►
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
D
D
B
A
I
am
here:
will
you
please
mark
assemblyman,
thomas
roberts?
He
will
be
a
little
late
he's
presenting
a
bill
in
another
committee
as
soon
as
he
arrives.
Madam
secretary,
I
will
let
you
know
that
he
is
in
the
meeting
I'd
like
to
welcome
everyone
to
today's
meeting
for
growth
and
infrastructure.
Today
we
will
hold
hearings
on
four
bills
that
have
been
sponsored
by
the
assembly
committee
on
growth
and
infrastructure
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
department
of
transportation.
A
We
are
joined
today
by
director
swallow
who
will
provide
a
general
introduction
to
these
measures,
and
I
understand
there
are
several
department
staff
members
who
will
be
speaking
to
the
specifics
of
each
bill
today,
but
before
we
begin
we'll
start
with
the
thing
that
you
probably
heard
a
million
times
in
every
committee,
but
we
must
repeat
it
all
of
our
meetings
are
virtual.
The
legislative
building
remains
closed
to
the
public,
and
so
all
committee
meetings
committee,
members
staff
and
everyone
else
will
be
participating
either
through
zoom
or
by
telephone
for
committee
members.
A
If
you
could,
please
remember
to
silence
your
electronic
devices,
particularly
your
phones
during
the
meeting,
and
make
sure
that
you
keep
your
mics
muted
unless
you
are
speaking
that
helps
minimize
the
background
noise.
Please
leave
your
cameras
on
so
that
we
can
maintain
a
quorum
throughout
our
meeting
and
please
state
your
name
for
the
record.
A
Your
comments
can
be
submitted
to
the
committee
up
to
48
hours
after
the
meeting,
and
this
can
be
done
online
at
the
page
for
today's
meeting,
which
is
on
nellis,
where
you'll
find
today's
agenda,
I'm
committed
to
giving
each
matter
before
this
committee
a
proper
hearing
and
to
allow
as
many
individuals
as
possible
to
offer
testimony
in
support
opposition
and
neutral
positions.
I
would
encourage
those
wishing
to
offer
testimony
on
a
measure
to
do
so
in
writing
to
ensure
we
receive
your
full
statement
in
the
interest
of
time.
A
Anyone
can
submit
testimony
in
writing
by
using
the
submit
option,
which
is
on
nellis
and
that's
located
on
the
webpage
for
today's
meeting
or
by
emailing,
our
committee
at
asmgi,
at
asm,
dot,
state
dot,
dot
us
to
make
sure
the
best
use
of
the
limited
time.
Please
avoid
repeating
points
that
have
already
been
made
ditto.
I
agree.
Those
comments
are
sufficient.
A
E
Chairwoman,
monroe
moreno-
this
is
christina,
swallow
the
director
of
the
nevada
d.o.t
and
in
the
interest
of
time
I
just
wanted
to
and
tell
the
committee
that
we
will
have
subject
matter
experts
on
all
four
of
the
bills.
They
will
introduce
themselves
as
their
bill
is
called
they'll,
have
a
short
presentation
and
I
am
available,
as
will
they
be
available
to
answer
any
questions
throughout
the
duration
of
the
hearing
and
with
that,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
our
first
subject
matter:
expert
deputy
director
cole
mortensen
for
ab12.
F
So
the
first
part
of
ab12
really
speaks
to
the
qualifications
of
the
deputy
director,
and
we
feel
that
just
making
a
few
changes
will
allow
us
to
have
a
wider,
more
diverse,
more
more
diverse
pool
of
candidates
to
be
able
to
select
from,
as
we
look
to
fill
existing
vacancies
and
future
vacancies.
F
The
second
portion
of
ab12
has
to
do
with
the
chief
engineer,
and
I
believe
that
this
is
just
a
little
bit
of
cleanup
from
back
in
2013
when
the
assistant
directors
were
made,
unclassified
positions
from
classified,
and
I
believe
that
the
chief
engineer
was
intended
to
be
an
executive
within
the
department,
and
so
really
all
of
our
executives
are
now
unclassified
employees.
So
we
wanted
to
make
the
change
of
the
designation
of
chief
engineer
be.
A
A
I
believe
a
simply
woman,
summons
armstrong,
that's
a
question.
G
I
am
curious
or
concerned,
I
should
say
in
your
language
where
you
say
that
one
two
years
of
administrative
experience
as
an
assistant
director
or
chief
engineer.
G
If
you
are
recruiting
outside
of
your
agency
that
this
is
an
open
recruitment,
could
that
limit
your
pool
of
possible
candidates
if
you
are
specific
about
the
types
of
titles
that
they
have
to
have
when
all
other
agencies
within
the
state
of
nevada
and
maybe
even
outside
the
state,
may
not
classify
the
the
the
positions
in
this
particular
way,
and
and
so
I'm
I'm
kind
of
curious
and
concerned
that
you
may
be
limiting
your
pool
if
you
are
so
specific
about
these
types
of
job
titles.
Thank
you.
F
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
question
for
the
record
cole
mortensen
deputy
director.
We're
hopeful
that,
with
this
language,
that
the
two
I
guess,
the
the
the
two
requirements
are
really
an
ore.
And
so
we
we
hope
that
the
second
point
of
having
15
years
of
progressively
responsible
experience
in
engineering
or
project
management,
not
only
opens
it
up
further
to
outside
candidates.
But
it
also
helps
us
open
it
up
further
to
internal
candidates.
That
may
not
have
progressed
as
far
as
in
their
career
as
being
an
assistant
director
or
the
chief
engineer.
G
Thank
you,
the
the
issue
that
I
have
and
and
is
that
the
language
does
not
say
or
the
only
or
is
two
years
of
administrative
experience
or
the
chief
engineer,
and
I
think
that
if
you're
looking
at
one
and
two
to
be
either
an
and
or
or
an
or
I
think
you
have
to
be
a
little
bit
more
specific
about
that,
because
I
I
could,
I
could
see
someone
being
disqualified,
because
this
is
so
specific
and
does
not
say
or
thank
you.
F
For
the
record
cole
mortensen
deputy
director,
I
I
may
have
a
different
version
of
the
build.
But,
following
the
chief
engineer,
there's
a
semicolon
and
we're
hopeful
that
the
or
after
that
semicolon
makes
that
an
optional.
G
Thank
you
ma'am.
Yes,
that's
sufficient!
Thank
you
and
I
appreciate
I
apologize
mr
mortensen.
My
four
eyes
missed
the
blue
semicolon
and
the
or
after
it
it's
been
a
long
day.
Thank
you
so
much.
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Mr
mortensen,
can
you
explain
well
first
off
I'd
like
to
tell
you
you
had
a
beautiful
background
there,
so
I
thought
I'd
join
you
and
but
secondly,
I
thought,
could
you
explain
to
us
the
difference
between
classified
and
unclassified
for
the
committee's
edification.
F
Absolutely
for
the
record
cole
mortensen
for
us
classified
employees
are
appointed
and
our
in
our
departments
serve
at
the
the
will
of
the.
I
F
Yes,
I
do
apologize,
we
got
those
flipped
classified
unclassified
appointments
where
unclassified
employees
are
appointed
classified
employees,
go
through
all
of
the
statutory
requirements
with
human
resources
and
all
the
other
requirements.
H
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
have
a
question
about
the
15-year
experience.
Can.
Can
you
just
tell
us
a
little
bit
about
how
you
came
up
with
15
years
versus
10
years
or
14
years?
What
was
what's
the
magic
about
15.
F
You
know
for
these
roles.
I
guess
we
kind
of
looked
at.
You
know
your
average
career
length.
I
apologize
for
the
record
cole
mortensen
deputy
director
for
the
easier
roles
we
kind
of
looked
at
your
average
career
length
being
30
years
and
felt
that
somebody
that
has
15
years
worth
of
progressively
responsible
engineering
or
project
management
experience
would
likely
have
the
necessary
background
to
be
successful
in
the
position.
