►
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
Thank
you
please
mark
the
chair
present
when
she
arrives.
I
know
that
she
is
presenting
a
bill
in
another
committee
right
now
with
that
we
do
have
a
quorum.
I'd
like
to
welcome
everyone
to
today's
meeting
today,
we'll
hear
two
bills,
and
after
that
we
will
do
a
work
session,
we'll
be
limiting
all
testimony
to
two
minutes,
and
we
encourage
anyone
to
submit
additional
testimony
in
writing
to
be
included
in
the
record
and
uploaded
to
nellis
for
everyone
to
see
for
those
attending
virtually
and
in
person.
We
encourage
you
to
register
in
nellis.
A
However,
you
prefer
please
remember,
to
select
your
position
and
agenda
item.
You
can
submit
opinion
or
testimony
online
for
up
to
48
hours
after
each
meeting
for
those
joining
us
in
person.
Just
a
reminder
to
please
remember
to
wear
your
mask
and
observe
social
distancing.
While
you
are
in
the
the
meeting
room
and
then
yeah
with
that,
I
believe
we
can
get
right
down
to
business
today.
We're
gonna
start
with
senate
bill,
387
I'll
open
the
hearing
on
sb
387
senator
harris
welcome.
C
Good
afternoon
vice
chair
watson,
committee
members,
I'm
dallas
harris
representing
senate
district
11
in
clark
county,
I'm
here
to
present
senate
bill
387
in
its
first
reprint,
which
deals
with
the
regulation
of
intra-state
calling
services
for
inmates
before
going
over
the
specifics
of
senate
bill
387
I'd
just
briefly
like
to
explain
why
this
bill
is
necessary.
C
So
for
many
years
throughout
the
united
states,
inmate
calling
services,
both
interstate
and
trust
state,
were
unregulated
in
2007
nevada
legislature
eliminated
the
authority
of
the
public
utilities
commission
to
oversee
the
companies
that
provided
inmate
calling
services
over
the
years.
The
number
of
companies
providing
inmate
calling
services
has
decreased
due
to
telecommunication
mergers.
Not
surprisingly,
this
lack
of
oversight
and
lack
of
composition,
competition
resulted
in
phone
rates
for
inmate
calls
that
were
unconscionably
high
and
the
issue
gained
national
attention.
C
In
response
to
this
problem,
the
federal
communications
commission
stepped
in
to
regulate
and
limit
the
cost
of
inter-state
calls.
Currently,
the
fcc
caps
are
21
cents,
a
minute
for
prepaid
calls
and
25
cents
a
minute
for
collect
calls
and
the
fcc
is
working
to
further
lower
those
numbers.
However,
the
fcc
lacks
jurisdiction
to
regulate
interest
date,
calls
which
account
for
80
percent
of
the
calls
made
from
prisons
or
jails.
C
Now
you
may
wonder
why
we
care
so
much
about
how
an
inmate
is
charged
for
a
phone
call.
The
answer
lies
in
the
many
studies
that
document
the
benefits
and
importance
of
inmates.
Maintaining
family
contact,
while
incarcerated
chief
among
those
benefits
is
evidence
of
significantly
reduced
rates
of
recidivism
and
equally
compelling
are
the
mental
health
benefits
for
the
inmates
and
the
positive
impacts
on
children
of
inmates
from
maintaining
a
parent-child
bond.
C
Allowing
inmates
to
stay
in
touch
with
their
families
also
helps
them
upon
release
to
find
jobs
and
housing
and
to
maintain
sobriety,
despite
the
benefit
of
family
contact.
At
least
one
survey
found
that
nearly
70
percent
of
inmates
respondents
reported
the
cost
of
a
phone
call
as
a
key
obstacle
to
keeping
in
touch
and
a
third
went
into
debt
to
make
phone
calls.
C
C
Section
two
defines
correctional
facility
to
include
nevada
department
of
correction
facilities,
be
they
public
or
private
prisons,
as
well
as
all
city
and
county
jails
or
detention.
Centers
section
three
defines
inmate
calling
service
as
limited
to
inter-state
phone
calls
from
a
correctional
facility.
C
Section
4
simply
says
an
inmate
calling
service
must
file
an
application
with
the
public
utilities,
commission
for
approval
of
its
rates
and
ancillary
charges.
The
crux
of
the
bill
is
section
5,
which
directs
the
commission
to
adopt
regulations,
establishing
rate
caps,
limiting
ancillary
charges
and
creating
a
procedure
for
allowing
deviations
from
those
caps
or
limits.
C
Section
5
also
makes
clear
that
the
rate
cap
set
by
the
commission
cannot
exceed
the
cap
set
by
the
fcc
for
interstate
inmate
calls
and
that
the
limits
on
ancillary
charges
must
be
consistent
with
the
fcc's
in
ter
state
limits.
Finally,
section
5
mandates
an
annual
review
of
the
established
caps
and
limits
and
directs
the
commission
to
revise
them
as
needed.
C
Finally,
section
13
exempts
the
bill
from
having
a
fiscal
note
before
a
committee
takes.
