
to
do
any
kind
of
reporting
related
to
these
particular
sources
of
income
or
particular
form
of
the
rental
agreement.
B
I
think
that
the
rental,
the
realtors
need
to
what
should
be
able
to
explain
that
better,
but
they
gave
that
to
me
last
night
because
they
wanted
to
make
sure
that
they
they
weren't
going
to
have
some
additional
responsibilities.
That's
the
way
I
interpreted
it
and
I
went
ahead
and
accepted
that
amendment.
So
I
could
get
them
to
neutral.
B
But
I
think
that
the
realtors
need
to
explain
that
provision,
because
that
was
thrown
in
by
them
last
night.
A
C
C
Earlier
that
you,
over
the
summer
had
about
20
ex
female
felons
that
you
apparently
had
a
focus
group
concerning
this
bill,
I
was
wondering
if
you
also
included
any
of
the
male
ex-felons.
Thank
you.
B
I
didn't
I
didn't
exclude
it's
just
that
when
I,
when
it
got
put
out
in
the
space
there
were
majority
women
who
joined
there
was
only
one
male
and
he
was
literally
recounting
the
story
of
another
female.
That
was
what
was
interesting
about
it
and
the,
and
it
was
with
the
nevada
apartment
association.
We
all
were
on
the
zoom,
it's
recorded.
B
If
you
want
to
watch
it
and
literally
we
had
a
conversation
about
what
was
really
going
on
in
the
space
and
the
issues
that
they
were
encountering
and
they
were
able
to
put
in
that
conversation
which
apartment
complex
they
had
been
denied
access
to
and
how,
how
this
impacted
them,
trying
to
re-enter
the
space
and
live
their
lives
and
they
and
they
were
able
to
put
in
the
in
the
information
how
they
hadn't
been
able
to
find
or
live
anywhere
or
had
triple
and
double
deposits.
B
C
C
B
B
There
are
some
other
groups
too,
I'm
forgetting
their
names,
but
they
came
to
me
and
they
had
their
individual
stories
about
why
this
bill
mattered
and
why
it
was
important,
and
so
that
is
how
I
got
there
and
then
the
other
into
the
other
person
who
came
to
me
was
a
pastor's
wife
has
like
pastor
smith's
wife
who
worked
at
casa
grande.
B
Who
then
came
to
me
also
about
the
bill
asking
me
directly
to
deal
with
the
issue
because
she
was
seeing
firsthand
what
was
going
on
at
casa
grande
and
the
only
reason
why
she
didn't
participate
in
the
zoom
meeting
that
I
had
is
because
she
ended
up
getting
freaking
covet,
and
so,
but
she
literally
was
came
to
me
and
was
saying
they
we
are.
We
are
housing
them
in
casa
grande
and
they
are
not
able
to
find
housing.
So
it's
almost
like
this.
B
This
hamster
wheel
that
they're
on
and
that's
that's
how
I
got
the
bill.
That's
how
I
decided
to
do
it
because
of
the
folks
who
came
to
me
in
my
district,
who
literally
said
this
is
a
problem
need
to
deal
with
it
and
then
after
I
had
a
series
of
conversations,
then
I
understood,
and
then
I
went
to
professor
pindell,
who
is
his
expertise,
is
in
fair
housing
and
then
he
offered
a
couple
of
books
and
then
we're
here.
H
A
More
chair
please
follow
up.
Please
follow
up.
B
Professor
pindell,
I
know
that
there's
data
out
there
there's
a
lot
of
data
out
there
in
around
fair
housing.
Is
he
not
on
the
zoom
anymore,
professor
fendell.
A
I
think
we
may
have
lost
him
if
we
could
have
and-
and
I
also
see
him
as
jenkins,
ready
to
go.
I
think.
G
Hey
so
the
nevada,
equal
rights
commission
does
keep
track
of
nevada
state
specific
data.
I'm
sorry,
my
apologies
committee,
cara
jenkins
for
the
record
and
three
you
tier
floors
directly
to
the
member.
We
do
keep
data.
G
However,
we
have
not
done
a
great
job
with
it
because
of
funding
I'll
say
that
we
will
work
to
collect
more
data
when
we
can
have
staff
to
do
so
right
now,
when
we
do
employment
data
and
we
capture
national
pictures
of
housing
issues,
we
again
we
go
to
eeoc
or
we
go
to
hud
and
hud
does
break
down
data
when
I
spoke
with
hud
early
this
season
about
housing
statistics,
particularly
during
covid.
G
G
So,
to
the
extent
that
I
can
provide
and
get
some
information
from
hud,
I'm
happy
to
do
it.
Senator
neil
give
me
a
day
or
two,
and
I
can
try
and
get
a
screenshot
of
what
hud
can
give
us.
But
essentially
I
would
really
like
the
commission
to
be
able
to
provide
that
for
you
all,
hopefully,
next
session.
G
A
B
A
B
B
F
I
really
appreciated
that
metaphor
that
you
just
used
of
the
hamster
wheel,
because
I
it's
it's
so
true
and
there's
so
many
elements
of
this
bill
that
I
really
really
agree
with
and
think
that
there's
something
for
us
to
do.
I
am
going
to
get
into
the
weeds
a
little
bit
on
some
of
them
if
I
may,
but
I
will
refer
to,
I
hopeful,
hopefully
we'll
be
able
to
refer
to
specific
areas.
My
first
question
has
to
do
from
page
four.
I
believe
this
is
from
the
head
guidelines.
F
Already
it's
a
section
14
and
I
don't
know
enough
about
this
process,
but
is
there
any
sort
of
whistleblower
protection
for
the
witnesses
and
or
for
the
individuals
who
bring
forward
this
complaint,
or
is
that
based
upon
the
process
itself?
Because
you
want
to
make
sure
that
the
people
making
those
complaints
there
is
whistleblower
protection
in
some
fashion.
G
G
Yes,
whistleblower
protections
are
are
embedded
in
anyone
filing
a
complaint
under
title,
seven
or
housing,
and
so
nurk
investigations
also
have
a
state-specific
statute
to
protect
folks
who
serve
as
witnesses
to
the
commission
in
the
course
of
our
investigation.
However,
once
you
file
the
complaint,
this
is
really
important.
The
commission
has
to
give
due
process
to
the
entity
right,
so
it's
either
the
employer
or
maybe
it's
the
rental,
the
rent,
the
apartment.
G
We
have
to
tell
them
that
there
is
a
charge,
a
charge
that
there
is
a
charge
that
has
been
filed.
Please
respond
to
these
questions,
that's
part
of
their
due
process,
so
there
does
get
to
a
point
where,
at
some
at
some
juncture
of
our
investigation,
we
have
to
notify
the
respondent
aka.
The
other
party
and
all
the
investigations
are
kept
confidential
as
it
relates
to
nerf.
We
are
not
the
privilege
holders
of
that
information,
the
respondent
the
complainant.
G
They
have
to
come
to
an
agreement
to
share
it,
but
usually
these
matters
are
settled
confidentially.
Privately,
that's
why
you
don't
hear
a
lot
about
these
cases
that
we're
successful
in
settling
and
that's
a
good
thing,
because
we
want
to
protect
entities
and
we
want
people
to
be
able
to
move
forward.
But
yes,
there
are
protections,
however,
to
a
point.
G
So
if
you're
the
charging
party
or
I'm
sorry
and
hud,
they
call
them
complainants
or
did
calm
complainants
someone
filing
we
it's
confidential
until
we're
at
the
point
where
we
have
decided
that
we
want
to
proceed
with
an
investigation,
it's
meant
prima
facie
elements
of
hud
discrimination
or
housing
discrimination
where
we
need
to
now
go
to
the
entity
that
you
are
complaining
about
and
ask
them
that's
part
of
their
due
process.
So
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
A
F
Thank
you.
My
next
question
has
to
do
with
section
16
with
with
the
number
of
different
days,
and
it's
not
the
dates
themselves
that
that
my
question
really
deals
with.
F
It
should
be
in
our
own
state
over
to
to
nurk
I'm
concerned
about
the
number
of
employees
and
whether
or
not
this
timeline
can
actually
be
utilized,
because
I
mean
you've
got
that
within
20
days
after
this
those
sort
of
time
frames
has
there
been
a
discussion
about
increasing
the
number
of
employees
at
nerc
with
this,
this
very
strict
timeline,
because
you
don't
want
to
lose
or
not
be
able
to
bring
forward
a
complaint
because
of
something
not
being
done
within
the
time
frame
that
is
set
in
law.
B
So
dean
and
neal
for
the
record,
so
part
of
the
importance
of
this
sections
in
this
bill
is,
is
the
support
that
nerc
will
get.
Nerc
will
get
additional
investigators
if
we
get
into
substantial
equivalence
with
hud,
it
doesn't
remove
the
opportunity,
it's
my
understanding,
ms
jenkins.
Yes,
we
will,
we
will
get
beefed
up,
but
it
doesn't
remove
their
ability
to
still
file
with
hud.
B
It
just
allows
them
to
be
sourced
locally
in
terms
of
the
complaint,
but
if
we
adopt
this
language,
we're
going
to
get
an
additional
attorney
at
nerc
and
additional
investigators
and
potentially
some
other
financial
support.
So
this
is
super
important.
We
have
not
been
on
the
same
page
with
hud,
which
is
a
problem.
So
when
we
talk
about
trying
to
deal
with
fair
housing,
we
have
to
bring
this
language
forward
in
order
to
get
to
the
place
where
we
can
actually
handle
the
complaints
fairly
equitably
and
with
enough
support.
F
Oh
wait.
I
it
looks
like
miss
jenkins,
also
wanted
to
speak
before
I
do
so.
