►
From YouTube: 3/4/2021 - Assembly Committee on Judiciary
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
C
E
G
H
C
D
C
A
Here
we
do
have
everybody
present,
so
we
have
a
quorum.
Thank
you
all
for
being
on
time
this
morning,
greatly
appreciate
that,
and
I
want
to
welcome
the
members
and
members
of
the
public
who
may
be
watching
either
on
the
legislature's
website
or
on
our
youtube
channel.
We
are
now
on
day
32
of
the
81st
session
of
the
nevada
legislature.
A
Before
we
get
started
with
this
morning's
agenda,
just
a
few
housekeeping
matters,
these
will
be
familiar
to
most
of
you
by
now,
but
just
in
case
we
have
new
people
joining
us
today,
I'd
like
to
go
over
these
one.
If
you
were
on
the
zoom,
if
you
could
please
mute
when
you're,
not
speaking,
that'll
help
with
the
audio
feedback
and
for
our
presenters
who
are
on
zoom
today,
if
you
could
remember
to
state
your
name
each
time
before
you
speak,
that'll
help
our
committee.
Secretaries
prepare
the
minutes.
A
If
you
forget
to
do
that,
I
will
try
to
remind
you.
I
know
it's
not
a
natural
thing
to
do.
We
do
expect
courtesy
and
respect
in
our
interactions
with
one
another.
We
don't
always
agree
on
policy,
and
I
think
this
is
probably
a
day
where
there'll
be
some
pretty
serious
disagreements
about
the
policy
in
front
of
the
committee.
That's
perfectly
okay,
but
we
need
to
make
sure
we're
being
respectful
of
each
other
of
the
legislative
process.
A
So
please,
in
your
testimony
and
comments
today
if
we
could
limited
to
the
policy
in
front
of
us,
that
would
be
most
appreciated
and
then
finally,
many
members
are
using
multiple
devices
to
access
this
meeting.
We
have
ipads
phones,
laptops
extra
monitors,
so
please
don't
see
it
as
a
sign
of
disrespect
if
members
appear
to
be
looking
away
most
likely
they're
looking
at
exhibits
that
are
uploaded
online.
A
So
with
that
behind
us
members
we're
going
to
go
to
our
agenda
today,
as
you
can
see,
we
only
really
have.
We
have
one
bill
on
the
agenda
today
and
so
at
this
time
I'm
going
to
formally
open
assembly
bill
141
assembly
bill
141
revises
provisions
relating
to
evictions
and
before
we
get
started
for
the
members
and
members
of
the
public,
I
did
want
to
note
that
there
are
a
couple
of
different
amendments
up
on
nellis.
A
One
is
proffered
by
the
sponsor
of
the
bill,
so
that
obviously
is
a
friendly
amendment
and
then
there's
also
one
that
has
been
put
forth
by
the
opposition
so
that
I
assume
that
one's
not
a
friendly
amendment,
but
we'll
hear
from
the
sponsor
on
that.
So
I
wanted
to
welcome
back
to
the
assembly
judiciary,
committee,
assemblyman,
howard
watts,
who
served
on
the
committee
last
session.
We
sure
miss
you
here
in
the
assembly,
judiciary,
committee,
assemblyman
watts
and
welcome
you
back
along
with,
I
believe
your
two
co-presenters
miss
bortolin
and
mr
birch
told
so.
A
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair
members
of
the
committee,
it's
very
good
to
be
back
in
the
judiciary
committee.
Thank
you
for
the
the
warm
welcome
for
the
record.
I
am
assemblyman
howard
watts.
H
I
represent
district
15
in
central
east
las
vegas
and,
as
noted
with
me,
at
the
virtual
table,
are
bailey
borderland
and
jim
birchhold
with
the
legal
aid
center
of
southern
nevada,
with
the
chair's
permission
I'll
give
some
opening
remarks
and
then
I'll
turn
it
over
to
them
to
walk
you
through
all
through
the
bill,
then
we'll
be
glad
to
take
any
questions
that
committee
members
have
so
assembly
bill.
41
really
is
aimed
at
preventing
homelessness,
and
it
does
that
in
two
ways.
H
Second,
it
provides
more
time
for
longer
term
runners
that
are
facing
removal
for
no
cause
to
find
substitute
housing
in
today's
tough
market
as
a
result
of
the
pandemic,
nevada
is
on
the
cliff
of
a
major
eviction
crisis
when
centers
and
during
the
pandemic
found
that
over
half
a
million
nevadans
are
a
potential
risk
of
eviction
due
to
the
pandemics,
and
as
many
of
you
are
aware,
the
current
protections
that
are
in
place
on
evictions
are
set
to
expire
on
march.
H
31St,
communities
of
color
will
be
hit
the
hardest,
making
up
two-thirds
of
nevada's
renters
according
to
the
gwen
center.
These
communities,
as
we
know,
have
also
been
hit
the
hardest
by
the
health
and
economic
impacts
of
covet
19.
they're,
disproportionately
cost
burdened
and
have
had
homeownership
pushed
out
of
reach.
Job
loss
and
income
reduction
puts
these
households
in
an
even
more
precarious
position.
H
The
failure
to
pay
rent
during
the
pandemic
is
directly
related
to
our
staggering
unemployment
numbers.
During
this
crisis,
unemployment
has
reached
historic
highs
during
the
pandemic,
with
npr
reporting
last
may
that
nevada
had
the
highest
unemployment
rate
in
the
nation
and
the
highest
rate.
Since
the
bureau
of
labor
statistics
started
tracking
this
data
in
1976.
H
folks
who
work
in
our
tourism
and
hospitality
industry,
which,
as
we
know,
is
the
backbone
of
our
economy,
especially
in
southern
nevada,
were
hit
the
hardest,
with
a
nearly
41
percent,
year-over-year
loss
of
jobs
at
hotels,
casinos
and
restaurants,
and
in
september
of
2020,
the
reno
gazette
journal
estimated
that
38
of
households
that
rent
were
experiencing
unemployment-
and
I
just
want
to
put
a
finer
point
on
that-
I
mean
that
was
about
six
months
ago,
more
than
one
in
three
households
that
rent
had
no
employment
from
it
from
employment
income
evictions
are
often
the
result
of
poverty,
but
they
are
also
a
cause
of
poverty.
H
People
who
have
an
eviction
on
their
record
experience
greater
financial
insecurity
and
housing
insecurity.
People
want
to
get
back
to
work
and
want
to
move
forward
with
our
lives.
We
all
do
and
it's
critical
to
ensure
that
as
we
recover
from
this
pandemic,
that
there
is
not
a
permanent
mark
on
their
records,
that's
creating
a
barrier
to
prevent
folks
from
finding
new
housing.
H
You'll
hear
more
about
this
from
legal
aid,
but
it's
common
to
see
seniors
on
fixed
incomes
living
month
to
month
in
rentals,
they
may
start
with
a
year-long
lease
and
then
stay
on
in
the
same
place
for
an
additional
three
four
five,
even
ten
years
on
a
month-to-month
tenancy
now
imagine
after
you've
lived
in
a
place
so
long
having
to
pack
up
your
entire
life
and
figure
out
where
to
move
and
what
your
next
steps
are
going
to
be
within
30
days.
H
I
think
that
people
deserve
a
little
bit
of
extra
time
to
figure
out
what
their
next
steps
are,
and
so
this
bill
will
extend
those
timelines
from
30
days
to
60
days
for
people.
Who've
lived
in
a
property
for
one
to
three
years
and
90
days
for
people
who
have
lived
in
a
property
longer
than
three
years,
and
that's
it.
That's
all
this
bill
does-
and
I
want
to
take
a
moment
to
just
also
be
really
clear
about
what
this
bill
does
not
do,
because
I've
received
some
emails
from
concerned.
H
H
It
does
not
change
the
summary
eviction
process
or
prevent
it
in
any
way
which
you
know
when
somebody
fails
to
pay
out
after
these
protections
have
expired.
If
somebody
is
a
nuisance,
if
somebody
is
damaging
a
property,
there
is
a
an
expedited
summary
eviction
process
that
this
bill
does
not
modify
at
all.
H
Also,
if
an
owner
has
a
lease
with
a
renter,
this
does
not
tack
additional
time
onto
the
end
of
that
lease,
stable
housing
has
a
range
of
positive
benefits.
A
2016
study
by
the
enterprise
community
partners
found
that
stable
housing
reduces
medicaid
spending
by
12
percent.
Primary
care
use,
increased
20
percent
and
emergency
room
visits,
which
are
more
expensive
and
more
serious
drop
by
18.
H
Keeping
people
in
stable
housing
is
a
vital
tool,
of
course,
in
protecting
public
health
and
fighting
copit19,
which
is
why
we've
been
enacting
these
protections
to
keep
people
from
being
evicted
during
the
crisis
in
the
first
place.
H
I
believe
that
the
two
measures
in
ab-141
are
critical
to
helping
people
get
back
on
their
feet
and
giving
them
the
opportunity
to
secure
new
housing.
As
we
come
out
of
this
crisis,
I
also
just
want
to
acknowledge
a
couple
of
things:
real,
quick.
H
I
have
not
agreed
to
that
amendment,
but
we're
continuing
to
talk
and
and
we'll
see
if
we
can
get
to
the
point
of
an
agreement-
and
I
also
just
want
to
note
briefly
on
that
point-
that
this
bill
is
not
to
point
a
finger
at
or
say
that
property
owners
have
done
anything
wrong.
Necessarily,
we
know
that
everyone
is
hurting
financially
in
this
crisis,
and
that
includes
property
owners,
and
I
know
that
the
actors
out
there
who
have
tried
to
reach
out
and
work
with
tenants
to
address
their
issues.
H
This
is
just
making
sure
that
anybody
who
slips
through
the
cracks
during
this
unprecedented
crisis
is
able
to
get
back
up
on
their
feet.
H
I
also
just
want
to
briefly-
and
it
will
be
covered
more
by
the
other
presenters
with
the
amendment
we
put
forward
really
looks
at
just
clarifying
the
language,
so
it
can
be
easily
implemented
by
the
courts,
and
I
appreciate
conversations
with
judge
zaragoza
that
allowed
us
to
make
sure
that
the
language
was
honed
so
that
it
could
be
implemented
in
the
most
efficient
way
by
the
courts.
J
Thank
you,
assemblyman,
chair
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
jim
burchtold.
I
am
a
directing
attorney
with
legal
aid
center
of
southern
nevada.
Thank
you
very
much
for
allowing
me
to
present
with
assemblyman
watts
this
morning.
J
So
as
assemblyman
watts
did
a
really
good
job
presenting
this
bill.
So
I
don't
really
have
a
lot
to
cover,
but,
as
he
said,
this
bill
really
only
does
two
things,
and
I
will
so.
I
will
walk
you
through
those
two
things,
starting
with
section
two
of
the
bill,
which
is
the
provision
that
allows
for
the
automatic
sealing
of
certain
types
of
evictions,
non-payment,
evictions
that
were
issued
during
the
pandemic,
and
we
will
be
working
off
the
conceptual
amendment
that
assemblyman
watts
submitted.
J
Now
nevada
law
already
allows
for
the
automatic
sealing
of
certain
types
of
evictions.
This
happens
automatically.
The
tenant
doesn't
need
to
do
anything
for
other
types
of
evictions.
The
court
has
the
ability
to
seal
those
evictions.
If
the
tenant
files
a
motion,
the
court
can
seal
an
eviction,
for
example,
when
the
eviction
was
the
result
of
something
that
was
out
circumstances
beyond
the
tenant's
control.
J
So
what
this
section
two
would
do
would
extend
the
automatic
ceiling
that
is
already
in
place
to
non-payment
evictions
that
have
occurred
during
the
pandemic,
so,
basically
any
eviction
from
march
20
2020
forward
until
the
state
of
emergency
stops
would
be
automatically
sealed
now.
Why
is
this
important?
It's
important
for
a
couple
of
reasons.
First,
an
eviction
can
be
a
huge
black
mark
on
a
tenant's
record
that
can
prevent
them
from
finding
new
housing.
J
Some
landlords
will
simply
not
rent
to
someone
who
has
an
eviction
on
their
record,
and
we
are
already
seeing
this
for
those
evictions
that
have
snuck
through
all
of
the
protections
in
place.
We
are
already
seeing
tenants
who
are
finding
it
difficult
to
find
new
housing.
So
the
second
reason
is
this
is
important.
This
is
this
section
two
is
important
is
because
evictions
have
been
sneaking
through
the
protections
that
were
in
place
now,
the
the
during
the
pandemic.
There
have
been
broad
protections
for
tenants.
J
But
those
protections
those
moratoriums
were
incredibly
confusing.
There
were
federal
moratoriums,
there
were
state
moratoriums,
those
moratoriums
would
shift,
they
would
morph.
So
it
was
difficult
for
housing
experts
to
keep
on
top
of
the
current
status
of
the
moratoriums
and
it
was
impossible
for
the
tenants.
So
what
the
tenants
heard
was
there
is
a
moratorium
in
place.
So
if
I
receive
an
eviction
notice,
I
don't
need
to
do
anything.
J
So
a
lot
of
evictions
were
granted
by
default
because
the
tenant
didn't
know
that
they
had
to
respond.
There
was
also
a
huge
problem
with
the
rental
assistance
getting
into
the
hands
of
the
tenants.
That
was
a
herculean
task
administratively,
so
a
lot
of
tenants
were
evicted
while
they
were
waiting
for
their
rental
assistance
application
to
be
approved.
J
So
that's
really
what
this
bill
is
targeting
for
those
evictions
that
snuck
through
the
cracks
non-payment
evictions
would
be
automatically
sealed
to
allow
the
nevadans
who
are
facing
that
black
mark
on
their
record
to
move
on
with
their
lives,
get
back
on
their
feet
now.
The
second
thing
in
section
one,
the
second
thing
that
this
bill
does
is
extend
the
time
frame
for
no
cause
evictions,
so
that
will
make
more
sense.
J
J
Now
in
those
situations,
if
the
tenant
pays
monthly,
if
the
tenant
is
a
month-to-month
tenant,
the
landlord
can
issue
a
30-day
notice
and
evict
the
tenant.
If
the
tenant
is
a
weekly
tenant,
meaning
the
tenant
pays
their
rent
every
week,
then
the
landlord
can
issue
a
seven
day
notice
and
evict
the
tenant.
J
These
are
not
temporary
tenancies
we're
talking
about.
We
have
seen
situations
where
tenants
can
be
on
the
property
for
10
15
years,
while
in
a
month
to
month,
tenancy
so
for
a
tenant
who
has
done
nothing
wrong
to
all
of
all
of
a
sudden,
receive
a
30-day
notice
saying
you
have
to
be
out
by
30
days
that
can
be
in
incredibly
difficult
and
sometimes
impossible,
especially
for
tenants
who
are
seniors
tenants
who
are
disabled
or
have
some
health
issues
or
tenants
who
are
on
fixed
incomes.
J
So
during
that
30
days,
what
they're
being
asked
to
do
is
find
a
new
place
that
they
can
afford
that
meets.
Their
needs
is
close
to
their
doctors,
to
the
bus
line,
to
to
schools,
to
figure
out
how
to
physically
move
a
lifetime's
worth
of
possessions,
and
to
do
this
all
while
trying
to
come
up
with
a
first
and
last
month's
rent
and
a
deposit,
because
remember
during
that
period,
the
tenant
is
still
paying
rent
to
the
landlord
and
the
landlord.
J
The
current
landlord
and
the
landlord
has
their
deposit
so
for
tenants
on
a
fixed
income
trying
to
even
come
up
with
that
money
to
find
a
new
place
to
live
is
incredibly
difficult.
So
what
this
bill
would
do.
It
would
extend
those
timelines
for
long-term
tenants
who
have
done
nothing
wrong
so
for
tenants
who
have
lived
in
the
property
more
than
one
year,
one
to
three
years
it
would
they.
It
would
require
a
60-day
notice
to
evict
those
tenants
for
tenants
who
have
lived
in
the
property
more
than
three
years.
J
It
would
require
a
90-day
notice
to
those
tenants.
Those
timelines
are
not
out
of
sync
with
what
other
states
are
doing
now,
as
I
would
just
like
to
touch
on.
Finally,
what
assemblyman
watts
noted
there's
been
some
confusion
and
misinformation
about
what
this
bill
does
again.
What
this
bill
does
not
do
is
give
tenants
the
right
to
live
in
the
property
for
free
during
that
60-day
period,
that
30-day
60-period
day
period
90-day
period
the
tenant
has
to
pay
rent.
J
If
the
tenant
doesn't
pay
rent,
then
the
landlord
can
evict
the
tenant
for
non-payment
of
rent,
which
is
a
totally
separate
notice
and
process
just
like
any
other
tenant.
What
this
bill
also
does
not
do.
It
does
not
automatically
extend
every
12-month
lease.
There
have
been
some
suggestions
that
well,
if
the,
if
there's
a
12
month
lease
that
means
the
tenants
on
the
property
for
12
months,
which
means
they
get
an
additional
60
days.
That
is
absolutely
incorrect.
J
J
This
bill
does
not
require
landlords
to
house
problem
tenants.
In
fact,
it
does
just
the
opposite.
We're
talking
about
the
tenants
who
have
done
nothing
wrong.
These
are
no
cause
evictions,
meaning
the
tenant
is
paying
their
rent.
The
tenant
is
complying
with
the
terms
of
whatever
agreement
they
have
with
the
landlord.
The
landlord
simply
wants
the
property
back
and
finally,
does
this
apply
to
every
tenant?
J
No
again,
it
only
applies
in
the
narrow
slice
of
tenants
where
the
tenant
never
had
a
lease
agreement
or
the
tenant
had
a
lease
agreement
that
has
expired,
and
but
the
tenant
has
lived
on
the
property
for
a
long
term
at
the
consent
of
the
landlord.
So
what
this
really
does?
It
just
extends
the
time
frames
to
a
realistic
point
that
the
tenant
has
the
ability
to
find
a
new
place
in
a
tight
housing
market
to
arrange
for
the
physical
move
of
all
their
possessions
and
to
come
up
with
the
money
to
make
that
happen.
J
So
I
will
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have.
A
G
A
K
Thank
you
chair,
sorry
about
that.
My
is
having
trouble
with
my
mouse
and
thank.
C
You
all
for
the
presentation,
can
you
give
us
just
basically
a
little
primer
and
refresh
our
recollection
on
summary
evictions.
G
Sure
bailey
bortlin
for
the
record,
so
I
think
that's
where
a
lot
of
the
confusion
is
that
there's
a
lot
of
different
types
of
evictions,
a
lot
of
roads
to
evictions
and
we're
dealing
with
different
pieces
and
different
ones.
