►
From YouTube: 5/27/2021 - Assembly Committee on Natural Resources
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
A
Here,
thank
you.
We
do
have
a
quorum
and,
madam
secretary,
if
any
other
members
arrive,
please
mark
them
present
when
they
do.
However,
I
know
there
are
multiple
committees
and
a
lot
of
things
going
on
right
now,
so
anyone
who
doesn't
make
it
please
mark
as
as
excused.
I
know
that
assuming
women
martinez
is
definitely
excused.
A
A
So
with
that
I
will
open
the
hearing
on
sb
454.
I
believe
we
have
mr
ferris
here
with
us
to
go
through
the
bill.
Welcome
back
mr
ferris,
you
can
proceed
whenever
you
are
ready.
D
Good
afternoon
sharon.
Thank
you,
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
doug
ferris
and
I
am
the
administrator
for
the
animal
industry
division
at
the
department
of
agriculture.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
appear
before
you
today
to
present
senate
bill
454,
which
provides
a
one
part
of
a
two-part
solution
to
solve
the
budget.
Problems
that
exist
in
budget
account
4546
the
livestock
inspection
program,
to
provide
some
background.
D
As
part
of
the
department's
response
for
long-term
financial
stability,
we
created
a
business
plan
that
not
only
solved
the
budget
portion
but
also
addressed
some
long-standing
quality
training
and
customer
service
issues.
Within
the
program,
the
business
plan
was
submitted
to
the
june
2020
ifc
and
submitted
as
a
budget
amendment
in
the
fy
2223
biennium
budget.
The
joint
committee
excuse
me,
the
joint
budget
committee
chose
not
to
approve
the
business
plan
in
part.
We
believe,
because
the
change
from
this
this
bill
was
not
in
place.
D
Yet,
as
I
mentioned,
this
bill
is,
is
a
part
of
a
two-part
solution.
The
first
part
is
an
increase
in
fees
for
service
that
has
to
go
through
the
administrative
rule,
making
process
we've
begun
that
process
and
have
had
two
workshops
with
industry.
The
first
first
workshop
was
held
on
january
14th,
and
the
second
workshop
was
on
may
18th.
D
The
next
step
in
that
process
is
the
hearing
with
the
intention
of
requesting
participation
on
the
first
legislative
commission
agenda
after
this
session.
The
second
part
of
the
solution
is
the
bill
in
front
of
you.
This
bill
was
a
recommendation
by
industry
to
reduce
the
need
to
solve
the
entire
to
reduce
the
need
to
solve
the
entire
budget
shortfall
by
fee
creases
solely.
D
There
are
approximately
5,
700
individuals
or
families
in
nevada,
with
a
registered
brand
with
the
department
of
agriculture.
The
brand
is
recorded
for
120
every
four
years
after
an
amendment
on
the
floor
of
senate
bill
450
on
the
senate
senate
bill
454
changes
the
brand
recording
time
period
from
120
every
four
years
to
200
every
five
years.
This
will
provide
approximately
a
hundred
and
twelve
thousand
dollars
annually
to
the
budget
account
as
part
of
the
overall
livestock
inspection
program
solution.
D
A
C
Thank
you
thanks
very
much
for
that
presentation.
I
just
have
one
question
relative
to
the
prorating
of
the
fees.
I
didn't
really
see.
I
read
in
here
in
this
bill
the
way
that
it's
presented.
It
does
not
look
like
if
you
were
yeah.
If
you
were
mid
stream,
that
you
would
have
any
credit
at
all
toward
when
your
fee
was
to
be
renewed.
So
I'm
curious
to
know
is
the
200
fee.
Gonna
start
the
day
you
apply
for
the
brand
and
then
go
for
that
period
of
time,
or
is
it
does
it
work
midway.
D
Thank
you
for
your
question
for
the
record.
Doug
ferriss.
You
are
correct
that
it
it
would.
It
would
start
midway
and
that's
the
way
it's
been
set
up
historically
in
this
statute.
Is
that
if
you
apply
for
a
brand
in
between
the
recording
cycle
that
200
will
pay
for
until
you
get
to
the
end
of
the
recording
cycle
which,
on
this,
I
believe
we
start
on
january
of
23.
C
E
Thank
you,
sir
yeah.
I
know
it
sometimes
can
be
a
real
pain
to
to
follow
all
these
brands
and
and
keep
an
eye
on
them.
You
know
like
we
had
multiple
different
brands.
You
know
because
some
brands,
you
you
start
working
them
out
and
find
out
they
don't
work
as
good
as
they
should.
But
what
about
people
with
multiple
brands?
It's
that's
not
going
to
create
a
problem
to
you.
D
For
the
record,
doug
ferriss,
thank
you
for
your
question.
It
it'll
still
operate
as
it
as
it
has
historically
will
still
continue
with
the
same
operation
with
multiple
brands
will
just
be
processed
in
that
in
that
fashion.
Throughout
our
program.
E
Okay
and
then
what
about
my
follow-up,
sir?
What
if
they
decide
to
surrender
some
of
the
brand's
midpoint,
did
they
get
a
credit
for
that
or
or
and
say
they
want
to
just
keep
two
or
three?
So
at
that
point
in
time,
if
they
surrender
a
brand
midterm,
can
they
get
a
credit
or
is
that
this
done.