Action
is
no
longer
relevant,
however,
because
this
bill
only
enables
the
commission
to
adopt
regulations,
any
fiscal
impact
on
the
department
of
correction
or
local
jails
and
detention
centers
will
be
addressed
likely
during
the
rulemaking
process.
C
I
just
want
to
note
at
this
time
for
the
committee.
I
have
debris
terwilliger
from
the
public
utilities,
commission
of
nevada,
on
the
line
who
has
been
fantastic
in
assisting
me
in
drafting
this
legislation,
and
I
don't
know
if
she
wants
to
make
a
few
comments,
but
she's
also
available
for
questions
so
vice
chair.
Do
you
mind
if
I
turn
it
over
to
mr
williger?
At
this
time?.
A
Yes,
please,
mr
wiliga,
welcome.
Please
proceed
whenever
you're
ready.
D
Yes,
thank
you.
Vice
chair
debris,
tuliga
from
the
public
utilities,
commission
for
the
record,
I'm
most
senator
harris
covered
the
covered.
Why
this
bill
is
important
and
what
the
intent
of
the
bill
is.
It
will
do
so.
I
don't
need
to
to
go
into
that.
I'm
I
am
available
for
questions,
particularly
any
questions
pertaining
to
how
the
puc
process
will
work
upon
passage.
D
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that,
we'll
open
it
up
to
questions
from
members.
I
believe.
First
up
we
have
assemblyman
wheeler.
E
Thank
you,
mr
vice
chair,
senator.
I
I
see
what
you're
trying
to
do
here,
but
I'm
wondering
is
there
any
chance
that
the
providers
will
see
it
as
not
being
financially
viable
and
just
stop
altogether
providing
those
services
to
the
inmates.
C
Thank
you
for
the
question
assemblyman
wheeler
to
you
through
through
the
vice
chair.
You
know.
I
think
that
is
a
a
process
that
can
be
dealt
with
at
the
public
utilities
commission,
so
they
are
actually
very
well
versed
in
allowing
companies
to
come
in,
put
forward
an
application
and
say
here's
what
the
cost
to
provide
the
services.
C
Here's
why
we
need
to
charge
whatever
rate
we
need
to
charge,
and
then
the
public
utilities
commission's
job
is
to
decide
if
that
those
those
charges
are
just
and
reasonable,
and
so
any
company
who
can
come
in
and
make
an
argument
that
they
need
to
charge
the
rate
they
need
to
charge
will
be
able
to
to
do
so.
We
do
know
that
the
fcc,
as
I
mentioned,
has
already
put
a
cap
on
these
inter-state
calls,
and
so
a
lot
of
these
companies
are
already
operating
under
under
that
limit.
C
I'll
also
note
that
the
the
cost
of
delivering
a
a
voice
minute
today
in
2021
is
almost
negligible.
The
infrastructure's
already
put
into
place
right
nowadays
we're
charged
charged
for
data.
They
don't
even
count
our
minutes
anymore,
on
cellular
service,
much
less
landline
type
services,
and
so
I
I
don't
actually
believe
it
would
be
a
situation
upon
which,
if
they
could
not
charge
51
cents,
a
minute
that
the
the
model
wouldn't
work.
E
Thank
you
follow-up.
I
think
you
actually,
this
would
be
for
mr
william,
do
you
know
why
they
charge
so
much
now
for
an
inmate
call
versus
a
regular
call,
I
mean:
are
there
extra
expenses,
etcetera.
D
Debris
twilight
for
the
record.
Thank
you,
so
many
mailer
by
sure
watts
through
you
to
assembly,
linda
wheeler.
I
I
think
senator
harris
covered
this
in
our
opening
remarks.
D
You
know
there
was
a
big
push
and
the
two
you
know
the
early
2000s
to
deregulate
telephone
service
and
that
happened
in
nevada
with
assembly
bill
518
in
2007,
and
I
think,
as
part
of
that
process,
things
like
inmate
calling
got
deregulated
and
once
it
got
deregulated
and
as
senator
harris
noted,
there
was
consolidation
in
the
market,
the
competition
just
decreased,
and
so
therefore
it
opened
up
an
opportunity,
for
you
know
rates
to
go
higher.
D
So
I
I
you
know
the
fcc
has
explored
this
issue
at
length
to
see
if
there's
any
justification
for
why
an
inmate
call
might
be
higher
than
a
regular
call
and
that
you
know
the
comments
didn't
yield
or
indicate
that
the
fcc
didn't
indicate.
There
was
any
justification
for
that
right
now.
They've
proposed
the
fcc
has
proposed
a
slight
difference
in
calls,
and
it's
just
it's
still,
I'm
sorry.
The
fcc
has
proposed
in
a
rule
making
they
haven't
adopted
it.
D
D
I
don't
think
there's
any
support
for
this
idea
that
an
inmate
call
is
more
expensive
than
a
regular
telephone
call,
and
I
did
want
to
just
provide
also
a
note
about
your
your
earlier
question
that
the
provisions
of
this
bill
also
provide
a
what
I
would
call
a
relief
valve
or
something.
If
an
inmate
calling
service
provider
comes
to
the
puc
and
says
it's
gonna
cost
us
more
to
provide
service
than
the
rate
caps
that
you
put
into
place.
