►
From YouTube: 5/12/2021 - Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor
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
B
Senator
hardy
senator
lange
here
senator
neal
here,
senator
pickard
senator
schaible
senator
settlemyer,
chair
spearman.
A
Here,
thank
you
and
want
to
welcome
our
audience
who's
joining
us
remotely.
Today
we
have
hearings
on
assembly
bill
277.
A
We
have
a
work
session
on
assembly,
bill,
45,
47,
73,
173,
200,
308,
327,
366,
442
and
assembly
joint
resolution
10.-
and
I
see
the
speaker
here
with
deference
to
you-
I
can
we
can.
Let
you
go
first
speaker-
is
that
okay,
yep,
okay,
all
right
so
once
once
we
get
finished
doing
all
the
other
housekeeping
stuff,
everybody
turn
your
phones
off
turn
your
laptops
off.
Well,
you
can
keep
them
on,
just
don't
make
sure
they
don't
make
noise.
A
Let's
say
a
building
is
open
under
certain
circumstances.
People
can
come
in
and
mingle
and
sit
and
see
and
talk,
but
you
must
have
your
mask
on.
So,
if
you
are
not
able
to
get
in,
there's
still
some
ways
that
you
can
participate,
you
can
register
through
nellis.
You
have
the
opportunity
to
testify
on
a
bill.
Submit
written
comments,
share
your
opinion
via
the
legislators.
Legislature's
opinion
application
on
nellis,
and
you
can
view
committee
meetings
through
nellis
or
on
the
legislature's
youtube
channel
to
register
on
nellis
click.
A
Participate
participate
on
the
meeting
and
the
time,
and
once
you
do
that,
then
you
will
see
see
information
receive
an
email
confirmation
will
give
you
the
email
and
the
telephone
number
to
call
at
the
time
of
the
meeting.
If
you
question
first
participate
in
person,
you
will
receive
additional
email
with
instructions
on
entering
the
bill.
Building,
just
like
we
have
in
other
sessions.
Just
because
you
sign
up
does
not
mean
that
you
will
be
able
to
speak.
A
That's
why
I
ask
people
if
we
are
hearing
a
bill,
if
someone
has
already
covered
the
points
that
you
want
to
make,
please
just
say
ditto
that
gives
more
people
an
opportunity
to
speak
during
that
time
frame
when
you're
on
the
telephone.
Please
pay
attention.
Please
pay
attention.
Please
pay
attention
to
the
bill
that
is
being
discussed
and
follow.
The
verbal
prompts
by
the
staff
and
they'll
call
on
you
to
speak
by
your
last
three
digits
of
your
phone
number.
A
You
have
got
to
hurry
up
because
whatever's
not
out
of
here
on
friday,
we'll
go
into
the
round
foul.
So
make
sure
that
you
do
that
so
I'll,
tell
you
what
let's,
let's
open
up
with
the
speaker's
bill,
we'll
do
a
work
session
on
that
assembly.
Joint
resolution,
10.
A
You
guys
got
two
well,
I
think
he
said
he
has
to
go.
He's
got
two
bills.
You
got
your
bill:
okay,
okay,
all
right,
my
bad,
my
bad!
I'm
looking
at
you,
I'm
like
okay,
we're
gonna,
okay,
308
back
up,
and
let's
start
again
good
morning,
mr
speaker,
we're
going
to
open
up
with
the
with
similar
bill.
308,
I'm
thinking
about
ajr10.
You
know
that.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
records
today
is
our
great
committee
policy
analyst
and
our
first
bill
in
the
work
session
today
is
assembly
bill
308,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
landlords
and
tenants,
and
it
was
sponsored
by
assemblyman
fryerson
heard
on
april
23
2021
because
of
the
long
agenda
I'll
skip
the
bill
summaries,
but
their
medicare.
There
are
no
amendments
for
this
measure.
D
A
All
right,
so
I
think
we
are
ready.
Madam
secretary,
please
do
a
roll
call
vote.
A
F
A
D
G
I
I'm
waiting
for
some
response
from
the
rental
community.
I
just
feel
like
there's
been
an
awful
lot
of
pressure
on
landlords
and
so
right
now,
I'm
just
not
comfortable.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
so
we've
got
six
and
one
reserving
the
night,
no
and
then
one
reserving
the
right.
So
the
motion
passes
senator
lang.