D
For
the
record
doug
ferris,
that
is
actually
even
if
you
surrender
midterm,
then
it
there
is
there
isn't
a
a
resource
for
setting
up
refunds
and
and
hasn't
been
throughout
as
long
as
I
know
that
this
has
been
enacted
even
when
it
was
under
the
four
year.
If
you
surrendered
a
brand
within
two
years,
you
you
still,
you
didn't
get
a
refund
back
on
on
that
on
that
half
half
of
that.
A
I
have
one
mr
ferris
not
being
as
familiar
with
the
process.
You
know,
I
see
that,
and
I
think
some
of
this
has
been
pulled
and
modified
from
the
administrative
code,
and
so
I
see
in
section
one
there's
specific
reference
to
kind
of
the
the
recording
itself
and
and
the
fee
related
to
the
for
the
recording
in
the
added
language
and
in
section
1.5,
there's
the
striking
out
the
recording
and
then
adding
the
processing
of
applications.
A
So
can
you
just
walk
us
through
a
little
bit
the
the
the
process
as
it
exists
now
and
how
it's
contemplated
under
this
bill?
For
when
someone
goes
to
apply
our
fees
provided
at
that
point
currently,
and
is
that
distinct
from
fees
that
have
to
be
paid
for
the
recording
itself
and
then
and
then
how?
If
at
all,
is
that
changed
under
the
the
proposed
legislation.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
for
the
record
doug
ferris.
The
way
it
is
currently
set
up
is
the
hundred
and
twenty
dollars
that
is
is
the
current
assessment
on
registering
a
brand
is
paid
at
the
time
of
application.
D
D
Currently,
if
you
send
in
an
application
and
120
and
either
the
application
is
denied,
because
it's
a
duplicate
brand
or
too
close
to
to
an
existing
brand,
the
department
actually
refunds,
the
entire
hundred
and
twenty
dollars,
and
over
time
we've
found
that
we
have
a
you
know
a
lot
of
staff
hours
involved
in
processing
the
application,
doing
the
research
to
see
to
make
sure
that
there
aren't
any
brands
that
conflict
with
the
one
that's
being
applied
for
and
basically
the
way
it
was
set
up
is
then
we're
out
that
120
dollars.
D
So
we
changed
that
so
that
we
would
have
a
35
dollar
processing
fee
on
new
applications
just
to
cover
the
administrative
costs
that
are
associated
with
that
in
the
case
of
this
bill.
If
somebody
were
to
apply,
it
would
be
a
235
dollar
fee.
If
the
brand
wasn't
awarded,
they
would
be
refunded
their
200
dollars,
and
if
that
answered
your
question,
mr
chairman,.
A
It
does
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
and
I
I
would
just
note
that
the
sections
of
statute
that
these
changes
are
made
in
560,
section
1
references,
the
application
itself
and
then
section
1.5
references
kind
of
the
other
fee
schedule.
So
we
just
may
have
you
connect
with
some
of
our
staff
to
make
sure
all
the
references
are
in
the
right
place,
but
I
think
you
giving
us
the
thorough
rundown
of
how
the
process
works
and
and
what's
envisioned,
particularly
with
the
the
proposed
application
fee-
is
very
helpful.
So
thank
you.
A
F
G
G
With
that,
I
again
offer
our
support
for
sb
454.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
ms
laxalt,
for
for
your
comments,
and
I
will
also
note
that
there
is
a
letter
of
support
from
the
cattleman
this
association
available
on
nellis
bps.
Can
we
go
to
the
next
caller
in
support.
H
H
nevada
farm
bureau
has
recently
participated
in
a
regulatory
workshop,
dealing
with
a
rewrite
of
the
provisions
for
the
nevada
brand
inspection
program.
Sb
454
is
one
of
the
components
in
the
process
for
implementing
the
business
plan
that
the
nevada
department
of
agriculture
has
prepared
to
bring
the
state's
brand
inspection
program
to
a
financially
sustainable
operation.
H
H
A
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
for
the
record,
doug
ferris,
I'd
just
like
to
thank
you
for
your
time
and
and
all
your
work
you
put
in
through
this
session
with
everything
I
know.
There's
it's
been
busy
and
there's
been
a
lot
going
on
for
all
of
you.
This
bill
is
just
very
critical
to
to
this
program
and
and
the
fiscal
stability
of
it,
and
I
thank
you
for
your
time
and
everything.
A
Thank
you
very
much
again
for
the
presentation
and
for
the
kind
words.
Mr
ferris.
We
appreciate
it
members
with
that.
I'm
going
to
close
the
hearing
on
sb
454..
We
are
not
going
to
work
session.
This
bill
today,
make
sure
that
we
have
a
chance
for
everyone
to
take
a
look
at
it
I'll,
let
you
know
as
soon
as
we
do
decide
to
hold
a
work
session
as
soon
as
I
know,
I'll
get
the
information
out
to
everyone.
A
So
with
that,
we
have
one
last
item
on
our
agenda
today,
and
that
is
public
comment.
A
A
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
members.
That
concludes
our
business
for
today
again
when
we
do
have
a
work
session,
if
or
when
we
do
have
a
work
session
on
this
bill
I'll
make
sure
to
get
information
out
to
you
as
soon
as
possible.
Thank
you
for
your
time,
and
this
meeting
is
adjourned.