D
It
allows
them
to
make
that
justification
to
make
their
case,
why
the
rate
caps
that
the
s
the
commission
will
the
puc
will
set
via
a
rulemaking
or
a
rule
making
process.
I
should
say
why
it
allows
that
inmate
calling
service
provider
to
say
that
those
rates
won't
be
just
unreasonable
and
won't,
allow
it
or
permit
it
to
recover
its
cost.
So
there
is
a
process
in
place
in
case
it's
just
too
expensive
or
one
particular
inmate
calling
service
provider
in
lincoln
county
pershing
county
wherever
that
might
be.
D
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
also,
just
for
our
presenters
I'd
like
to
just
note
that
you
can
go
directly
to
the
member
moving
forward.
Also,
one
other
note
that
I
would,
I
would
say
is
that,
while
with
the
consolidation,
there
may
be
still
some
options
for
the
department
of
corrections
to
consider
the
inmates
themselves
only
have
one
option,
and
so
we
know
that,
while
general
phone
customers
have
choices
in
that
competition
can
help
keep
prices
lower.
That's
not
necessarily
the
case
for
inmates
so
and.
E
A
C
Time,
you
will
hear
me,
give
nevada
department
of
corrections
a
shout
out.
They
actually
already
are
providing
these
services.
I
think
at
about
11
cents,
they're
at
the
the
fcc
cap
well
below.
What
we
see
is
a
lot
of
local
jails
who
are
charging
some
of
these
higher
exorbitant
prices,
and
I
think
that's
a
function
of
the
fact
that
I
believe
department
of
corrections
is
contracted
with
centurylink
who
operates
across
the
country
and
so
they're
actually
already
keeping
their
rates
as
low.
As
as
we'd
like
to
be
seeing.
A
C
F
Follow
up.
Thank
you
for
that.
I'm
not
sure.
If
you
do,
I
just
noticed
that
it
it
talks
about
the
department
of
corrections,
so
I
had
some
concern
that
maybe
the
definition
wouldn't
be
broad
enough
to
to
cover
some
of
our
juvenile
facilities,
but
certainly
we
can
get
some
guidance
from
legal
on
that
and
then
the
other
question
on
that
same
section
is
a
question
of
mentions
there.
F
The
department
of
corrections
may
have
contracted
with
private
entities,
which
I
think
there
still
are
some
of
those
contracts
in
place,
although
I
think
they're
being
phased
out,
but
my
question
was:
we
have
scenarios
where
sometimes
our
nevada
inmates
are
transferred
out
of
state,
sometimes
for
safety
reasons
or
other
reasons.
So
is
this
only
going
to
apply
to
facilities
located
in
the
state
of
nevada?
C
Thank
you
for
the
question
chairman
yeager.
Well,
assemblyman,
yeager,
here
sorry,
yes,
it
would
only
apply
to
facilities
within
the
state.
I
think
there's
some
jurisdictional
issues
that
we
have
to
consider.
As
you
mentioned,
the
public
utilities,
commission
of
nevada
can
only
regulate
operators
as
they
are
here
and
we're
actually
only
talking
about
calls
within
the
state
of
nevada
anyway.
So.
G
F
Thank
you
vice
chair.
Thanks
for
the
presentation,
I
appreciate
you
bringing
the
bill
forward.
My
question
is,
you
may
have
said
it
in
your
opening.
I
apologize
if
I
missed
it.
Fcc
regulates
obviously
state
to
state
calls
in
state
is
currently
unregulated
right,
and
so
this
would
provide
some
oversight
and
regulation
on
that
with
this
bill.
F
So
what
drives
the
rate
costs
now,
so
is
that
purely
up
to
the
discretion
of
the
the
jail
or
whoever's
signing
those
contracts,
and
is
that
pretty
much
how
it's
determined
now.
C
Thank
you
for
the
question
of
summoning
roberts.
Yes,
I
would
say
traditional
market
forces
how
many
actors
there
are,
which
is
why
we've,
you
know
kind
of
discussed
the
fact
that
there's
been
quite
a
bit
of
consolidation
and
and
the
contract
between
the
jail
and
and
the
provider.
F
Just
brief
follow-up:
do
you
know
of
any
any
facilities
in
the
state
that
that
share
some
of
the
like
get
a
get
money
back
from
these
calls?
You
know
like
say,
and
I'm
not
I'm
not
aware
of
any,
but
in
your
research
did
you
come
across
any
of
that.
C
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblyman
roberts,
I'll
I'll,
try
and
tread
carefully
here.
I
have
not
read
any
of
these
contracts
personally,
but
it
is
my
understanding
that
there
may
be
some
financial
benefit
to
in
the
exchange
for
these
phone
call
rates
inside
of
the
the
setups
how
they
operate
together.
Thank
you.
H
Thank
you
vice
chair.
Thank
you
senator
harris
for
bringing
this
bill.
It's
really
important.
It's
it's
close
to
me,
as
I
have
had
some
very
close
family
members
that
made
repeated.