You
want
to
take
that.
Yes,
thank.
D
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
says
our
milk
rail
community
policy
analyst.
Our
next
bill
elects
measure
is
assembly.
Joint
resolution
10
of
the
80th
2019
session,
which
proposes
to
amend
the
nevada
constitution
to
prospectively
increase
the
required
minimum
wage
paid
to
employees
is
sponsored
by
assembly
committee
on
commerce
and
labor,
and
there
are
no
amendments.
This
measure.
A
H
Comment
if
I
could
manager?
Yes,
please
thank
you.
I
was
actually
one
of
the
people
who
was
the
first
person
to
spoil
me
to
find
out
that
we
had
the
ability,
as
a
legislature,
to
raise
the
minimum
wage
as
a
body
and
if
that's
the
intent,
I
think,
as
a
body,
we
should
make
that
decision,
rather
than
have
it
to
take
it
to
the
vote
of
the
people
and
then
basically
create
a
situation
where
it's
another
two
years
in
northern
nevada.
It
doesn't
make
much
difference
in
all
reality.
H
You
can't
find
somebody
for
12
bucks.
If
you
had
to
that's
just
a
reality,
that's
you
listen
to
the
radio
all
day,
long
advertising
jobs
for
16
dollars
an
hour.
So
in
that
respect,
I'll
be
voting
no
today,
because
I
think
this
is
just
about
putting
it
to
the
ballot
when,
if
our
job
is
to
worry
about
people,
I
think
we
ought
to
do
it
as
a
bill,
rather
than
just
doing
it
on
the
ballot.
Thank
you.
A
And
senator
my
I
hear,
and
I
understand
that
I'm
going
to
go
back
to,
I
think
it
was
2013
when
we
first
started
this
conversation
and
a
number
of
people
were
like
well,
why
are
you
all
doing
it?
You
ought
to
let
the
people
vote
on
it.
So
I
guess
it's
like
so
the
one
thing
that
one
thing
that
you
can
say
to
people
is
that
we
did
vote
to
give
them
their
voice:
fair.
A
Okay,
mr
speaker,
okay,
all
righty,
so
we've
had
a
motion.
It's
under
pickard
and
second,
I
mean
a
motion
by
vice
channel
and
second
by
senator
picker,
all
those
in
favor.
I'm
sorry,
madam
secretary,
please
call
the
role.
F
E
A
Yes,
okay,
so
the
motion
passes
and
I'll
do
the
floor
statement.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
cesar
mcgregor
community
policy.
Analyst.
Our
next
bill
is
we'll
go
back
to
the
top
of
the
order
for
assembly
bill
45,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
insurance,
and
the
bill
is
sponsored
by
assembly
committee
on
commerce
and
labor,
on
behalf
of
the
division
of
insurance
of
the
department
of
business
and
industry
and
was
heard
on
april
28th.
C
I'm
sure
there
is
an
amendment
proposed
by
you,
which
does
the
following
adds
a
new
transitory
section
to
the
bill
to
allow
an
association
of
self-insured
private
employers
be
deemed
to
be
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
subsection,
2
of
nevada,
revised
statute,
616b
0.353,
if
the
association
meets
certain
requirements
and
number
two
is
to
amend
section
87,
to
provide
that
the
new
transitory
section
is
effective
upon
passage
and
approval
for
all
purposes
and
expires
by
limitation
on
june
30th
2023.
A
Thank
you
committee
questions,
senator
settlemeyer.
H
A
A
Yes
and
let
the
records
show
that
the
motion
carries
unanimously
senator
solomon,
you
want
to
make
a
before
statement.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
member
chair,
cesar
margaret
committee
policy.
Analyst.
Our
next
bill
is
assembly
bill
47,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
unfair
trade
practices
sponsored
by
the
assembly
committee
on
commerce
and
labor
on
behalf
of
the
attorney
general
and
was
heard
on
may
5th,
and
there
are
no
amendments
to
this
measure
and
we
do
have
individuals
on
zoom
can
answer
questions.
A
F
A
C
For
the
record,
our
next
bill
is
assembly,
bill
73,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
licensure
of
dietitians
and
sponsored
by
assembly
committee
and
commerce
and
labor
on
behalf
of
division
of
public
and
behavioral
health
of
the
department
of
health
and
human
services,
and
is
heard
on
april
26
2021.