G
Thank
you,
chair
flores.
This
is
carol
jacobs
again
for
the
record.
I
just
wanted
to
follow
up
with
senator
dale
in
saying
that,
in
order
for
us
to
partner
with
hud,
we
have
to
certify
and
it's
a
three-year
process,
and
we
have
had
discussions
about
that
for
a
very
long
time.
As
senator
neil
had
mentioned,
this
has
been
going
since
2009
and
you
know
we're
the
executive
branch,
so
we
can't
speak
to
any
efforts
to
try
to
get
on
board,
but
we're
certainly
encouraged
by
this.
G
So
it
would
take
three
years
to
certify
with
hud
and
upon
certification.
They
would
give
us
four
cases
so
how
it
goes
is
hud,
since
we
are
not
substantial
equivalent,
we're,
not
partners
with
them.
Yet,
unlike
the
eeoc,
we
partnered
with
the
eeoc,
in
fact
nerves
known
for
our
complaints
in
employment,
but
with
hud,
because
we're
not
a
state
government
partner
with
them
yet
and
folks
will
go
to
san
francisco
to
file
hud
maintains
all
those
cases
they
are
ready
to
give
them
to
us.
G
So
when
I
had
a
discussion
with
the
director
over
at
hud,
my
counterpart
he's
great.
He
they're
encouraged
too.
He
said
that
they
would
slowly
give
us
maybe
four
cases
a
month.
We
can
do
four
cases
a
month
and
I
even
spoke
to
our
dad
on
that.
We
had
conversations
at
the
ag's
office
about
the
ability
to
handle
that
caseload
because,
as
you
all
know,
right
now
we're
at
14
fte
kovach.
It
is
kind
of
hard,
but
we're
we
are
the
mighty
nerf.
G
So
we
are
getting
cases
done
to
the
best
of
our
ability,
but
we
can
definitely
handle
four
cases
a
month
and
if
we're
successful,
it's
a
it's
a
process
like
a
ladder
we
go
through
the
next
year
certified
then
we
go
to
the
third
year,
also
with
the
hud
dollars
we
get
funding
so
that
we
can
trade
and
provide
outreach.
So
we
all
the
the
private
industries
can
get
the
resources
like
we
do
with
employers
to
basically
prevent
harassment
to
prevent
charges,
because
proactiveness
is
kind
of
our
thing
here.
G
Education,
preventing
discrimination,
really
helps
everybody,
so
we
get
money
to
train
and
we
would
be
trained
so
nerc
would
get
instead
of
us
having
to
attend
cle
courses
or
just
did
our
outside
secure
outside
training.
Hud
would
be
giving
us
up-to-date
training
on
laws
protection
so
that
we
can
stay
current
as
an
agency.
So
sorry
again
I
try
to
boil
down,
but
I
get
really
excited
about
this
and
end
up
talking
so
long
story
short.
We
could.
F
Thank
you
and
follow
up
mr
chair.
Please
follow
thank
you,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
I'm
understanding
correctly,
though
that
nerc
is,
is
under
our
oh,
my
gosh,
who
is
ahead
of
them?
Is
it
the
is
it
or
dieter?
Okay.
Thank
you.
I
was
like
what's
the
right
word
dieter,
which
has
been
understaffed
and
incredibly
overworked
at
the
same
time
that
that's
a
different
topic
so
with
nerc.
Is
that
a
a
governor
employee
board,
because
so
could
it
be
complete?
Can
the
executive
director
be
completely
changed?
F
F
Thank
you
policy
in
nature.
Thank
you,
senator
neil,
for
for
clarifying
that.
My
next
question
has
to
do
with
something
that
you
actually
brought
up
and
it's
not
really
a
question.
It's
a
concern,
it's
from
page
23.,
and
it's
it's
something
that
that
you
brought
up
about
the
fact
that
the
rental
properties
are
basically
apartments.
There
are
no
houses
that
are
being
mentioned.
F
I
guess
my
concern
is
that
just
I,
I
do
believe
that
there
are
some
houses
that
should
also
be
part
of
this.
We
do
have
some
people
that
it
is
okay
to
rent
a
house.
It
does
not
always
have
to
be
an
apartment.
It
feels
like
it's
only
apartments
or
multifamily
areas
that
can
be
rented,
so
it
was
just
asking
for
maybe
a
little
bit
more
clarification
as
to
why
it's
it's
basically
taking
out
the
houses
in.
F
B
Dean
and
neal
for
the
record.
Thank
you,
assembly,
woman
anderson.
So
for
me,
first
of
all,
I
never
intended
to
include
single-family
housing
so
when
the
realtors
brought
it
up
to
do
the
exclusion,
I
understood
that
and
here's
the
reason.
Here's
here's
my
thought
process
and
my
and
my
reasoning
behind
that
number
one
I
see
and
and
this
may
open
a
door
for
the
folks
in
opposition.
B
But
at
this
point
you
can't
make
everyone
happy-
and
I
am
past
that
and
will
not
so
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
feel
like
private
property
has
a
has
a
has
a
total
different
piece
for
a
single
family
residence.
When
you
extend
your
home
to
someone,
I
think
you
have
the
right
to
determine
who
will
live
within
the
same
four
walls
of
you
or
who
will
live
in
a
conjunction
or
a
grandmother's
suite
or
whatever.
B
It
is
that
you
have,
and
I
think
that
there
are
inherent
property
rights
associated
with
that
single-family
residence.
It's
the
same
thought
process
that
that
I've
had
for
a
really
really
long
time
around
hoas
right,
not
trying
to
drag
them
in,
but
I
do
feel
that
there
are
distinct
control
and
inherent
rights
of
that
property
owner.
Who
has
that
mortgage?
Who
that
30
year
mortgage
on
a
single
family,
residence
of
the
proximity-
and
I
know
that
people
could
say:
oh
well,
it's
proximity
of
apartments.
No,
but
I
feel
like
a
single
family.
B
Residence
is
very
different
than
an
apartment.
It
is
something
that
someone
has
decided
they
own
they
own.
They
have
taken
their
hard
money,
it's
not
a
commercial
lending
experience
and
I
have
no
idea
what
airbnb
does
in
this
space
and
I
could
care
less
because
that's
nothing
to
do
with
this
bill.
B
E
Thank
you,
wow.
That's
a
lot.
I
was
planning
to
go
to
mr
pindell
and
clarify
some
statements
he
made
yesterday,
but
since
we're
on
the
topic
of
property
rights,
I
guess
we
can
start
there.
I
was
tracking
with
you
as
far
as
you
know,
keeping
people
out
of
prison
and
the
amount
of
money
that
we
invest
in
doing
that
and
decreasing
recidivism.
E
You
know
we
we
work
on
education.
I
know
we've
seen
a
couple
bills,
this
session
for
giving
people,
birth
certificates
and
state
issued
ids
and
signing
them
up
for
medicaid
when
they
get
out
of
prison.
So
I
would
agree
with
you.
We
certainly
do
exhaust
a
lot
of
resources
for
that
and
those
people
when
they
get
out.
E
But
a
property
owner
that
owns
an
apartment
complex,
has
the
same
exact
property
rights
as
a
homeowner,
whether
they
came
by
that
property
complex
through
commercial
lending
or
private
lending
or
cash
or
whatever
property
rights
are
property
rights,
and
what
gives
us
the
right
to
tell
them
who
they
can
rent
to?
That's,
not
discriminating
against
someone.
That's
a
risk
assessment.
These
people
have
a
business
and
they
have
to
make
an
assessment
on
who's,
a
good
risk
and
who's
a
bad
risk.
And
what
gives
us
the
right
to
tell
them
that
they
can't
do
that.
B
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblywoman
black,
so
there's
a
couple
of
things
in
there
number
one
as
a
government
and
as
a
state,
we
actually
can
take
state
action
and
we
can
set
apart
a
public
policy
purpose
in
order
to
get
into
this
space.
We
are
not
prevented.
We
are
not
constitutionally
prevented
from
establishing
housing
as
a
position
that
that
we
would
like
to
make
reasonable
accommodations
for
there's
a
long
history
of
number
one
property
rights
and
and
the
state
engaging
in
the
issue
of
what
is
reasonable,
accommodations
and
access.
B
So
in
terms
of
a
public
policy
purpose,
I
feel
like
we
are
within
our
rights
as
a
legislature
number
one
and
as
a
state
government
to
then
go
in
and
make
this
public
policy
purpose.
We
are
not
limited
at
all
from
doing
this.
Your
second
point
about
distinguishing
between
who
should
have
a
safe
place.
B
That's
what
I'm
resting
in,
and
that
is
the
legal
concept
that
I'm
resting
in,
and
so
when
we
talk
about
the
hierarchy
right-
and
we
talk
about
legal
terms
in
the
hierarchy
of
what
is
an
equal
protection
argument
that
I'm
potentially
making
right
here,
that
ex-felons
should
have
an
equal
right
to
housing.
I
am
making
that,
and
I
am
saying
that
in
regards
to
private
individuals,
we
have
seen
more
than
once,
when
you
think
about
takings
by
a
government
right.
That
is
an
infringement
upon
property
rights,
but
does
it
have
a
constitutional
place?
B
Yes,
it
does.
Is
it
constitutionally
protected?
Yes,
it
is:
does
the
state
have
an
ability
in
other
frameworks,
around
property?
Can
they
go
in
and
infringe?
Eminent
domain
is
another
place
where
we
do
that.
So
when
you
talk
about
property
rights,
there
are
caveats
and
there
are
places
and
there
is
a
lineage
there.