You
know,
caused
contacts
with
my
grandma
and
my
mother
and
my
aunts,
and
they
had
really
high
high
high
bills.
H
I'm
curious
to
know-
and
this
is
just
for-
I
guess-
for
understanding
those
bill,
though,
that
the
cost
it
still
falls
on
the
person
receiving
the
call
correct.
C
Thank
you
for
the
question,
assemblyman
miller.
You
know,
that's
that's
a
good
question,
I'm
not
entirely
sure
that
it
always
does.
I
know
when
you
make
a
collect
call
of
the
call
will
fall
upon
the
receiver,
but
it
is
my
understanding
and
I
I
could
be
wrong
so
I'll
double
check
this
and
circle
back,
but
it's
my
understanding.
You
could
also
have
some
money
on
your
books
and
and
pay
for
the
call
that
you're
making
and
that
way
you
don't
have
to
make
a
collect
call.
H
Okay,
thank
you
very.
Oh
much
go
ahead
if
at
all
possible.
I
would
also
like
to
be
a
sponsor
on
this
bill.
It.
I
Thank
you
vice
chair.
Thank
you.
Senator
harris
for
this
bill
very
thoughtful
and
timely.
Do
you
by
chance
know
how
much
money
was
spent
on
calls
in
either
2019
or
2020.?
How
much
money
are
we
talking
about?
Please.
C
C
Let's
see
I
do
know,
I
can
tell
you
that,
according
to
the
prison
policy
initiative,
the
highest
cost
of
a
15-minute
call
from
a
local
jail
in
nevada
was
about
14
and
25
cents.
That's
almost
a
dollar
a
minute,
and
so
these
these
charges
can
rack
up
fairly
quickly.
I
Thank
you,
and
I
would
also
like
to
be
added
as
a
co-sponsor
on
this
bill,
and
I
just
appreciate,
with
all
that
you
have
done
this
session
to
be
sensitive
to
these
issues
of
of
justice
and
and
I'm
very,
very
proud
to
to
participate.
Thank
you.
A
Seeing
none,
I
would
just
note
that
I
think
this
is
a
extremely
timely
measure,
especially
with
recent
news
about
resuming
visitation,
especially
within
the
department
of
corrections,
starting
up
on
the
first
after
a
14-month
hiatus
and
the
the
importance
of
contact
with
friends
and
family
members
and
loved
ones
as
part
of
the
rehabilitation
process,
and
you
know
the
the
need
to
have
a
range
of
options
available
for
people,
including
in-person
visitation,
as
well
as
options
for
remote
contact.
So
appreciate
you
bringing
this
measure
forward
with
that.
A
J
K
Hi,
jim
hoffman,
h-o-f-f-m-a-n
nevada,
attorneys
for
criminal
justice,
I'm
also
testifying
today
on
behalf
of
the
clark
and
washoe
county
public
defenders
offices.
We
support
sb
387
for
incarcerated
people.
Phone
calls
are
a
lifeline
to
the
world
with
covid,
it's
impossible
for
incarcerated
parents
to
see
their
children
or
for
spouses
to
see
each
other.
Even
without
kovid.
K
K
Here's
a
specific
real
world
example:
a
15-minute
interstate
jail
call
from
the
henderson
detention
center
cost
three
dollars
and
fifteen
cents.
Then
senator
harris
said
a
regular
phone
call
cost
literally
nothing
on
top
of
our
existing
data
bills,
but
a
15-minute
in-state
jail
call
from
the
henderson
detention
center
and
42
cents,
that's
slightly
less
than
50
cents.
A
minute
prisoners
can
make
as
little
as
50
cents
an
hour
put
yourselves
in
their
shoes.
K
K
A
A
A
C
C
I
just
want
everybody
to
kind
of
close
their
eyes
and
go
back
in
time
to
when
you
had
to
pick
your
your
fab,
five
right,
where
your
minutes
would
be
free
or
where
your
calls
were
free,
if
you
made
them
after
seven
o'clock
right-
and
that
was
the
main
driver
of
your
your
cell
phone
bill
and
your
cost
right.
That
was
the
win
nowadays.
C
Nobody
cares
how
many
you
could
call
long
distance.
You
can
call
interstate
right,
like
the
the
the
cost,
is
really
about
data
these
days
and
there's
a
reason
for
that.
It's
because
technology
has
made
its
way
down
a
path
where
to
deliver
a
voice
minute
is
fairly
cheap.
There
is
no
reason
for
us
to
allow
these
barriers
to
continue
to
be
in
place
for
folks
who
are
in
jail
to
communicate
with
their
families,
especially
when
we
know
that
that
is
one
of
the
best
ways
to
ensure
that
they
don't
return.
A
I
believe
we
may
also
have
mr
lawrence
joining
us
by
zoom,
very
reminiscent
of
yesterday
same
room,
different
committee.
A
So
with
that
some
of
them
in
peter's,
you
may
proceed
whenever
you're
ready.
G
G
This
measure
is
a
result
of
the
work
accomplished
by
the
legislative
committee
for
the
review
and
oversight
of
the
tahoe
regional
planning
agency
and
the
marlette
lake
water
system,
which
is
a
mouthful
during
the
most
recent
interim,
those
familiar
with
the
com.