So,
while
the
record
sealing
piece
is
dealing
with
non-payment,
the
no
cost
piece
is
not
dealing
with
non-payment,
but
summary
evictions
occur
when
somebody
falls
behind
on
rent
and
as
soon
as
one
day
after
they
are
delinquent
on
rent.
G
The
landlord
can
issue
a
seven
day
notice
to
pay
rent
or
quit
is
what
we
call
it.
That
is
important
in
the
context
of
the
record
sealing
piece.
So
in
that
seven
days
the
tenant
has
the
ability
to
become
current
on
rent.
So
they
have
an
legal
opportunity
to
tender
that
rent
and
prevent
the
eviction
from
occurring.
G
They
have
the
opportunity
to
leave
the
property,
in
which
case
an
eviction
won't
be
necessary
to
be
executed
against
them
because
they
will
have
left
the
property
or
they
can
file
an
answer
with
the
court,
and
that
is
where
summary
eviction
is
very
unique
to
nevada
and
that
the
tenant
has
to
initiate.
We
call
it
filing
an
answer,
but
the
tenant
is
initiating
the
court
proceeding
and
it
is
actually
the
first
filing
with
the
court
happens
by
the
person
who
wishes
to
assert
a
defense.
G
If
you
do
none
of
those
three
things,
if
you
do
not
leave,
if
you
do
not
become
current
on
rent
and
you
do
not
file
an
answer,
the
landlord
can
move
to
have
the
evictions
summarily
granted
without
a
hearing,
and
then
that
would
get
sent
to
the
constable
who
would
effectuate
the
lockout
at
the
property,
and
so
that's
a
complicated
process,
and
that's
where
people
have
fallen
through
the
non-payment
of
rent
evictions
in
this
state
of
emergency.
G
So
while
there
have
been
eviction
protections
in
place,
it
requires
the
tenant
to
still
respond
to
that
notice
to
find
out
that
there's
a
declaration
that
they
need
to
fill
out
and
give
to
their
landlord
and
then
file
it
into
the
court
with
their
answer
with
their
proof
of
service.
And
if
they
just
heard
there
was
a
moratorium
and
didn't
do
those
things.
Those
are
the
people
who
now
have
non-payment
of
rent
eviction
records,
despite
the
protections
that
have
been
in
place.
H
I
would
also
just
briefly
add
on
to
that
that
summary
of
the
summary
eviction
process
is
also
available
for
some
of
the
other
issues
that
were
brought
up
in
our
testimony,
including
that
breach
of
the
lease
agreement
becoming
a
nuisance,
and
this,
I
think,
often
is
mentioned
in
the
context
of
somebody-
who's
damaging
or
harming
the
property,
and
I
also
just
wanna
again
be
extremely
clear
that
the
provisions
in
section
two
of
the
bill
only
apply
to
an
eviction
related
to
non-payment
of
rent
and,
in
fact
many
of
the
eviction
protections
that
have
been
put
in
place
have
also
been
specific
to
non-payment
to
the
financial
burden.
H
A
You're
welcome
so
I
have
a
number
of
questions
so
far
and
I'll
just
give
the
order.
So
everyone
knows
and
I'm
sure
we
have
some
additional
ones,
but
we
have
vice
chair
wynn,
assemblywoman,
bilbray,
axelrod,
assemblyman,
wheeler,
assemblywoman,
krasner,
assemblywoman,
gonzalez
and
assemblywoman
hanson
is
who
I
have
on
the
list.
So
far
I
see
us
only
woman
kasama
has
her
hand
up
as
well.
So
I'm
going
to
add
her
to
the
list
and
assemblywoman
hardy.
A
C
Yes,
in
reviewing
section
one
where
you
have
these
amended
or
new
proposed,
like
dates
and
timelines
for
how
they
are,
can
you
tell
me
a
little
bit
about
how
you
drafted
that
did
we
look
at
best
practices?
I
know
that
in
this
body,
unfortunately,
it
seems
like
a
lot
of
times.
We
arbitrarily
pick
numbers.
I
don't
know
if
the
previous
numbers
that
were
like
listed
in
there
like
the
seven
days
or
ten
days
or
any
of
those
were
arbitrary
or
if
there's
any
kind
of
like
data
or
evidence-based,
like
practice.
Behind
that.
G
Sure
bailey
bortling
for
the
record.
That
is
a
great
question.
I,
from
a
housing
policy
perspective,
I
would
actually
say
the
progressive
trend
that
is
occurring.
Housing
advocates
are
working
towards
are
just
cause
evictions,
so
there
are
actually
a
lot
of
localities
and
one
state
who
has
done
away
with
no-cause
eviction,
and
that
is
kind
of
the
next
frontier
of
you
should
have
to
have
a
reason
to
be
able
to
evict
somebody.
G
G
Evictions
are
a
little
bit
difficult
when
you
look
at
the
data
because
it
is
such
a
state-by-state
beast,
but
a
lot
of
states
do
offer
60
days
what
we're
doing
differently
is
creating
a
tiered
system
so,
where
a
lot
of
states
just
have
60
days
across
the
board,
we
put
in
something
that
we
thought
was
more
justifiable
based
on
actual
circumstances,
and
I
think
the
other
piece
to
this
is.
G
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
the
courts,
but
court
capacity
and
the
systems
capacities
that
we're
dealing
with,
and
so
something
that
we
see
a
lot
at
legal
aid.
Is
people
get
a
30
days
and
it
is
just
not
doable.
C
I
I
just
have
some
concerns.
I
was
curious
if
there
was
like
any
evidence
based
on
those
numbers.
Obviously
you
know
we
have
a
lot
further
to
go
potentially
in
this
realm
and
then
this
space.
So
I
appreciate
you,
you
know
elaborating
you
know
getting
away
from
no-cause
evictions
into
a
more
reasonable
like
realm.
Obviously,
that's
not
what
this
bill
does
today.
C
I
have
concerns
enough
that
I
want
to
put
out
like
ideas
for
people
to
be
bad
players
and
have
bad
intent,
but
what
would
stop
someone
from
like
just
making
their
tendencies
always
like
11
months,
to
avoid
this?
To
avoid
like
longer
time
periods.
H
Thank
you
for
that
question.
Vice
chair,
this
is
assemblyman
watts
for
the
record.
I
want
to
address
both
both
your
initial
question,
as
well
as
your
follow-up
and
I'll
start
with
the
follow-up
just
to
go
back
to
another
point.
You
know
this
does
not
apply
to
lease
agreements,
and
so
I
want
to
make
that
extremely
clear
for
the
record.
So
if
you
have
a
12-month
lease
agreement,
all
the
provisions
of
section
1
they
do
not
grant
an
additional
30,
60
or
90
days
at
the
end
of
that
lease
agreement.
H
Under
the
terms
of
that
lease
ending.
If
a
a
property
owner
wishes
to
remove
the
tenant
at
the
end
of
that
time,
they
can
do
so
so
creating
an
11-month
lease
doesn't
have
any
impact
on
avoiding
the
provisions
of
assembly
bill
141
compared
with
the
12
month
lease.
It
is
only
once
the
tenant
goes
into
a
month
to
month,
rent
situation
which
again,
as
noted
they
may
do
from
the
very
start.
H
They
may
never
have
a
lease
agreement,
or
they
may
continue
month
to
month
after
a
lease
agreement
ends
and
that
it's
at
that
point
that
these
notice
provisions
take
effect
so
there
there
is
no
in
reason
to
reduce
a
lease
term
by
one
month,
because
at
the
end
of
a
12-month
a
year-long
lease
a
tenant
can
still
be
asked
to
move
out
promptly.
H
At
the
end
of
that
lease,
this
bill
does
not
apply
to
that
situation
in
terms
of
providing
an
additional
time
and
what
I'd
say
to
your
first
question
about
timelines,
is
many
states
still
have
timelines?
You
know
there
is.
There
are
some
that
are
moving
towards
an
end
to
no
cause
evictions
and
towards
a
just
cause
requiring
cause
for
any
removal
of
a
tenant,
and
it
really
varies.
There
are
several
states
that
are
like
nevada,
which
essentially
tie
it
to
the
term,
so
you'll
see
in
our
current
statute.
H
Essentially,
if
it's
week
to
week,
then
you
get
a
week
seven
days.
If
it's
month
to
month
you
get
a
month
or
30
days.
There
are
a
number
of
states.
I
think
five
other
states
currently
are
doing
what
we're
proposing
in
this
bill,
which
is
actually
tying
the
notice
to
the
length
of
residency
in
order
to
provide
an
additional
cushion
for
longer
term,
more
stable
tenants,
and
then
there
are
also
there
are
a
couple
of
other
states
that
have
90
or
more
days
of
notice
in
place
with
certain
conditions.
H
There
are
also
some
states
like
delaware
and
georgia
that
are
just
a
flat
60
days
across
the
board.
So
just
like
many
other
laws
across
the
states,
there's
there's
a
lot
of
variability,
but
the
the
provisions
of
this
are
well
within
what
has
been
established
in
other
states
across
the
us.
C
C
Thank
you
chair,
and
you
know
thank
you
for
bringing
this
bill.
I
think
it's
an
important
conversation
that
we
have.
I
did
just
want
to
say
on
the
record
that
when
I
heard
about
the
eviction
moratorium
and
then
saw
in
the
news
or
read
in
the
paper
that
people
were
being
evicted,
I
was
confused
and
I'm
a
legislator.
G
Sure
thank
you
for
the
question.
Bailey
bordelin
for
the
record,
so
it
has
been
a
complicated
year
and
the
eviction
protections
have
ebbed
and
flowed
through
different
forms.
G
But
what
has
been
pretty
consistent
throughout
most
of
the
year
and
where
we
are
right
now,
is
that
the
cdc
at
the
federal
level
issued
a
guidance
that
there
was
an
eviction
moratorium
for
those
who
qualified
and
in
order
to
figure
out
who
qualified
tenants.
Who
did
so?
You
have
fallen
behind
on
rent
because
of
covid
and
that's
why
you're
unable
to
pay
your
rent
and
you
have
nowhere.
You
could
go
because
again.
This
is
a
social
safety
net
issue
for
the
community.
G
If
we're
moving
people
out
of
their
homes,
we
don't
have
capacity
and
it's
not
safe
to
be
overcrowding,
our
shelters
and
our
streets,
so
that
declaration
system
is
being
used
nationally.
Governor
sislex
eviction,
protections
that
are
also
in
place
right
now
mirror
that
concept
so
you're
qualifying
for
both
essentially
you're.
Following
the
same
process.
You
can
use
the
cdc
declaration.
G
You
just
need
to
google
it
it's
on
the
cdc's
website.
It's
on
the
governor's
website.
It's
on
legal
aids
website
and
we
have
done
what
I
think
is
a
tremendous
community
education
outreach
campaign
to
try
to
reach
people
to
let
them
know.
This
is
how
the
eviction
protections
work.
G
So
I
just
saw
the
additional
proposed
amendment
online
this
morning
and
I
want
to
speak
to
a
little
bit
why
that
doesn't
work,
because
what
they're
proposing
is
that
only
people
who
did
file
in
that
declaration
to
the
courts
are
the
people
who
would
have
their
records
sealed
and
that's
problematic
for
me,
because
a
lot
of
people
didn't
know
that
they
needed
to
do
that
declaration
process.
They
thought
they
were
protected,
and
so
that's
why
we're
instead
going
for
people
who
fell
through
the
cracks
because
they
didn't
know
to
do
that.
G
G
But
we
do
think
that
just
pulling
the
non-payment
of
rent
eviction
records
to
automatically
seal
is
not
going
to
catch
everyone
that
was
affected
by
the
pandemic
and
was
evicted,
because
these
protections
at
the
state
and
federal
level
have
ebbed
and
slowed
and
constantly
changed.
So
there
were
points
in
the
last
year
where
non-payment
of
rents
weren't
going
forward,
but
you
could
evict
someone
for
no
cause
using
the
no
cause
process,
because
the
non-payment
of
rent
lane
was
marked
off,
so
those
people
unfortunately,
still
won't
be
automatically
helped
by
this.
G
But
because
of
the
process
that
we
did
put
in
place
together,
assemblyman
bilbray
axelrod
anyone
can
petition
to
have
their
records
sealed.
So
our
hope
is
that
we'll
do
the
bulk
of
the
people
who
need
it,
who
fell
through
the
cracks
in
one
click,
reduce
that
burden
on
the
court
to
do
it
on
a
case-by-case
basis
and
then
we'll
go
back
to
a
community
education
campaign
and
try
to
reach
other
people
and
say
hey
if
you
were
affected
by
covet.
G
If
these
circumstances
are
out
of
your
control,
here's
what
you
need
to
do
to
get
your
eviction
records
sealed.
So
it's
still
going
to
be
a
lot
of
work,
but
I
don't
think
that
it's
overly
broad
and
that
summary
eviction
process
that
I
spoke
to
it
does
require
an
opportunity
to
become
current
on
rent
during
the
seven
days
or
to
leave
the
property.
And
if
you
do
either
of
those
two
things
you
did
not
end
up
with
a
non-payment
of
rent
eviction
record.
M
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
I've
been
listening
and
I,
while
I
had
some
questions,
I
also
need
a
little
clarification
here.
I
guess
from
the
sponsor.
We
keep
talking
about
the
pandemic,
the
pandemic,
the
pandemic
and
it's
causing
this,
and
this
is
what's
hurting,
but
I'm
keep
looking
at
the
bill
and
I
don't
see
anything
where
this
ends
when
the
pandemic
is
over
or
when
the
state
of
emergency
is
over.
So
this
goes
on
into
perpetuity,
so
I
don't
think
it's
a
pandemic
bill,
but
those
aren't
that's
not
my
questions.
M
My
question
for
miss
portal
and
or
mr
park
told
what
I'm
seeing
in
my
district
is
you'll,
find
that
a
lot
of
you
know.
Mom
and
pop
type
landlords
have
homes
that
they
use
for
their.
M
The
house
is
sold
and
all
of
a
sudden,
it's
no
longer
a
rental
house,
so
the
tenant,
you
know,
we've
we're
pushing
the
tenant
out
and
instead
of
going
through
a
procedure
where
maybe
the
landlord
could
work
with
the
tenant
to
get
that
money
in,
especially
with
all
the
programs
that
we've
put
in
place.
M
You
know
for
rental
assistance,
so
another
problem
that
I've
seen
and
I
wonder
how
you'll
address
this
is
that
if
I
were
renting,
let's
say
or
leasing
a
home
and
the
lease
comes
to
an
end
and
it
goes
to
month
to
month.
I
would
now,
with
this
bill
in
in
place,
go
to
the
tenant
and
say:
okay,
if
we
stay
on
month
to
month,
I'm
going
to
raise
your
rent
by
40,
because
obviously
I
now
have
eviction
problems.
If
you
don't
pay.
L
M
If
you
go
into
another
lease,
I
will
only
raise
your
rent
by
20,
so
I
see
problems
for
for
the
tenants
here
where,
in
normal
normal
times,
when
the
lease
is
up
most
landlords,
that
I've
seen-
including
myself,
have
you
know
just
let
the
tenant
continue
on
with
the
current
rent
and
because
they're
good
tenants.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblyman
wheeler,
this
assemblyman
watts
for
the
record
and
yeah
a
few
different
questions
and
and
concerns
in
there
and
I'll
try
and
as
many
of
them
as
I
can.
First,
you
know
again
I'll
just
say
that
the
so
if
you
first
asked
a
question
about
what's
related
to
the
pandemic,
I'm
glad
to
clarify
that
and
section
two
is
specifically
limited
to
the
declaration
of
emergency
by
the
governor.
H
So
the
automatic
ceiling
will
only
happen
for
evictions
for
non-payment
of
rent
that
occur,
while
the
governor's
emergency
declaration
is
in
effect.
As
soon
as
that
ends,
the
provisions
of
section
2
will
no
longer
apply
for
automatic
sealing.
So
when
we
talk
about
the
impact
of
the
pandemic
on
on
folks,
we're
really
talking
about
section
2.,
the
changes
to
section
1
are
not
limited
to
the
pandemic,
so
that
is.
That
is
a
a
permanent
application
to
your
questions.
H
I
I
would
need
a
little
bit
of
clarity
about
why
you'd
be
looking
at
rent
increases
of
varying
amounts
or
or
why
the
the
provisions
of
this
bill
would
lead
a
a
property
owner
to
sell
instead
of
continuing
to
rent,
particularly
because,
as
you
said,
this
applies
to
good,
stable,
tenants
and
again.
H
That
notice
period
is
not
does
not
end
the
obligation
for
a
renter
to
pay
so
currently
under
law.
Right
now,
if
you
have
a
tenant,
this
lease
has
ended
and
you're
going
month
to
month.
If
for
no
for
any
reason
you
just
want
to
get
the
property
back,
then
you
give
them
30
days
notice.
H
Under
the
provisions
of
this
bill,
you
instead
would
give
them
60
days
notice,
as
was
said
before.
If
they
find
another
place
to
live,
and
they
want
to
move
out,
then
they
can
let
you
know,
and
they
can
move
out
within
the
30
days
or
with
or
less
just
like.
Currently,
if
somebody
has
30
days
notice,
they
can
move
out
sooner
than
that
also
they
have
to
pay
rent,
so
they'd
have
to
pay
rent
for
that
last
month.
H
Once
you
give
them
that
notice
under
this
they'd
have
to
pay
rent
for
those
last
two
months,
and
if
they
do
not,
you
can
initiate
summary
eviction,
which
has
a
completely
different.
It's
a
completely
different
part
of
statute,
a
completely
different
timeline,
and
you
can
have
that
tenant
removed
within
a
matter
of
days.
M
Okay,
well,
the
reason
that
people
would
sell
is
because
of
the
housing
market
right
now,
if
they've
got
a
good,
steady,
tenant
coming
in
all
the
time,
they
don't
have
to
worry
about
an
eviction,
etc.
M
You
know
where
the
rent's
coming
in
all
the
time
a
lot
of
times,
they'll
keep
it
because
that's
their
retirement
income,
but
if
there's
a
if
they
see
a
problem
and
coming
down
the
line
in
my
opinion,
then
it's
easier
to
sell
the
house.
You
know:
pay
the
9
capital
gains
on
the
thing
put
money
in
a
bank
so
or
reinvest
in
something
else,
maybe
bitcoin,
but
that's
my
reasoning
here,
the
you
know-
and
I
think
this
is
going
to
end
up
charging
the
tenant
more
and
more
as
things
as
time
goes
on.
M
I
know
a
lot
of
landlords
have
relationships
with
their
tenants,
for
instance,
and
never
raise
the
rent
ever.