E
I
think
there's
a
clear
difference
between
guaranteeing
equal
rights
to
housing,
for
somebody
on
the
basis
of
their
ethnicity,
their
religion,
their
gender,
their
whatever
those
things
that
are
out
of
your
control
are
versus
somebody
that
chooses
to
go
to
prison
because
they
choose
to
break
the
law.
That's
you
I.
E
I
would
agree
with
you
that,
yes,
in
some
cases
there
are
cases
where
we
should
protect
people's
right
to
housing,
but
these
people
made
a
choice
to
break
the
law,
and
I
believe
that
we
don't
have
a
place
to
tell
a
private
property
owner
who
they
can
and
can't
rent
to
whether
we
have
done
that
historically
or
we
haven't
that,
doesn't
make
it
right.
It
just
means
that's
what's
been
done,
but
I
still
think
that
that
violates
these
people's
property
rights.
B
Why
are
we
because
that
has
been
a
bipartisan
effort
for
about
15
years?
So
why
are
we
investing
a
single
dollar
in
the
actual
re-entry
of
those
individuals
into
society?
Why
have
we
taken
on,
as
you
stated,
vouchers,
birth
certificates,
health
care?
Why
are
we
even
allowing
them
to
even
be
on
medicaid
or
or
engage
in
welfare
if
we're
saying
that
they
are
completely
lost
and
because
you
made
a
choice
to
commit
a
crime
you
are
now
in
the
dungeon
of
society.
B
You
are
now
no
longer
allowed
to
participate
at
any
level
in
this
society,
because
if
that
is
the
viewpoint
that
we
have
that,
because
of
your
prior
offenses,
you
are
you,
you
are
designated
to
a
caste
system,
then
we
need
to
re-examine
number
one.
How
we
spend
our
government
dollars
absolutely
because
that
means
that
we
have
put
our
dollars
in
a
purpose
that
does
not
serve
our
ultimate
goal,
but
that
is
not
the
case.
B
We
are
spending
millions
of
dollars
to
rehabilitate
and
re
and
re,
bring
basically
re-enter
those
persons
into
society
and
give
them
a
second
chance.
Even
one
of
the
most-
and
I
would
say,
conservative
states,
texas,
has
focused
on
the
re-entry
and
bipartisan
way
to
help
those
individuals
come
back
into
society
and
the
main
reason.
Why
is
because
the
damage
that
is
done
by
leaving
them
out
of
society
the
damage
that
occurs
is
that
you
leave
them
homeless,
which
has
an
even
greater
problem
on
and
drain
on
the
society
then
housing
them.
B
And
so,
when
we
balance
this
out,
it
is
very
important
to
balance
out
what
are
the
needs
and
the
goals
of
this
state.
And
if
we
have
already
established
that
they
are
worthy
of
being
serviced
and
being
placed
in
casa
grande
being
placed
in
a
halfway
house
going
to
hope
for
prisoners
going
and
participating
in
all
other
aspects,
then
why
is
housing
one
of
the
places
that
they
won't
be
allowed
to
participate
in?
And
so,
if
you
believe
something
opposite
of
me,
we
can
respectfully
disagree.
A
Follow-Up,
so
members
we
do
have-
and
I
will
entertain
another
follow-up,
but
I
just
want
to
remind
members
we
have
another
hearing.
The
other
hearing
will
have
an
equal
amount
of
questions
and
folk
with
who
have
opposition
and
support,
and
we
have
floor
at
11
30..
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
it
clear
that
this
is
what
we're
going
to
do.
A
We're
going
to
go
and
go
back
to
assemblywoman
black,
then
we'll
go
to
madam
vice
chair
ellison
will
ask
a
few
questions
to
our
legal
so
that
it
can
be
clarified
on
the
record,
but
not
to
senator
neil
and
then
we'll
go
lastly
to
assemblyman
matthews,
I'm
gonna
close
it
out
with
that
assemblywoman
black.
Please.
E
I
agree
with
you
100
that
housing
is
is
an
issue
and
I
do
not
want
people
to
be
relegated
to
living
in
a
dark
hole
somewhere.
That's
not
what
I'm
saying
what
I'm
saying
is.
I
don't
want
it
to
be
at
the
expense
of
people's
property
rights,
so
I
I
think
that
the
mechanism
we
disagree
on
the
the
point
we
do
not
disagree
on.
E
I
want
to
clarify
that
first,
but
I'm
going
to
shift
gears
here
and
just
say
you
know:
we've
been
in
a
pandemic
for
over
a
year
now
our
property
owners
have
been
on
rent
moratoriums,
not
able
to
collect
rent.
We
have
a
huge
influx
of
people
coming
from
all
over
the
country.
The
real
estate
market
is
insane
another.
B
B
My
main
issue
and
argument
is:
would
you
rather
them
be
homeless
and
then
deal
with
the
millions
of
dollars
that
we're
spending
there,
where
you
find
them
in
an
empty
lot,
where
you
find
them
hovering
behind
some
space
using
the
bathroom
behind
a
restaurant?
What
would
you
prefer,
because
I
prefer
for
them
to
at
least
be
able
to
put
in
an
application
and
at
least
be
afforded
the
opportunity
to
be
equally
viewed
just
the
same
as
any
of
us
to
determine
that
they
can
have
in
a
roof
over
their
head?
B
We
can
debate
whether
or
not
apartment
complexes
managed
to
survive
and
whether
or
not
the
subsidies
met
the
need
or
because
there
were
several
arguments
out
there-
that
you
basically
allowed
a
bad
tenant
to
stay
in
my
apartment
forever
or
for
six
months
when
I
was
literally
on
the
verge
of
evicting
them.
B
But
there
is
a
larger
public
policy
purpose
that
was
also
being
established
by
the
government.
That,
yes,
were
we
all
attempting
to
be
good
citizens
in
the
pandemic.
Yes,
we
were
and
here's
the
reason
why,
because
it
was
far
more
dangerous
to
place
those
families
on
the
street,
and
so
we
had
to
make
a
decision
about
whether
or
not
we
wanted
to
a
place,
an
additional
burden
temporarily
on
private
owners
in
order
to
save
a
greater
good.
B
The
greater
good
was
a
single
mother
and
families
who
potentially
were
going
to
be
on
the
street,
who
then
what
they?
What
they
you
don't
longer
have
milk
for
your
kids.
They
don't
have
a
bed
to
sleep
in.
It
would
be
a
far
greater
issue
to
have
had
that
rush
of
individuals
living
out
their
homelessness
in
as
homeless
people,
because
the
government
had
no
ability
to
sustain
them.
Where
were
they
going
to
go?
Where
were
they
going
to
go?
B
B
B
That's
it
it's
not
deep,
but
for
some
reason,
because
of
our
ideological
spaces,
we
have
already
decided
that
certain
individuals
cannot
make
it
through.
But
that
was
the
case
in
the
60s
blacks.
Weren't
allowed
to
live
in
houses,
their
whole
set
of
case
law,
where
we
were
literally
denied
before
for
the
color
of
our
skin,
and
we
couldn't
change
that
and
now
you're
telling
me
as
we
move
into
2021,
and
I
say
that
ex-felons
who
have
served
their
time,
who
were
putting
government
dollars
into
they
are
the
class
of
individuals.
B
B
D
If
somebody
comes
in
and
applies
because
of
not
being
in
prison
but
damage
to
properties,
to
other
properties
and
to
non-payment
of
rent
history,
are
they
are
we
setting
up
the
private
housing
market
to
be
sued
or
be
enforced
on
by
this
bill?
And
my
problem
is,
the
private
industry
is,
is
in
the
drink?
It's
it's
in
major
damage
and
my
biggest
fear
is
we're
taking
away
their
rights,
more
rights
for
them
to
manage,
and
so
with
this
bill.
D
B
So
miss
thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison,
miss
jenkins.
Can
you
please
clarify
what
is
currently
the
federal
rules
around
private
housing
and
what's
currently
in
place
because
there
are
existing
policies?
Thank
you.
G
Long
story
short
outside
of
any
protections,
and
you
say
you
don't
want
to
rent
that
person
because
they
have
a
lack
of
a
stable
payment
history,
that's
legitimate
and
not
tied
to
protected
category
status.
It's
not
tied
to
fair
housing.
It's
a
legitimate
question
that
you'd
want
to
ask
on
your
rental
application
that
has
no
bearing
here.
G
They
would
not
be
affected
similarly
to
elves
parallel
to
employment.
If
you
have
someone
who
is
applying
for
a
job,
but
they
have
a
criminal
background
and
it's
a
public
employer
say
because
that's
where
the
box
applies
here
in
the
state
of
nevada,
you
would
just
see
if
the
person
could
beat
the
essential
requests
of
what
the
job
is.
Can
this
person
meet
our
essential
work
functions
and
outside
of
their
criminal
conviction?
G
G
D
My
biggest
fear
is,
you
know
these
guys
have
not
received
payment
for
a
year
and
a
half
they
they're
they're,
almost
in
bankruptcy,
some
have
already
lost
all
their
homes
or
the
businesses.
D
My
biggest
fear
is,
if
you
have
somebody
that
that's
got
a
bad
record
for
non-payment
or
damage
of
people's
properties,
then
I
should
have
the
right
to
deny
them
to
rent
them
a
home,
and
I
think
the
history
of
that
should
be
it's
not
about
their
criminal
history,
but
it
is
about
the
history
of
prior
say
they
had
five
evictions
or
whatever
destruction.
I've
got
I'll.
Give
you
an
example.
I
have
a
spanish
family
in
elko,
probably
the
have
the
most
beautifulest
houses
you
ever
saw.