The
work
of
the
committee,
which
I
don't
know
if
any
of
you
expiring,
mr
wheeler,
would
have
it's
really
a
fantastic
interim
committee.
If
you
have
the
opportunity
to
serve
on
it,
does
bring
you
to
northern
nevada
quite
frequently,
but
you'd
get
to
spend
most
of
your
days
around
lake
tahoe.
G
With
an
estimated
25
percent
increase
in
visitation
expected
by
2035
transportation
around
the
lake
tahoe
area
will
become
an
increasingly
important
issue
to
address
and
a
more
difficult
problem
to
solve
the
longer
we
wait
and
being
a
local
resident
here.
Having
lived
all
of
my
life
in
this
region,
I
can
tell
you
right
now
that
the
issue
is
there.
This
isn't
a
pending
problem
senate
concurrent
resolution.
G
8
re
requests
that
the
existing
bi-state
working
group
on
transportation
work
collaboratively
to
develop
a
list
of
transportation
priorities
and
projects
for
the
lake
tahoe
basin
to
be
accomplished
over
the
next
five
years
or
more.
This
list,
which
will
be
presented
in
the
committee's
first
meeting.
G
During
the
interim
committee,
we
heard
from
some
stakeholders
who
had
gone
through
a
process
of
assessing
the
best
option
for
addressing
transportation
issues
in
the
basin.
They
came
up
with
one
option
that
ultimately
became
unfeasible
because
of
the
pandemic
and
budgetary
issues
related
to
where
we
are
today.
G
It
is
really
a
task
that's
taken
on
by
each
individual,
that
by
each
community
by
each
group
of
individuals
who
are
trying
to
attempt
to
do
the
same
thing,
get
to
work,
get
to
school
get
to
play,
and
I
think
this
request
directs
these
partners
in
pursuing
those
kinds
of
options
and
to
me
in
a
basin
such
as
lake
tahoe,
which
is
so
dynamic,
where
we
have
some
of
the
highest
earning
population
and
some
of
the
lowest
earning
population
living
within
streets
of
each
other.
G
A
L
And
thank
you
vice
chair
watson,
members
of
the
committee.
I
really
do
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
testify
and
support
just
a
couple
of
quick
things.
One
is,
I
really
do
want
to
thank
the
interim
committee
for
all
of
their
attention
to
lake
tahoe
and
all
of
the
issues
and
challenges
that
mason
faces,
and
particularly,
I
wanted
to
thank
assemblywoman
peters
for
all
of
her
time
and
work
that
she
spent
dedicated
lake
tahoe
issues
in
the
interim
and
for
supporting
this
legislation.
L
Yeah.
I
think
it's
pretty
clear
up
at
tahoe,
we've
got
it.
It's
a
tourist-based
economy,
it's
estimated
at
five
billion
dollars.
We
have
two
states
up
there:
five
counties,
a
large
federal
land
manager
and
a
very
large
and
beautiful
lake
right
in
the
middle
of
everything,
we're
at
a
place
where
the
balancing
sustainable
recreation
in
the
economy
with
the
environment
is
getting
fairly
urgent
and
my
department
I
serve
as
the
deputy
director
of
the
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources,
while
it
might
not
seem
readily
apparent.
L
Agencies,
while
not
necessarily
in
the
wheelhouse
resource
departments,
the
recognition
of
the
need
to
balance
that
economy
with
the
environmental
impacts
that
can
occur
with
unmanaged
transportation,
it's
of
very
much
importance
to
our
two
to
state
resource
department.
So
we
have
been
working
with
the
stakeholders.
L
We've
made
very
significant
progress,
but
we
need
to
make
action
and
we
need
to
take
action
soon,
and
so,
as
someone
peters
mentioned
in
her
testimony,
we
need
to
identify
those
priority
projects
and
we
need
to
get
consensus
amongst
all
of
the
stakeholders,
because
collaboration
is
what
really
makes
up
things
happen
up
in
lake
tahoe
and
I
think,
with
this
resolution,
it
really
does
send
the
message
that
time
is
of
the
essence.
N
N
G
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblywoman
peter's
for
the
record.
I'm
gonna
defer
some
of
that
response
to
mr
lawrence,
but
I
do
want
to
point
out
that
this
group
has
been
working
towards
a
solution
for
the
transportation
issue,
particularly
the
congestion
in
the
basin
for
quite
a
while
and
we've
taken
small
chunks
right.
We've,
we've
enhanced
roadways,
we've
enhanced
parking
and
access
in
certain
areas,
we've
invested
in
certain
projects
that
have
have
helped
in
small
ways
in
certain
areas
and
we're
asking
them
to
continue
to
do
that.
Effort.
G
The
the
real
benefit
that
I
see
of
asking
for
them
to
create
to
to
continue
to
to
develop
options
right
now
and
within
the
next
five
years
is
we
have
potential
infrastructure
funding
dollars
coming
in
as
part
of
the
rest,
the
the
rescue
funds
and
and
the
the
federal
government's
investment
in
recovering
from
the
pandemic?