You
know,
even
when
it
goes
to
month
to
month,
but
now
they
may
look
at
that
and
say
I
can't
afford
two
months
without
rent.
Well,
I
like
this
guy.
Maybe
I
ought
to
just
sell
this
place
and
get
out
of
here.
So
I
think
I
you
know
I
I
can
see
both
sides
as
soon
as
and
thank
you
for
that.
H
Thank
you,
assemblyman,
wheeler
and
again
someone
watts
for
the
record.
I
I
appreciate
your
clarification
on
that
and
and
of
course,
want
to
recognize
the
positive
relationships
that
many
tenants
and
landlords
do
have,
and
I
just
want
to
reiterate
once
again
that
nothing
in
any
provision
of
this
bill
removes
a
tenant's
obligation
to
pay
so
changing
the
the
changes
in
section.
One
of
this
bill
do
not
create
a
30,
60
or
90
day
window
where
a
tenant
does
not
have
to
pay
and
therefore
creates
an
additional
cost
onto
the
property
owner.
H
C
J
This
would
apply
to
anyone.
Anyone
who
is
a
month-to-month
tenant
who
does
not
have
a
written
lease
agreement
who
has
been
on
the
property
for
an
extended
period
of
time,
would
be
entitled
to
the
additional
notice.
So,
yes,
it
would
apply
to
seniors,
it
would
apply
to
disabled,
but
it
would
apply
to
everybody,
so
families
moving
who
have
children
and
have
to
relocate
and
try
to
keep
in
the
same
school
district
and
that
that
can
be
incredibly
problematic.
So,
yes,
it
would
protect
them
as
well.
C
Mr
mr
burke
told
now
I
I
know
you
said
I
think
you
said
this.
The
section
one
only
applies
to
non-payment
of
rent
during
the
pandemic,
and
then
I
think
you
gave
a
a
time
frame.
Is
that
correct?
Could
you
can
you
please
clarify
that.
J
Sure,
of
course,
and
that
that's
actually
section
two,
I
think
you're
talking
about
jim
merch,
told
for
the
record
section.
Two
is
the
section
that
deals
with
the
sealing
of
the
eviction
records
and,
yes,
that
would
only
apply
to
non-payment
evictions
during
the
state
of
emergency.
The
state
of
emergency
was
declared
on
march
20th
2020,
so
it
would
extend
until
the
governor
until
it
ends
until
the
governor
says
it
ends
so
dirt.
Any
eviction
during
that
period
for
a
non-payment
of
rent
would
be
automatically
sealed.
K
Good
morning,
everybody
thank
you
chair,
a
couple
of
questions
here.
Let
me
navigate
my
devices
and
you've
answered
some
of
my
questions,
so
I
kind
of
keep
moving
to
well.
Now
I
have
a
different
question:
assemblyman
watts,
so
we've
clarified
that
that
this
applies
when
tendency
is
month
to
month
and
tendencies
with
a
fixed
expiration
date.
They'll
they'll
not
fall
under
this,
so
my
concern
is
for
landlords
that
maybe
have
they
they
are.
K
You
might
have
a
tenant
who
wants
a
month
to
month
because
of
life
circumstances,
but
in
order
to
get
the
rental
that
they
need,
it's
only
going
to
be
a
fixed
date
and
then
they
would
be
kind
of
forced
into
a
situation
to
take
a
property
that
they
might
have
to
break
a
lease
on,
because
this
this
landlord
now
doesn't
is
is
concerned
about
a
month
to
month
wants
a
fixed
date.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question,
assemblyman
watts
for
the
record
and
I'll.
Let
others
speak
to
this
as
well.
I
think
what
what
I
would
say,
my
personal
opinion
is-
and
I've
heard
about
stories
of
you
know
there
are.
There-
are
folks
who
are
serving
our
country
overseas,
who
have
properties
that
they're
renting.
There
are
other
folks
who
have
properties
that
they're
renting
and
they
have
a
planned
return
date
and
they're
concerned
about
how
this
could
affect
them.
H
I've
spoken
with
some
of
those
individuals
and
and
as
you've
noted
did,
did
want
to
clarify
that
this
does
not
apply
to
a
lease
agreement,
so
I
think,
usually,
when
a
a
property
owner
is
looking
at
a
date
certain
that
they
want
to
have
the
property
freed
up,
then
they're
going
to
want
to
seek
out
a
lease
agreement,
and
so
yes,
I
would
say
that
this
would
encourage
if
a
property
owner
needs
to
have
their
property
back
on
a
date,
certain
they
would
establish
a
lease,
so
they
would
be
able
to
gain
control
of
the
property
on
that
date.
H
You
know
what
we
often
find
is
you
know,
month
to
month,
can
go
on
really
until
there's
an
issue
with
the
tenant
or
until
the
tenant
decides
to
move
somewhere
else
and
again.
This
only
is
when
there's
no
issue
with
the
tenant
and
the
the
property
owner
has
decided
that,
for
whatever
reason-
and
I
again
I
I
understand
the
property
owner's
rights-
whatever
reason
that
they
have
that
they
want
to
remove
the
tenant
and
whether
they
want
to
move
in,
sell
it
get
in
get
a
new
tenant
chain
change
things
around
remodel
there.
H
They
can
do
any
of
that.
We're
just
asking
that
for
tenants
that
they've
had
a
longer
term
relationship
with
over
a
year
that
they
they
have
up
to
the
additional
the
additional
30
days,
30
to
60
days.
H
To
do
that,
and
and
again
it
may
work
out
where
they
can
find
a
place
even
quicker
than
that,
in
which
case
they
can
move
on
and
and
again-
and
I
know
I'm
I'm
repeating
myself,
but
if
they
do
not
pay,
if
they,
after
that
history
of
being
of
having
a
great
relationship,
decide
they
don't
want
to
pay.
After
getting
that
notice,
then
they
can
be
removed
quickly.
Through
summary
eviction.
G
I
would
just
add
that
we
would
view
it
as
a
positive
additional
consequence
if
more
people
were
in
leases,
leases
don't
have
to
last
for
one
year,
but
they
do
provide
some
clarity
and
contractual
security
for
both
the
landlord
and
the
tenant
about
how
this
relationship
is
going
to
work.
G
So
if
more
people
do
choose
to
renew
a
lease
rather
than
allow
a
month
to
month
to
just
casually
occur,
I
think
that's
positive,
because
there's
a
lot
of
rates
and
systems
that
work
better
when
there
is
a
lease
in
place
and
it
wouldn't
have
to
last
for
a
year.
You
could
do
three
months.
You
could
do
six
months,
but
you'd
have
some
certainty
certainty
and
with
that
certainty,
each
time
that
date
was
approaching.
You
would
have
a
built-in
date
where
you
could
communicate
between
the
landlord
tenant
and
say.
G
Do
we
want
to
plan
on
this
as
an
exit
date
either
party,
or
should
we
continue
to
renew,
and
so
that
builds
in
just
a
little
more
stability
for
that
contractual
relationship?.
K
So
yes-
and
I
and
I
understand
the
intent-
your
intentions
are
good.
You
know
you're
trying
to
accomplish
something
good,
but
again
I
I
just
am
concerned
that
the
this
legislation
is
going
to
force
some
unintended
consequences.
You
know
the
majority
well,
I
would
assume
a
lot
of
the
mom-and-pop
type
rentals.
N
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
watts
for
the
for
the
assemblyman
watts,
for
the
presentation
and
to
jim
burchell
and
bailey
borderland.
N
My
question
is
one
of
the
questions
was
asked
and
it
was
clarified
that
under
section
one
and
the
proposed
amendments
here
that
this
could
apply
to
anybody,
and
so,
but
with
jim
burk
tolls
your
overview
and
your
presentation,
I
heard
you
using
numerous
times
senior
low-income
housing
disabled,
not
giving
people
enough
time.
It
could
move
people
to
homelessness,
but
that
isn't
addressed
in
this
section.
N
So
if
I
understand
it
correctly,
if
I
have,
which
is
a
true
example
from
from
someone
else,
that
there's
an
owner
for
property
who
rented
his
home
here
took
his
job
in
california
loses
his
job.
There
has
to
come
back
he's
had
the
tenant
in
there
for
two
years,
they've
gone
to
month
to
month
gives
them
notice.
N
So
now
he
has
to
go
rent
a
hotel
until
the
person
leaves
the
property
and
that's
where
I
see
problem
with,
because
what
I'm
hearing
from
everybody
is:
is
the
low
housing,
the
seniors
the
disabled,
and
I
think
this
bill
goes
too
far
encompassing
all,
and
I
do
believe
that
it
takes
away
the
right
of
the
owner
to
take
possession
of
their
property
again,
and
I
understand
these
issues
here.
N
H
Thank
you
for
expressing
that
concern.
Assemblywoman
kasama.
This
is
someone
watts
for
the
record
and-
and
I
know
that
you
have
much
experience
with
these
issues,
so
I
appreciate
that.
I
think
we
do
just
have
some
disagreement.
I
would
say
that
this
you
know
it
does
place
some
additional
protection
for
the
tenant,
but
it
does
not
fundamentally
restrict
the
property
owner's
ability
to
regain
control
their
property,
and
you
are
correct.
H
This
does
not
just
apply
to
seniors
or
people
with
disabilities
that
also,
as
assemblywoman
krasner
asked,
would
apply
to
families
with
children.
It
would
apply
to
single
individuals
as
well,
who
also
you
know,
may
be
living
in
a
property
for
a
long
period
of
time
and
and
not
have
a
plan
for
where
they're
going
to
go
next.
So
you
know
it
is
in
fact
broadly
applicable
to
everyone
to
give
that
additional
notice,
and
you
know
in
the
yeah.
So
that's
that's
the
response
that
I
have.
H
I
don't
know
if
my
co-presenters
have
anything
else
to
add.
A
N
So
the
other
thing
I
did
want
to
ask
about
at
the
beginning
of
your
presentation,
you
quoted
half
a
million
projected
to
be
evicted
and
I
believe,
where
did
where?
Did
you
get
that
number
from.
H
N
So
so
I
and
I
believe
that
that
gwen
study
was
done
at
the
beginning
of
the
pandemic.
Is
that
correct.
G
Bailey
bortlen
for
the
record,
it
was
done
twice.
The
first
projection
was
earlier
on
in
the
pandemic.
I
don't
have
the
exact
dates
in
front
of
me,
but
I
believe
at
that
point
it
was
over
300
000
nevadans
were
projected
to
be
at
risk
of
eviction
and
it
was
increased
to
over
500
000
evictions
in
the
fall.
N
So
from
my
observation,
I
just
don't-
I
I
haven't
seen
an
indication
of
the
numbers
being
that
high.
I
think
we'd
have
to
get
hard
data
to
see
what
has.
Actually
you
know
what
is
the
projections
from
people
that
are
faced
with
these
evictions?
I
know
currently
now
I
know
you
were
talking
about
the
unemployment
rate
rates
right
now.
N
It's
8.2
percent,
as
of
december
2020,
and
that's
from
the
western
information
office,
the
euro
bureau
of
labor
statistics,
our
unemployment
is
now
at
that
rate,
and
I
know
you
were
quoting
higher
rates,
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
dealing
with
the
most
current
information
when
we
you
know,
provide
this
information
for
people
to
make
informed
decisions.
H
Thank
you
for
that
kasama
assemblyman
watts
for
the
record.
I
appreciate
that
and
and
again
this
is
not
people
that
were
had
eviction
processes
in
place.
This
was
given
the
economic
consequences
of
the
pandemic
renters,
who
would
be
at
risk
for
eviction,
and
one
of
the
reasons
that
those
numbers
haven't
been
so
high
is
because
of
the
protections
that
have
been
put
in
place
to
date
during
the
during
the
pandemic
crisis.
H
And
yes,
our
unemployment
rate
has
gone
down
from
hitting
truly
stunning
record-setting
highs
of
the
pandemic,
although
I
will
note
that
it
is
still
among
the
highest
of
any
state
in
the
country.
I
don't
have
the
the
late
figures
in
front
of
me,
but
I
would
be
surprised
if
we
were
not
still
in
the
top
five
states
in
the
country
for
for.
A
Unemployment,
thank
you.
Members.
We've
been
going
for
about
an
hour.
I've
got
about
15
more
minutes.
I
want
to
spend
on
questions
and
answers,
and
then
I'm
going
to
go
to
testimony
because
we
have,
as
you
might
imagine
quite
a
few
folks,
who'd
like
to
express
their
opinion
on
this
bill.
So
I've
got
a
couple
more
people
in
the
queue
right
now,
but
just
keep
in
mind
members.
If
you
can
keep
your
questions
concise
and
our
presenters.
A
K
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
to
all
of
you
here
presenting
this.
I
think
we've
kind
of
demonstrated
and
talking
about
this.
The
eviction
process
in
general
can
be
very
confusing
for
both
landlords
and
tenants.
So
my
question
is
in
section
one
using
this
tiered
approach.
H
Thank
you
for
that
question.
Some
of
them
watts
for
the
record,
one
of
the
things
that
we're
doing
is
actually
trying
to
simplify,
so
that,
instead
of
based
on
the
the
term
and
and
and
other
things,
we're
trying
to
streamline
this
so
across
the
board
for
any
tenancy
that
is
not
covered
under
a
lease
agreement.
It
would
be
30
days
if
less
than
a
year,
60
days
if
between
one
and
three
years
and
90
days,
if
more
than
three
years.
So
I
understand
that
chapter
40
has
a
lot
of
pieces
to
it.
H
There's
even
been
a
discussion
about
probably
the
need
to
to
clean
up
the
statute,
so
it's
easier
to
understand
and
that's
a
separate
conversation
for
another
day,
but
I
actually
believe
that
this
would
add
some
additional
stability
and
clarity.
It
is
a
change
of
course,
but
I
think
the
communicating
the
change
could
be
fairly
clear.
K
Okay,
thank
you
just
one
quick
question
to
follow
up
with
that.
Just
a
short
one
go
ahead.
Do
I
understand
that,
as
far
as
like
seniors,
do
they
already
get
an
additional
30
days,
so
that
would
be
on
top
of
any
of
these
days.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question,
assemblyman
watts
to
the
record.
Yes,
there
is
a
provision
specifically
for
seniors
and
disabled
individuals
to
request
an
additional
30
days
and
that
portion
of
the
statute
currently
remains
again.
That
requires
affirmative
action
and
does
not
capture
families
and
other
people.
H
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
establish
a
time
frame
that
is
specifically
for
tenants
that
have
long-term,
stable,
positive
relationships
for
them
to
have
the
additional
notice
without
having
to
go
through
a
process
to
request
it
legally
could
also
describe
this
process
a
little
bit
better
and
how
it
works
in
practice.
A
Okay,
assemblywoman
marzola
has
indicated
her.
Questions
have
been
answered
already.
Are
there
other
members
that
would
like
to
ask
a
question
if
you
could
raise
your
hand,
I
see
assemblyman
o'neal,
so
we're
going
to
go
to
him
in
just
a
moment,
but
let
me
see
if
let
me
look
at
everyone
on
the
screen.
Anyone
else
that
has
a
question.
If
so,
could
you
raise
your
hand,
so
I
can
hopefully
note
that
you
have
a
question.
C
Thank
you,
chair,
and
actually
I
had
several
questions.
I'm
just
going
to
make
a
statement.
I
think
that
I
appreciate
what
assembly
was
watching
and
the
rest
are
trying
to
do
with
this,
but
I
think
miss
bortland
and
I
may
have
agreed.
Maybe
the
solution
to
this
whole
discussion
today
is
to
scrap
the
bill
and
require
that
all
rentals
have
to
have
contracts
or
leases,
and
that
will
solve
the
problem
because
it
gets
confusing.
Otherwise
we're
talking
about
lease.
No
lease
person
was
on
a
lease.
C
Then
they
go
off
the
lease
now
they're
qualified
for
this
tiered
system
of
how
long
they
are
there
just
maintain
that
they
have
to
have
at
least
this
period
it's
contract.
It
protects
both
sides.
The
other
part
is,
I
do
disagree
with
section
two
on
sealing
the
records.
I
think
there
has
to
be
more
of
an
effort
and
I
think
the
landlords,
the
owners
of
the
property,
have
a
right
to
know
that
the
person
was
evicted.
So
it's
more
of
a
statement
just
to
be
short,
I
think
we
thank
you
for
the
times
chair.
A
Thank
you.
Assemblyman
o'neill
certainly
welcome
to
roach
that
topic
with
the
sponsors.
I
I
don't
imagine
they're
going
to
be
willing
to
take
that
suggestion,
but
would
I
encourage
you
to
ask
them
offline
any
other
questions
for
our
presenters
today,
and
this
is
last
call
for
questions
I
don't
see.
Oh,
I
see
one
more
assemblywoman
kasama
we're
going
to
give
you
the
last
word
but
pl.
Please
make
sure
it's
a
question
and
not
a
statement.
N
Thank
you
very
much
chair.
I
do
have
a
question
for
section
two
under
the
the
ceiling
of
the
records
for
covid,
so
in
this
in
this
broad
ceiling
of
the
records,
if
somebody
was
receiving
rental
assistance
pandemic,
money,
stimulus
checks
even
had
their
job
and
they
had
the
money
and
they
chose
not
to
make
the
payments
to
the
landlord
they
would
still
get
their
record.
Sealed
under
this
case
is
that
correct.
G
Okay
sure
I
do
not
believe
that
they
would
have
an
eviction
record.
So
it's
a
it's
a
bit
of
a
fine
hair
to
split.
But
if
someone
were
to
have
the
ability
to
pay
and
choose
not
to,
I
don't
believe
they
would
be
evicted
for
a
non-payment
of
rent
eviction
because
of
that
seven
day
process
where
somebody
has
a
legal
opportunity
to
become
current
or
leave
the
property.
And
if
you
do
one
of
those
two
things
you
would
not
get
to
the
point
where
an
eviction
record
has
been
created.
G
H
Sorry,
if
I
may
briefly
just
follow
up
yes,
so
specifically,
it
would
have
to
apply
to
someone
who
had
the
resources
to
pay
rent
and
their
other
obligations
chose
not
to
do
that
chose
not
to
respond
not
to
get
current
and
not
to
leave
a
property
and
to
let
an
eviction
be
entered
in
onto
their
record
in
in
that
hypothetical
case.
H
If
it
occurred
during
this
declaration
of
emergency,
it
would
be
included,
however,
and-
and
I
know
you'll
hear
later
from
opponents
about
their
suggestion
for
for
automatic
sealing,
and
you
know
the
issue
is
we
know,
I
think
all
of
us
here
know
how
long
people
struggle
to
get
access
to
their
unemployment
benefits.