J
So
15
years
of
experience,
as
an
engineer
I
mean
I
can
think
of
people
who
have
experience
being
like
an
environmental
specialist
or
an
engineering
technician
who
don't
necessarily
have
the
experience
of
the
pe
under
their
name.
Are
you
requiring
that
that
15
years
be
with
a
pe
behind
their
name.
F
For
the
record
cole
mortensen
department
of
transportation,
the
first
well,
actually
it's
the
second
requirement
after
being
in
the
unclassified
service
for
the
deputy
director
requires
that
they
hold
a
master's
degree
in
public
or
business
business
administration,
a
degree
of
bachelor
of
science
in
civil
engineering,
structural
or
mechanical
or
industrial
engineering,
or
be
a
licensed
professional
engineer.
K
F
Absolutely
for
the
record
cole
mortensen
deputy
director,
we
struck
the
head
of
the
engineering
or
planning
division
because
we
think
that
it's
older
language,
we
also
have
an
operations
division
where
we
have
a
professional
engineer
that
manages
our
operations
group,
and
so
we
just
felt
that
it
was
an
unnecessary
provision
to
have
within
the
statute.
A
A
L
H
H
A
A
M
B
B
I
It's
like
your
worst
fear
is
the
screen
share
part.
I
I
A
new
way
of
presenting
yes,
give
it
one
second
to
like,
hopefully
get
caught
up
with
you
guys,
and
then
let
me
know
if,
if
it's
still
in
the
presenter
mode
shouldn't
be,
but.
I
That's
a
win
right
there.
Thank
you.
Over
dimensional
vehicle
permits
is
regulated
by
nrs484d
and
nac484d.
The
over
dimensional
section
is
responsible
for
issuing
oversized
overweight
permits
for
the
entire
state.
I
I
There
are
three
areas
of
nrs484d
that
ndot
is
proposing
to
change.
These
changes
will
improve
public
and
infrastructure
safety,
streamlining
the
permit
application
process
and
aligning
the
requirements
with
the
growth
of
the
manufacturer,
mobile
home
industry.
The
following
is
a
quick
overview
of
our
current
regulations
within
nrs484d,
605
and
0.725.
I
The
measuring
of
the
height
width
and
length
of
a
load
is
not
specified
next
within
484d,
0.685.715,
0.720
and
0.725.
The
requirements
state
that
permit
application
must
be
made
in
writing.
Lastly,
within
nrs484d
0.720
there
is
restrictive
language
that
does
not
allow
a
manufactured
or
mobile
home
over
16
wide
to
travel
on
nevada
roadways
or
highways.
I
Endot
is
proposing
the
following
changes:
adding
clarifying
language
to
nrs484d,
0.605
and
0.725
on
how
a
load
is
to
be
measured
in
regards
to
the
height.
It
will
be
measured
from
the
surface
on
which
the
vehicle
carrying
the
load
stands
length
from
the
front
bumper
or
front
overhang
to
the
rear,
bumper
or
rear
overhang.
Whichever
is
greater
width,
the
widest
point
on
each
side,
specifying
this
measurement
will
provide
consistency
across
the
industry
and
reduce
potential
risk
to
public
safety
and
or
damage
to
infrastructure
under
484-d.
I
I
A
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
My
question
has
to
do
with
the
application
process.
I'm
just
wondering
about
the
adequacy
of
removing
in
writing
and
also
concerns
related
to
folks
who
don't
have
access
to
on
digital
applications.
J
I'm
not
familiar
enough
with
your
applications
to
know
whether
they're
mobile
friendly
and
how
much
speed
you
have
to
have
access
to
in
order
to
to
plot
to
have
access
to
those
online
or
if
it's
a
billable
pdf.
I
know
I've
run
across
those
quite
often
in
state
agencies.
So
could
you
just
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
the
adequacy
of
this
removal?
I
For
the
record,
maya
bourgeois
the
this,
the
strikethrough
of
the
in
writing
does
not
prohibit
us
to
keep
continuing
to
receive
applications
in
writing.
We're
just
looking
at
opening
that
door
and
removing
that
str
restrictive
language
to
where
right
now
with
applications
having
to
be
in
writing.
So
we
still
give
everybody
that
opportunity
if
they
want
to
submit
in
writing.
We
do
have
fillable
forms
as
well
and
we
do
have
an
online
system.
We
are
trying
to
gravitate
more
towards
the
electronic
means.
I
It's
obviously
a
lot
easier,
we're
able
to
everybody's
able
to
have
like
their
own
accounts
in
there,
so
they
can
once
they
go
back
in
to
ask
for
or
request
another
permit,
all
their
information
will
be
there
and
they
can
easily
resubmit.
But
right
now
the
process
is
for
a
paper
application,
especially
during
covid.
They
would
still
have
to
go
online
currently
to
download
and
then
turn
around
and
and
submit
via
mail.
I
J
Yeah
that
makes
a
lot
of
sense
to
me
and-
and
I
have
to
admit
going
through
well
logs,
people's
handwritings
are
not
always
so
great
that
can
be
in
the
interpretation
into
a
format
or
databasable
application.
So
I
thank
you.
I
appreciate
your
your
comment.
Thank
you.
N
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
just
had
a
question
on
the
wit
or
on
the
width,
the
maximum
width.
So
previously
it
could
go
up
to
192
inches.
N
16
feet
in
width
and
under
this
provision
you
could
get
a
waiver
to
exceed
that,
and
but
it
doesn't
it's
still
it's
kind
of
limited
to
it
looks
by
the
writing.
It
looks
like
it's
limited
to
the
degree
the
discretion
of
whoever
is
granting
the
waiver
as
to
how
wide
it
can
be.
Is
there
anything
in
the
conditions
prescribed
by
the
department
of
transportation
on
a
maximum
width
that
can
that's
allowable
that
that
whoever
is
is
granting
the
waiver
if
they
choose
to
do
so
is
is
bound
to.
I
For
the
record,
maya
bourgeois,
thank
you
for
the
question.
Yes,
so
we
are
expanding
it.
We
are
moving
that
restriction
off
of
a
waiver
and
it
is
currently
going
to
be
determined
by
the
department
seeing
what
the
other
states
are
doing
and
and
where
this
industry
is
going
right.
Now
we
get
minimal
questions
or
minimal
requests
only
a
couple
year
and
with
the
widening
of
these
manufactured
in
in
mobile
homes,
they're
not
they're,
not
exceeding
levels
of
where
we
consider
it
almost
super
low
level.
I
So
they
are
looking
at
just
over
16
feet.
17
feet.
18
feet
is
really
what
we're
seeing
as
as
what's
coming
through
and
the
growth
of
that
industry.
So
we
do
leave
it
subjective.
What
what
we
did
do
in
there,
though,
is
that
we
added
with
additional
excuse
me
additional
conditions.
I
I
How
many
staff
members
need
to
be
attached
to
that
for
safe
moving.
I
N
Follow
up,
madam
chair,
so
I
wonder
if
it
would
be
in
this
is
mainly
for
the
protection
of
whoever
is
designated
to
grant
these
waivers.
You
know
I.
I
don't
know
that
it
would
be
difficult
to
look
at
the
most
expansive
roadway,
that
we
have
in
nevada
and
come
up
with
a
number
and
and
that's
the
not
to
exceed
numbers
so
that
they're
not
they're,
not
trying
to
figure
out
what
what
what
they
can
go
up
to
and
they're,
not
on
the
hook
for
it.
N
I
For
the
record,
maya
bourgeois,
you
bring
up
a
really
good
question
so
right
now
what
staff
does
is
that
they
evaluate
each
route
that
is
being
requested,
including
the
load
and
all
the
dimensions
and
the
weight
they
determine
at
that
point
in
time,
what
the
safest
route
is
in
and
around
construction
to
to
their
destination
that
they
need
to
go
to.
So
they
know
if
it's
two
lanes
four
lanes,
what
that
capacity
looks
like
over
the
bridges.
I
So
there
is
an
analysis
done
if
there's
over
a
certain
like
16
wide
there
there's.