G
And
if
we
can
get
these
shut
these
projects
into
a
condition
of
shovel
readiness,
then
we
can
try
and
put
some
of
those
dollars
to
those
projects.
That
has
been
a
huge
hurdle
for
some
of
these
smaller
projects
in
regions
that
are
very
specific
and
I'm
hoping
to
help
overcome
some
of
that
by
encouraging
that
we
just
get
moving
on
it
and
don't
put
it
aside,
because
the
cost
benefit
analysis
isn't
quite
getting
there
when
we're
talking
about
state
dollars
or
local
dollar
investments.
L
Thank
you,
southern
woman
peters,
and
to
you
vice
chair
watson
through
you
to
assemblyman
levitt.
You
know,
I
believe
you
know
directly
your
question
about
how
long
is
the
expectation
I
know
personally
and
I
do
a
lot
of
work
in
lake
tahoe.
I
you
know
the
way
it
works
up
there.
L
The
people
will
get
together
and
collaborate
for
as
long
as
there's
value
and
there's
progress
and
at
this
point
in
time
in
lake
tahoe,
there's
a
tremendous
amount
of
passion
and
investment
that
people
are
putting
in
their
personal
time
to
start
trying
to
solve
some
of
these
issues
up
there.
So
I
see
this
group
kind
of
moving
forward
really
for
as
long
as
they're
going
to
be
effective.
I
think.
Ideally,
it
is
a
group
that
doesn't
need
to
get
together
in
the
planning
phases
and
we
get
into
implementation.
L
A
couple
of
recent
things.
Yesterday,
at
the
tahoe
regional
planning
agency
governing
board
meeting,
the
trpa
unanimously
adopted
the
next
plan
for
the
regional
transportation
plan
for
the
basin.
It's
also
being
heard
at
the
tahoe
transportation
district.
So
I
think,
amongst
the
major
planning
entities
up
in
the
basin,
there
is
consensus
on
a
vision.
It's
really
the
details
and
the
implementation
schedule.
So
I
think
the
group
will
get
together
for
as
long
as
they
feel
like
they're
effective.
L
I
have
no
expectation
that
people
will
get
together
if
it's
just
time
wasted-
and
you
know
to
date,
the
bi-state
group
has
achieved
a
lot
of
accomplishments.
We've
got
some
work
started
on
the
priorities.
We've
had
some
pilot
projects
roll
out.
We
have
some
memorandums
of
understandings
in
place,
or
maybe
regional
transportation
connecting
the
mega
regions
with
the
tahoe
basin.
L
So
there's
been
a
tremendous
amount
of
momentum,
but
as
far
as
putting
this
group
together
in
this
project
priorities,
I
think
that
could
probably
be
done
pretty
quickly,
but
it's
really
the
implementation,
and
so
the
group
might
have
to
stay
together
just
to
make
sure
that
the
implementation
is
coordinated.
So
that
was
a
very
long-winded
answer
to
your
specific
question.
I
hope
I
answered
it.
N
Thank
you
for
that
thorough
answer.
I
love
thorough
answers.
If
you
know
me,
this
is
a
so
so
what
I'm
getting
is
is
this:
is
a
mechanism
put
in
place
to
help
to
help
groups
prioritize
and
implement
projects?
Is
that
what
I'm
getting.
G
Thank
you
for
the
question,
assemblywoman
peters,
for
the
record,
and
to
express
our
support
for
that
effort,
which
I
think
I
mean
not
expressly
saying
that
we
would
continue
to
be
partners
in
pursuing
legislation
as
necessary
and
being
partners,
and
pursuing
funding
at
different
levels
is
necessary.
This
encourages
that
relationship
that
we're
here
in
support
of
this
effort
also,
and
as
they
need
us,
we
can.
We
continue
to
be
a
partner,
although
not
maybe
of
the
silent
partner
in
the
corner,
who
shows
up
every
interim
to
talk
about
it.
I
Thank
you
vice
chair
and
thank
you,
assemblywoman
peters,
just
a
question.
I'm
trying
to
get.
You
were
talking
about
a
shovel,
ready
project
and
hopefully
having
something
together
by
the
time
this
the
american
recovery
funds
come
down.
Do
you
have
an
idea
of
where
you
all
want
to
begin?
Do
you
have
it
all
the
you
know
the
report
written
all
of
these
things?
Do
you
have?
I
I
have
an
idea
where
you
want
to
start
or
a
particular
area,
and
is
that
connected
with
all
of
these
together
or
are
you
choosing
like
one
place
because
it
looks
like
there
are
several
organizations
together
and
and
have
you
all
as
a
group
identified?
I
G
Thank
you
for
the
question,
assemblywoman
peters,
for
the
record,
I
being
on
the
interim
committee.
G
We
meet
with
the
stakeholders
through
an
a
small
period
of
time
right
once
a
month
or
once
every
couple
of
months
for
a
couple
of
hours,
so
as
partners
we're
not
in
the
legislative
interim
committee,
it's
not
in
the
nitty-gritty
with
them
on
the
planning
and
the
discussion
and
the
reporting
I'm
so
I
mr
lawrence
does
attend
those
meetings
regularly
and
I'm
going
to
ask
him
to
go
into
the
details
of
how
that
planning
process
has
been
going
and
where
the
partners
are
in
their
their
hopes
for
implementation
of
that
of
those
projects.