We
know
how
quickly
rental
assistance
programs
have
been
swallowed
up.
H
Frankly,
we
just
don't
have
the
resources
to
help
everyone
to
help
tenants,
and
I
mean
people,
nevada
families,
catch
up
on
all
of
their
their
bills
and
their
needs,
so
they
can
provide
food,
so
they
can
provide
housing,
so
they
can
pay
their
other
critical
bills
and
meet
their
basic
needs,
and
you
know
the
the
resources
just
haven't
been
sufficient
in
terms
of
unemployment.
H
That's
fluctuated
in
amount
that
sometimes
has
taken
months
to
receive
in
terms
of
payments
from
the
federal
government
that
have
totaled
less
than
two
thousand
dollars
over
the
course
of
a
year.
So
you
know
we
certainly
need
more
resources
to
help
property
owners
and
renters
and
again,
just
all
of
these
folks
being
nevada.
Families
help
make
them
whole.
H
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
for
folks
that
have
suffered
those
consequences
that
they
don't
slip
through
the
cracks
and
that
they're
able
to
access
housing
again.
N
And
assemblyman
watts
I
I
completely
agree
with
you:
there
are
a
lot
of
people
out
there
struggling.
We
need
to
to
get
these
resources
moving
to
them.
I
know
I
know,
there's
a
delay
in
the
resources
coming
to
them,
and-
and
that
is
an
issue
but
based
on
your
own
comment
and
my
my
question
was
somebody
that
had
the
ability
to
pay,
they
would
be
protected
under
the
ceiling
of
the
eviction
records
and
that
that
is
something
I
couldn't
agree
with.
H
For
that
assemblyman
watts
for
the
record,
I
just
want
to
briefly
say:
this
is
a
discussion
and
debate
that
I've
had
with
others
as
well,
and
I
appreciate
that
I
just
simply
will
I'll.
Just
be
very
blunt.
I
respectfully
disagree
and
I
would
rather
protect
that
hypothetical
person
who
again
not
only
chose
not
to
pay
but
then
chose
to
allow
an
eviction
record
to
happen
instead
of
vacating
or
instead
of
getting
current
with
the
rent.
H
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
cover
everybody
who's,
not
who's,
who
slips
through
the
cracks,
even
if
that
does
cover
a
handful
of
bad
actors
and
miss
portland,
said
many
folks,
if
they're,
actually
being
cleverly
malicious
and
trying
to
and
having
excessive
resources
that
they're
trying
to
hold
and
don't
have
other
obligations
that
they're
using
it
for
would
likely
find
a
way
to
avoid
getting
the
eviction
record
in
the
first
place.
G
N
I
was
just
gonna
say
I
believe
we
need
to
carve
out
for
that,
but
I
respectfully
agree.
We
can
disagree
on
that.
G
Lily
borderland
for
the
record,
apologies
to
the
chair.
For
not
being
brief.
My
only
the
only
thing
I
want
to
add
to
that
piece
is
if,
from
my
conversations
with
the
judiciary
without
speaking
for
them,
but
I
will
tell
you
that
our
conversations
have
been.
G
It
doesn't
make
sense
from
a
policy
position
to
go
through
these
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
because
people
do
have
the
ability
to
motion
to
have
their
records
sealed.
But
what
we
are
up
against
on
march
31st
in
less
than
a
month,
is
that
the
state
and
federal
eviction
protections
are
currently
set
to
lift
and
we
are
going
to
have
a
tsunami
of
court
proceedings
that
have
not
been
occurring
by
and
large
for
the
last
year.
And
so
how
do
we
want
to
use
those
limited
court
resources?
G
Because
we
do
not
have
capacity
to
have
hearings
or
to
review
those
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
when
we're
also
going
to
now
have
all
of
the
evictions
that
have
been
stayed
because
of
the
pandemic
and
so
from
a
systems
operations
standpoint?
It
just
makes
more
sense
to
click
a
button
and
cover
these
people
than
to
require
the
burden
and
the
community
education
and
the
court
resources
to
do
it.
H
Otherwise,
stay
very
quickly.
Mr
chair
is
again
I
and
I
offered
to
as
well
as
to
the
the
other
folks
that
I've
discussed
that
have
concerns
with
this
bill.
If
there
is
a
way
to
preserve
the
automatic
process
that
we're
talking
about
to
preserve
the
court's
resources
as
well
as
to
find
some
way
to
carve
that
out
in
a
way
that
the
court
can
operationalize.
A
Hey
great
so
we're
going
to
leave
it
there
in
terms
of
the
presentation,
questions
and
answers.
Members,
if
you
have
additional
questions,
would
encourage
you
to
seek
out
assemblyman
watts
or
his
two
co-presenters,
and
I
want
to
thank
the
three
of
you
for
presenting
I'll.
Ask
you
to
sit
tight
while
we
get
through
some
testimony
and
then
there'll
be
time
for
some
concluding
remarks
and
just
want
to
give
everyone
kind
of
a
lay
of
the
land
of
where
we're
going
to
go
from
here.
A
Given
the
amount
of
time
we've
had
I'm
planning
on
taking
about
45
minutes
up
to
45
minutes
of
supportive
testimony
about
45
minutes
of
opposition,
and
then
I
guess
we'll
see
if
there's
any
neutral,
there
may
not
be
on
this
bill,
so
everyone
who's
going
to
be
presenting
if
you're
on
the
phone
or
you're
in
the
zoom
in
support,
would
ask
you
to
try
to
keep
your
comments
to
two
minutes
and
it's
perfectly
fine
to
say.
I
agree
with
what's
been
stated,
so
we
can
get
to
as
many
folks
as
possible.
A
So
now
I'm
going
to
open
testimony
in
support.
We
do
have
a
few
individuals
with
us
on
the
zoom
today
that
are
going
to
offer
supportive
testimony
and
I'll
just
I
think
we
have
three
of
them
I'll,
just
call
them
out
in
order,
so
we
can
do
this
in
an
orderly
fashion,
so
I
wanted
to
start
with
emily
paulson
from
the
nevada
homeless
alliance.
A
L
L
A
single
eviction
record
can
make
it
extremely
difficult
to
secure
new
housing
and
puts
households
at
risk
of
homelessness.
Eviction
records
are
also
a
common
barrier
to
people
exiting
homelessness.
We
hear
consistently
from
homeless
service
providers
the
difficulty
they
have
in
rehousing
households
with
an
eviction,
as
the
presenters
of
the
bill
have
shared.
L
Pre-Pandemic
nevada
had
the
fourth
highest
rate
of
unsheltered
homelessness
in
the
nation
due
to
a
variety
of
factors,
including
inadequate
investment
into
affordable
housing
development.
We
simply
do
not
have
the
social
service
infrastructure
in
place
to
respond
to
a
wave
of
households
becoming
homeless,
and
if
we
do
not
take
steps
to
help
tenants
get
back
on
their
feet.
The
reasonable
policy,
as
proposed
in
this
bill,
the
consequences
that
we'll
have
are,
will
be
great
to
human
to
have
great
human,
social
and
physical
fiscal
costs.
Excuse
me,
thank
you.
A
O
Chair
yeager,
you
got
the
name
perfectly
right,
so
thank
you
very,
very
much
and
good
morning
and
good
morning
to
honorable
members
of
the
committee,
I'm
quentin
sevilla,
the
deputy
director
at
making
work,
nevada,
we're
also
part
of
the
nevada
housing
justice
alliance.
I'm
at
my
organization,
specifically,
we
work
alongside
black
women
and
black
families
to
help
change
policy
in
the
areas
of
economic,
racial
and
reproductive
justice
and
ab141
allows
legislators
an
opportunity
to
do
something
about
each
of
those
fights
and
it
demands
our
urgent
attention.
O
O
O
That
is
if
they
are
able
to
find
housing,
that's
affordable,
because
black
women
are
still
paid
significantly
less
than
their
colleagues
for
doing
the
exact
same
work.
According
to
sociologist
matthew
desmond
when
a
black
mother
with
an
eviction
on
her
record
moves,
it
is
often
to
a
neighborhood
that
is
significantly
further
away
from
basic
amenities
like
a
park,
a
grocery
store
or
a
healthcare
clinic.
O
All
of
these
things,
layered
on
top
of
the
other,
proves
this
is
more
than
just
a
housing
issue.
It's
an
economic
justice
issue.
It's
a
racial
justice
issue.
It's
a
reproductive
justice
issue
at
its
core
ab141
is
about
giving
families
a
little
wiggle
room
as
we
all
navigate
the
landscape
of
these
uncertain
times.
We
don't
seek
to
villainize
or
devastate
the
industry
for
landlords
or
property
managers.
We
just
ask
for
policy
that
considers
the
full
humanity
of
our
community
members
and
shakes
the
iron-clad
grip
that
this
industry
has
on
our
public
policy
in
this
state.
A
Thank
you
for
your
testimony,
mr
saboa.
I
like
saying
your
name
by
the
way
nice
to
pronounce
the
last
supporter
we
have
on
the
zoom
with
us
is
mr
jim
sullivan
from
the
culinary
union,
mr
sullivan,
welcome
to
the
assembly
judiciary
committee,
and
please
provide
your
testimony.
C
This
pandemic
has
hit
culinary
union
members
and
their
families
incredibly
hard,
while
hospitality
workers
are
slowly
returning
to
work,
tens
of
thousands
of
workers
are
still
unemployed
and
struggling
with
housing
and
security.
Since
last
march,
the
culinary
union
has
worked
with
our
housing
fund
other
organizations
to
keep
workers
in
their
homes.
C
Unfortunately,
there
are
still
too
many
nevadans
who
have
lost
their
home
during
this
pandemic
ceiling.
Eviction
records
that
were
created
during
the
pandemic
and
extending
the
timeline
for
no
cause
evictions.
Based
on
how
long
a
resident
has
lived.
There
are
common
sense
measures
that
will
prevent
further
housing
and
security
in
the
middle
of
this
pandemic.
Working
families
and
people
of
color
have
been
disproportionately
impacted
by
housing
and
security
and
ab141
is
a
step
in
the
right
directions
towards
rectifying
that.
C
A
Thank
you
for
your
testimony,
mr
sullivan.
I
don't
believe
we
have
anybody
else
on
the
zoom
with
us,
but
I'm
pretty
sure
we
have
some
folks
on
the
phone
who
would
like
to
offer
testimony
and
support
bps.
Could
we
go
to
the
phone
to
see
who
might
be
there
and
ask
the
first
caller
to
provide
testimony.
F
F
D
D
R
s-a-u-n-d-e-r-s
and
I'm
a
policy
director
with
progressive
leadership
alliance,
nevada,
you're
in
support
of
ab141.
First,
we
want
to
thank
assemblyman
watts
for
bringing
this
important
legislation
forward.
This
morning,
you
will
hear
stories
of
the
hundreds
of
thousands
of
nevadans
who
have
faced
unemployment
and
housing
instability
because
of
covenant.
19.
D
F
D
End
domestic
and
sexual
violence
and
we're
here
today
in
strong
support
of
ab141.
Like
many
vic.
Like
many
excuse
me,
victim
survivors
of
domestic
and
sexual
violence
are
experiencing
housing
insecurities
because
of
the
copen
19
pandemic.
In
about
99
percent
of
abusive
relationships,
the
victim
survivors
experience
some
form
of
financial
abuse.
This
includes
purposely
sabotaging
an
individual's
credit
and
employment
prior
to
the
pandemic.
D
Victim
survivors
noted
that
access
to
affordable
and
safe
housing
was
one
of
the
biggest
barriers
for
leaving
an
abusive
relationship
and
the
financial
abuse
that
they
incurred
negatively
affected
their
ability
to
obtain
new,
safe
housing
options.
The
pandemic
has
only
exasperated
this
problem
with
the
additional
burden
of
now
having
a
no
pay
eviction
on
their
record.
D
We
know
that
without
being
able
to
obtain
safe
and
affordable
housing,
victim
survivors
are
more
likely
to
stay
with
an
abu
with
an
abuser
increasing
their
risk
of
homicide,
or
they
have
the
increased
risk
of
becoming
homeless,
which
significantly
increases
their
risk
for
future
domestic
and
sexual
violence.
Victimization
stealing
records
of
evictions
for
no
pay
during
the
pandemic
crisis
will
decrease
barriers
for
victim
survivors
and
their
families
in
accessing
safe
housing.
F
Q
Q
We
are
a
member-led
nonprofit
organization
fighting
to
improve
the
quality
of
life
of
all
immigrants
and
working
families
in
nevada.
With
the
end
of
the
eviction
moratorium
looming,
thousands
of
households
are
at
risk
of
eviction.
The
cdc
eviction
moratorium
does
not
kick
in
automatically
for
renters.
Q
Additionally,
eviction
records
do
present
barriers
to
obtaining
long-term
housing
for
those
families
who
have
been
disproportionately
impacted
by
coba
19.
ab41
is
needed
it's
needed
now.
We
need
immediate
protections
now.
It
will
provide
tenants
with
just
a
little
more
time
to
secure
new
housing
and
it's
going
to
lessen
the
collateral
damage,
that's
being
caused
by
these
no
cause
eviction
records.
Q
F
F
C
C
I
will
keep
my
remarks
brief,
since
a
lot
of
what
I
wanted
to
say
has
been
said,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
those
effective
community
members
have
time
to
speak.
This
bill
looks
to
help
not
only
those
who
have
fell
through
the
cracks,
but
those
who
have
been
left
behind
in
their
time
of
need
and
that's
important
to
know.
They've
been
left
behind
by
the
state
of
nevada.
C
Just
one
nevada
and
at
risk
of
eviction
due
to
the
pandemic
is
too
much
and
the
fact
that
it's
in
the
hundreds
of
thousands
and
can
be
up
to
five
hundred
thousand
it
should
be
something
that
we
must
act
on
now.
Thank
you
so
much
for
taking
your
attention
at
this
bill.
We
need
to
make
sure
we
pass
this.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
F
F
P
K-A-R-L-A-R-A-M-I-R-E-Z,
I
am
an
organizer
with
planned
parenthood
and
a
community
member
planned
parenthood
votes.
Nevada
is
in
favor
of
ab141,
because
housing
is
healthcare
and
no
person
should
be
left
without
a
roof
over
their
head
for
any
period
of
time.
Losing
housing
is
one
of
the
greatest
threats
to
reproductive
health
and
rights,
because
it
jeopardizes
a
person's
privacy
and
access
to
critical
reproductive
health
care
services,
as
well
as
impacts
a
person's
right
to
make
decisions
about
their
bodies.
P
It's
hard
to
imagine
that
a
person
could
prioritize
their
health
while
healthless
and
the
pandemic
has
shown
us
how
true
that
is.
Sealing
eviction
records
and
ensuring
that
people
have
an
adequate
amount
of
time
to
find
stable
housing
is
crucial
for
a
healthy
nevada.
We
urge
you
to
support
nevada
families
and
support
ab141.
Thank
you.
A
F
F
R
Good
morning,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
tess
opferman,
that's
spelled
o
p
o-p-s-e-r-m-a-n
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
women's
lobby,
one
of
the
top
priorities
of
the
nevada
women's
lobby
is
housing
security.
We
work
hard
to
support
legislation
that
ensures
women
and
families
are
able
to
maintain
affordable
and
stable
housing,
something
that
has
been
made
even
more
difficult
by
the
current
pandemic
and
the
incredibly
high
rates
of
unemployment,
unemployment
that
has
disproportionately
affected
women
and
women
of
color.
These
are
unprecedented
times
and
stealing.
R
Eviction
records
that
took
place
during
coven
19
is
a
fair
and
logical
way
to
protect
those
that
have
lost
their
jobs
or
have
income
in
security.
The
second
part
of
the
bill
allowing
30,
60
or
90
days,
merely
provides
a
cushion
to
those
tenants
to
find
housing
they
can
afford,
while
still
paying
rent
throughout
that
time
frame
to
their
current
landlord.
This
is
fair
and
reasonable
legislation.
F
C
Director
of
true
beginnings
and
a
member
of
plan
action,
we
support
the
ab-141.
True
beginnings,
assist
formally
incarcerated
women
with
overcoming
barriers
that
prevent
them
from
reclaiming
their
rightful
place
in
american
society.
I
am
a
peer
support
member,
but
bigger
than
that,
I
am
a
formerly
incarcerated
woman.
B
C
I
C
C
Criminal
history
is
the
number
one
barrier
to
employment,
so
we
will
be
affecting
our
entire
community.
Allowing
this
bill
to
pass
would
give
the
women
the
people
in
our
community
that
are
formally
incarcerated
the
ability
to
become
proactive
or
remain
proactive
and
key
players
within
our
community
and
not
face
that
additional
barrier
of
eviction,
even
though
they
have
other
barriers
to
overcome.
Thank
you.
F
R
R
Thousands
of
nevadas
are
currently
wading
back
in
fear
and
instability
wondering
what
is
going
to
happen
when
this
ends
and
evictions
begin
sealing
records
for
non-payment
or
renovations
will
enable
thousands
of
these
people
to
rebuild
and
move
forward
with
their
lives,
which
is
what
we
want
for
every
resident
of
our
state.
Failing
to
provide.
This
protection
only
extends
the
misery
of
uncertainty
and
instability
for
many,
limiting
their
ability
to
regain
stability
and
again
become
an
active
productive
member
of
our
society.
R
F
Q
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you,
everyone.
My
name
is
dr
jeffrey
thompkins.
It's
j-e-f-f-e-r-y,
my
last
name
is
t-h-o
image
and
mary
p
is
in
paul
k-I-n-s,
I'm
the
founder
and
executive
director
for
a
jet
foundation,
a
local
nonprofit,
in
addition
to
the
nevada
chapter,
president
of
the
national
nonprofit
minority
association,
and
and
and
strong
support
of
the
bill
being
a
person
that
was
personally
affected
and
forced
out
of
my
home
after
eight
years,
and
not
having
a
lease
for
six
of
those
years
last
year.
Q
Myself
being
you
know,
having
my
cancer
relapse
and
being
a
single
father
in
addition
to
working
in
the
community
coming
home
to
three
separate
eviction,
notices
on
my
door
and
not
having
the
resources
to
be
able
to
combat
that,
I
definitely
am
in
favor
of
this
bill.
I
was
fortunately
able
to
find
her
housing,
but
a
lot
of
people
would
not
be
able
to
do
so,
and
this
bill
definitely
helps
people
by
sealing
those
records
and
not
having
those
barriers
to
moving
forward.
Q
F
F
F
D
We
are
entering
into
a
new
phase
of
the
covet
crisis,
which
is
homelessness
and
eviction.