D
The
people
moved
in,
they
never
got
a
rent,
a
dimes
rent
for
a
year
and
a
half
and
when
they
finally
got
them
out
of
there
for
destruction,
fifteen
thousand
dollars
in
damage
to
the
house
and
fifteen
thousand
dollars
in
background
they'll
never
see
a
dime
of
they
should
be
able
to
write
somebody
else
to
rent
them
to
deny
them.
Based
on
that.
B
So
assemblyman
ellison,
a
prior
eviction,
is
not
precluded
from
this
bill.
I'm
not.
B
B
They're
allowed
to
look
at
your
income
that
the
issue
is
I'm
talking
about
the
criminal
history,
I'm
not
talking
about
all
of
the
other
factors
that
may
come
into
play,
and
I
understand
that
this
this
this
bill
is
now
becoming
convoluted
with
all
of
the
housing
issues,
but
sb
254
is
trying
to
get
at
number
one,
bringing
forward
substantial
equivalence
by
having
provisions
in
the
bill
that
allows
us
to
get
on
the
same
page
as
hud
adopting
fair
housing
policy
that
brings
in
familial
status.
B
Religion
also
brings
in
support
investigative
support,
financial
support
to
nerc
after
they
certify
and
get
in
compliance.
It
also
is
opening
a
brand
new
door,
which
is
the
one
that
we've
been
debating
for
this
extensive.
The
hearing
is
around
the
criminal
history.
B
Everybody
has
differing
opinions,
but
this
is
a
first
step
into
this
issue
and
I
think
it's
a
good
first
step.
The
source
of
income.
Peace
has
caused
much
concern,
but
there's
a
broader
question
of
all
fights
that
happen.
Whether
or
not
an
income
of
a
person
should
be
protected
and
to
what
extent
should
it
be
protected?
B
Yes,
I
did,
but
the
context
and
the
gist
of
this
bill
is
still
intact,
and
if
you
don't
support
it,
okay,
then,
but
I'm
telling
you
that
this
is
good
policy
for
the
state
of
nevada
and
some
of
this
tangential
issues
that
were
brought
up
around
the
pandemic
do
not
come
into
play
here,
because
these
individuals,
my
issue,
is
that
shade
have
a
right
to
apply
and
have
a
roof
over
their
head,
and
I'm
just
going
to
keep
it
that
simple
and
I'll.
Just
open
myself
up
for
additional
questions.
A
Thank
you
senator
and
assembly
of
matthews.
I
knew
I
know
that
we
had
you
for
a
second
followed,
but
would
it
be
okay,
since
we
we
allowed
for
you
to
go
first?
So,
for
the
sake
of
allowing
for
the
meeting
to
move
that
we
just
take
that
question
offline
yeah.
That
would
be
fine
chair.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
assemblyman,
and
only
because
you
already
had
a
question
on
there.
We
just
really
got
to
get
going.
A
I
want
to
be
mindful
of
the
other
hearing
that
we
still
have
to
take
care
of.
So
with
that
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
invite
those
wishing
to
testify
in
support
of
senate
bill
254.
A
C
Caller
with
the
last
three
digits
of
938,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin
good
morning,
chair,
flores
vice
chair
torres
and
members
of
the
committee.
For
the
record.
My
name
is
ariel
edwards
a-r-I-e-l-l-e
e-d-w-a-r-d-s
with
the
city
of
north
las
vegas.
We
would
like
to
thank
senator
neil
for
bringing
this
bill
before
the
legislature,
and
we
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
testify
in
support
of
senate
bill
254
sure
housing
is
essential
to
fostering
a
healthy
community
that
thrives.
C
C
Reintroduction
to
society
and
people
who
have
already
paid
their
debts
to
society
should
have
an
opportunity
to
have
a
dwelling
of
their
own
for
them
and
their
families.
We
know
that
these
discriminatory
practices
disproportionately
affect
black
and
brown
communities
the
most
it
has
been
long
overdue,
but
it
is
time
that
we
move
on
from
these
discriminatory
practices
and
ensure
that
housing,
dignity
and
respect
is
paid
to
all.
We
strongly
urge
the
committee
to
support
and
pass
senate
bill
254..
Thank
you.
C
C
D
New
opportunities,
the
lack
of
stable
housing,
all
that
guarantees
recidivism.
We
thank
senator
neil
for
bringing
this
bill
forward
today.
C
Caller,
with
the
last
three
digits
of
653,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin
good
morning
to
the
committee
chair
and
vice
chair
and
senator
neil.
Thank
you
so
much.
This
is
dora
martinez,
representing
nevada,
disability,
peer
action
coalition.
C
C
Caller,
with
the
last
three
digits
of
199,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin
good
morning,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
tech.
Opterman,
that's
spelled
o-p-s-e-r-m-a-n
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
women's
lobby.
We
are
in
full
support
of
this
bill,
which
will
work
to
remove
monetary
barriers
that
prevent
prior
felons
from
securing
housing.
Stable
housing
is
the
foundation
for
safe
and
secure
communities.
C
A
C
C
C
Caller,
with
the
last
three
digits
of
725,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin
hello.
Thank
you
chair
and
committee
members.
This
is
nick
chipak,
n-I-c-k-s-h-e-p-a
c-k,
with
the
aclu
of
nevada.
I
want
to
start
by
thanking
senator
neil.
This
legislation
intends
to
address
real
problems.
We
have
not
had
time
to
address
the
amendment
with
senator
neil
and
we
did
not
plan
to
testify
today.
C
C
That
our
state
is
facing
that
disproportionately
harms
communities
of
color,
low-income
nevadans
and
the
formerly
incarcerated.
However,
with
the
carve
out
that
has
been
provided
for
realtors
in
the
amendment,
we
believe
this
bill
will
do
harm
to
the
criminal
justice
reform.
This
body
is
committed
to
pursuing
by
exempting
single-family
homes
from
their
fair
chance
provisions.
The
nevada
legislature
will
be
clearing
that
nevadans
with
criminal
records
who
have
served
their
time
are
too
dangerous
to
be
considered
for
the
suburbs.
C
Dangerous
senator
neil
said
during
this
hearing
that
we
do
not
want
to
have
an
equal
protections
issue
or
create
classes
of
persons
in
regards
to
housing.
In
that
same
vein,
all
tenants
should
have
the
same
protections
and
rights
regardless
of
where
they
would
like
to
live,
so
we
don't
create
modern
day
housing
segregation.
C
The
most
rewarding
part
of
my
job
is
working
with
currently
informally
incarcerated
individuals.
Many
of
them
have
violent
felonies,
most
violent
felonies
are
not
murdered.
Many
have
served
decades
in
prisons
and
years
in
solitary
confinement.
Punishment
for
violent
crimes
are
severe
in
this
state
and
often
include
intense
community
supervision
upon
release.
The
aclu
of
nevada
will
continue
to
fight
to
ensure
that
those
men
and
women
have
equal
opportunities
in
nevada.
This
includes
housing
and
equal
opportunity
means
access
to
all
housing,
including,
but
not
limited
apartments
and
single-family
housing.
C
When
we
release
people
from
prison,
they
need
housing
over
90
percent
of
the
people
who
leave
who
enter
ndoc
will
be
entered
society
each
and
every
one
of
them
need
housing.
We
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
put
our
concerns
on
the
record
and
urge
this
body
to
take
bold
steps
to
ensure
that
people
have
equal
access
to
housing.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time.
A
Thank
you
next,
caller
in
opposition
on
senate
bill
254,
I
do
recognize.
We
have
somebody
on
zoom,
we'll
finish
off
those
on
the
phone
line
and
then
we'll
come
back
to
zoom.
C
C
C
C
I
want
to
first
thank
senator
neil
for
starting
this
discussion,
but
I
do
want
to
say
that
I
am
opposed
to
the
bill.
Landlords
have
a
duty
to
take
reasonable
steps
to
keep
their
communities
safe,
and
this
includes
asking
reasonable
questions
and
doing
reasonable
inquiries
into
an
applicant's
background.
C
This
is
reaffirmed
over
and
over
again
in
2007,
the
city
of
reno
established
a
crime-free
multi-housing
program.
The
mission
of
the
reno
police
crime
free
program
is
to
establish
a
partnership
with
property
owners
and
managers
to
improve
the
quality
of
life
for
citizens
that
reside
in
any
form
of
commercial
property,
such
as
hotels,
motels,
apartment
properties
through
the
use
of
local
and
other
resource
agencies
using
civil
and
criminal
law
to
facilitate
effective
and
lasting
solutions.
C
Reno's
crime-free
community
requires
requires
background
checks
and
the
program
provides
model
lease
language
and
model
background
checks.
The
city
of
reno's
website
states,
the
crime
free
pre,
the
crime,
3
program,
lists
benefits,
proactive
property
management
deters
50
percent
of
crime,
and
careful
screening
at
the
front
desk
is
required
to
deter
a
potential
problem
before
it
starts,
and
this
saves
time
and
money
more
stable
residents,
more
a
great
resident
base
and
increased
personal
safety
for
residents.
This
is
worth
repeating.
C
C
This
guidance
balances
the
landlord's
obligation
to
keep
a
community
safe
with
an
individual's
efforts
to
rehabilitate
themselves.
I
support
the
federal
guidance,
it's
good,
it's
workable
and
it
makes
sense
and
it's
fair.
Finally,
during
the
presentation,
senator
neal
made
an
admission
that
the
bill
would
infringe
on
the
private
property
rights
of
single
family
homeowners.
If
it
were
applied
to
single-family
residences.
C
I
would
suggest
that
the
bill
also
infringes
upon
private
property
rights
of
multi-family
apartment
owners
such
as
myself,
and
it
makes
impossible
for
landlords
to
fulfill
our
obligation
to
take
reasonable
steps
to
safeguard
our
communities,
and
it
emerges
upon
the
current
good
law
by
the
tenant's
ability
to
have
safe
and
quiet
enjoyment
of
their
apartment.