Definitely
an
analysis
done
looking
to
see
what
is
the
best
way
to
get
them
from
point
a
to
point
b
safely
for
the
public
safety
and
for
the
truck
drivers
themselves,
so
it
is
determined
at
that
time
there
we
do
also
do
super
loads
and
there
are
certain
roads
that
they
can
only
go
on
depending
on
the
size,
weight
height,
so
on
and
so
forth.
N
It
didn't
really
answer
my
question.
I
mean
that
you
know
an
analysis.
Isn't
a
you
know,
isn't
isn't
a
prescribed
step
right.
An
access
is
an
analysis.
So
you
you
you
by
analysis.
You
could
go
as
wide
as
you
want
as
long
as
you
can
justify
it
through
analysis,
and
so
I
just
figure
I
I
just
feel
like
you
need
to
have
a
prescribed
prescribed
width
just
for
everyone's
benefit,
but.
B
N
E
Christina
swallow
for
the
record
and
and
maya
thank
you,
I'm
just
going
to
jump
in
and
and
when
maya
mentioned,
the
super
loads.
There
are
specific
routes
that
they're
able
to
traverse
simply
because
those
routes
are
capable
of
managing
a
larger
load.
However,
there
are
conditions
and
times
where
an
extreme
load
is
super
load.
It
may
need
to
go
in
a
certain
end.
So
then
we
can
work
with
the
permittee
to
find
out.
E
Are
there
pieces
of
infrastructure
that
they
may
need
to
remove
and
replace
we
work
with
them,
which
is
why
we
don't
put
a
maximum
on
there,
so
that
there
is
flexibility.
If
something
needs
that
there's
something?
That's
not
typical.
It's
abnormal
needs
to
traverse
the
state.
We
can
find
a
way
to
work
with
them
now
that
means
that
they
may
be
responsible
for
how
for
removing
and
replacing
certain
pieces
of
infrastructure,
putting
down
additional
equipment
to
protect
infrastructure
while
they
traverse,
and
so
that's
why
we
don't
put
a
maximum
we're.
E
Not
the
only
state
that
permits
over
dimensional
vehicle
permits
either,
and
so
most
of
these
over
dimensional
vehicles
are
working
through
multiple
states.
At
the
same
time,
if
we
were
to
put
a
maximum
there,
then
we
might
run
into
periods
where
we
need
to
put
in
a
waiver
for
that,
because
they
were
able
to
traverse
across
five
states
and
then
they
hit
nevada
and
we
would
no
longer
be
able
to
allow
them
across
nevada.
E
So
we
request
the
flexibility
to
continue
to
monitor
it,
but
do
respect
the
awareness
that
you're
suggesting
that
we
provide
for
our
permittees,
and
there
may
be
something
we
can
put
on
the
paperwork
that
indicates
typical
or
something
along
those
lines,
but
without
restricting
it
to
a
maximum.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
I
just
got
a
couple
comments.
I
see
a
lot
of
these
heavy
equipments
like
on
the
display
there
that
you
had
going
through
the
tunnels
and
and
what
they're
trying
to
do
is
get
them
from
like
20
miles
away
from
from
the
mine
site
to
where
they
got
to
repair
them.
The
only
way
to
get
them
there
is
the
highway.
C
That's
that
that's
the
only
way
they
can
get
them
through
there
and
I
see
all
the
highway
patrol
before
and
behind,
and
then
they
try
to
get
the
traffic
around
them
as
long
as
any
time
they
can.
But
I
noticed
there's
two
pictures
there.
They'll
come
out
of
the
carton
tunnels
and
the
the
old
highway
that
went
out
and
around
you.
Do
you
guys
use
that
anymore
because
it
used
to
be
that's,
they
would
divert
away
from
the
tunnels
and
go
around
it
and
then
come
back
onto
the
highway.
I
For
the
record
maya
bourgeois
yes,
we
do,
we
do
actually
use
still
that
old
route.
There
is
restrictions
on
it
and
I
I
can
find
that
information
for
you
on
what
those
restrictions
are,
how
much
weight
and
what
we're
able
to
move
on
that.
But
we
do
still
use
that.
C
Well,
I
I
appreciate
everything
you
guys
do
for
safety
on
this,
because
it's
amazing-
and
if
you
guys,
look
at
that
picture
that
that
that
bucket
going
through
that
tunnel,
it's
amazing
how
they
can
get
that
thing
they
go
so
slow
and
how
they
do
it.
But
you
guys
guys
do
a
great
job
of
getting
this
done
and
now
they're
building
these
manufactured
housing
out
of
idaho
and
and
you've
got
to
deal
with
that,
but
you've
done
a
great
job.
Thank
you.
B
Hello,
excuse
me,
thank
you,
my
question
and
miss
swallows.
You
kind
of
hit
on
it
a
bit
there
by
mentioning
the
cost
of
infrastructure,
protection
or
upgrades
that
would
need
to
be
covered
by
the
entity.
That's
bringing
the
large
or
the
super
low
through,
but
as
far
as
the
added
support
from
nhp
and
things
like
that,
how
is
that
cost
covered?
Is
it
covered
through
the
entity?
That's
also
bringing
the
the
package
through
or
is
it
covered
just
you
know,
through
our
nhp
budget.
I
For
the
record
maya
bourgeois,
thank
you
for
the
question.
Those
costs
are
covered
and
discussed
and
negotiated
between
nhp
and
the
trucking
company
itself.
I
believe
they
do
get
into
a
contract
with
each
other,
and
price
is
determined
at
that
time,
but
that
it
does
not
affect
us
or
impact
us
and
we're
not
involved
with
that.
At
that
point,.
A
Thank
you.
So
I
just
have
one
question.
Just
out
of
curiosity.
In
section
five
section,
one
you're,
adding
verbiage
that
says
measured
from
the
surface
of
which
the
vehicle
stands
is,
is
that
currently
being
done
and
you're
just
putting
in
clarifying
language
or
it's
a
measurement
from
the
ground
up
to
the
top
of
the
load
being
carried.
I
Right
now
it
is
being
measured.
You
know
from
the
ground
up
we
just
had
to
put
in
the
clarifying
information,
because
we
have
received
phone
calls
where
it
got
a
little
confusing
with
measuring
a
load,
because
the
load
by
itself
is
on
top
of
the
trailer.
So
if
they're
measuring
from
the
the
bottom
of
the
load
all
the
way
to
the
top,
that
leaves
about
four
feet,
so
it
leaves
a
big
difference
between
the
overall
measurements.
So
we
have
had
several
different
calls
on
this
over
the
years.
I
So
we
are
trying
to
clarify
from
from
the
ground
in
which
it
stands
at
which
it's
it's
on.
So,
if
even
if
it
was
on
a
concrete
pad
or
something
measuring
it
from
there
all
the
way
to
the
top
of
the.
A
I
For
the
record,
maya
bourgeois,
thank
you
for
the
question.
Yes,
so
it
is
from
the
ground
from
which
it's
it's
on
so
below
the
tires
like
right
at
where
the
tire
meets
whatever
it
is,
standing
on
all
the
way
up
to
the
top
of
the
load.
L
L
L
L
B
Thank
you
for
the
record.
My
name
is
susan
fisher
s-u-s-a-n-f-I-s-h-g-r
with
mcdonald
carano
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
nevada
housing
alliance,
which
is
the
statewide
association
for
manufactured
and
modular
home
dealers,
I'm
speaking
today
in
support
of
av
41,
specifically
the
proposed
language
in
section
4,
which
allows
ndot
to
grant
a
waiver
for
transporting
manufacture
to
modular
homes
that
are
oversized
having
the
ability
for
our
transporters
to
have
more
options
and
ways
to
request
a
transport
permit
also
is
very,
very
helpful.
B
The
majority
of
manufactured
and
modular
homes
coming
to
home
purchasers
in
nevada,
at
least
in
the
northern
part
of
the
state,
come
in
from
idaho.
I
will
note
also
for
safety
purposes.
The
homes
can
only
be
transported
during
the
light
of
day.