The
pandemic
has
already
taken
lives,
it's
taken
jobs,
and
now
it's
taking
homes
as
well,
and
people
are
struggling
to
inform
themselves
on
how
to
exercise
their
rights
against
evictions
when
they're,
faced
with
unlawful
threats
of
eviction,
which
are
real
and
even
discriminatory,
behavior
from
their
landlords,
which
is
also
very,
very
real,
as
several
of
our
members
have
shared
via
written
testimony
submitted
to
this
committee,
an
eviction
order
on
a
person's
record
is
punitive.
D
It's
a
source
of
shaming
and
judgment.
The
covet
pandemic
has
already
wrecked
a
lot
of
havoc.
We
all
know
that,
and
economic
and
health
hardship
due
to
kova
19
are
sometimes
out
of
our
control,
and
those
who
are
hurting
most
due
to
the
pandemic
have
done
everything
that
they
can
to
help
themselves,
but
they're
still
struggling.
There
are
millions
of
dollars
in
rental
assistance
funding
that
hasn't
been
disbursed.
D
D
It's
clear
that
the
funds
are
there,
but
with
the
volume
of
people
needing
help
nobody's
getting
the
assistance
swiftly
in
the
manner
that
they
need
it
on
behalf
of
ariba
las
vegas
workers
center.
I
strongly
urge
you
to
act
swiftly
in
support
of
ab141
to
ensure
that
our
communities
can
recover
and
that
they
can
rebuild
after
covet
19..
F
If
you
have
just
been
admitted
to
the
meeting,
we
are
in
testimony
in
support
of
bill
ab141.
If
you'd
like
to
submit
testimony
in
support
of
the
bill
press
star
nine
now
to
take
your
place
in
the
queue.
F
F
F
O
Hello,
thank
you.
This
is:
will
pregnant
w-I-l-l-p
like
peter
r-e-g-m-a-n,
representing
battleborn
progress,
we're
rising
in
strong
support
today
of
ab-141
to
give
those
experiencing
housing,
insecurity
in
nevada,
hope
of
securing
new,
stable
housing
and
prevent
landlords
from
abusing
no
cause
evictions
to
swiftly
kick
people
out
of
their
homes.
During
this
pandemic,
thousands
of
nevadas
have
lost
jobs
in
income
due
to
no
fault
of
their
own.
O
The
governor
and
the
cdc's
eviction
moratoriums
have
been
a
vital
asset
to
keeping
families
in
their
homes
this
past
year,
however,
these
protections
are
set
to
expire
march
31st
and
even
still,
many
families
have
fallen
through
the
cracks.
Today,
nearly
500
000
renters
in
nevada
are
vulnerable
to
eviction.
Once
these.
O
Expire
at
the
end
of
the
month,
especially
amongst
communities
of
color,
make
up
a
disproportionate
number
of
nevada.
Renters
ev141
would
help
prevent
an
eviction
crisis.
Sealing
records
for
those
who
are
evicted
during
a
state
of
emergency
will
allow
ruin
would
avoid
ruining
that
person's
rental
or
credit
history.
Having
an
eviction
on
record
makes
it
more
difficult
for
that
person
to
ever
have
hope
of
finding
new
housing
or
be
able
to
own
a
home.
O
Second,
extending
the
notice
timeline
for
no
cause
evictions,
which
can
be
initiated
by
a
landlord,
no
fault
of
the
tenant
will
at
least
give
those
families
time
to
pack
sort
out
their
affairs
and
secure
new
housing
before
being
removed
from
the
property.
We
should
not
let
unscrupulous
landlords
rely
on
a
loophole
to
kick
people
out
on
the
streets
during
this
pandemic,
and
we
should
let
renters
who
are
already
economically
vulnerable,
move
forward
with
their
lives
without
the
storm
cloud
of
an
eviction
hanging
over
them
forever.
O
A
F
I
I
A
F
F
P
P
P
F
D
T-A-Y-L-O-R-D-I-X-O-N,
I
am
the
msw
policy
intern
with
the
aclu
of
nevada,
and
we
are
here
in
support
of
av-141.
The
aclu
of
nevada
recognizes
that
the
eviction
crisis
happening
in
the
states
is
a
racial,
social
and
economic
issue.
As
assemblyman
watts
stated
in
his
presentation,
500
000
nevadans
are
at
risk
for
eviction,
with
two-thirds
of
the
renters
being
people
of
color.
These
communities
have
experienced
systemic
economic
and
social
burdens
that
have
pushed
home
ownership
out
of
their
reach
for
decades,
either
from
the
u.s
census.
D
D
Prior
to
the
coven
19
pandemic,
our
communities
of
color
had
yet
to
recover.
At
the
same
level,
the
west
communities
have
from
the
2008
economic
crisis.
Poverty
in
these
populations
has
continued
to
increase
from
the
years
2007
to
2018,
with
2018
rates
higher
than
that
of
the
great
recession.
While
poverty
in
white
communities
have
steadily
decreased,
african-american
communities
maintained
poverty
rates,
greater
than
20
percent,
already
at
an
economic
deficit
faced
with
higher
cova
19
mortality
rates
and
now
experiencing
a
risk
of
addiction
that
will
tarnish
every
opportunity
for
housing
for
the
rest
of
their
lives.
D
Communities
of
color
are
facing
further
oppression.
Ab141
does
the
bare
minimum
for
these
vulnerable
populations
and
the
mitsuba
pandemic
that
has
already
devastated
our
communities
of
color.
Protecting
the
right
to
shelter
and
facilitating
an
environment
that
does
not
discriminate
against
them
based
on
evictions
during
this
time
is
essential.
The
aclu
supports
tens
rights
and
supports
ab141.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
F
F
Q
Thank
you,
mr
chair
members
of
the
committee
in
the
interest
of
time,
and
not
wanting
to
take
away
from
the
voices
of
those
directly
impacted.
I
simply
want
to
echo
and
agree
with
what
has
previously
been
stated.
Both
sections
of
this
bill
protect
nevadans,
who
would
be
facing
evictions
through
no
fault
of
their
own.
I
encourage
you
to
support
both
sections
of
ab141.
F
F
D
Good
morning,
chairman
jaeger
and
the
committee,
this
is
dora
martinez,
and
I
am
here
with
the
nevada
disability,
peer
action
coalition,
and
I
did
all
the
the
colors
before
me.
I
just
want
to
put
a
component
in
there
that
there
are
people
with
disability
who
are
going
through
this
hardship
and,
as
you
all
know,
the
people
with
disability
are
on
a
fixed
rate,
income
fixed
income.
So
this
would
really
benefit
people
with
disability,
and
I
thank
you
so
much
and
I'm
sorry.
I
had
a
hard
time.
D
A
A
Thank
you,
bps
committee
members.
I
wanted
to
note
for
you
that
we
did
have
the
one
caller
who
gave
testimony
in
spanish.
I
believe
that
the
testimony
has
been
translated
in
english
and
it
is
up
on
nellis
as
an
exhibit,
so
you
can
find
that
there-
and
I
did
also
want
to
note
for
members
of
the
committee
and
members
of
the
public,
that
there
are
a
number
of
letters
in
support
that
were
submitted
in
writing.
So
those
are
available
on
nellis
as
well.
A
There
are
a
few
in
opposition
as
well,
but
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
we
all
knew
that.
So
at
this
time,
I'm
going
to
close
testimony
in
support
and
I'm
now
going
to
open
it
up
for
testimony
in
opposition
and
how
we're
going
to
do
this
committee
is
I
I
have
five
folks
that
are
with
us
on
the
zoom
call,
who
are
going
to
provide
opposition
testimony
and
we'll
have
a
chance
to
ask
them
some
questions.
A
If
you
have
them
and
then
after
that,
we'll
go
to
the
phone
line,
so
I
have
with
us
miss
mackenzie
warren,
miss
susie,
vasquez,
miss
tiffany
banks.
Mr
dave
tina
and
mr
david
dazzlich
so
we're
going
to
give
them
all
an
opportunity
to
make
their
opposition
test
to
give
their
opposition
testimony
and
then
we'll
take
questions
so
miss
warren.
I
imagine
we'll
start
with
you
welcome
to
the
assembly
judiciary
committee
and
please
provide
your
testimony.
S
S
We
would
of
course
like
to
acknowledge
the
sponsor
assemblyman
watts
for
spending
what
amounts
to
now
hours
of
work
with
us
and
the
nevada
realtors
to
try
and
reach
consensus.
We
will
continue
that
work
together.
The
apartment,
association
and
realtors
have
submitted
an
amendment
for
your
consideration
and
section.
One
of
our
amendment
retains
that
30-day
notice
period
in
current
law,
section
2,
proposes
that
automatic
stealing
of
non-payment
evictions
shall
pertain
to
those
tenants
impacted
by
cobit
19
and
covered
under
the
cdc
declaration.
S
We
view
the
extension
of
these
notice
provisions
as
reactionary
to
the
pandemic
and
as
an
industry,
we
have
been
under
an
eviction
moratorium
for
nearly
a
year,
and
we
strongly
feel
that
now
is
not
the
time
to
tinker
or
interfere
with
current
law.
These
extensions
will
have
a
devastating
blow
on
nevada's,
scarce,
short-term
housing,
inventory
and
affordability.
S
Our
real
experience
tells
us
that
most
tenants
do
not
engage
in
the
process
until
the
eve
of
a
lockout
until
that
notice
is
taped
on
their
door,
and
it's
usually
at
that
moment
that
tenants
then
engage
and
spring
to
action.
And
while
the
thinking
is
well
intended
by
the
sponsor
that
by
giving
people
two
or
three
more
months
will
help.
In
fact,
when
an
eviction
is
set
to
occur,
we've
reached
an
impasse
allowing
the
tenant
to
remain
in
a
unit
or
rental.
S
S
Tenants
elect
this
rental
option
that
provides
the
flexibility
and
the
ability
to
terminate
quickly
and
requiring
a
landlord
to
provide.
This
much
notice
will
force
landlords
to
re-evaluate
offering
short-term
rental
housing
at
all
and
hearing
today
many
times
that
ab-141
does
not
apply
to
lease
agreements
with
a
fixed
end
date
and
only
applies
to
tenants
without
a
lease
or
month
to
month,
then
the
language
should
be
amended
to
specifically
state
the
same.
S
Turning
to
section
two,
notably,
our
amendment
proposes
a
substantial
compromise
here
as
an
industry.
I
want
to
be
clear.
We
are
generally
opposed
to
automatic
stealing
of
eviction
records,
because
we,
as
business
owners
and
landlords,
rely
on
this
critical
information
in
deciding
how
much
risk
to
take
on
in
selecting
our
tenant,
regardless.
The
market
tends
to
take
care
of
her
itself
and
the
markets.
So
as
the
market
changes,
so
do
we
landlords
adjust.
S
Accordingly,
nevada
saw
this
through
the
great
recession,
where
thousands
of
tenants
unfortunately
had
foreclosures
or
evictions
on
their
records,
and
we,
as
landlords
could
not
and
did
not
scrutin
an
application.
If
a
prospective
tenant
had
an
eviction
there,
because
chances
are
the
next
applicant
would
too.
This
was
the
sad
norm
and
during
those
years
and
likely
during
the
years
that
follow
the
pandemic,
we'll
see
that
trend
and
we
as
landlords
will
be
forced
to
look
past
it.
S
We
will
have
no
choice
because,
as
the
markets
adjust
so
do
we,
regardless
existing
nrs,
allows
tenants
to
file
a
motion
to
seal
their
eviction
record
of
any
kind,
and
a
blanket
seal
as
ab141
suggests,
does
not
protect
our
industry.
Instead,
we
are
offering
the
eviction
records
for
non-payment
of
rent
be
automatically
sealed
in
those
cases
where
the
tenant
has
signed
the
cdc
declaration
and
is
a
covered
person.
S
A
K
Thank
you,
cherry
yeager,
vice
chairwin
and
members
of
the
assembly
judiciary,
suzy,
vasquez,
executive
director
of
the
university
department
association
for
the
record.
Nvsaa
represents
737
communities
with
nearly
156
000
units,
75
property
management
companies
and
155
supplier
partners
from
73
different
industries.
All
in
all,
we
represent
67
percent
of
all
apartment
units
in
nevada,
mackenzie,
provided
the
reasons
why
we
opposed
ab141
from
a
practical
standpoint.
K
I
want
to
share
some
examples
of
what
I've
heard
from
my
members,
but
first
a
recent
fact.
I
stumbled
upon
in
2021
nevada
has
1100
fewer,
affordable,
low-income
housing
tax
credit
units
than
we
did
in
2020.
after
the
2019
legislative
session.
A
few
owners
told
me
that
was
the
final
straw
and
they
were
pulling
out.
My
thought
was:
okay,
you're
angry
and
it
will
pass.
I
was
wrong.
K
This
bill
may
have
similar
implications.
I
am
receiving
on
average
five
calls
a
week
from
with
the
same
story.
If
this
passes
I'm
selling.
Eighty
percent
of
those
calls
are
from
owners
with
fewer
than
30
units,
many
of
which
keep
their
rents
lower
than
market
many
times
two
to
five
hundred
dollars
per
month,
lower.
In
order
to
keep
good
residents,
new
owners
will
either
opt
to
own
or
occupy
or
raise
the
rent
to
market
rate.
K
K
A
E
E
This
bill,
as
drafted,
would
mandate
that
landlords
give
tenants,
60
or
90
days
notice,
depending
on
the
length
of
tenancy,
as
we
have
heard
you,
as
we
have
heard,
and
as
you
may
hear
today,
landlords
are
desperately
struggling
and
bearing
the
brunt
of
the
burden
when
a
landlord
gives
a
30-day
notice.
It
is
because
the
lease
is
in
a
month
to
month,
typically
after
the
initial
lease
term,
the
lease
reads
that
either
party
can
give
a
30-day
notice.
E
Existing
law
allows
a
tenant
that
is
60
and
over
or
has
a
disability
to
request
from
their
landlord
an
additional
30
days.
We
understand
that
some
tenants
may
need
additional
time
and
the
law
provides
for
that.
If
a
landlord
were
to
deny
that
request,
a
judge
most
certainly
would
grant
it
as
needed.
Those
that
truly
need
this
additional
time
are
afforded
that.
In
addition,
the
judge
has
the
ability
to
stay
the
execution
up
to
10
additional
days
as
they
see
fit
using
their
judicial
discretion.
E
This
means
that
a
tenant
could
potentially
have
70
days
notice
under
existing
law.
Unfortunately,
tenants
do
not
begin
the
move
out
process
until
the
very
last
chance
they
have
to
move
out,
whether
through
the
eviction
process,
notice
provision
in
the
lease
or
otherwise
affording
them
additional
notice
will
not
solve
current
problems,
only
exacerbate
them
further.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
Today.
A
T
Good
morning,
I'm
dave
tina
broker
a
broker
owner
of
a
real
estate
office
in
las
vegas.
As
your
legislative
chair,
I
am
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
more
than
18
000
members
of
the
nevada
realtors,
who
are
opposed
to
ab141.
T
T
T
Our
greatest
concerns
concern
stems
from
the
unintended
consequences
on
this
bill.
Mom
and
pop
landlords
have
been
hammered
through
no
fault
of
their
own
from
this
pandemic
and
through
the
governmental
moratoriums
that
have
been
put
in
place,
they
still
need
to
make
their
mortgage
payments
hoa
payments
pay
their
taxes
and
the
governmental
assistance
to
date
has
been
focused
on
tenants
initiating
access
to
initiating
actions
to
access
this
assistance,
rather
than
focusing
on
the
mom-and-pop
landlords
landlords
and
providing
them
assistance
and
relief.
T
The
fee
small
landlords
are
stressing
that
properties
are
becoming
too
difficult
to
manage
in
this
and
by
environment
anecdotally,
we
know
and
are
experienced
the
great
influx
of
out-of-state
buyers
moving
to
nevada
and
buying
these
properties
as
owner
occupying
occupants
from
exhausted
landlords,
which
is
in
turn
reducing
the
number
of
available
rentals
for
tenants.
Our
association
is
strongly
committed,
encouraging
our
members,
property
managers,
landlords
and
tenants
to
work
together
during
these
trying
times,
and
we
will
continue
to
do
so.
Thank.
A
O
O
We
have
to
bring
opposition
to
section
one:
we're
opposed
to
providing
longer
term
changes
to
the
nevada,
revised
statutes
in
the
form
of
pandemic
response
bills.
Section
one
is
a
long-term
change
in
a
bill
that
is
responding
to
a
situation
that
has
been
exacerbated
by
the
pandemic,
as
you've
heard
from
the
apartment,
association,
the
realtors
and
some
of
the
landlords.
This
is
going
to
have
an
extreme
adverse
effect
on
not
only
the
availability
of
market
rate
housing,
but
the
affordability
as
well.
O
This
has
been
a
challenge
that
the
vegas
chamber
has
been
engaged
on
since
before
the
pandemic
and
is
very
necessary
as
we
try
to
diversify
our
economy
and
rebuild
the
availability
and
affordability
of
market
rate.
Housing
has
a
significant
effect
on
the
relocation
of
companies
and
industries
that
we
desperately
need,
as
we
rebuild
our
economy
and
make
ourselves
more
resilient
to
future
recessions
and
pandemics.
O
A
A
Perhaps
I'll
go
to
ms
warren
and
if
you
want
to
answer
it
great,
if
not,
if
you
want
to
designate
somebody
else,
I
just
don't
think
we're
going
to
have
time
for
everybody
on
the
zoom
to
answer
all
the
questions
so
I'll
go
to
you
as
point
to
kind
of
decide
where
that
question
should
best
be
answered
so
so
far
I
have
three
questions
out
there
we're
going
to
go
to
assemblywoman
cohen,
then
assemblywoman,
kasama
and
then
assemblywoman
summers,
armstrong.
So,
let's
start
with
assemblywoman
cohen.
K
Thank
you,
chair
and,
and
thank
you
all.
C
For
your
testimony,
miss
warren,
I
I
want
to
make
sure
I
understood
what
you
said
about
section
one
and.
K
C
K
C
Have
written
it
down
before
everyone
else
testified,
but
are?
Are
you
saying
that
you
said
that
if
section
one
is
just
for
the
for
the.
C
S
Mackenzie
warren,
thank
you
assemblywoman
for
the
question.
I
believe
you're
talking
about
the
portion
of
my
testimony
when
I
noted
that
you
know
time
and
time
again
this
morning,
we've
heard
that
ab141
does
not
apply
in
in
the
situation
of
a
lease
agreement
with
a
fixed
end
date,
and
it
only
applies
to
tenants
without
a
lease
or
those
that
are
that
are
month
to
month,
and
so,
if
that
is
the
case,
then
we
would
like
that
explicitly
stated
in
the
bill.