A
Very
much
thank
you,
sir.
Next,
caller
in
support
of
senate
in
opposition
to
senate
bill
254.
C
C
C
C
A
C
Sorry
I
was
waiting
for
broadcast
to
make
an
announcement
chair
and
committee
members.
My
name
is
susie
vazquez
and
I'm
the
executive
director
of
the
nevada
state
department
association,
first
I'd
like
to
address
the
question
from
assemblywoman
constandine
regarding
screening.
Our
industry
only
accepts
and
evaluates
one
application
per
available
unit
and
not
multiple,
and
we
also
use
professional
screening
companies.
This
is
to
avoid
any
fair
housing
issues.
C
Second,
I
want
to
clarify
federal
rent
assistance
dollars
approved
in
december
of
2020
and
again,
in
january,
of
2021
have
been
distributed
by
some
chat
programs
and
minimal
sporadic
payments
to
landlords.
This
year
the
apartment
association
opposes
senate
bill
254,
despite
our
months
and
hours
of
work,
to
try
and
reach
consensus
language
with
the
sponsor.
We
started
with
work
with
senator
neil
last
year.
In
fact,
we
participated
in
a
round
table
and
heard
first-hand
accounts
for
mostly
formerly
incarcerated
women
that
struggled
to
find
housing
because
of
their
criminal
past.
C
I
personally
have
been
impacted
by
people
that
I
love
who
face
the
same
issue.
Unfortunately,
criminal
convictions
carry
consequences
and,
as
an
association,
we
owe
a
duty
to
our
residents
to
ensure
their
safety.
While
we
appreciate
the
sponsor's
willingness
to
exempt
some
crimes,
sb
254
still
goes
too
far.
C
An
outright
ban
on
criminal
background
screening
means
nevada
would
join
a
very
small
handful
of
localities,
oakland,
california
and
seattle,
washington,
to
name
a
few
that
have
taken
this
extreme
approach.
As
senator
o'neill
stated,
neither
the
california
nor
the
washington
legislature
decided
to
ban
the
box.
Some
startling
statistics
of
the
consequences
in
seattle
include
seattle,
housing
authority
staff
saw
a
75
turnover
since
its
law
went
into
effect,
and
our
industry's
on-site
teams
will
only
work
in
pairs
now
to
protect
their
safety
evictions
tripled
in
two
years,
for
residents
being
evicted
for
committing
crimes.
C
Sb254
allows
landlords
to
evict
tenants
if
they
commit
a
crime
on
the
premise.
As
we
saw
in
seattle,
this
policy
sets
some
tenants
up
for
failure.
Yes,
some
of
that
would
have
paid
their
time
and
changed.
Their
habits
will
be
okay,
but
many
others
will
not.
Yes,
many
in
this
building
fear
the
supposed
avalanche
of
evictions
that
are
expected
to
occur
once
the
eviction
moratorium
is
lifted
at
the
end
of
this
month
and
its
effects
on
access
to
housing
and
yet
sb
254
will
contribute
to
housing
barriers.
C
Sb
254
will
lead
to
more
evictions
and
further
housing
and
stability
for
the
very
people
it
is
intended
to
protect.
We
submitted
a
letter
on
nellis
that
represents
the
national
department
association's
best
practices.
This
guidance
is
in
line
with
hud
and
the
southern
nevada
regional
housing
authority
guidance,
which
we
also
included.
C
We
tried
unsuccessfully,
to
have
our
best
practices
codified.
We
represent
the
good
landlords
and
support
codifying
best
practices
which
may
not
necessarily
be
followed
by
all,
but
nonetheless
represent.
What
is
right,
most
notably
our
best
practices
do
not
look
at
arrests
and
include
a
look-back
period
of
seven
years
or
three
years,
depending
on
the
crime
and
also
required
by
height.
C
Sb
254
has
no
look-back
provisions
under
our
guidance.
If
enough
years
have
passed
from
the
crime,
a
person
would
not
be
denied
tenancy.
Based
on
that
fact,
sb
254
also
includes
a
source
of
income
provision.
We
appreciate
senators
neil
amendment
to
exclude
section
8
vouchers.
Hud
is
in
the
process
of
introducing
section
8
housing
reform
in
washington,
dc
national
apartment
association
and
other
trade
associations
have
worked
diligently
with
hud
to
address
the
issues
many
programs
experience
across
the
country.
C
I
would
like
to
take
this
time
to
ask
legislators
to
assist
us
in
the
interim
with
reducing
barriers,
landlords
experience
with
some
section,
8
programs.
We
are
committed
to
partnering
with
our
housing
authorities
to
expand
the
program
and
would
appreciate
any
assistance
you
can
provide
nevada
families
deserve
us
to
feel
safe
at
home.
Landlords
have
a
right
to
choose
who
they
rent
to
as
long
as
the
practice
is
non-discriminatory,
which,
under
our
best
practices,
it
is
not
sb.
254
goes
too
far,
it's
a
dangerous
policy
and
we
urge
you
to
oppose
this
measure.
Thank
you.
A
A
Miss
jenkins,
we,
we
can't
hear
you
on
our
end.
G
Okay,
unmuted
sorry
technology
is
just
not
yeah.
Thank
you,
members.
Thank
you,
chair
flores,
and
vice
chair
torrez
and
members
of
the
committee.
You
all
know
me
by
now
I'm
cara
jenkins
administrator
of
the
nevada,
equal
rights
commission.
We
are
neutral
on
this
bill,
but
encouraged
by
it
and
again
we're
here
to
answer
any
questions
as
it
relates
to
the
substantial
equivalency
component.
So
thank
you.
A
C
Caller,
with
the
last
three
digits
of
983,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin
good
morning
chair
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
theresa,
mckee
m-c-k-e-e
and
I'm
with
nevada
realtors.
We
want
to
thank
senator
dana
neal
for
working
very
hard
with
us
on
this
bill.
You've
seen
how
difficult
it
really
is.
The
nevada
realtor
stands
neutral
on
this
bill
with
the
amendment
that
you
can
find
in
nellis.
C
We
did
not
want
any
of
these
programs
if
a
landlord
is
required
to
accept
those
funds
to
have
any
additional
type
of
reporting
any
additional
burden
on
them
in
in
receiving
those
funds.
We
thank
you
very
much
I'll
cut
it
off
short
and
again.
Thank
you
to
senator
dina
neal
and
thank
you
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
A
C
Caller,
with
the
last
three
digits
of
988,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin
good
morning.
My
name
is
emily
paulson
e-m-I-l-y
p-a-u-l-s-e-n
and
I'm
the
executive
director
of
the
nevada
homeless
alliance,
we're
testifying
in
neutral
today,
because
we
are
in
support
of
the
advancement
of
nerc
to
become
a
hud
qualified,
fair
housing
assistance
program.
We're
very
concerned
about
the
amendment
senator
neal
has
introduced
today
that
weakened
fair
housing
opportunities
for
the
very
people
she
originally
intended
to
help
through
this
bill.
C
Senator
neil,
we
agree
fundamentally
with
your
original
intent
of
this
bill
and
your
passionate
remarks
about
the
need
for
equitable
housing
policy
to
address
homelessness,
but
the
amendments
you've
introduced
today
have
taken
us
off
track
to
do
that.
We
would
like
to
invite
senator
neil
to
come
back
to
hear
from
the
nevadans
who
are
impacted
by
housing
discrimination
because
of
their
income
source
and
conviction,
history
and
are
facing
homelessness
and
housing
and
security,
as
well
as
the
organizations
who
are
fighting
to
house
them
to
get
their
feedback
about
the
amendments
made
to
this
bill.
C
Today,
housing
choice,
vouchers,
also
known
as
section
8,
are
an
incredibly
important
tool
to
help
nevadan
families
afford
housing
and
avoid
housing,
instability
and
homelessness
in
nevada.
A
majority
of
voucher
holders
are
working
families
and
single
mothers,
who
are
women
of
color,
who
don't
earn
a
housing
wage
housings
out
housing
choice
vouchers
are
intended
to
allow
families
to
live
in
the
neighborhoods
of
their
choice,
the
neighborhood
where
good
schools
are
located
and
where
good
paying
work
opportunities
exist.
C
Currently
in
nevada
housing
choice,
voucher
holders
don't
have
a
choice
to
what
neighborhood
they
can
live
in
and
face
enormous
challenges.
Finding
landlords
willing
to
accept
these
vouchers,
the
exclusions
in
this
bill
reinforce
and
codify
that
landlords
can
freely
discriminate
against
nevadans
with
housing
choice
vouchers.
Our
state
and
clark
county
in
particular
are
about
to
receive
thousands
millions
of
dollars
in
funding
of
additional
housing
choice
vouchers
through
the
american
relief
plan.
This
is
a
historic
and
monumental
opportunity
for
our
state.
It's
a
shame.
C
These
vouchers
may
not
get
fully
utilized
because
the
recipients
will
continue
to
face
the
enormous
challenge
of
finding
landlords
willing
to
accept
them
due
to
this
bill,
reinforcing
that
they
can
freely
discriminate
against
them.
Voucher
holders
have
a
time
limit
on
finding
the
landlord
willing
to
accept
the
voucher
before
the
voucher
must
be
returned.
When
these
vouchers
can't
get
used,
the
value
is
returned
back
to
hud
and
is
lost
to
our
state,
including
housing.
C
Choice
vouchers
as
protected
in
this
bill
will
help
our
state
maximize
this
precious
federal
funding
landlords
benefit
from
vouchers
because
it
guarantees
rent.