L
Thank
you
again,
jim
lawrence,
for
the
record
excellent
question.
I
sure
watched
to
you
and
through
you
to
the
assemblywoman,
there
is
general
agreement
on
the
vision
for
the
top
priority
projects
and
to
do
that,
I'm
going
to
step
back.
You
know.
Lake
tahoe
has
got
such
a
unique
transportation
challenge
and
that
it
is,
you
know,
a
very
popular
tourist
destination,
but
it
is
also
home
to
many
workers
and
commuters
either
between
the
valley
and
lake
tahoe,
or
vice
versa.
L
But
we
know
looking
at
the
transportation
system
and
looking
you
know
past
over
the
years.
You
know
the
main
challenges
and
it's
becoming
even
worse,
are
really
the
peak
recreation
visitor
days.
It's
kind
of
that
during
you
know,
peak
ski
seasons
or
during
the
summer
times
at
the
beaches.
The
system
just
becomes
overwhelmed.
L
So
you
know
a
lot
of
the
priorities
we've
been
talking
about
is
how
do
you
address
that
most
urgent
problem,
and
so
we've
looked
at
the
basin
and
sectors?
Basically
so
on
the
nevada
side
or
northern
nevada
side
of
the
lake.
L
We
have
challenges
and
we
need
to
reinvest
in
the
communities
in
the
south
shores
revitalization
project
in
order
to
get
some
micro
transit
set
up
on
the
california
side.
Emerald
bay
has
the
same
problems
and
challenges
as
the
beaches
on
the
east
shore.
So
that's
really
kind
of
how
do
we
manage
for
a
sustainable
recreation
system?
L
The
visitor
experience
there
getting
people
out
of
their
cars,
maybe
taking
shuttles
and
then
the
northwestern
quadrant,
around
tahoe
city?
On
the
california
side,
they
get
certainly
a
lot
of
summer
visitors,
but
that's
where
a
lot
of
the
ski
areas
are,
and
so
the
wintertime
visitor
is
a
real
challenge
there
and
so
placer
county,
which
is
home
to
a
lot
of
the
ski
areas
they're
looking
at
trying
to
get
additional
bus
lanes
in
order
to
give
priority
to
buses
to
get
people
to
ski
areas
back
and
forth.
L
So
there
is
that
vision
of
how
do
you?
How
do
we
take?
You
know
the
worst
of
the
problem
and
try
to
make
it
better,
but
it's
the
details
that
we
really
need
to
get
specific
on
the
phasing
your
question
about.
Okay:
if
there
was
a
pot
of
money
which
project
would
it
go
to
first,
I
think
that's
the
next
step
that
this
concurrent
resolution
does
it
takes
those
larger
priorities
and
really
gets
more
specific.
G
We
have
a
variety
of
I'm
sorry,
sarah
peters,
for
the
record.
We
have
a
variety
of
community
advocates
as
well,
who
are
participating
in
these
conversations.
Our
working
families
up
there
in
particular,
have
different
complaints
about
transportation
and
access
than
our
are
some
our
vacation
families
right,
and
so
they
are
they're
strong
partners
at
the
table.
Talking
about
things
like
the
micro
transit
and
the
the
accessibility
of
resorts
to
the
working
family
homes
even
related
to
the
access
to
homes
up
there,
which
is
not
it's
almost
as
well.
G
I
would
say
it's
worse
than
in
some
of
our
our
other
regions
that
people
are
gentrification
has
happened
and
people
are
getting
pushed
out
of
their
communities,
and
so
how
do
we
keep
those
working
families
connected
to
the
jobs
that
you
know?
We
need
them
for
to
meet
those
goals
of
of
tourism,
but
also
won't
don't
want
to.
G
I
we
have
to
find
that
balance
right,
like
in
those
communities
of
how
do
we
regulate
and
ensure
those
are
all
all
folks
are
taken
care
of,
and
I
also
wanted
to
mention
just
the
other
day.
I
heard
a
story
about
a
new
gondola
service,
going
in
as
an
option
for
transportation,
which
is
mostly
for
the
tourism
base
right,
but
that
gets
people
off
of
the
roads.
So
those
are
all
different
projects
we've
been
seeing
coming
through.
A
Another
resolution
calling
for
the
continuation
and
expansion
of
the
east
shore
trail
project,
which
is
a
multi-modal
trail
that
with
parking
nodes
that
can
help
relieve
some
of
the
congestion
on
on
the
nevada
side
of
the
lake.
So
members
are
there
any
additional
questions.
E
Thank
you,
mr
vice
chair.
I'm
not
sure
what
good
that's
going
to
do.
For
20
years,
I've
been
hearing
about
all
these
projects,
we're
going
to
do
up
there
and
everybody's
going
to
get
together.