S
Out
so
I
I
may
have
three
letters
behind
my
name:
mackenzie
warren,
for
the
record.
I
don't
practice
in
eviction
court
I'll,
kick
it
to
tiffany
banks
with
the
realtors.
She
wants
to
tackle
that.
E
Hey
tiffany
banks
for
the
record,
thanks
mackenzie,
so
nrs
40.250
is
the
section
of
law
that
talks
about
the
holdover
that
occurs
after
the
period
of
time
of
the
one-year
lease,
and
the
section
that
this
is
in
section.
40.25
is
the
section
that
then,
is
covered
under
the
month
to
month
or
the
week
to
week.
What
mckenzie
is
asking
for
is
because
of
how
it's
drafted
and
again,
because
of
the
confusion
that
we're
concerned
that
landlords
and
tenants
alike
will
be
faced
with
because
of
how
it's
drafted.
E
Some
landlords
and
tenants
may
think
that,
oh,
if
I've
been
in
the
property
for
more
than
a
year
and
I've
been
in
a
fixed
term,
lease
and
I've
been
in
the
property
for
two
years
of
two
years
of
a
fixed
term.
That
then
two
five
one
applies
or
two
five
zero
applies.
It
leads
to
the
confusion
that
we're
very
very
concerned
with
with
this
bill
and
that
tears
and
just
how
you're
concerned
just
how
you're
confused
today,
our
landlords
and
tenants
are
going
to
be
confused
the
same
way.
C
E
Tiffany
banks
for
the
record
so
so
currently
how
a
lot
of
lisa's
read
is
that
a
lease
is
for
a
set
period
of
time,
so
a
one-year
lease
and
then
it'll
say
that
it
goes
month
to
month
thereafter
until
either
party
either
the
landlord
or
tenant
gives
a
30-day
notice.
So
at
that
point,
when
it
switches
to
the
month
to
month,
then
yes,
40.251
applies
so
a
landlord
and
tenant
would
be
responsible,
then,
for
entering
into
another
term.
Leave
in
that
case,
rather
than
just
letting
it
go
to
month
to
month.
N
Thank
you
chair,
and
my
question
goes
to
tiffany
or
mckenzie.
Whoever
wants
to
answer
that
question.
Are
there
currently
mechanisms
under
the
current
nrrs
statute
that
allows
for
the
sealing
of
eviction
records?
Do
we
already
have
that
in
place.
S
Mackenzie
warren
for
the
record.
Thank
you
assemblywoman.
We
do
have
that
mechanism
in
place
and
and
sort
of
the
the
findings
that
a
judge
needs
to
make
is
if
justice
requires
and
if
there
are
extenuating
circumstances.
So
we
view
certainly
fallout
from
covet
and
the
pandemic
to
be
an
extenuating
circumstance.
S
I
don't
have
hard
numbers
and
facts
and
figures,
but
anecdotally,
for
those
attorneys
that
spend
lots
of
time
in
justice
court
where
those
those
motions
are
made.
Judges
are
liberally
granting
the
same
because
they
want
to.
S
You
know,
afford
that
ability
to
seal
their
their
record
if
they
had
an
extenuating
circumstance
like
covid,
which
is
why
our
our
amendment
in
section
2,
seeks
to
automatically
seal
those
records
of
those
that
have
signed
that
cdc
declaration,
and
I
have
to
push
back
a
little
bit
about
something
that
was
stated
in
the
bill
presentation
that
the
tenants
are
finding
it
impossible
to
navigate
this
environment.
S
We
know
that
thousands
of
nevadans
have
signed
the
cdc
declaration
and
the
court
codes
the
cases,
but
that
cdc
declaration
is
part
of
that
file
and
the
automatic
ceiling
would
not
be
unduly
burdensome
in
that
regard.
To
add
the
cdc
decoration
as
a
requirement
for
automatic
sealing
of
non-payment,
evictions.
N
So,
regarding
the
the
the
ceiling
of
the
eviction
records
this
this
proposal
in
section
two,
so
the
way
you
look
at
that
it
wouldn't
be
only
for
non-payment
of
rent.
If
a
person
had
the
if
the
person
was
employed
had
federal
assistant
funds,
had
the
ability
to
pay
and
chose
not
to
that
person
would
still
have
their
eviction
records
sealed
under
this.
Currently,
the
way
it's
written
is
that
correct.
S
Mckenzie
warren
for
the
record
that
is
correct
and
again
that
was
the
intent
for
us
to
come
to
the
table
with
something,
and
I
will
say
that
that
was
not
easy
to
get
the
apartment
association
and
the
realtors
our
clients
to
to
agree
to
that,
because
the
market
does
adjust-
and
you
know,
sort
of
an
undertone
of
this
pandemic
is
there's
a
lot
of
misinformation
out
there,
but
we
know
that
there
are
tenants
that
are
receiving
either
assistance
or
they've
had
no
change
in
income
and
that
they're
they're
simply
using
that
moratorium
in
an
adaptation
in
an
advantageous
way
to
get
out
of
their
rental
obligations,
which
is
why
8141
is
currently
drafted,
protects
everyone
and
to
us
it
should
be
those
that
are
truly
impacted
and
have
signed.
S
You
know
a
sworn
legal
document
under
the
penalty
of
perjury
that
they've
been
impacted.
We
want
to
protect
those
people.
We
want
to
do
our
part,
as
we've
done,
providing
essential
housing
for
the
last
year
and
many
instances
rent
free.
We
feel
that
that
is
a
fair
compromise
to
capture
those
that
that
are
truly
impacted
and
covered.
N
B
S
Mackenzie
warren
for
the
record.
Thank
you
assemblywoman
a
resounding
yes,
we
have
put
out
email
blasts
flyers
talking
to
tenants
going
door
to
door.
In
some
instances,
the
apartment
association
has
been
offering
this
the
cdc
declaration
as
a
safe
harbor
as
it's
intended
to
function.
This
is
a
legal
document
that
halts
the
process
and
gives
people
the
breathing
room
that
they
need.
S
We've
even
heard
in
some
instances
that
judges,
you
know
right
or
wrong
for
inserting
themselves
in
the
process
are
handing
it
to
tenants
that
stand
before
them.
As
you've
heard,
legal
aid
is
doing
their
part
and
trying
to
get
out
the
word
with
the
cdc
declaration
and-
and
we
know
that
thousands
of
nevadans
have
taken
advantage
of
this
of
this
safe
harbor
and
have
utilized
that
declaration.
B
Would
sure
if
I
could
have
a
follow-up
could
legal
aid?
Please
speak
to
that,
because
I
think
that
we
have
conflicting
information,
because
there
has
been
discussion
about
people
falling
through
the
cracks,
and
I
know
at
the
beginning
of
the
pandemic,
when
I
had
folks
in
my
community
which,
by
the
way
before
the
pandemic,
have
15
unemployment,
and
I
don't
know
where
these
numbers
are
coming
from.
But
I
know
that
we
have
two
large
casinos
that
are
still
not
open.
B
So
I
think
that
our
unemployment
numbers
are
a
little
higher
than
what
was
stated
earlier.
Could
someone
from
legal
aid
please
speak
to
whether
or
not
the
tenants
that
they
are
trying
to
assist,
knew
about
the
cdc
declaration
and
how
that
process
worked.
A
And
if
I
could
interject
for
just
a
moment
assemblywoman
what
I'm
going
to
ask
our
folks
from
legal
aid
to
do
if
you
could
hold
that
question
and
address
it
in
your
concluding
remarks
just
so,
we
maintain
a
clear
record
that
we're
on
opposition
testimony
so
assemblywoman
will
get
that
question
answered
before
the
end
of
the
meeting.
I
want
to
make
sure
we're
trying
to
keep
things
as
orderly
as
possible
with
our
our
committee
minute.
So
did
you
have
another
question
for
anyone
who
testified
in
opposition
on
the
zoom.
B
I
I
guess
what
concerns
me
is
how
we
deal
with
what
could
be
devastating
fallout
from
evictions
and
having
an
eviction
record
and-
and
I
know
you
all-
have
your
concerns-
the
members
in
your
organization
and
everybody
is
concerned,
but
I'm
going
to
give
you
just
a
small
antidote
and
I'd
like
you
to
help
me
understand
how
how
what
you
want
could
help.
B
I
have
someone
that
I
know
who
has
an
addiction
on
their
record
and
this
mom,
who
is
hard
working
with
two
beautiful
children
who
I
know
and
and
care
a
lot
about
because
of
an
eviction
that
happened,
that
was
of
no
fault
of
her
own,
ended
up
in
a
weekly
and
was
paying
rent
in
a
weekly
over
a
thousand
dollars
a
month
for
a
one
bedroom
weekly
and
could
not
ever
get
ahead.
B
Finally,
something
happened
broke
out
recently
and
she
was
able
to
move,
but
a
thousand
dollars
a
month
for
a
weekly
is
a
lot
of
money,
and
I
think
that
it
is
disingenuous
for,
from
my
perspective,
to
ask
someone
who's
paying
that
kind
of
money
to
be
able,
in
seven
days,
to
come
up
with
a
first
month,
rent
for
a
new
place,
the
security
deposit
for
a
new
place,
and
I'm
just
having
a
hard
time
figuring
out.
B
Why
the
ask
for
30
days
or
60
days
or
90
days,
considering
the
length
of
a
person's
tendency
in
good
faith,
people
who
are
paying
why
this
is
so
difficult
and
why
you
all
don't
believe
that
seeing
the
records
of
folks
during
this
pandemic
only
is
such
a
big
deal.
I
I
just
I'm
I'm
struggling
with
with
what
really
appears
to
be
lack
of
compassion
and
sensitivity
in
this
very
difficult
and
traumatic
period
of
time.
S
Mackenzie
warren
for
the
record.
Thank
you
assemblywoman.
I
I
hear
two
questions
within
what
you
just
shared
and
the
first
speaks
to
your
example
of
your
friend
with
the
eviction
on
her
record.
S
S
So
if
you
were
to
change
that
say,
say
she
was
able
to
to
manage
that
thousand
dollars
a
week
and
she
hung
around
for
three
years
and
now
all
of
a
sudden.
The
landlord
now
needs
to
give
this
this
three
month
period.
Does
that
disincentivize
our
our
landlords
from
option
from
offering
those
short-term
options,
those
weekly
and
those
those
monthlies?
S
So
that's
more
the
point
I'm
trying
to
make
and
to
your
second
question,
with
with
the
declaration
and
and
where
our
pushback
is
on,
allowing
folks
to
get
their
record
sealed
and
the
lack
of
compassion.
I
have
to
tell
you
that
we've
had
immense
compassion
for
our
attendants.
We've
had
some
landlords
that
have
just
written
run
off
entirely.
S
We've
used
our
our
community
clubhouses
and
our
leasing
offices
as
internet
hubs
to
let
kids
access
school
we've
printed,
the
cdc
deck
for
them
and
handed
it
to
them.
We
we
have
given
up
toilet
paper,
we
have
given
backpacks
and
pizzas,
and
and
and
that
that
support
and
commitment
that
we
provide
to
our
attendance
remains
because
truly
we
are
not
in
the
business
of
evicting
people,
and
I
have
to
say
that
again,
we're
not
in
the
business
of
evicting
people.
S
We've
seen
great
success
with
payment
arrangements
of
those
tenants
of
the
apartment
association
that
are
behind
nearly
70
percent
of
those
people
have
entered
into
a
payment
arrangement
with
us.
Our
amendment
simply
seeks
to
refine
the
ceiling
to
impact
those
that
are
struggling
because
we
have
made
that
cdc
declaration
to
our
attendance
at
every
available
opportunity.
Legal
aid
is
also
part
of
that
mission.
Judges
other
community
groups,
as
you've
heard
from
by
testimony
today.
The
compassion
is
there.
We
need
the
law
to
be
contoured
to
protect
both
the
landlord
and
the
tenant.
B
Chair
yeager,
one
more
question:
is
there
a
financial
ability
for
landlords
and
apartment
owners
to
write
off
the
types
of
losses
that
they
use,
that
they
may
have
encountered
during
coven,
and,
and
if
that
is
so-
and
I
do
believe
that
it
is,
can
you
see
the
the
how
that
is
a
and,
and
if
that
is
so,
what
I
do
believe
it
is?
B
I
think
that
what
this
bill
is
asking
is
for
a
similar
type
of
write-off,
if
you
please,
for
those
who
are
not
property
owners
who
don't
have
tax
shelters
for
them
to
be
able
to
to
make
it
through
and
get
another
apartment
it
by
not
allowing
the
write-off.
B
Quite
frankly,
you
force
people
into
situations
of
daily
weakness,
because
they're
the
only
places
that
will
take
them
when
they
have
an
eviction
and
and
and-
and
I
understand
that
you
all
are
saying
that
the
market
will
correct
itself.
But
that
sounds
great
in
theory
in
actuality.
That
is
really
not
what
we
are
seeing
happening.
We
are
seeing
people
being
unable
to
secure
housing.
B
So
this
is
a
really
tough
situation
for
me
in
my
community,
and
I
I
just
wish
that
that
there
could
be
some
middle
ground
here,
but
regardless
you
know,
I'm
listening
and
I'm
trying
to
understand.
S
S
We
saw
that
after
the
great
recession,
people's
credits,
dipped
evictions,
foreclosures
on
on
the
record,
and
you
couldn't
scrutinize
and
reject
an
apple
applicant,
because
perhaps
the
next
person
behind
was
going
to
have
have
a
similar
history
so
truly
as
the
boots
on
the
ground,
those
that
have
been
through
similar
emergency
situations
as
as
the
pandemic
the
market
does
and
and
it
will
correct
itself
and
then
landlords
adjust
accordingly.
That
is
our
experience.
Thank
you.
S
B
You
miss
miss
warren.
B
I
I
think
what
we're
what
we
are
missing
is
that
in
the
in
the
present
right
now
the
detriment
people
can't
wait
for
the
market
to
correct
itself
if
they're
looking
for
housing
today
and
if
people
have
to
send
their
have
to
get
back
to
work
and
they
need
some
place
to
live,
how
long
before
the
market
corrects
itself
and
what
happens
in
the
interim
and-
and
I
think
that
it's
a
small
ask,
because
you
all
still
have
the
law
in
your
in
your
to
evict
people
with
it
with
the
prior
who
don't
pay.
B
So
I
I
think
that
we
we've
got
to
look
at
the
at
the
present,
the
right
now
and
and
to
hold
up
help
for
everyone
just
for
a
few
bad
actors.
The
sun
shines
on
on
good
and
evil.
The
shines
on
nice
people
and
bad
people,
and
sometimes
we
can't
parse
every
little
thing,
and
how
are
we
going
to
afford?
Are
you
all?
Do
you
have
a
suggestion
on
how
to
finance
this
carve
out?
We
don't
have
money
in
the
state
budget.
So
how
do
you
all
propose
to?
B
A
And
suddenly
one
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
encourage
the
two
of
you
to
perhaps
continue
that
discussion
offline,
we're
getting
a
little
a
little
further
away
from
the
content
of
the
bill,
so
appreciate
the
conversation,
but
want
to
ask
you
to
if
you
can
continue
that
beyond
the
contours
of
the
meeting,
because
I
want
to,
I
want
to
move
on
to
make
sure
we
have
enough
time
to
hear
from
some
folks
on
the
phone
as
well.
So
I
want
to
go
to
two
additional
questions
and
then
we're
gonna
go
to
phone
testimonies.
A
K
Thank
you,
chair
and,
and
I
promised
it
was
just
a
quick
question,
but
I
just
one
quick
comment:
I
I
hope
that
we
all
understand
that
this
is
not
lack
of
compassion,
that
we
have
questions
about
legislation
that
can
have
unintended
consequences
that
could
harm
the
market.
K
In
particular,
I
have
lived
this
I'm
the
I
was
raised
by
a
single
I've
lived
these
very
scenarios
that
have
been
discussed,
but
I've
also
seen
landlords
work
with
my
mother
and
so
we're
trying
to
navigate
some
difficult
issues
and
with
that
being
said,
my
question
would
be
to
agree,
particularly
in
regards
to
the
amendment
the
nevada
state,
apartment
association
and
nevada
realtors.
K
So
I
see
that
there
is
this
middle
ground
that
we're
being
asked
to
put
forth.
You
know
in
discussing
this
legislation
that
in
section
two,
the
amendment
says
and
the
case
court
file
that
includes
a
signed,
tenant,
cdc
declaration
to
allow
for
the
ceiling.
I'm
I'm
curious
what
what
if
you
could
expand
on
what
benefits?
K
S
Warren
for
the
record.
Thank
you
assemblywoman
for
the
for
the
question.
We
see
it
as
a
benefit
to
our
members,
because
it
gives
us
something
and
and
at
the
risk
of
sounding
callous.
I
have
to
just
share
stories
of
what
our
property
managers
are
seeing
boots
on
the
ground.
Is
that
tenants
that
they
know
have
not
lost
their
jobs?
They
can
they
can
see
the
new
car
in
the
carport.
They
can
see
shopping
bags
whatever
it
is.
S
They
know
there
are
tenants
that
are
not
impacted
by
the
pandemic
and
are
using
the
moratorium
as
as
as
a
blanket
excuse
to
avoid
their
rental
obligations,
and
so
our
amendment
protects
those
tenants
that
are
truly
covered
and
it
allows
us
to
taper
those
automatic
ceilings
to
those
that
are
impacted,
because
I
have
to
push
back
on
on
another
statistic:
with
from
the
gwen
center
a
half
a
million
nevadans
facing
eviction,
I
had
one
of
my
members,
one
of
our
largest
members
ovation,
property
management.
S
S
There
are
thousands
thousands
of
tenants
that
are
on
a
payment
plan,
perhaps
we're
taking
less
now
when
things
improve
for
them,
then
we
can
be
made
whole,
but
it's
just
just
as
tenants
are,
are
viewing
the
cdc
declaration
and
this
eviction
moratorium
as
a
way
to
skirt
their
their
rental
obligations.
S
That's
dangerous
thinking
so
is
throwing
out
a
number
of
500
or
half
a
million
nevadans
facing
evictions,
because
our
statistics
belie
those
numbers.
A
D
Hello,
thank
you
so
much.
Mr
chair,
assemblywoman
gonzales
assembly
district
16..
I
kind
of
have
two
questions.
My
first
question
is
in
regards
to
the
cdc
declaration.
I'm
just
curious:
what
is
the
timeline
so
like
if
someone
goes
and
applies
for
the
cdc
declaration?
What
and
how
long
does
it
take
for
them
to
hear
back?