There
is
no
data
to
support
the
voucher
holders
are
riskier
tenants.
In
fact,
in
contrast,
according
to
a
recent
study
by
the
urban
institute,
landlords
receiving
rental
income
from
vouchers
have
fared
the
best
in
protecting
their
rental
income
investments
over
the
last
year
with
additional
concern.
The
second
chance
provisions
exclude
single-family
homes,
duplexes
and
fourplexes.
C
The
spill
language
codifies
that
people
in
our
seat
of
rental
assistance
or
who
have
a
prior
conviction
can
live
here,
not
there
more
specifically
in
apartments.
Only
this
is
modern
day
housing
segregation.
We
can
do
better.
We
agree
with
senator
neil
that
people
with
conviction,
histories
and
people
in
receipt
of
rental
assistance
are
not
less
than
they
should
be
able
to
have
housing
choice
and
not
be
limited
limited
to
living
in
apartments.
C
Only
an
equitable
housing
policy
would
ensure
that
second
chance
and
source
of
income
protections
apply
to
all
landlords
who
have
made
a
business
out
of
housing
people.
We
look
forward
to
continuing
to
work
with
senator
neil,
and
we
hope
we
can
come
together
to
ensure
this
bill
actually
does.
What
is
it
is
intended
to
do
to
improve
equitable
housing
access?
Thank
you.
B
B
B
So
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
am
going
to
listen
to
the
proponents
of
the
bill
and
my
conversation
with
them
were
that
if
I
took
out
the
source
of
income
and
just
had
a
conversation
in
the
interim
that
it
would
be
better
served
than
to
have
bad
policy
walk
out
of
the
door,
I'm
in
agreement
with
that,
and
so
that
would
be
the
only
section
that
I
take
out
of
the
bill.
B
Everything
else
would
remain
and
then
continue
the
conversation
on
the
source
of
income
during
the
interim.
It
is
a
big
ticket
item,
it's
a
hard
item
and
there
are
so
many
different
viewpoints
about
what
is
considered.
I
guess
proper
improper.
B
Sometimes,
legislation
takes
two
sessions,
but
you
got
to
get
the
first
part
out
and
then
you
can
come
back
and
deal
with
the
rest,
but
at
least
establishing
the
foothold
for
sb
245
in
terms
of
fair
housing.
I
think
moves
a
good
step.
It's
not
a
perfect
step,
but
it's
a
good
step,
and
so
I
appreciate
all
the
opposition.
I
also
appreciate
support
in
neutral.
Thank
you,
chair
flores,
for
hearing
this
bill.
A
A
I
look
forward
to
senator
neil
continuing
to
work
with
everybody
and
I'm
sure
the
conversation
will
continue
with
that.
We'll
go
ahead
and
close
out
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
254
and
I
wanted
to
say
thank
you
to
senator
harris
who's
been
very
patiently
waiting
to
do
senate
bill
150
senator
harris
whenever
you're
ready.
H
Good
morning,
chair,
flores
and
esteem
members
of
the
assembly
government
affairs
committee,
my
name
is
dallas
harris
and
I
represent
senate
district
11
and
it's
my
pleasure
to
present
senate
bill
150
to
you
all
today.
I
know
it's
been
a
long
morning
for
you
all
so
I'll
make
my
best
effort
to
keep
it
brief
senate
bill.
150
is
what
I
like
to
call
my
find
a
place
to
put
them
bill
right.
H
H
I
recently
moved
bought
a
new
house
and
I
was
thinking
for
a
moment.
Maybe
I
wanted
to
buy
a
tiny
house
right,
well,
they're
kind
of
cool
and
I'm
a
big
fan
of
financial
independence
and
retiring
early,
the
fire
movement-
and
I
thought
this
would
be
a
great
way
to
to
save
on
some
housing
and
maybe
downgrade
my
lifestyle
a
little
bit.
But,
as
I
started
to
look
around
where
I
could
possibly
put
a
tiny
home
if
I
bought
it,
I
ran
into
a
brick
wall
right.
They
aren't
currently
listed
as
single-family
housing.
H
It
is
too
small.
It's
obviously
not
not
commercial.
If
I
want
to
put
a
foundation
down,
it's
really
not
a
mobile
home,
it
doesn't
fit
in
an
rv
park,
and
so
I
thought
to
myself.
Maybe
there
are
other
folks
other
nevadans
who
want
this
option,
and
so
I
brought
this
bill
in
hopes
of
opening
that
up
for
people
who
want
to
to
live
in
these
types
of
homes.
H
I
imagine
once
we
open
this
up,
we'll
see
a
gamut
of
of
options
right
on
one
end,
we
have
models
like
hope,
springs
here
up
in
the
north,
where
you
can
provide
wrap-around
services
for
homeless
folks,
all
in
in
one
area,
all
the
way
up
to
the
kind
of
hipster
really
cool,
neat
new
thing
with
the
chic
type,
tiny
homes
I
mean
and
anything
in
between
right.
H
I
think
the
possibility
is
really
endless
here,
and
so
what
I've
tried
to
do
is
take
the
lightest
of
approaches,
because,
let's
be
real
at
the
state
level,
we
don't
do
zoning.
I
don't
know
anything
about
zoning.
That
is
something
that
our
local
governments
are
best
at,
so
I've
simply
asked
them
to
find
a
place
to
put
them.
H
H
I
just
want
to
make
sure
there
is
a
place
where
these
can
be
put
for
the
nevadans,
who
want
to
put
them
somewhere
it'll,
be
a
community
driven
process.
Of
course,
we've
got
zoning
commissions
all
all
throughout
the
state,
and
I
imagine
that
the
discussions
will
be
had
at
those
local
levels
about
where
the
best
place
is.
If
they
should
overlap,
how
many
zones
they
should
be
allowed
to
do,
and
I'm
perfectly
fine
with
that.
I
think
that's
the
way
that
the
process
should
work.
H
So
you
may
hear
a
bit
of
opposition
from
some
of
the
localities
because,
let's
be
honest
right,
nobody
likes
to
be
told
what
to
do,
and
I
think
they
would
much
prefer.
I
allow
them
to
do
their
thing
and
not
infringe
on
them.
At
all.
I've
heard
those
concerns,
and
I
really
feel
that
the
bill
before
you
walks
that
very
thin
line
of
not
infringing
on
the
localities,
expertise
and
zoning,
but
also
giving
just
a
little
direction
and
saying
hey,
let's
make
sure,
nevadans
have
an
option.
H
Chair
flores,
if
it's
okay
with
you,
I'd
like
to
invite
matt
walper,
representing
the
nevada
home
builders
association,
up
to
make
a
few
comments
and
then
I'll
be
ready
to
take
questions.
D
Good
morning,
chair
flores,
thank
you
for
so
much
for
accommodating
the
hearing
of
senate
bill
150.
Today,
I'm
going
to
speed
read
some
very
brief
comments
and
stay
ready
for
questions.
Community
matt
walker
for
the
record
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada,
homebuilders
association.
Community
development
standards
must
be
revisited
regularly
to
ensure
that
requirements
for
developers
and
property
owners
meet
the
needs
of
the
community.
D
This
bill
addresses
key
obstacles
to
affordability,
minimum
lot
size,
minimum
home
size
and
density
restrictions.
Tiny
home
and
accessory
dwelling
units
hold
great
promise
in
allowing
the
market
to
provide
you
new
units
available
to
more
nevadans,
while
also
meeting
our
goals
for
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
housing
affordability.
D
The
association
strongly
supports
the
bill,
also
referencing
the
international
residential
code
as
the
the
best
practice
for
determining
how
stick
built
houses
are
are
built.
We
think
it
makes
sense
for
local
governments
to
allow
for
accessory
drawing
units
in
residential
districts,
and
it
makes
sense
to
adopt
these
international
best
practices.
We
appreciate
senator
harris
bringing
this
important
conversation
forward.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
mr
walker.
I
think
you
were
giving
our
amazing
susan
furlong
a
run
for
her
money.
There
appreciate
the
speed
reading
with
that
members
will
open
up
for
questions
we'll
start
off.
First
with
assemblyman,
alice
and
members.
I
asked
that
if
somebody's
already
asked
a
very
similar
question
to
yours,
that
we
don't
repeat
them
and
that
you
try
to
stick
to
a
question
so
that
we
give
everybody
an
opportunity
to
at
least
get
one
on
the
record
so
we'll
first
start
with
assemblyman
ellison.
D
And
senator
I
didn't
they
just
built
some
of
these
in
reno
in
the
little
community
and
they
had
the
little
walkways
and,
and
they
had
the
downstairs
and
the
upstairs
above.
It
was
real
small
small
house,
but
they
were
based
on
on
about
a
half
size
of
what
a
regular
apartment
would
be,
but
god
they
were
gorgeous
and
and
the
parking
there
was
more
parking.
D
That
was
houses,
but
it
was
amazing
how
they
looked
and
and
the
prices
were
affordable
for
for
young
couples,
and
I
thought
it
was
the
greatest
thing
in
the
world,
but
not
all
communities
allowed
to
do
it
based
on
the
size
of
the
lots
and
stuff.
But
I
thought
it
was
a
great
idea
and
just
to
watch
them
to
go
up
and,
and
they
look
like
little
miniature
towns,
they
haven't
even
had
little
miniature
shops
in
there.
H
No
thank
you
for
the
comment.
Assemblyman
ellison,
yes
I'll,
say
reno
is
leading
in
in
this
area,
and
I
would
love
to
see
a
bit
more
of
that
throughout
the
state.
What
you're?