I
want
to
sincerely
thank
indot
and
maya
bourgeois
and
the
great
staff
who've
taken
our
calls
and
worked
with
us
to
help
get
homes
delivered
to
our
customers.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
in
support
of
ab41.
I
urge
your
support
and
I'd
be
happy
to
try
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank
you.
L
D
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
I
am
paul
enos
enos.
I
am
the
ceo
of
the
nevada,
trucking
association,
calling
today
in
support
of
assemblyville
41.
This
does
clarify
rules,
the
vacation
of
measurements
for
height
length
and
over
width,
and
we
also
appreciate
the
flexibility
the
department
has
for
mobile
homes.
We
do
understand,
sometimes
these
road
conditions
change
depending
on
construction,
depending
on
the
height
of
the
mobile
home,
that
they're
transporting.
Can
it
go
over
a
barrier
that
has
been
put
up
on
the
highway
or
not?
D
A
Thank
you,
then.
I
will
ask
the
presenters
if
they
have
any
closing
remarks
for
ab41
before
I
close
this
hearing.
A
We'll
see
none,
we
will
close
the
hearing
for
ab41
and
we
will
move
on
to
the
next
item
on
our
agenda,
which
is
assembly
bill
53,
which
revises
the
provisions
related
to
the
establishment
of
certain
systems
of
communications
on
our
highways,
and
I
will
invite
the
presenters
to
the
floor.
You
can
start
as
soon
as
you're,
ready.
A
M
And
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
vice
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record
seth
daniels
assistant
chief
traffic
operations,
engineer
for
the
nevada
department
of
transportation,
presenting
on
assembly
bill
53.
and
starting
off
with
the
brief
history,
1960s
marked
the
first
installation
of
highway
call
boxes.
This
was
a
solar
powered
emergency
call
system
installed
on
10
miles
of
freeways.
In
los
angeles,
the
main
proliferation
of
call
boxes
occurred
in
the
1980s
and
1990s,
with
roughly
16
000
units
installed
statewide
in
california.
M
Nearly
three
thousand
units
installed
on
the
florida
turnpike
and
around
a
thousand
units
installed
on
the
pennsylvania
turnpike.
The
last
nationwide
survey
that
was
identified
in
our
literature
search
was
in
2003
and
the
three
examples
stage
mentioned
accounted
for.
20
of
the
24
000
highway
call
boxes
in
the
us,
the
rest
being
distributed
among
the
other
18
states
who
installed
highway,
call
box
systems
in
comparing
the
2003
survey.
M
M
Regular
discussions
about
the
future
of
the
system
began
approximately
three
years
ago
in
regular
monthly
meetings
between
nhp,
radio
and
dispatch
staff,
our
indot
district,
one
communications
maintenance
staff
and
our
ndot
traffic
operations
technology
group
at
that
time,
julie,
butler
from
nhp
who
represented
their
dispatch
group,
and,
of
course,
who
is
now
the
director
of
the
dmv,
asked
about
the
removal
of
the
callback
system
due
to
continued
low
volume
of
calls
these
dista
just
sorry,
these
discussions
were
necessarily
involved.
Our
call
boxes
have
been
an
effective
tool
during
their
nearly
20-year
life
span.
M
M
M
M
California
was
a
little
harder
to
track
in
our
research.
Ongoing
project
funding
was
created
through
an
amount
added
to
vehicle
registration
fees,
but
was
disbursed
to
regional
transportation.
Organizations
for
the
installation
and
maintenance
documents
found
in
the
literature
search
indicated
that
approximately
75
percent
of
the
call
boxes
in
california
had
been
removed
by
2017..
M
So
on
to
safety,
it
is
interesting
that
the
research
performed
in
the
1990s
found
a
low
rate
of
risk
in
exit
exiting
vehicles
on
highways
for
activities
such
as
utilizing
call
boxes,
as
shown
by
the
12
figure
in
the
slide.
This
is
a
stark
contrast
to
current
national
research
statistics
and
best
practices.
There
are
many
factors
involved
and
distracted
over
or
impaired
driving
would
likely
be
at
the
top.
The
stock
stopping
recommendations
shown
on
the
slide
were
pulled
from
aaa
guidelines
and
are
also
widespread
in
regional
national
programs,
such
as
zero
fatalities.
M
Also,
given
this
information
walking
along
the
interstate
to
the
nearest
call
box
is
of
strong
concern,
even
though
responders
are
significantly
more
equipped,
unfortunately,
they're
not
immune
to
the
dangers
of
stopping
and
being
outside
of
their
vehicle
on
the
highway.
Their
training
and
best
practices
have
been
established
through
traffic
incident
management
programs.
M
M
Of
course,
this
is
a
high
volume
section
of
interstate,
it's
consistently
patrolled
by
nhp
and
is
an
indot
freeway
service
patrol
route
for
some
of
the
peak
travel
days,
and
we
do
emphasize
using
our
programs
like
this
because
of
the
successes.
Our
free
rape
service
patrol
program
has
logged
over
41
000
mitigations
in
the
las
vegas
area
in
fiscal
year.
20.,
the
rollout
of
5g
infrastructure
would
also
play
a
factor
with
cellular
coverage.
It's
set
to
provide
substantial
increases.
M
The
fcc
has
published
estimates
that
are
over
three
hundred
thousand
dollar,
that
over
three
hundred
thousand
small
cell
antenna
installations
will
will
occur
nationwide
in
the
next
five
years.
The
firstnet
program,
administered
by
the
federal
department
of
commerce
commerce,
is
increasing
coverage
as
part
of
the
program
to
provide
cellular
service
to
first
responders
and
that's
a
priority
based
service.
They
are
predicting
97
coverage
in
nevada
and
are
under
agreement
with
the
state
and
the
division
of
emergency
management
currently,
and
that
isn't
exclusive
to
first
responders
that
that
just
gives
them
a
preemption.
M
If,
if
the
call
volumes
are
high
and
the
system
is
at
capacity,
we're
also
starting
to
rely
on
traffic
management
platforms
such
as
a
product,
we
have
called
waycare.
It
is
utilized
to
combine
live
agency
data
with
data
from
a
variety
of
applications.
An
example
of
this
would
be
if
a
wage
users
enter
a
crash
or
a
disabled
vehicle
on
a
highway
or
interstate.
Waycare
will
confirm
this
and
display
those
details
on
our
operators
dashboards.
M
M
A
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
believe
we
have
just
a
few
questions
for
you.
Assemblywoman
summers,
armstrong.
We
will
start
with
you.
G
Thank
you
so
much,
mr
daniels,
for
your
presentation.
You
mentioned
waycare,
which
is
currently
a
crowdsourced
sort
of
software.
Is
that
correct.
M
G
M
We
we
do
pay
for
the
service
and
it
is
in
conjunction
with
the
rtc
of
southern
nevada,
sorry
seth
daniels
for
the
record
yeah
and
the
associated
data.
Generally,
I
would
say
a
lot
of
that
data
is
given
to
the
dot
we're
part
of
the
ways
connected
citizens
program
and
that
allows
us
free
access
both
ways.
They
pull
our
data
out
of
our
511
system
and
and
there's
no
charge
for
us
to
use
their
data
as
well.
G
One
more
question:
if
you
made
a
chair,
thank
you,
go
ahead.
Are
you
all
considering
looking
to
any
other
similar
crowdsource
data
so
that
you're
not
dependent
upon
just
one
relationship?
G
Just
in
case
you
know,
things
may
go
south
that
you
have
a
way
to
gather
similar
data,
you
know
from
another
source
or
just
to
get
a
different
perspective
and
also
additional
access
and
information
gathering,
so
that
you
know
if
some
people
are
not
making
using
waze
if
they're,
using
something
else
for
information
or
to
want
to
transmit
information
to
you
about
an
accident
or
something
that
we're
not
just
depending
on
one
source.
Thank
you.