Is
it
like
an
automatically
granted
thing
and
then
how
does
that
play
in
with
stopping
their
eviction
and
then
my
other
question
is
I've
heard
a
lot
of
testimony
about
extending
this
this
eviction
period
right?
D
If,
if,
if
the
claim
is
that
that
inventory
is
an
issue
regardless,
if
you
evict
someone
at
a
week
or
90
days,
you're
still
going
to
have
someone
that's
going
to
fill
that
unit.
So
I'm
just
really
trying
to
understand
the
pushback
on
the
timeline
of
eviction.
S
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
mackenzie
warren
for
the
record
I'll
tackle
the
first
question
about
the
cdc
declaration
and
then
I'll
have
tiffany
banks
answer
the
second
question
about
the
notice
provisions
so
to
be
clear
that
the
cdc
declaration
is
a
form.
It's
not
an
application,
there's
no
consideration
or
a
process
where,
where
it
is
weighed,
in
fact,
we
don't
even
question
the
veracity
of
this
attestation
and
under
law
we
cannot.
S
Similarly,
most
judges
are
not
questioning
the
veracity
of
this
declaration,
because
this
cdc
deck
is
a
form
and
it's
a
sworn
document
under
penalty
of
perjury,
that
when
a
person
signs
that
document,
they
are
saying
that
they
have
been
impacted
by
covid
and
are
covered
and
cannot
be
evicted.
So
the
mechanics
of
the
cdc
deck
are
really
simple.
All
a
tenant
has
to
do
is
sign
it
when
they
present
that
to
their
landlord.
The
landlord
has
the
onus
and
the
responsibility
to
get
that
deck
on
file
with
the
court.
S
So
so,
let's,
let's
go
there
las
vegas
justice
court,
which,
by
estimation
handles
90
of
all
evictions
in
the
state
currently
has
an
administrative
order
in
place
and
and
what
it's
saying
is
that,
during
the
moratorium,
if
a
tenant
has
signed
the
cdc
declaration
to
obtain
a
stay,
basically
a
halt
to
the
process,
there
are
two
things:
it's
remove
either
removed
from
calendar
entirely
or
it's
set
as
a
status
check
for
some
time
after
the
moratorium.
So
ostensibly
we'd
be
talking
about
april
here
right
if
the
moratorium
ends
march
31st.
S
So
then,
pursuant
to
this
administrative
order,
the
landlord
has
30
days
to
place
that
item
back
on
calendar
and
if
that
doesn't
occur
within
the
30
days,
then
the
case
is
sealed
as
if
it
never
happened.
So
this
is
again
yet
another
stop
gap
and
another
measure
that
is
existing
in
this
las
vegas
justice
court
order
to
to
allow
those
that
are
protected
under
the
cdc
declaration
for
their
cases
to
be
sealed
in
the
event
that
the
landlord
doesn't
engage
and
to
your
to
your
also
your
point
assemblywoman
gonzalez.
S
Won't
we
just
find
another
attendant.
Yes,
we
will,
and
I
can't
speak
to
whether
we're
gonna
be
you
know,
filing
this
motion
to
get
things
back
on
calendar,
but
I'd.
E
Thank
you,
mackenzie
and
thank
you
assembly,
assemblywoman
gonzalez,
for
your
question,
tiffany
banks
for
the
record.
So
to
answer
your
questions
so
the
way
you
phrased
it
and
again
it
goes
to
the
confusion
of
this
bill.
This
language,
you
mentioned.
Why
is
it
bad?
Essentially,
they
give
extended
timelines
of
an
eviction
notice,
and
this
is
actually
not
an
eviction
notice.
E
The
timelines
in
this
bill
have
to
do
with
notice
requirements
in
that
period
of
the
month
to
month
lease,
and
so,
if,
if
a
landlord
is
struggling,
if
a
landlord
and
the
cases
that
we
hear
from
our
members,
we
have,
we
have
mom
and
pop
landlords
that
that
have
cancer
that
that
need
to
move
back
into
their
home,
because
they've
gotten
they've
moved
out
of
their
rental
property
that
they've
lost
their
job.
E
We
hear
all
of
these
different
situations
from
our
landlords,
our
mom
and
pops
that
need
to
gain
access
to
their
property
again
and
that's
where
the
notice
provision
discussed
in
section
one
comes
in
and
so
giving
that
additional
time.
Maybe
they
don't
know
that
they
need
to
move
back
in,
and
in
this
case,
after
all,
the
covid
a
lot
of
the
tenants
that
haven't
paid
rent
in
a
year,
they
they
can't
afford
it.
They
need
to
sell
it.
E
They
can't
afford
to
pay
the
property
taxes
anymore,
they're
struggling
and
they're
lost,
and
so
this
additional
timeline
for
for
them
would
be
astronomically
bad.
And
so
that's
what
this
section
deals
with
and
nothing
to
do
with
the
eviction
notice
itself.
But
the
timeline
for
just
a
general
notice
that
I
need
to
gain
access
again
to
my
property,
for
whatever
reason.
D
Thank
you
so
much
just
one
quick
follow-up
chair,
if
I
may
do
you
have
any
data
very.
D
Do
you
have
any
data
on
how
often
this
is
happening,
that
landlords
are
needing
to
move
back
into
their
homes
and
that
they
have
nowhere
to
go.
T
Can
I
this
is
dave
tina,
assembling
woman
hanson?
Can
I
answer
that
so,
basically,
what's
going
on
with
that,
they
may
have
two
rentals
and
one
rental
is
paying
so
they
they're
paying
that
mortgage.
But
then
the
other
rental
is
not
paying
and
they're
losing
it.
So
their
decision
is,
oh,
I'm
gonna
lose
all
my
rentals.
So
let
me
sell
this
one,
that's
available
for
me
to
tell
the
tenant
in
30
days.
Let's
say
that
they
don't
have
a
lease
and
they
have
to
move.
T
So
I
have
to
put
it
on
the
market
that
money
going
on
the
market
from
selling
the
house
is
saving,
maybe
their
house
themselves
or
their
other
rental.
So,
on
the
basis
when
you
look
at
this,
it's
judging
that
they're
getting
paid
and
it
seems
unreasonable
that
we're
worrying
about
these
days,
but
their
situations
are
becoming
just
as
dire
as
the
tenant
situation,
because
they're
losing
their
houses
and
sometimes
their
primary
house,
and
they
will
be
homeless
too.
So
I
hope
that
answers
that
situation
of
what's
going
on.
D
Thank
you
so
much.
I
just
wanted
to
correct
the
the
record.
I'm
assemblywoman
gonzalez.
I
think
you
mentioned
assemblywomanhansen
and
it
didn't
answer
my
question.
I
asked
if
you
had
any
data,
but
thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you
so
much
chair.
S
A
Great
thank
you.
Hopefully
everyone
can
hear
me
and
see
me
I'm
having
some
internet
issues
over
here
today,
so
here
we're
going
to
have
to
leave
it
at
that
for
questions
members.
If
you
had
additional
questions
that
you
were
not
able
to
ask,
I
would
ask
you
to
take
those
offline,
and
can
somebody
give
me
an
indication
that
you
can
actually
hear
me?
A
Okay,
so
I'm
seeing
a
thumbs
up,
I'm
sorry!
My
screen
is
a
little
bit
frozen
right
now,
so
I
wanted
to
make
sure
you
could
hear
me
so
for
those
in
opposition
on
the
zoom.
I
want
to
thank
you
for
being
here
members.
If
you
do
have
additional
questions,
I
can
get
you
contact
information
for
those
who
are
on
the
zoom,
but
I
do
want
to
go
to
the
phone
lines
to
take
some
opposition
testimony.
I
don't
know
if
we'll
be
able
to
get
through
it
all.
F
F
F
P
Good
morning,
chairman
yeager,
a
member
of
the
committee
erica
arthur
e-r-I-c-a
a-r-t-h-u-r
senior,
vice
president
of
ovation,
property
management
owned
by
alan
moleski,
located
in
southern
nevada.
We
own
and
manage
almost
9
000
units
incorporating
37
communities,
including
11
communities,
serving
low-income
seniors.
It
is
very
difficult
to
achieve
a
nuisance
eviction.
The
burden
of
proof
can
be
so
heavy
to
achieve
an
eviction
that
it
becomes
virtually
impossible.
P
This
causes
residents
affected
by
a
problematic
neighbor
to
have
to
simply
live
with
it
or
move
out,
causing
the
landlord
additional
vacancy
loss,
etc.
I
cannot
think
of
a
time
we
have
issued
a
non-renewal
to
a
quality
resident
who
pays
their
rent
on
time.
As
others
have
stated,
we
are
in
the
business
of
providing
housing.
P
The
timeline
between
the
no
causes
served
in
the
actual
time
of
the
resident
vacating
can
be
at
best
uncomfortable
and
at
worst
dangerous.
Some
residents
can
become
hostile
and
threatening,
as
these
notices
are
typically
used
to
end
residency
for
problematic
residents,
multi-family
owners
have
been
forced
to
carry
a
large
financial
burden
throughout
the
pandemic.
P
No
other
industry
has
been
forced
to
maintain
full
service
while
essentially
giving
away
its
products
for
free
food
is
essential,
yet
grocery
stores
still
charge.
Gas
is
important,
yet
gas
stations
still
collect.
Would
legal
aid
continue
to
serve
their
clients
if
their
funding
stopped
and
they
had
to
work
for
free?
P
F
C
Good
morning,
mr
chairman
and
members
of
a
committee,
my
name
is
domina
bala
v-a-n-d-a-n-a
bala,
bha
lla,
and
I
am
a
property
manager
at
a
real
estate
company
that
manages
about
a
thousand
properties,
the
majority
of
them
being
mom
and
pop.
I
am
testifying
today
in
opposition
of
ab-141
this
bill
and
many
like
it
are
going
to
keep
landlords
from
providing
a
product
in
the
marketplace
that
many
tenants
desperately
need.
In
my
experience,
working
with
tenants,
many
truly
cannot
afford
to
buy
a
home.
So
renting
is
their
only
option.
The
legislation
is
this.
C
Legislation
is
going
to
make
it
harder
and
harder
for
us
to
provide
that
essential
product
rental
properties
most
recently-
and
this
was
not
a
hypothetical-
it
actually
happened.
I
had
a
tenant
that
didn't
pay
a
single
dime
per
month.
Twenty
thousand
dollars
later
the
tenant
appeared
in
court
and
the
judge
didn't
understand
if
the
cdc
or
nevada
declaration
applied
to
this
tenant,
even
though
the
tenant
admitted
under
oath
that
he
was
not
eligible
to
apply
for
assistance,
which
is
one
of
the
declarations
required
for
protection.
C
This
is
a
tenant
that
has
two
children
in
a
prestigious
private
school
personal
golf
court,
brand
new
mercedes
in
the
garage
and
membership
to
red
rock
country
club,
yet
says
he
can't
pay
his
rent.
The
judge
didn't
know
what
to
do
with
this,
but
I
want
you
to
consider
how
someone
can
pay
off
for
all
of
this
and
yet
not
a
dollar
in
renter
utilities.
We
eventually
got
him
out,
and
my
landlord
has
just
put
this
property
on
the
market
to
sell.
C
So
if
your
goal
is
to
have
rental
properties
being
sold,
passing
these
types
of
bills
will
absolutely
achieve
that
goal.
Furthermore,
this
bill
will
give
tenants
like
this
yet
more
time
to
stay
in
a
property
when
thinking
about
the
impact
of
this
bill.
Imagine
the
shortage
in
rentals,
which
will
drive
the
rental
prices
to
increase
at
an
even
faster
rate.
Mr
burchold
mentioned
that
it's
already
hard
enough
for
tenants
to
find
new
housing
now
think
about
the
impact
that
nevada
families
will
face
if
there
are
less
rentals
than
there
are
right
now.
C
F
F
R
For
the
record,
my
name
is
susan
fisher,
s-u-s-a-n
space
f-I-s-h-e-r.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
committee,
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today
for
in
full
disclosure.
I
also
represent
the
nevada
state
department,
association
and
nevada
housing
alliance,
but
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
a
private
business
person,
mr
leo
pagioni,
I
will
spell
his
name
for
the
record
as
well:
l
e
o
space
p,
o
g
g.
I
o
n
e
when
he
was
in
his
mid-20s.
R
R
We
are
in
opposition
to
ab141,
as
presented
he
has
indicated
he
could
live
with
with
the
bill
with
the
amendment
that
presented
by
the
apartment
association
and
the
realtors
we've
heard
today
about
inadequate
investment
into
affordable
housing,
there's
a
reason
why?
Because
it
costs
just
as
much
to
maintain
them
to
build
them
as
it
does
market
rate.
So
I
appreciate
the
time
to
put
his
comments
on
the
record.
Thank
you
very
much.
F
Q
Q
Q
I
dropped
off
groceries
supplies,
furniture,
allowed
late
payment,
partial
payments
and
still
maintained
repairs
on
the
property
rent
was
sporadic,
but
I
was
still
coming
in
until
about
july
when
the
tenant
stopped
communicating.
All
together,
I
stopped
by
the
property
to
find
that
my
tenant
could
not
pay
her
rent,
but
she
had
her
nails
done.
Q
Eyelash
extensions,
apple
airpods,
an
eighty
thousand
dollar
technical
launch
and
was
still
doing
odd
jobs
with
postmates
on
top
of
her
unemployment
with
1100
a
week,
my
tenant
was
making
more
on
unemployment
than
she
was
when
she
was
employed
and
stated
that
she
had
no
intention
of
returning
to
work.
Q
She
stopped
applying
for
rental
assistance
in
november
and
said
that
it
was
too
much
of
an
inconvenience
and
I
was
declined
for
any
landlord
assistance
in
february.
I
went
to
do
another
well
check
on
the
tenant
to
find
that
my
tenant
had
moved
out
in
the
middle
of
the
night
without
giving
any
notice
after
entering
the
property.
Q
This
pandemic
has
been
tough
on
everybody,
but
landlords
have
been
left
out
in
the
cold
instead
of
worrying
about
keeping
my
family
safe,
I
find
myself
working
seven
days
a
week
in
order
to
keep
our
heads
above
water.
I
hope
that
you
consider
the
small
mom
and
pop
investors
when
voting
against
this
belt.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
F
R
I
am
the
president
of
imperium
property
management
and
consulting
in
northern
nevada,
and
my
company
actually
spearheaded
a
program
that
did
mediation
to
prevent
evictions
for
the
city
of
sparc.
I
will
say
that
I'm
in
opposition
to
both
parts
of
this
bill.
There
are
provisions
that
already
exist
when
it
comes
to
notice
to
vacate,
and
especially
for
seniors
and
disabled
persons.
R
I
think
that
we
need
to
go
back
and
enforce
the
measures
that
were
passed
in
our
last
emergency
session
when
it
came
to
mediation
and
providing
those
resources
to
our
tenants
and
our
landlords
to
ensure
that
everybody
is
educated
about
what
the
process
is
and
how
to
avoid
an
actual
eviction
being
put
on
your
record.
There
are
so
many
people
in
our
community
right
now
who
are
doing
that
in
counseling
people
and
ensuring
that
actual
reasonable
processes
are
in
place.
So
judges
currently
have
the
discretion
to
steal
evictions.
R
I
see
no
reason
to
have
this
bill
put
in
and,
as
others
have
mentioned,
the
long-standing
effects
on
our
market
would
be
severe.
Having
worked
through
the
recession
in
property
management
back
in
2008
the
market
adjusts,
we
will
make
adjustments
for
people
who
do
have
evictions
on
their
records
due
to
covid.
R
R
That's
been
bulleted
out
in
our
eviction,
moratorium
forms
and
is,
and
the
judges
can
go
by
that
criteria.
Instead
of
just
saying
everybody
gets
a
free
pass,
essentially
again
t
tran
for
the
record
city
of
sparks,
and
I
appreciate
your
time
thank
you.
F
R
Lindsey
knox
s
a
l-I-n-d-s-a-y
k,
n
o
x,
representing
the
nevada
home
builders,
association,
terry
jager
and
esteemed
committee
members.
The
nevada
home
builders
association
is
a
statewide
organization
governed
by
members
of
the
builders
association
of
northern
nevada
and
the
southern
nevada
homebuilders
association.
R
The
nvhpa
represents
home
builders
throughout
the
state
and
engages
on
issues
of
state
wide
concern
to
home
building
industry.
There
is
no
question
that
the
kobit
19
pandemic
has
put
an
enormous
stress
on
nevadans
and
the
nevada
economy.
Homebuilders
have
been
fortunate
in
their
ability
to
provide
much-needed
jobs
to
nevadans.
During
this
pandemic,
we
oppose
ab-141
out
of
a
concern
that
it
will
have
an
unintended
consequence
of
slowing
the
housing
market
at
a
time
when
housing
supply
is
desperately
needed
to
keep
up
with
the
consumer
demand.
R
R
Ab141
would
implement
a
permanent
extension
to
eviction
notice
periods
to
nevada,
putting
the
putting
nevada
at
the
far
edge
of
such
periods
throughout
the
country.
Home
builders
are
concerned
that
rules
such
as
this
will
depress
the
construction
market
for
multi-family
rental
properties,
exacerbating
high
home
prices
by
limiting
the
supply
of
available
units.
We
urge
the
committee
to
reject
ab-141
and
allow
the
multi-family
market
to
continue
to
grow.
Naturally,
thank
you.
F
Q
Well
then,
hello,
mr
chairman,
and
members
of
the
committee,
sorry,
my
name
is
marlon,
say
that's
tse
and
I
regrettably
own
a
rental
property
in
las
vegas.
After
what
my
tenant
has
put
me
through
this
last
year,
I
have
now
been
diagnosed
with
anxiety
disorder.
Q
I
have
spent
sleepless
nights
having
panic
attacks,
not
knowing
where
to
turn
to
next.
I
relocated
because
of
a
job
two
years
ago,
and
I
rented
my
home
in
las
vegas
as
a
way
to
offset
my
rent
in
another
city.
I
have
been
furloughed
for
nearly
a
year
and
I've
drained
my
own
savings
to
continue
to
pay
my
rent
on
time.
Where
I
live
now.
Q
My
attendant
has
been
an
issue
since
the
day
she
moved
in
after
almost
a
year
of
not
paying
rent
and
not
responding
at
all,
my
property
manager
was
finally
able
to
get
into
the
unit
because
there
was
a
there
were
numerous
police
violations
occurring
to
our
astonishment
and
horror.
An
entirely
different
family
was
living
there.
That
said
that
they
were
related
to
the
tent.
Q
The
locks
had
been
changed
and
some
of
my
furniture
was
missing.