H
What
you're
speaking
about
is
one
of
the
potential
benefits
I
think
of
allowing
tiny
homes,
and
that
is
creating
this
kind
of
intimate
intermediary
step
for
those
folks
who
do
not
have
20
of
350
000
or
whatever
the
median
house
price
is
right
to
get
a
step
up
into
home
ownership,
something
they
can
enjoy
and
love
build
some
equity
in
and
then
possibly
move
into
a
more
traditional
home
if
they
so
choose.
F
Thank
you
chair,
and
I
promise
to
keep
my
question
since
you
wincy,
as
we
talk
about
the
tiny
homes
throughout
nevada,
and
so
I
I
just
wanted
some
clarifying
information.
So
my
understanding
right
now
is
that
a
county
whose
population
is
over
a
hundred
thousand
those
popular
like
when
we're
looking
at
that
specific
section
in
section
one
subsection,
one
that
would
be
applicable
to
only
washout
clark,
reno
henderson
in
vegas
right
and
then
requiring
those
those
jurisdictions
to
make
the
like
those
ordinances.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
of
vice
chair
torres
to
you
through
chair
flores
dallas
hairs
for
the
record.
Yes,.
F
Okay
and
then
in
subsection
two,
it
would
require
that
the
I'm
sorry
section,
one
subsection
two
it
would
require
that
there
is
a
that.
The
order
that
the
other
jurisdictions
would
then
choose
one
of
the
options
that
is
enumerated
there
below
a
b
or
c,
and
that
they
would
have
to
choose
one
of
those
they
wouldn't
have
to
do.
All
three
of
them
is
that
correct.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
advisor
torres
to
you
through
chair
flores,
dallas
harris
for
the
record.
Yes,
that
is
correct.
What
you
see
is
a
compromise,
a
discussion
that
I
had
with
some
of
those
smaller
localities
who
are
a
bit
worried
about
having
to
find
a
place
for
all
three,
and
so
I
said
all
right.
The
big
guys
need
to
figure
out
how
to
do
all
three
for
those
small
folks,
let's
at
least
just
figure
out
a
place
to
put
one
of
the
three
and
it'll
be
completely
up
to
them.
F
Perfect,
thank
you,
and
just
one
quick,
itty,
bitty
follow-up.
If
I
may,
I
just
want
to
understand
like
what
the
intent
like
it
seems
that
several
of
the
jurisdictions
have
already
made
the
like.
Taking
those
steps
to
have
these
ordinances
and
my
understanding,
I
think
clark
we
have
one
or
some,
maybe
the
jurisdictions
within
clark
county
have
some.
So
I'm
just
wondering
what
the
reasoning
is
behind
requiring
it,
instead
of
just
allowing
for
local
jurisdictions
to
to
make
that
decision
on
their
own.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
vice
torres
to
you
through
chair,
flores,
dallas
harris
for
the
record.
It's
my
understanding
that
in
clark
county,
the
only
one
we
have
was
set
up
by
tony
shea
of
zappos,
and
I
believe
that
is
a
function
of
his
ability
to
have
gobs
of
money
and
do
something
that's
kind
of
outside
of
the
standard
zoning.
H
For
your
average
person,
you
can't
go,
buy
a
plot
of
land
anywhere
in
clark
county,
not
to
my
understanding
and
set
up
a
tiny
home
if
you
so
choose,
and
so
the
idea
really
is
to
to
take
that
opportunity.
That's
available
to
some
folks
in
reno
and
make
sure
it's
available
to
everybody
across
the
state.
A
Thank
you
for
that,
madam
vice
chair
members.
Any
additional
questions
we'll
go
first
to
assemblywoman
thomas
and
then
we'll
make
our
way
to
assemblywoman.
B
I
just
have
a
small
question
in
reference
to
the
the
teeny
house
and
you
put
in
here
single
family
dwelling.
What
does
that
entail?
I
mean
is
that
a
family
of
four.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblywoman
thomas
to
you
through
chair,
flores,
dallas
harris
for
the
record.
That's
really
a
zoning
term
right
and
so,
where
you
want
to
make
sure
that
someone-
and
I
believe,
under
this
framework
localities,
would
be
able
to
restrict
how
many
occupants
can
be
in
a
tiny
home,
but
really
it's
about
the
ability
for
you
to
build
a
tiny
home
and
live
in
it
as
your
primary
residence.
F
My
question
has
to
do
with
section
one:
it's
it's
the
details
of
the
change
of
verb
when
it
starts
off
with
on
line
five
shall,
which
means
it
has
to
be,
and
then
a
through
c
and
then,
even
when
we
go
into
next
number,
two
a
through
c
it
becomes
may
so
so
that
confusion
of
you
have
to
versus
you
may
do
it
just
wondering
if
there's
a
reason
why
that's
not
consistent
or
if
there
was
some
other
reasoning
behind
those
those
that
language
choice.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemble
woman
anderson
to
you
through
chair,
flores,
dallas
harris
for
the
record,
so
the
shells
are
related
to
which
zones
you
must
actually
find
a
place
to
designate
right,
and
so
in
section
one
subsection
one
we're
talking
about
those
larger
folks
who
need
to
find
a
place
for
all
three
okay.
In
section
one
subsection
two,
we
address
the
smaller
localities
who
need
to
find
one
of
the
three
and
then,
when
you
move
down
to
a
subsection
section,
one
subsection
three.
H
What
I'm
doing
here
is
authorizing
localities
to
add
on
additional
requirements
if
they
so
choose,
and
so
I'm
not
going
to
require
them
to
include
other
requirements
for
tiny
homes
if
they
don't
want
to,
but
I
am
going
to
enable
them
to
do
so
as
well
as
give
them
the
ability
to
continue
to
have
jurisdiction
over
the
certificates
of
occupancy
again
getting
back
to
assemblywoman
thomas's
question
so
that
that's
a
distinction
there.
Thank
you
for
that.
F
Clarification
and
thank
you,
mr
sarah
flores.
A
H
Senator
harris
well
we'll
let
the
record
reflect
assemblywoman
dickman
is
all
on
board
for
it.
Thank
you.
A
Members,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
nobody
has
any
additional
questions,
all
right,
we'll
close
it
off
with
assemblymen.
Now,
listen.
D
Yeah,
you
know:
is
there
any
reason
you
restricted
it
from
100,
000
and
above
and
versus
the
smaller
ones?
Because
if
you
look
at
some
of
these
smaller
communities
or
like
mining
or
whatever
that
are
building,
you
know
like
several
different
units,
they
could
still
buy
like
a
two-person
house
for
mining
or
something
it
might
have
been
a
good
idea
for
some
of
these
areas
to
do
that
in
so.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblyman
ellison
to
you
through
chair,
flores,
dallas
harris
for
the
record.
I
agree.
The
bill
in
its
original
form
would
have
required
all
three
across
the
state,
but
after
discussions
with
with
some
of
the
the
folks
who
represent
those
smaller
jurisdictions,
they
were
worried
about
the
the
kind
of
heavy
lift
it
might
be
to
zone
all
three
types
in
those
smaller
towns.
H
It
would
be
my
hope
that
they
would
do
all
three,
and
I
think
this
bill
would
enable
them
to,
but
they
would
not
be
in
violation
of
the
laws
as
long
as
they
find
one.
A
C
C
C
Nevada
has
a
problem
with
the
availability
and
access
to
affordable
housing.
We
must
create
opportunities
to
increase,
affordable
housing,
and
this
bill
offers
a
unique
way
to
do
that.
Nevada
families
of
all
ages
have
suffered
during
the
pandemic
and
we
need
to
provide
housing
costs
that
allow
individuals
and
families
to
live
in
a
neighborhood
without
sacrificing
other
basic
necessities
such
as
food
and
health
care.
That
is
often
the
choice
people
make
when
their
housing
costs
are
not
affordable.
The
concept
of
tiny
houses
is
sweeping.
C
The
country
and
more
people
are
finding
this
to
be
a
great
way
to
modernize
their
lifestyle.
Creating
opportunities
for
tiny
house
developments
will
offer
more
people
the
chance
to
take
advantage
of
this
new
idea
and
to
save
money
on
housing
costs.
This
will
expand
the
opportunity
to
provide
affordable
housing
in
nevada.
Older
adults,
who
are
often
on
fixed
incomes,
can
become
homeless.
If
they
are
priced
out
of
their
housing,
we
must
make
sure
our
parents
and
grandparents
can
stay
in
their
communities
and
live
comfortably.
C
A
A
A
C
C
A
C
For
our
jurisdictions,
I
submit
that
decisions
concerning
zoning
are
at
the
very
heart
of
matters
of
local
concern
and
that
zoning
primarily
affects
and
impacts
areas
located
within
each
municipality
on
this
basis
alone.
This
bill
is
an
overreach
and,
moreover,
proposed
legislation
such
as
this
creates
damaging
precedent
for
future
proposed
legislation
that
may
attempt
to
further
erode
the
ability
of
municipalities
to
be
responsive
to
the
residents
that
we
serve.
C
A
F
C
C
This
is
one
of
those
tough
ones,
mr
chair,
because
I
really,
I
really
can't
think
of
any
way
senator
harris
could
have
been
more
accommodating
in
in
listening
to
our
concerns
and
taking
to
heart
the
concerns
we
had
just
like
the
legislature,
our
local
governments
and
the
elected
officials
of
the
local
level
grapple
with
affordable
housing
every
day,
it's
a
top
top
priority
for
our
folks
at
the
local
level,
and
so
this
this
is
a
difficult
piece
of
legislation
to
to
oppose,
particularly
because
what
senator
harris
is
requesting
is
reasonable
and,
as
I
said,
she's
been
extraordinarily
accommodating,
and
this
is
an
issue
that
is
important
at
every
level
and
it's
so
it's
not
the
idea
or
the
concept
that
we
oppose.