M
M
P
First,
I'd
like
to
acknowledge
that
this
report
has
been
delivered
to
the
transportation
planning
advisory
committee
over
the
course
of
the
interim,
and
so
there's
a
lot
of
really
good
information,
even
though
we're
really
only
looking
at
changing
child
to
may
in
this
piece
of
legislation
realize
that
there's
a
significant
implication
to
that
and
the
flexibility
within
the
department.
P
M
So
we
do
have
three
call
boxes
in
existence
in
northern
nevada.
Two
of
them
are
on
u.s
50
heading,
you
know
heading
to
lake
tahoe
and
one
is
on
a
particularly
shielded
and
twisty
part
of
highway
431
up
to
virginia
city,
those
were
established,
they
maintained
those
are
nowhere
near
end
of
life
and
and
an
effective
tool,
and
I'm
sure
there
are
other
locations
in
the
state.
M
You
know
maybe
through
a
transition
as
our
as
our
cell
coverage
grows,
and
you
know
any
any
traveler
who
knows,
especially
as
a
passenger
you're
frustrated
when
your
signal
dies
and
you're
trying
to
get
something
done
or
something.
So
I
I
completely
understand
and
and
as
well
as
you
really
feel
for
we've
all.
I
don't
know
if
everyone
has,
but
I've
certainly
broken
down
in
in
my
younger
days
and
and
been
frustrated,
and
it
is
a
difficult
situation.
So
absolutely.
A
C
Thank
you,
madam
chairman,
when
you
guys
first
put
these
in
it
was
99.9
percent
was
to
be
used
for
like
9-1-1
calls.
Emergency
calls
only
is
that
correct
or,
and
then
they
direct
like
a
tow
truck
or
an
accident,
or
something
like
this
is
that
correct.
C
And
then
the
other
question
I've
got
is:
is
there
any
other
places
you
plan
to
expand
to
across
nevada.
M
I'd,
I
would
say,
we'd
certainly
be
open
to
it.
We
we
do
I'm
sorry
seth
daniels
for
the
record.
We
do
get
a
you
know.
We
do
get
a
lot
of
feedback
as
as
you're
aware,
we
have
maintenance
crews
all
over
the
state.
We
coordinate
with
the
nevada
highway
patrol
frequently
ndot
operates
the
ns,
the
nevada
shared
radio
system,
as
you
may
know,
and
those
those
kind
of
all
all
over
our
maintenance
workers
have
cell
phones.
M
They
also
operate
our
radio
and
you
know,
we've
put
in
additional
radio
sites
due
to
problem
coverage
areas
as
well.
So
you
know,
I
think
we
would
be
absolutely
open
if,
if
there
is
a
particular
area
of
concern
to
and
look
at
look
at
an
installation
such
as
this,
and
that
might
not
just
be
highways,
it
might
be.
Where
a
you
know,
a
popular
recreation
area
intersects
with
a
highway-
and
you
know
there
there
has
been
incidents
or
something
that
would
warrant
that
that
installation
thank.
C
You
follow
up,
madam
chair.
Go
ahead.
Thank
you,
madam
it.
If
you
look
through
once
you
go
through
ruby
valley,
all
the
way
to
eureka,
you,
you
have
no
cell
service
in
there
and
that's
a
two-lane
highway
all
the
way,
and
it
seemed
like
to
me
if
there
was
ever
a
good
place
to
have
them
would
be
along
that
road
and
I've
hit
deer
in
there
and
tore
the
whole
front
end
off
of
a
truck.
So
there's
no
cell
service.
C
If
there
was
a
way
that
they
could
do
it
with
some
way
of
a
better
satellite
system
or
a
way
to
get
to
it,
that
would
be
a
great
spot
for
them,
and
so
and
then
it
goes
up
50
all
the
way
through
there
93.
So
I
know
ndot's
working
on
a
lot
of
projects
up
that
way,
but
it'd
be
great
to
see
places
like
that
tone
upon
hawthorne
and
some
of
these
other
ones
that
have
no
cell
service
at
all.
C
M
And-
and
I
will
note
that-
and
I
appreciate
those
comments
and
and
being
a
former
resident
of
elko-
I'm
very
familiar
with
the
area
so
yeah
and
bring
those
extensions,
because
you
know
my
group
seth
daniels,
sorry
for
the
record.
My
group
does
is
working
on
the
statewide
fiber
optic
network.
We
do
manage
the
radio
system,
we
do
partner
with.
You,
know,
cell
phone
companies
in
certain
locations
and
we
could
absolutely
reach
out.
M
A
J
I
may
have
a
few
questions
I'm
going
to
start.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
the
question
and
thank
you,
mr
daniels.
So
much
for
the
presentation.
Oh
they're,
really
well
structured.
I
appreciated
that
my
question
has
to
do
with
the
language
of
the
bill,
so
this
may
be
more
of
a
legal
question,
but
do
we
have
a
legal
definition
for
frequently
traveled
highways?
That's
something
we
usually
use
for
that
definition.
M
Seth
daniels
for
the
record,
not
that
I'm
aware
of
that
may
be
more
on
the
on
the
planning
side.
So
if
anyone
else
on
the
ndot
team,
you
know
to
me
I
I
could.
I
could
certainly
see
that
it
seems
a
little
ambiguous
ambiguous,
especially
as
you
know,
conditions
have
changed
in
nevada
since,
since
that
bill
was
written,
but.
J
Yeah
the
bill
itself,
I
was
reading
and
that's
an
interesting
way
to
make
a
a
statement
and
get
to
what
they
wanted
to
do.
My
other
question
has
to
do
with
the
the
inclusion
of
frequently
traveled
highway
in
the
bill,
similar
to
what
my
colleague
mr
ellison
was
talking
about.
There
are
some
rather
under
traveled
freeways
and
with
the
prolific,
the
availability
of
cell
phone
reception
through
most
places.
J
I
almost
think
that
those
would
be
the
most
reasonable
to
identify
and
use
this
kind
of
a
call
service
on,
rather
than
frequently
travel
highways.
Where
you
know
every
you.
Third,
you
know
every
car
that
goes
by
you
is
likely
gonna
have
a
cell
phone,
so
I'm
just
wondering
if
that's
if
you
considered
whether
we
that
is
still
applicable
in
this
bill
or
not.
M
And
seth
daniels
for
the
record
to
to
answer
that
question,
and
I
think
you
know
nevada
followed
a
lot
of
states
in
figuring
that
it
would.
It
would
have
to
be
a
fairly
high
volume
road
to
you
know,
to
justify
the
expense
of
putting
these
in
just
just
so
they're
used
frequently,
and
you
know,
to
justify
not
only
installation
but
the
the
required
maintenance
costs.
But
you
know
you
could
say
you
know
frequently.
M
Traveled
is,
like
you
said:
ambiguity
ambiguous
in,
I
would
say,
through
our
research,
a
lot
of
states,
you
know
eliminated
call
boxes,
you
know
based
on
usage,
but
some
also
did
it
based
on
the
lack
of
cell
service
as
well
in
spot
locations.
You
know
if
there
was
a
good
junction
or
something
in
an
area
that
you
know
was
a
common
place
in
an
area
without
cell
service.
They
would
certainly
keep
you
know
several
of
those
call
boxes
there.
J
Thank
you.
Oh
I
had
one
follow-up
question.
I
apologize
chair,
it's
okay,
thank
you
and
my
question
has
to
do
with
one
of
the
statistics
or
one
of
the
the
stitch.
J
The
scenarios
which
you
cited,
which
were
the
call
boxes
on
a
bridge
to
assist
people
on
finding
resources
for
for
maybe
suicidal
thoughts,
and
I
was
wondering,
if
that's
a
con,
if
that's
an
issue
in
nevada,
if
we've
identified
places
in
which
that
is
an
area
that
we
would
consider
continuing
to
use,
call
boxes
just
for
kind
of
a
different
mechanism
than
like
emergency
situations
on
a
roadway.
M
Absolutely
I
know
they've
done
some
other
mitigations
and
that
the
bridge
over
the
hoover
dam
is
a
good
example.