These
new
tenants
had
a
pet
that
had
destroyed
the
carpet
when
the
original
lease
did
not
allow
for
a
pet.
I
am
still
responsible
for
for
property
management
fees,
property
taxes,
lid
hoa
fees
and
with
no
money
coming
in
since
the
eviction
moratorium
began
at
the
end
of
march
2020.
I
don't
know
what
my
options
are.
Q
I
don't
even
have
the
option
of
moving
back
to
my
home
or
selling
my
hands
are
kind
of
tired,
I'm
I
am
the
sole
provider
for
my
family
and
I'm
not
urging
you
but
begging
you
to
require
that
tenants
take
accountability
for
their
own
actions.
There
has
to
be
a
fair
and
judicial
process.
Thank
you.
C
P-O-M-B-L-A-N-C-H-A-R-D
and
I'm
real
estate
broker
in
las
vegas,
I'm
testifying
to
the
opposition
141
prior
to
becoming
a
realtor.
I
was
met
at
the
united
states
navy
and
our
office
manages
approximately
a
thousand
rental
properties
in
the
las
vegas
valley,
and
I
value
the
importance
of
having
laws
that
protect
both
the
tenant
and
the
landlord.
C
If
this
bill
passes,
clients
have
instructed
us
to
sell
their
properties,
which
means
that
most
of
these
properties
will
be
bought
up
by
homeowners
that
intend
to
reside
in
their
homes,
which
would
create
even
less
rental
properties
available
to
tenants.
Mom
and
pop
landlords
are
just
finding
it
increasingly
difficult
to
survive
in
this
market.
C
Most
concerning
is
the
extended
timeline
for
notice.
In
section
one.
We
have
always
given
tenants
that
truly
need
additional
time.
More
time.
Landlords
will
never
recoup
money.
They
spend
fixing
their
property
after
a
tenant
has
had
time
to
damage
it
and
giving
additional
time
will
lead
to
a
substantial
increase
in
damage
to
properties
as
a
real
estate
professional
with
boots
on
the
ground.
We
know
the
impact
real
estate
has
on
our
nevada
economy.
C
Q
A
Time,
thank
you
for
your
testimony,
mr
blanchard,
and
thank
you
for
your
service
as
well.
We're
going
to
leave
opposition
and
testimony
there.
I
believe
there
were
other
folks
on
the
line,
but
in
the
interest
of
time
we
simply
have
to
move
on.
A
So
if
you
were
on
the
line
and
wanted
to
give
opposite
opposition
testimony,
I'm
sorry
we
were
not
able
to
accommodate
your
testimony
at
the
meeting,
but
I
would
encourage
you
to
provide
any
comments
that
you
have
in
writing
to
the
committee
and
we'll
be
sure
to
review
those
so
I'll
close
opposition
testimony.
I'm
now
going
to
open
it
up
for
neutral
testimony
on
assembly
bill
141.
F
F
F
D
Good
morning,
members
of
the
committee
and
chairman
yeager,
my
name-
is
jennifer
richards,
j
e
n
n,
I
f
e
r
r.
I
c
h
a
s
I
was
appointed
by
the
governor
to
serve
as
the
chief
elder
and
disability
rights
attorney
for
the
state
of
nevada,
which
is
housed
within
the
aging
and
disability
services
division.
I
also
serve
as
the
state
legal
assistance
developer
under
the
older
americans
act
and
oversee
our
legal
assistance
providers
throughout
the
state.
D
Since
many
individuals
in
the
aging
and
disability
community
are
at
higher
risk
for
contracting
the
coronavirus,
including
the
over
400
thousand
older
adults,
social
distancing
in
nevada,
it
is
critical
to
maintain
access
to
stable
housing,
nutrition
services
and
personal
care.
Services
for
seniors
and
persons
with
disabilities.
Housing
and
security
can
have
a
devastating
effect
from
which
they
may
never
recover.
D
D
I
have
submitted
written
testimony,
including
an
issue
brief
from
justice
and
aging
on
rental
burdens
for
old,
older
adults
and
nevada's
2021
elders
count
which
provides
authoritative
data
on
the
status
of
older
adults
in
nevada
across
all
racial
and
ethnic
categories.
A
higher
proportion
of
older
renter
households
face
significant
rental
cost
burdens
compared
to
the
rental
population
as
a
whole.
D
D
A
A
Thank
you
so
much
bps.
I
will
close
neutral
testimony
and
you
know
before
we
do
closings
on
the
bill.
I
just
would
like
to
note
for
the
record.
I've
been
keeping
a
track
of
time
and
trying
to
keep
this
hearing
as
fair
as
possible.
So
we
spent
about
an
hour
and
15
minutes
on
the
presentation
and
questions
we
had
35
minutes
of
supportive
testimony,
and
then
we
took
an
hour
and
eight
minutes
of
opposition
testimony
and
questions.
A
So
we
did
give
opposition
a
little
bit
more
time
than
support
to
be
able
to
get
through
that
and
then,
of
course,
we
just
had
neutral
testimony,
which
was
just
a
few
minutes,
but
I
wanted
to
again
apologize
to
those
who
were
not
able
to
participate
today
we
do
the
best
we
can
in
the
time
frame.
We
have
to
hear
these
bills,
but
would
again
encourage
anybody
to
provide
additional
comments
and
writing
if
they
have
them.
A
So
if
I
haven't
already
done
that
I'll
close
neutral
testimony
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
assemblyman
watts
and
our
friends
from
legal
aid,
and
if
I
could
just
remind
someone
from
legal
aid
to
address
miss
assembly,
one
summer's
armstrong
question
in
your
closing.
That
would
be
helpful,
so
assemblyman
watts
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you.
H
G
Thank
you,
bailey
bortlin,
for
the
record,
representing
the
nevada
coalition
of
legal
service
providers.
Thank
you
for
the
robust
conversation
and
the
time
that
you
have
given
to
this
issue.
It
has
been
the
issue
of
the
year
for
us.
It's
been
a
really
long
year
trying
to
keep
people
housed,
and
I
know
everyone's
temperatures
are
very
high.
G
I
apologize
I'm
not
trying
to
be
cheesy.
It's
just
been
a
really
long
year,
and
so
I
appreciate
assemblyman
watts
bringing
this
bill
and
really
spending
some
time
on
what
is
realistic.
What
doesn't
take
the
bar
too
far,
what
doesn't
turn
the
system
upside
down,
but
what
gets
people
a
little
bit
of
what
they
need
right
now
so
to
assemblywoman's
question
that
was
posed
earlier
to
legal
aid?
G
Has
it
been
do
most
people
get
legal
aid
was
sort
of
the
question
I
interpreted,
and
you
can
remind
me
if
that
wasn't
quite
your
question,
but
the
nevada
state
bar
in
conjunction
with
the
access
to
justice
commission
run
by
the
nevada
supreme
court.
G
So
what
that
has
meant
for
us
this
year
is
sort
of
akin
to
what
we've
seen
with
dieter
right.
So
dieter
was
there
and
they
were
doing
everything
that
they
could
and
they
just
weren't
prepared,
and
we
have
turned
our
lives
inside
out
to
help
as
many
people
as
we
can.
We
have
hired
additional
staff,
we've
also
taken
funding
cuts,
we've
also
taken
the
hit,
but
we
cannot
keep
up
with
the
sheer
volume
of
legal
needs,
especially
in
evictions
and
housing
that
people
are
facing.
G
So
for
the
lucky
few
that
do
get
through
to
a
legal
aid
provider
that
are
able
to
connect
with
us.
You
have
someone
to
help.
You
navigate
the
process
and
we've
taken
people
out
of
every
department,
we've
taken
people
off
of
every
issue
that
we
have
and
we
have
funneled
it
into
trying
to
prevent
evictions
in
every
way,
shape
and
form.
We
have
been
working
with
the
courts
and
the
supreme
court.
G
So
no,
not
everyone
knows
that
this
is
happening,
and
I
think
the
the
prime
example
of
what
we
see
on
a
day-to-day
basis
is
that
we
run
the
civil
law
self-help
center
inside
of
the
las
vegas
justice
court,
and
we
call
that
our
legal
emergency
room,
because
that's
where
people
come
when
they
have
a
legal
emergency,
typically
related
to
housing
and
evictions,
and
they
don't
know
what
to
do
or
how
to
file
or
what
comes
next
or
what
the
rules
are
or
where
to
find
help,
and
we
triage
and
we
get
people
connected
with
attorneys
and
forms
and
assistance.
G
And
I
will
say
to
this
day
the
vast
majority
of
people
that
walk
into
that
office
when
it's
open
or
who
are
calling
our
lines,
we've
set
up,
texting
and
emailing
and
phone
calls
to
try
to
continue
to
serve
people
during
the
pandemic.
The
vast
majority,
still
at
this
point
in
march,
have
no
idea
that
there
is
a
cdc
protection.
They
have
no
idea
that
there
is
a
cdc
declaration.
G
They
just
know
that
they're
being
evicted
and
that
they're
in
a
crisis
and
they
need
help
and
we
triage
from
there
and
those
are
the
people
that
know
how
to
reach
us
that
know
that
there's
a
civil
law
self-help
center.
So
it's
something
that
we
grapple
with
every
day
that
we
cannot
meet
the
legal
needs
and
we
are
helping
as
many
people
as
we
can.
But
the
vast
majority
of
people
just
simply
do
not
know
how
to
take
advantage
of
the
eviction
protections
that
have
been
put
in
place.
G
G
My
personal
opinion
is
that
we
should
steal
absolutely
everybody's
evictions.
We
should
just
call
it
a
wash.
It's
been
a
terrible
year
and
we
shouldn't
have
that
follow
people
forward,
but
by
just
doing
the
non-payment
of
rents,
it
is
targeted
and
then
we'll
go
we'll
go
from
there.
People
who
are
evicted
for
no
cause
because
the
non-payments
were
paused
but
were
really
evicted
because
they
couldn't
pay,
we'll,
try
to
find
them
and
we'll
try
to
educate
them
and
we'll
try
to
help
them
go
through
that
record.
Sealing
process
in
that
way.
G
So
I
appreciate
the
emotions
and
the
temperatures
and
what
everyone
has
said
here
today
to
channel
john
pirro,
your
resident
quoter
of
this
committee,
something
that
I
deal
with
something
I
my
mantra
has
been
we're
all
weathering
the
same
storm,
but
we're
in
different
boats
and
the
people
that
we
are
serving
show
up
to
the
courthouse
with
our
suitcases,
because
they
just
don't
know
where
they're
going
next
and
this
isn't
the
solution.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair
I'll,
be
as
brief
as
I
possibly
can.
I
just
also
want
to
acknowledge
this
hearing
has
again
resurfaced
the
unbelievable
human
toll
that
this
pandemic
has
taken
on
on
this
state
on
our
community
on
everyone.
H
The
health
toll,
the
emotional
toll,
the
mental
toll,
the
financial
toll,
and
I
want
to
recognize
that
that
does
that.
That
applies
no
matter
whether
you're,
a
property
owner
or
a
tenant
it
applies
is
this
pandemic
has
touched
us
all,
and
I
I
really
appreciate
the
the
questions
from
the
members
of
this
committee.
You
know
I.
H
I
appreciate
the
opposition
for
engaging
in
the
in
the
discussion
and
trying
to
find
some
way
that
we
can
advance
some
protections
for
for
folks
that
are
in
need
really
briefly
I'll,
speak
to
each
section
of
the
bill
to
section
one.
One
thing
that
we
didn't
really
get
clearly
covered
for
the
record,
but
it
is
in
the
amendment,
is
that
we
also
want
to
clarify
that
this
does
not
apply
to
commercial
properties.
H
We
had
been
reached
out
to
by
nayop
about
that
and-
and
they
wanted
to,
I
think,
they'll
be
sending
a
letter
but
wanted
to
express
that
they
are
neutral
on
the
legislation
with
the
proposed
amendment.
The
other
thing
I'll
just
say
about
notice.
Is
you
know
I?
I
did
a
count
and
there
is
some
form
of
extended
notice
passed
past.
H
Other
states
again
are
moving
past
having
an
eviction
without
cause
at
all,
and
you
know
I.
I
think
that
it
is
certainly
possible
for
us
to
make
this
adjustment
for
again
for
for
stable
tenants
who
are
not
to
make
sure
that
they
have
the
ability
to
figure
out
what
comes
next
for
them
and
that
we
can
do
that
without
it
causing
chaos
in
our
in
our
housing
market,
and
this
is
these
are
changes
that
do
exist
elsewhere
and
and
they're
getting
by.
H
I
think
on
section
two
with
the
the
ceiling
you
know,
we
recognize
that
there
are.
There
are
no
perfect
solutions.
These
are
difficult
issues.
It
would
be
great
if
we
could
have
a
court
look
at
every
single
case,
one
by
one
and
really
figure
out.
What
is
the
the
just
and
right
outcome?
H
You
know
we're
hoping
that
we
get
more
federal
resources
to
support
people,
but
what
we
know
is
that
when
these
protections
expire
there's
to
be
a
backlog
of
thousands,
tens
of
thousands
potentially
of
evictions
that
are
going
to
have
to
go
through
the
courts-
and
I
think
that
it
it's
puts
in
a
dif
an
additional
burden
to
also
have
to
process
thousands
or
tens
of
thousands
of
individual
record-sealing
decisions
to
see
who
qualifies
and
who
doesn't
even
under
the
proposed
amendment
by
the
opposition.
H
Somebody
who
is
malicious
could
sign
a
cdc
declaration
and
be
protected.
So
it's
difficult
to
there.
There
is
not
a
policy
that
really
accounts
for
every
individual
circumstance,
and
so
what
assembly
bill
141
seeks
to
do
is
to
create
a
systemic
solution
that
helps
make
sure
that
that
people
aren't
falling
through
the
cracks.
H
So
you
know
I.
I
know
that.
There's
concerns
about
wanting
this
information,
on
the
one
hand,
from
the
opposition,
but
also
stating
that
the
information
doesn't
really
matter
because
the
market
will
adjust.
So
I
would
prefer
that
we
have
the
policy
certainty
in
assembly
bill
141
to
ensure
that
this
does
not
follow.
People
and
create
those
collateral
consequences
when
they
look
to
to
find
house
their
next
housing.
A
Thank
you.
I
want
to
thank
miss
bortolin
and
mr
birch
told
for
for
the
work
that
you
do
day
in
day
out
helping
our
most
vulnerable.
It
certainly
has
been
a
trying
year
for
for
all
of
us,
but
probably
not
definitely
not
any
more
so
than
those
who
were
already
struggling
going
into
the
pandemic,
and
thank
you
for
being
here
this
morning
to
present.
Thank
you,
assemblyman
watts.
It
was
good
to
have
you
back
in
the
assembly
judiciary
committee.
A
So
I'm
going
to
close
the
hearing
now
on
assembly
bill
141
that
takes
us
to
our
next
item
on
the
agenda,
which
is
public
comment.
By
way
of
reminder,
we
reserve
up
to
30
minutes
for
public
comment
at
the
end
of
each
meeting.
Public
commenters
will
have
up
to
two
minutes
to
provide
public
comment
and
just
a
note.
Public
comment
really
is
a
time
for
individuals
to
address
matters
of
a
general
nature
that
are
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
assembly
judiciary.
A
Committee
public
comment
is
not
a
time
to
rehash
arguments
on
a
bill
or
not
a
time
to
provide
comments
that
we're
not
you're
not
able
to
provide
during
the
bill
hearings,
as
we've
now
closed
assembly
bill
141,
I
would
just
note
to
anyone
still
on
the
line
that
this
is
not
the
time
to
testify
on
that
bill.
That
time
has
now
passed.
This
is
a
time
for
public
comment
of
a
general
nature.
Bps.
Could
we
go
to
the
public
comment
line
and
see
if
there's
anybody
there
who'd
like
to
give
public
comment.
F
F
P
Anne-Marie
grant
a-n-n-e-m-a-r-I-e
my
brother,
thomas
purdy,
was
hard
time
by
reno
police
on
10
4
2015
during
a
mental
health
crisis.
Instead
of
getting
him
medical
attention,
they
hard
tied
him
and
dumped
him
up
at
washoe
county
jail.
Instead
of
the
deputies
heeding
the
pleas
of
my
brother
for
his
life,
they
chose
to
smother
him
to
death.
He
was
the
second
of
three
homicides
at
the
hands
of
deputies
at
the
jail
within
one
year.
There
have
already
been
four
deaths
under
the
new
sheriff
balaam
who
took
office
in
2019.
P
P
This
special
concern,
all
of
you,
the
county
commissioners,
are
required
to
get
a
bi-annual
report
from
the
sheriff
her
nrs
to
11.030.
The
last
time
he
gave
his
report
was
423
2019.
P
I
also
wanted
to
mention
that
the
jail
medical
vendor
nav
care
was
contributed
to
5
000
campaign
contributions
to
sheriff
balaam
shortly
before
election
day.
Nafta
is
a
german
medical
vendor
that
was
present
when
my
brother
and
all
three
men
were
killed
at
the
jail.
Their
contract
went
on
to
get
renewed
after
balaam
was
re-elected.
P
A
F
A
Thank
you
so
much
bps
and
as
always
thank
you
for
helping
us
manage
the
phone
line.
There
are
a
lot
of
people
on
there
today,
so
we
appreciate
the
work
that
you're
doing
to
make
these
meetings
possible
without
a
close
public
comment.
Anything
from
committee
members
this
morning
before
we
make
announcements.
A
I
don't
see
anything
I
want
to
thank
all
of
you.
Obviously
it
was
a
very
long
morning
and
a
very
in-depth
hearing,
but
I
think
the
record
that
was
made
on
that
bill
is
one
that
we
can
be
proud
of.
We
ask
good
questions.
We
treated
each
other
with
respect,
even
though
we
may
not
agree
on
the
policy,
and
I
think
that
really
highlights
the
best
of
the
legislative
process
and
certainly
can
make
all
of
your
constituents
proud.
So
thank
you
for
that
hearing
this
morning.
A
In
terms
of
where
we
go
from
here
tomorrow
morning,
we
do
have
a
committee
meeting
at
8
o'clock.
We
have
two
bills
on
the
agenda
tomorrow.
I
don't
believe
our
agendas
are
out
yet,
but
as
of
now,
we
are
planning
to
have
committee
meetings
at
least
monday
through
wednesday
of
next
week.
Monday
is
going
to
be
a
9
a.m
start,
so
we
should
get
an
extra
hour
in
the
morning,
but
that's
sort
of
where
we're
going
from
there
and
we'll
get
those
agendas
out
soon.
So
you
have
an
idea
of
what
bills
might
be
heard.