I've
had
a
ferry
across
the
lake
we've
had
the
loop
road,
we've
had
a
light
rail
now,
I'm
hearing
for
the
first
time
about
a
gondola
and
I'm
wondering
when
we're
actually
going
to
do
something
and
we're
actually
going
to
be
able
to
get
these
people
together
and
do
something
up
there,
because
that
it
needs
to
be
done.
E
I've
got
no
problem
with
this
resolution.
I
just
want
to
see
us
take
it
to
the
next
step
and
it's
almost
impossible
to
work
with
california
and
the
federal
government
to
get
any
of
this
done,
I'm
wondering
if
the
next
resolution
should.
I
guess
this
is
more
of
a
statement.
Sorry,
mr
vice
chair.
I
wonder
if
the
next
resolution
says
nevada's
just
going
to
do
our
site
ourselves.
Thank
you.
G
While
the
the
impetus
of
this
resolution
is
how
about
we
take
a
smaller
bite
and
look
at
projects,
we
can
actually
get
done
and
set
a
timeline
for
getting
these
to
this
team.
We
have
this
coalition
of
of
people
who
are
invested
in
these
problems
together
to
to
prioritize
and
get
us
on
a
definitive
date,
their
five
top
priorities
to
kind
of
flesh
out
and
ensure
that
we're
all
on
the
same
page.
A
J
O
My
name
is
emily
walsh,
e-m-I-l-y
w-a-l-s-h-
and
I
appear
today
on
behalf
of
the
league
to
safe
lake
tahoe
in
support
of
scr8.
Increasing
traffic
in
the
lake
tahoe
basin
has
negative
impacts
on
the
visitor
experience
and
quality
of
life
of
residents.
Most
importantly,
though,
the
pollution
from
these
cars
impacts,
lake
clarity
and
air
quality.
The
leak
has
been
involved
in
discussion
on
transportation
improvements
for
a
number
of
years,
and
our
executive
director
has
served
on
the
bi-state
working
group.
O
J
P
J-U-L-I-E-R-E-G-A-N,
I'm
chief
of
external
affairs
and
deputy
director
for
the
tahoe
regional
planning
agency,
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
trpa
in
support
of
scr8
trpa,
would
like
to
thank
assemblywoman
peters
for
bringing
this
item
before
you
today,
as
well
as
the
leadership
of
senator
rowdy
and
all
members
of
trpa's
legislative
oversight
committee
who
you've
heard
about
today.
We
appreciate
this
discussion
on
transportation.
P
As
you
know,
tahoe
is
the
backyard
for
northern
nevada's
growing
population,
and
the
covid19
pandemic
demonstrated
the
importance
of
public
recreational
opportunities
for
the
region.
While
many
resort
destinations
were
empty
because
of
covet
closures,
our
beaches,
trails
and
roadways
were
crowded
with
visitors
seeking
refuge
in
the
great
outdoors
congested
hot
spots
around
the
basin
underscored
the
vital
need
for
this
improved
infrastructure
that
we've
all
discussed
today,
acting
in
our
capacity
as
the
federally
designated
metropolitan
planning
organization
or
mpo.
P
As
mr
lawrence
indicated,
our
board
yesterday
voted
unanimously
on
the
update
of
our
regional
transportation
plan,
and
this
is
a
2.4
billion
dollar
plan
calling
for
investment
in
transportation
projects
to
improve
transit
trails
technology
and
community
corridors
like
highway
28
around
the
entire
basin,
and,
as
was
mentioned,
this
bi-state
consultation
will
continue
to
work
in
the
30s
and
we
are
actively
engaged
in
the
driving
consensus
around
funding
solutions
to
implement
the
plan.
So
thank
you
all
for
this
really
important
discussion
that
affects
the
quality
of
life
of
our
residents,
our
commuters
and
our
visitors.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
comments.
Let's
go
on
to
the
next
caller.
A
A
J
A
A
All
right
with
that,
I
believe
the
last
item
on
our
agenda
today
is
a
work
session,
so
we
will
get
started
and
then
we
may
need
to
take
a
brief
pause
while
the
chair
comes
up
before
we
take
final
action.
So
with
that,
I
believe
we
have
miss
seaman
available
to
walk
us
through
the
work
session
document
for
sb17.
B
Thank
you
vice
chair
watts,
for
the
record
katie
seaman,
s-I-e-m-o-n
committee
policy.
Analyst
senate
bill
17
revises
provisions
governing
motor
vehicles.
It
was
first
heard
before
this
committee
on
march,
the
4th
2021
senate
bill
17
revises
provisions
relating
to
driving
schools
by
number
one,
removing
the
requirement
for
a
physical
location
for
online
schools
number
two
requiring
the
production
of
records
at
the
request
of
the
department
of
motor
vehicles
or
dmv
and
number
three
setting
three
years
as
the
retention
periods
for
records.
B
A
A
M
M
The
motion
passes
unanimously
of
the
members
present
and
I
will
assign
the
floor
statement
to
not
everyone's
like
looking
up
saying
me
me
me
me:
I
will
sign
the
floor
statement
to
assemblywoman
brownmay
and
the
last
item
on
our
that's
the
only
item
in
our
work
session.
So
we
will
close
the
work
session
and
the
last
time
on
our
agenda
is
public
comment
yeah.