They've
done
some
other
suicide
prevention,
but
and
the
reason
I
included
that
in
my
presentation
is
because
I
thought
it
was
a
great
idea
and
a
really
good
use
of
that
technology.
So
you
know,
if
there's
you
know
a
frequent
event
somewhere.
I
I
think
it's
a
wonderful
idea
for
that
for
that
type
of
crisis,
because
it
is,
it
is
really
concerning
and
disheartening.
A
Thank
you.
I
see
no
other
questions
for
you,
so
I
thank
you
for
the
introduction
for
assembly
bill
53
and,
what's
that
we
will
move
on
to
testimony
in
support.
Do
we
have
any
callers
here
to
testify
in
support
of
simply
bill
53.
A
Thank
you.
Do
we
have
any
final
remarks
from
the
presenters
on
this
bill
before
we
close
out
the
hearing.
A
Well,
thank
you
for
joining
us
today
and
with
that
we
will
close
the
hearing
for
assembly
bill
53
and
we
will
open
the
hearing
for
assembly
bill
54,
which
creates
the
advisory
committee
on
traffic
safety
within
the
department
of
transportation,
and
I
will
welcome
the
presenters
for
assembly
bill
54
to
the
room.
The
floor
is
yours,.
O
Thank
you
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
vice
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
sandra
rosenberg,
I'm
the
assistant
director
for
planning
at
the
nevada
department
of
transportation,
I'm
here
today
to
present
assemblyville
54.
The
creation
of
an
advisory
committee
for
traffic
safety
with
me
today
is
amy
davey
administrator
of
the
office
of
traffic
safety.
We
also
have
some
team
members
standing
by
to
assist
with
questions
if
needed.
O
I'd
like
to
start
with
a
little
history
on
the
committee,
an
existing
partnership
in
the
world
of
traffic
safety
in
nevada,
the
nevada
executive
committee
on
traffic
safety
was
established
in
2005
to
facilitate
the
strategic
highway
safety
plan.
The
shsp
is
a
federal
requirement
and
requires
that
safety
stakeholders
are
consulted
during
the
development.
O
O
The
committee
reviews,
progress,
provides
guidance,
addresses
challenges,
removes
barriers
and
receives
recommendations
from
key
area
task
forces
and
working
groups,
and
I
think
that's
an
important
piece
to
to
mention.
I'm
going
to
mention
it
probably
a
couple
times
that
the
committee
is
kind
of
the
overseeing
in
the
policy
portion
of
it.
But
a
lot
of
the
work
occurs
at
the
task
force
and
working
group
areas.
That's
where
the
subject
matter.
Experts
really
get
together
to
dig
into
specific
safety
issues.
O
So
this
is
the
current
structure
of
the
strategic
highway
safety
plan.
It
may
look
slightly
different
from
the
organizational
structure
you
saw
from
the
office
of
traffic
safety
and
the
nevada
executive
committee
on
draft
safety
last
week
for
two
reasons:
one
were
continuously
evolving
and
two
there's
a
slight
difference
between
the
organization
of
the
plan
and
the
organization
of
the
committee
and
task
forces.
O
What
you
saw
last
week
was
the
actual
task
forces
which
are
driven
by
the
critical
emphasis
areas
which
is
driven
by
the
data,
the
leading
causes
of
fatal
crashes
in
our
state,
and
so
that's
what
creates
the
critical
emphasis
areas
and
the
task
forces.
However,
as
mentioned
in
this
committee
last
week,
and
often
in
our
nects
meetings,
the
top
causes
aren't
the
only
causes
and
we
want
to
address
as
many
issues,
particularly
those
cross-cutting
issues
as
possible.
O
So,
for
example,
you'll
see
that
we
have
or
you've
heard,
that
we
have
a
task
force
on
pedestrians,
because
that
is
really
the
number
of
pedestrians
that
are
killed
on.
Our
roadways
is
really
really
frightening
in
the
state
and
many
others.
So
we
have
a
task
force
specifically
focused
on
that.
However,
the
plan
itself
and
that
task
force
looks
at
the
whole
range
of
vulnerable
road
users
and
puts
together
strategies
to
address
all
of
those.
O
So
we
recently
reorganized
or
planned
into
not
just
those
specific
top
issues,
but
but
areas
that
we
want
to
focus
on
key
areas,
so
safer
roads,
vulnerable
road
users,
safer
drivers
and
passengers
and
excuse
me
impaired
driving
prevention.
O
The
traffic
safety
practitioners
for
years
have
focused
on
the
ease,
I
think
at
one
point.
There
were
three
and
then,
for
a
long
time
there
were
four
engineering,
education
enforcement
and
emergency
management
systems
the
past
few
years.
We
have
added
everyone.
As
we
know,
it's
not
just
the
agencies
who
are
responsible
for
engineering
and
enforcement,
but
we
all
need
to
work
together,
including
the
users
of
the
transportation
system,
we've
recently
just
last
year,
added
equity
as
the
sixth
and
very
critical
e.
O
The
state,
both
ndot
and
ots,
and
probably
other
agencies
as
well,
have
a
number
of
federal
requirements
with
respect
to
plans
and
programs
related
to
traffic
safety.
I
mentioned
the
strategic
highway
safety
plan,
for
example,
which,
in
addition
being
to
being
a
requirement
for
safety
planning,
is
also
a
requirement
for
creating
the
highway
safety
improvement
program,
which
is
the
plan
that
actually
allocates
our
federal
safety
funding
to
projects.
So
that's
where
we
go
from
strategies
and
areas
of
focus
to
where
our
money
goes.
O
With
relation
to
those
those
areas
of
of
critical
emphasis,
the
project
selection
comes
from
the
priorities
and
strategies
identified
in
coordination
with
stakeholders
in
the
strategic
highway
safety
plan.
In
addition,
both
ndot
and
office
of
traffic
safety
have
a
number
of
federally
required
performance
measures,
some
of
which
what
must
be
identical
between
the
agencies,
including
the
number
and
rate
of
traffic
fatalities
and
the
number
of
serious
injuries.
O
Other
agencies
likely
have
other
measures
that
are
required,
but
it's
critical
for
for
any
of
us
to
meet
our
measures
that
we
work
together
on
the
strategies
to
improve
safety.
Overall,
that's
the
e
for
everyone,
so
the
bill
as
written,
provides
a
broad
group
of
stakeholders
at
the
state
and
local
level.
O
It
really
means
we're
trying
to
meet
the
proposed
model
of
membership,
which
is
statewide,
subject
matter:
experts
to
meet
our
federal
requirements
we
have
received.
Since
information
about
this
bill
came
out.
We've
received
a
number
of
requests
for
amendments,
this
bill
with
respect
to
membership,
we're
thrilled
that
so
many
people
want
to
engage
in
the
in
the
conversation
about
traffic
safety,
so
we're
reviewing
those
requests.
We
want
to
make
sure
we're
coordinating
with
all
the
stakeholders
and
partners
to
move
forward
in
traffic
safety.
O
O
So
we've
discussed
the
background
requirements.
Membership.
You
probably
want
to
know.
What's
actually
in
you
know
what
what
this
committee
will
be
responsible
for
and
it's
fairly
basic
but
and
broad-reaching.
O
They
would
review
study
and
make
recommendations
regarding
best
practices
for
reducing
deaths
and
injuries
related
to
crashes,
data
on
the
cause
of
crashes
resulting
in
death
or
serious
bodily
injury,
as
well
as
crash
prevention
measures
and
other
other
matters.
Matters
submitted
by
the
chair,
which
of
course,
would
have
to
relate
to
transportation
safety
for
parents
admit
to
the
governor
and
legislature
on
an
annual
report
concerning
advisory
committee
activities
and,
if
needed,
established
working
groups,
task
forces
or
similar
entities
within
or
outside
its
membership
for
further
study.
O
A
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
You
know
this
committee
does
such
important
work
in
improving
traffic
safety
in
our
state.
You
know
when
I
was
at
metro.
We
had
participation
on
that
committee
and
I
can't
tell
you
how
many
times
we
would
make
changes
to
infrastructure
to
address
issues
that
we
were
seeing
in
our
community.