C
It's
the
process
that
we
have
some
concerns
with
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we
just
sort
of
reached
a
philosophical
divide
in
terms
of
where
this
this
responsibility
should
appropriately
lie,
and
at
the
local
level,
with
with
senator
harris's
support
and
and
emphasis
on
this,
we
will
continue
to
work
on
this
at
the
end.
C
At
the
end
of
the
day,
we
we
do
think
that
the
requirement
in
statute
is
problematic
from
a
precedent
perspective
and
as
well
as
we
do
believe
that
requiring
all
three
types
of
housing
is
problematic
in
allowing
us
to
respond
and
react
to
the
needs
of
our
constituents
at
home.
So
with
that,
mr
chairman,
I
I
appreciate
the
time
and
I
want
to
thank
senator
harris
again.
As
I
said,
I
don't
know
how
she
could
have
been
more
accommodating.
We
just
reached
a
philosophical
divide
at
the
end.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
A
A
C
A
C
Caller
with
the
last
three
digits
of
229,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
may
begin
good
morning,
chair
and
committee,
I
am
jamie
rodriguez,
that's
spelt
j,
a
m,
I
e
r,
o
d
r
g
ez,
I'm
the
government
affairs
manager
for
washoe
county.
I
want
to
start
by
thanking
the
bill
sponsor
for
working
with
us
on
the
other
side
to
address
our
concerns
for
the
bill,
as
is
now
drafted.
G
A
C
With
the
last
three
digits
of
978,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
and
may
begin
good
morning,
claire
flores
joanna
jacob
j-o-a-n-n-a-j-a-c-o-b
government.
E
C
Manager
for
clark
county,
we
are
neutral
today,
chair
I'll,
keep
it
very
brief.
We
worked
with
senator
harris
on
this
bill
in
the
senate
side,
while
it
does
mandate
that
we
find
a
place
for
tiny
homes
in
clark,
county.
C
Loosest
sense
of
the
word
world
because
she
gives
us
options
to
designate
local
zoning,
something
that
was
very
important
to
clark
county.
As
we
have
launched
an
effort
called
transform
clark
county.
We
are
engaged
in
a
complete
rewrite
of
our
master
plan
and
our
development
codes.
So
it's
the
timeliness
of
this
is
appropriate.
We
that
we
will
be
able
to
find
a
place
for
these
types
of
structures
in
clark
county,
and
we
committed
to
senator
harris
that
we
will
do
so.
So
we
worked
with
her
to
get
us
to
neutral.
C
E
Good
morning,
chair
florence
and
committee
members,
dagny
stapleton
d-a-g-n-y
s-t-a-p-l-e-t-o-n
executive
director
of
naco,
the
nevada
association
of
counties.
I
just
want
to
echo
the
comments
of
clark
and
washoe
counties.
We
very
much
appreciate
the
center
working
center
working
with
counties
on
this
bill.
On
the
other
side,
we
did
work
with
her
on
language,
that's
now
in
the
reprint,
and
we
understand
her
intent
and
the
important
addition
that
tiny
homes
can
make
to
nevada's
housing
stock.
E
We
want
to
thank
her
for
the
language
in
the
reprint
that
gives
us
a
little
more
local
flexibility,
especially
for
smaller
counties
and,
as
you
have
heard,
land
use,
planning
and
zoning
are
local
responsibilities,
very
important
ones
for
local
governments,
so
that
flexibility
is
important
to
allow
us
to
tailor
ordinances
based
on
differences
in
geography,
community
need
and
other
factors.
Again,
thanks
to
senator
harris,
as
well
as
the
committee
for
the
opportunity
to
provide
comment.
C
Caller
with
the
last
three
digits
of
938,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
may
begin
good
morning,
chair
flores
vice
chair
torres
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
ariel
edwards
a-r-I-e-l-l-e,
e-d-w-a-r-d-s
government
affairs,
specialist
with
the
city
of
north
las
vegas,
the
city
of
north
las
vegas,
is
neutral
on
senate
bill
150
and
would
like
to
thank
senator
harris
for
working
with
us
on
this
piece
of
legislation.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
time
and
consideration
today.
H
Thank
you
so
much
chair
flores
for
squeezing
me
in
no
one
likes
to
follow
senator
neil,
so
I
hope
I
I
did
okay
just
in
in
closing
I'll
remind
you
all.
This
is
a
very
light
touch.
H
It
is
still
a
touch,
though
right
and
some
people
don't
like
to
be
told
what
to
do-
and
I
understand
that
and
I
took
that
into
consideration
and
I
really
tried
my
best
to
to
walk
that
line
of
giving
some
direction
but,
of
course,
allowing
the
localities
to
to
do
with
what
they
do
best,
and
so
I
hope
the
committee
will
take
some
time
to
consider
work
sessioning
this
bill.
Thank
you
all.
So
much.
A
A
I
did
forget
public
comment
if
we
could
please
first
go
to
public
comment.
I
want
to
remind
you
that
this
is
not
a
time
for
you
to
reopen
a
debate
on
any
previously
heard
matter
here.
This
is
the
time
for
you
to
speak
about
general
matters
that
fall
within
the
purview
of
our
committee.
Please
do
not
try
to
rope
in
a
hearing.
If
you
do
I'm
going
to
have
to
cut
you
off
broadcast,
we
have
no
one
here.
We
could
please
go
to
the
lines
for
public
comment.
C
C
E
A-N-N-E-M-A-R-I-E-G-R-A-N-T
sister
thomas
purdy,
who
was
murdered
by
reno
police
and
washington
county
sheriff's
office
during
a
mental
health
crisis.
Today,
I'd
like
to
talk
about
stanley
gibson,
who
was
killed.
1212
2011
by
ldmpd
stanley
was
born
in
las
vegas
and
was
a
lifelong
resident.
He
served
in
the
u.s
army
during
the
first
gulf
war.
He
was
a
decorated
soldier
receiving
medals,
including
the
army,
good
conduct
medal.
The
army
service
ribbon
saudi
ara
arabia,
kuwait,
liberation
medal,
southwest
asia
medal
in
the
national
defense
service
medal.
He
had
an
honorable
discharge.
B
E
Only
do
police
murders
of
community
members
weaken
the
public's
trust
in
law
enforcement,
but
it
is
the
community
and
the
taxpayers
who
ultimately
pay
for
these
bad
actors.
Stanley
was
43
years
old
when
he
was
shot
and
killed
by
ldmpd
officer
jesus
arabello
in
the
early
morning,
hours
of
1212
2011,
an
inferior
police
plan
to
force
stanley
out
of
his
car,
led
to
the
shooting
the
officer
or
only
erroneously
thought
he
was
being
shot
at
and
returned
fire.
E
He
fired
seven
times
his
wife
wanda
said
he
suffered
from
post-traumatic
stress
disorder
from
his
time
proudly
and
bravely
serving
our
country
during
the
gulf
war,
stanley
gibson
was
unarmed.
His
jacket
would
later
be
returned
to
his
wife,
riddled
with
bullet
holes
and
his
service
medals
still
attached.
I
don't
think
the
general
public
is
aware
of
how
often
veterans
are
killed
in
crisis
by
police
stanley
was
killed
less
than
two
years
after
21
year,
old
anand,
trayvon
cole
was
shot
by
lvmpd
in
his
apartment.
E
Bathroom
stanley's
murder
is
a
perfect
example
of
how
the
mental
health
care
system
failed.
Stanley
had
been
arrested
two
days
prior
and
was
ordered
to
have
a
psycaval
done
at
the
jail
that
never
took
place
when
he
was
released.
These
unnecessary
murders
by
police
have
been
occurring
far
too
long
in
nevada.
I
would
just
like
to
mention
ronald
venday.
Haas
was
killed,
54,
2020,
brpd
and
spd
while
show
d.a.
Chris
hicks
has
just
yet
to
release
his
ois
report
over
a
year
later,
his
family
and
the
community
wait
for
the
report
in
the
body.
E
A
F
Thank
you
chair,
and
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
government
affairs
committee
took
the
opportunity
to
celebrate
our
nevada
teacher
of
the
year,
miss
juliana
ertuve
for
winning
the
national
teacher
of
the
year.
It's
very
exciting.
She
is
the
first
nevada
teacher
to
win
this
honor
and
she
was
celebrated
today
with
dr
joe
biden
and
we're
so
excited
and
so
proud
to
have
her
as
an
educator
in
nevada
and
in
west
las.
A
Vegas
and
then
I
think,
members,
I
don't
know
that
you
all
knew
this,
but
a
little
birdie
whispered
into
my
ear
that
our
very
own
colleague,
miss
brown
may
today
is
celebrating
her
birthday,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
say
it's
an
honor
to
serve
alongside
of
you.
Thank
you
for
stepping
up
to
your
role.
It's
been
a
pleasure
to
have
you
in
this
committee
and
just
we
wish
you
the
very
best
of
birthdays
and
thank
you
for
being
here
happy.
A
Birthday,
as
you
all
know,
we
will
not
be
meeting
tomorrow.
Please-
and
I
know
mr
ellison
mr
edison
will
be
meeting
here
by
himself
if
anybody
wants
to
join
him
off
the
record.
But
for
those
of
you
who
I
ask
that
you
just
please
tomorrow,
pay
close
attention
we'll
be
uploading.
An
agenda
next
week
will
be
very
heavy
on
work
session
documents,
so
just
get
ready.
Give
yourself
an
opportunity
to
go
back
and
review
your
notes
and
with
that
this
meeting's
adjourned.