K
I
have
one
quick
question:
you
you
have
in
section
one,
maybe
not
section
one
all
right,
yeah
section,
one
one
l,
it
says
you
have
five
members
who
represent
local
government
entities
appointed
by
the
director.
Would
that
include
representations
from
the
regional
transportation
committee
or
regional
transportation?
Commission,
the
rotcs
in
specifically
like
clark
in
wausau
washoe
county,
would
those
be
included
in
those
five
on
those
five
people.
O
Under
rosenberg,
and
not
for
the
record,
yes,
that
was
the
initial
intent
of
those
additional
five
members
and
those
are
the
types
of
questions
we're
getting
and
requests
for
amendments.
So
currently,
the
metropolitan
planning
organizations
which
includes
the
rtc's
are
on
the
committee,
so
we
want
to
reevaluate
that
if
we
name
them
by
name
or
add
them
as
as
kind
of
those
additional
five
members,
we
also
currently
have
naco
and
league
of
cities.
So
those
are
some
of
the
other
entities
we
were
considering.
O
We
don't
necessarily
want
to
get
because
the
committee's
large,
already
we
don't
necessarily
want
to
get
to
you,
know
every
county
having
a
representation.
O
We
feel
like
organizations
such
as
naco
and
league
of
cities
and
the
mpos
could
potentially
fill
that
function,
and
so
that's
that's
the
conversation
we're
having
now
with
a
lot
of
the
stakeholders
in
terms
of
a
potential
amendment.
K
O
Laundros
for
the
record,
that
is
correct.
We
certainly
don't
want
to
exclude
anyone.
We
wanted
to
maintain
some
flexibility
as
we
put
this
in
statute
as
some
of
those
roles
change.
However,
we
are
evaluating
the
potential
to
potentially
name
some
of
those
in
the
in
the
bill.
Coming
back
in
an
amendment.
K
Right
I
mean
they,
I
think
that's
a
great
idea,
I'd
hate
to
see
them
eliminated.
They
they
have
so
many.
You
know
miles
they
travel
within
the
jurisdiction,
especially
in
clark
I
mean
they
were
a
valuable
member
to
us
at
metro.
When
we
looked
at
traffic
safety
issues,
I
hate
to
see
them
left
out.
So
thank
you.
I'm
glad
I'm
glad
you're
not
doing
that
appreciate
it.
Q
Thank
you
so
much,
madam
chair,
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
just
had
a
couple
of
questions.
I
guess,
and
I
think
the
first
one's
just
a
clarifying
one.
You
you
just
talked
a
little
bit
in
response
to
assemblyman
robert's
questions
about
the
composition,
and
I
just
noted
that
we
have
two
different.
It
looks
like
proposed
amendments
that
are
uploaded
on
nellis,
and
one
of
them
reduces
the
local
government
entity
from
five
to
three,
but
then
adds
two
others
and
then
the
other
one
talks
about
the
transportation
commission.
Q
O
O
We
just
want
to
take
a
look
at
make
sure
we're
hearing
all
of
the
requests
and
looking
at
the
wholesale
membership
to
make
sure
it
is
a
statewide
subject
matter:
experts
agencies
that
have
transportation
safety
as
a
primary
role,
but
make
sure
we're
not
leaving
out
any
any
really
critical
stakeholders.
So
so
yes,
yes,
they're
friendly,
yes,
we're
still
evaluating
them,
and-
and
we
will
come
back
with
a
more
succinct,
combined
amendment
shortly.
Q
Thank
you,
man.
Thank
you.
So
you
answered
part
of
my
question.
My
next
question
was
just
going
to
be
about
who
who
typically
chairs
this
committee-
I
think
it's
been
around
since
2005,
so
we
have
a
15
or
16
year
history
and
it
sounds
like
miss
davey
currently
chairs
it,
which
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
Given
her
role,
I
just
wondered
if
historically
isn't
normally
end
up
being
the
executive
director
or
the
administrator
of
the
office
of
traffic
safety,
or
are
there
other
members
who
have
typically
chaired
over
the
years.
O
Andrew
rosenberg
and
that
again
for
the
record,
that's
an
excellent
question.
In
my
time
on
the
committee,
it
has
typically
been
dps
or
ndot
so
prior
to
amy.
I
chaired
it
prior
that
to
that,
I
believe
it
was
someone
from
nhp.
O
G
Thank
you
so
much,
madam
chair
for
the
acknowledgement
and
thank
you
ma'am
for
the
presentation.
I
am
curious
as
to
why
there
is
no
request
to
have
anyone
from
civilian
life
on
this
committee.
As
a
representative
as
a
representative,
maybe
one
from
each
of
these
large
entities
who
have
a
number
of
people
that
they
can
nominate
and
the
reason
being
is
in
my
other
life.
I
know
that
we
have
organizations
that
are
pedestrian
safety
centered.
They
we
had
a
horrible
accident
down
in
southern
nevada
with
some
bicyclists.
G
We
have
groups
in
our
community
who
do
this.
You
know
safety
for
children,
walking
safety
for
regular
pedestrians
and
safety
for
bicyclists,
and
I'm
wondering
if
someone
from
those
groups
might
not
be
able
to
bring
a
perspective
to
the
table.
That
is
not
so
much
government
centered,
you
know.
Sometimes
we
get
caught
up
in
our
acronyms
and
the
things
that
we
see
and
know
and
maybe
not
be
really
boots
on
the
ground
from
a
just,
a
regular
person's
perspective,
just
kind
of
curious.
Thank
you.
O
Thank
you
for
that
question,
sandra
rosenberg
and
dot
for
the
record,
and
I
may
ask
amy
to
fill
in
a
little
bit
as
well.
We
would
certainly
be
open
to
that.
We
have
had
civilians
or
members
of
organizations
who
have
an
important
role
in
this
participate,
just
not
as
voting
members.
So
currently
our
meetings
occur
are
noticed.
O
O
Additionally,
as
I
mentioned,
those
task
forces
where
a
lot
of
the
work
is
occurring,
so
I
believe
we
do
have
some
advocacy
groups
that
are
actively
involved
in
vulnerable
users,
particularly
pedestrians
and
likely
some
of
the
other
task
forces
miss
davey.
Can
you
add
some
detail
to
that
as
possible.
R
Amy
office
of
traffic
safety
fondra
is
correct.
We
do
have
a
number
of
advocacy
groups
and
including
interested
individuals
that
participate
in
our
task
forces
they're
quite
involved
in
bringing
forth
recommendations
giving
input,
and
I
think
that
the
structure
of
the
committee
historically
has
really
come
quite
a
bit
out
of
our
federal
requirements
and
which
are,
you
know,
outlined
as
organizations
with
a
primary
focus
on
traffic
safety,
transportation,
safety,
public
health,
school
safety,
those
those
types
of
things.
R
But
that's
a
that's
a
wonderful
question
and
something
for
us
to
certainly
consider
and.
O
I'm
just
going
to
add
to
that
sandra
rosenberg
and
I
in
in
other
committees
that
we
operated
operate.
We
have
had
some
challenge
in
making
sure
those
citizen
members
can
participate
regularly
and
not
run
into
an
issue
with
quorum.
So
we
can.
We
can
look
into
that
issue,
but
if
it's,
if
it's
okay
with
everyone,
I
think
having
them
continue
to
operate
as
they
are,
is
probably
most.
J
Thank
you
chair.
My
question
has
to
do
with
one
of
your
amendments,
the
amendment
to
add
two
members
from
the
research
units
at
enshi
and
I'm
wondering
about
the
history
of
this.
Have
you
had
like
the
have
you
had
folks
who
are
doing
research
on
the
committee
previously,
as
and
and
would
these
be
voting
members?
J
I
guess
are
my
first
two
questions
and
then
I
just
can't
encourage
enough
having
that
kind
of
voice
on
committees
today,
as
we
talk
about
infrastructure
advancement,
particularly
around
transportation,
as
we're
addressing
issues
related
to
electric
vehicles
that
are
just
you
know
in
their
baby
stages
of
understanding.
So,
but
if
you
could
answer
the
question
about
the
history
of
having
folks
like
that
on
the
committee.
O
Sure
sandra
rosenberg
and
not
for
the
record,
I
may
pull
amy
back
in
for
this
one
as
well
again.
I
think
that
amendment
may
have
been
a
little
premature,
but
the
system
of
higher
education
has
been
very
active
in
this
city.
They
have
not
previously
been
voting
members,
but
they're
they're,
very
active,
particularly
on
the
data
collection
and
analysis
side.
R
Absolutely
this
is
amy
davey
with
the
office
of
traffic
safety
and,
as
saundra
correctly
stated,
they
have
representatives
from
the
nevada
system
of
higher
education
have
been
actively
involved
in
our
working
groups,
task
forces
and
have
not
previously
held
a
position
on
the
in
terms
of
voting.
R
They
actually
approached
us
and
said
that
they
they
felt
there
was
a
natural
nexus,
in
particular
unlv's
transportation,
research
center
and
the
umc
and
the
unlv
school
of
medicine
trauma
and
emergency
medical
services.
R
N
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
mine
is
just
kind
of
a
little
bit
of
a
follow-up
on
assemblyman
roberts
and
simon
yeager's
line
of
questioning.
So
in
your
friendly
amendment,
you
had
mentioned
that
you
were
looking
at
potentially
adding
the
the
rtc's
by
name
as
far
as
placeholders
in
the
committee
is.
Are
you
also
adding
mpos
metropolitan
planning
organizations
by
name
as
as
as
part
of
the
committee,
or
is
that
part?
Is
that
part
of
the
friendly
amendment
as
well.
O
Andrew
rosenberg,
and
not
for
the
record,
our
terminology
in
nevada
sometimes
gets
a
little
confusing.
The
rtc
of
southern
nevada
and
the
rtc
of
washoe
county
are
the
mpos
for
those
metropolitan
regions.
So
the
intent
of
the
when
we
say
the
rtc's,
those
are
the
ones
we're
referring
to.
The
additional
mpos
would
be
carcinaria
mpo
and
the
tahoe
regional
planning
agency.
N
Thank
you
for
that
clarification.
I
think
that
yeah,
the
acronyms
get
a
little
a
little
interesting
sometimes
so
I
appreciate
that.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
K
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
have
a
well.
I
have
one
quick
question
and
then
a
follow-up.
That's
a
little
bit
more
of
a
comment
or
request.
So
the
question
that
I
have
relates
to
the
item
k
the
member
who
represents
indian
tribes-
and
I
noticed
just
in
the
language
of
the
bill.
It
notes
appointment
by
the
director
of
the
department
of
transportation.
K
O
Absolutely
ronda
rosenberg,
yes,
so
in
in
the
past
it
has
been
the
inter
tribal
council.
We
have
recently
improved
relationships
with
the
nevada,
indian
commission,
so
I
think
we
would
probably
consult
with
both
entities
to
determine
an
appropriate
appointment.
I
know
some
other
state
committees
have
recently
specifically
named
the
indian
commission.
O
K
Thank
you
for
that.
I
appreciate
that
clarification
and
I
would
just
encourage
you
to
make
sure
you
touch
base
with
with
both
the
inter-tribal
council
and
the
indian
commission
to
make
sure
that
the
language
in
the
bill
respects
tribal
sovereignty
and
and
their
wishes,
and
how
that
position
is
filled
and
that
kind
of
leads
into
my
other
request,
and
I
understand
from
the
the
other
questions
and
discussion
on
the
bill
so
far
that
we're
still
working
out
what
the
final
membership
roster
is
going
to
be.
O
Saunders
brigand
up
for
the
record.
We
would
be
happy
to
do
that
along
with
the
explanation
of
why,
if
there
are
some
changes,
why
why
we're
recommending
those
changes
to
the
current
committee.
A
Thank
you
and
and
very
good
suggestions,
so
once
you
have
that
put
together
if
you'll
send
it
to
the
committee
manager,
she
will
get
it
to
all
the
members
on
the
committee
we're
seeing
I'm
seeing
no
other
questions
from
members,
so
I
will
ask
staff
we
will
move
to
callers
for
support.
I
believe
there
are
a
few
callers
in
the
queue
for
support.
L
L
P
F-A-B-R-A-N-E-W-B-Y
and
I
am
representing
the
university
of
nevada
las
vegas,
we
are
in
support
of
ab54,
with
the
friendly
amendment
submitted,
specifying
two
members
of
the
research
units
of
the
nevada
system
of
higher
education
at
unlv,
one
of
our
state's
two
r1
carnegie
high
research
activity
institutions.
We
believe
that
research
is
best
when
it
can
benefit
the
lives
of
our
citizens
and
improve
our
community.
P
L
D
M-I-C-H-A-E-L-H-I-L-L-E-R-B-Y,
on
behalf
of
the
regional
transportation
commission
of
washoe
county
we'd,
like
to
offer
our
support
today
for
the
bill
with
the
amendment
from
ndot.
That
includes
our
suggestion
that
the
representatives
of
the
state's
four
metropolitan
planning
organizations
be
involved
in
the
committee.
Rtc
washoe,
like
our
sister
organizations,
has
within
its
jurisdiction
some
of
the
state's
busiest
and
most
heavily
traveled
roadways,
because
safety
is
a
paramount
concern
and
in
our
mission
we
think
it's
appropriate
we'd,
be
a
part
of
the
committee
that
proposed
in
the
bill
and
look
forward
to
working
with
the
other
members.
L
P
Good
afternoon
it's
angela
castro
c-a-s-t-r-o
with
the
regional
transportation
commission
of
southern
nevada
on
behalf
of
the
rtc
southern
nevada.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
express
support
for
ab54
as
amended.
That
would
include
the
metropolitan
planning
organizations.
Ab54
promotes
a
collaborative
approach
to
developing
sound
policies
to
improve
traffic
safety.
This
is
a
vital
strategy
for
supporting
economic
development
and
infrastructure
growth
and
enhancing
the
quality
of
life
for
nevada
residents
as
the
region's
traffic
management
agency
and
the
metropolitan
planning
organization.
P
We
are
grateful
for
the
nevada
department
of
transportation
and
end
up
director
christina
swallow,
as
well
as
the
department
of
public
safety
and
traffic
safety
division
and
minister
administrator
sorry,
amy
davey.
For
sponsoring
this
legislation
and
agreeing
to
amend
ab54
to
specifically
include
nevada's
metropolitan
planning
organizations.
As
advisory
committee
members,
we
look
forward
to
developing
effective
solutions
for
protecting
drivers,
passengers
and
pedestrians
on
nevada's,
road
and
highways.
L
H
Thank
you
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
david
davlich
d-a-c-l-I-c-h,
I'm
the
director
of
government
affairs
for
the
las
vegas
chamber
of
commerce
here
to
testify
today
in
support
the
regional
traffic
issue
and
statewide
traffic
issues
of
traffic
safety
are
very
important
to
our
continued
development.
H
We
would
like
to
thank
the
department
for
bringing
this
legislation
forward.
We
think,
through
proper
study
and
utilization
of
the
information,
that
this
will
lead
to
much
better
outcomes
for
everybody
on
nevada's
roads.
We
urge
your
support.
Thank
you.
A
A
L
A
Thank
you
so
much
so
members
that
will
conclude
today's
meeting.
I
think
all
of
our
presenters
for
joining
us
here
today
are
our
diligent
staff
for
making
this
all
easy.
Virtually
the
public
who's
joined
us
virtually
to
join
in
on
the
meeting
and
for
the
members
and
the
public
watching
our
next
meeting
for
the
assembly
committee
on
growth
and
infrastructure
will
be
on
tuesday
march,
2nd
at
1
30
pm,
where
we
will
be
hearing
four
bills
and
with
that
today's
meeting
is
adjourned,
and
I
wish
you
all
a
pleasant.