And
there
are
no
amendments
to
this
measure.
A
A
Yes
and
the
motion
passes
senator
scibel,
you
want
to
take
the
first
statement.
Okay,
thank
you.
C
A
A
D
A
Do
isn't
it
just
do
passwords
yeah
new
pass,
it's
just
you
pass
yeah.
Second
lang
lang
is
made
the
motion
and
senator
schreibel
made
the
the
second
and
so,
madam
secretary,
please
do
the
roll
call
vote.
D
D
A
Yes
and
the
moshe's
motion
carries
senator
hardy,
take
that
floor
statement.
Okay,
we're
gonna,
we're
gonna,
do
a
five-minute
recess.
I
have
a
bill.
That's
coming
up
in
the
assembly
and
they're
calling
for
me
now
and
once
summerwoman
duran
gets
down,
we'll
begin
the
bill
hearing
for
her
and
vice
chair.
If
I'm
not
back
by
that
time,
if
you
can
start
the
hearing,
okay,
okay,
I
appreciate
it.
No,
you
should
have
said
yeah,
okay,
okay,
so
five
minute
recess.
Okay,
we'll
be
right!.
A
F
A
A
So
we'll
come
back
from
recess
and
we'll
open
up
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
277
and
I
see
assemblywoman
durand.
You
are
here
and
ready
begin
when
you
wish.
Thank
you.
A
A
J
Good
morning,
chair
spearman
members
of
the
committee,
graham
galloway,
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
justice
association
and
in
a
rare
and
unusual
situation.
I
have
with
me
my
colleague,
jesse
wadhams,
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
insurance
council,
we're
here
to
present
jointly
present
an
amendment
to
the
bill,
and
the
amendment
I
believe,
is
now
on
nellis.
The
amendment
clarifies
the
bill
simplifies
the
bill
and
rather
than
spend
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
the
history
of
this
bill
or
the
background.
I'm
just
going
to
talk
about
the
amendment.
J
The
amendment
deletes
section
one
of
the
bill
section.
One
had
to
do
with
what
we
call
automobile
medical
coverage,
and
we
realized
that,
once
we
got
into
the
discussion
about
section
one
that
we
were
going
to
create
more
problems
than
that
we
were
going
to
resolve.
So
we
decided
that
we
would
defer
medical
coverage.
Med
pay
coverage
for
a
later
date
after
we've
had
some
more
time
to
think
it
through
section.
J
Two
is
what
remains
and
section
two
just
simply
simplifies
the
pre-litigation
obligations
between
personal
injury
claimants
and
the
insurance
carriers
to
whom
they
have
presented
insurance
claims.
Historically,
for
numerous
years,
we
had
a
a
statute
nrs
690
b
024,
which
required
the
two
sides,
the
insurance
industry,
the
claimants
to
exchange
the
information
pre-litigation
2015.
J
That
statute
went
away
2019,
we
brought
back
the
statute,
but
we
realized
that
there
was
some
ambiguity
in
the
language
and
the
amendment
the
bill
clarifies
that
we
go
back
to
how
it
was
for
ever
where
insurance
companies
provide
policy
limits
to
the
claimants.
The
claimants
provide
medical
records
and
authorizations
to
the
insurance
company.
That's
what's
taking
place
with
the
bill.
That's
what's
taking
place
with
the
amendment.
K
Chair
spearman
excuse
me
for
the
record
jesse
wadhams,
with
the
law
firm
of
black
and
whatems,
representing
the
nevada
insurance
council.
It
is,
it
is
an
interesting
time
to
actually
yeah,
like
my
colleague
mr
galloway,
said
to
be
sitting
next
to
him
on
jointly
presenting
a
bill.
Fortunately,
there
still
is
the
glass
partition
here
which
will
mitigate
any
other
issues.
I
think
mr
galloway
did
a
a
a
good
job
of
sort
of
summarizing
the
issue
we
have
lit.
K
I
think
litigated
this
issue
in
front
of
various
commerce
and
labor
committees
over
the
course
of
a
number
of
sessions
and
and
very
much.
The
intent
here
is
to
create
a
simplified
process
whereby
the
insurer
discloses
certain
policy
issues
and
the
claimant
discloses
their
medical
records
so
that
you
can
understand
both
sides
of
the
claim
and
again
taking
a
cue
from
an
earlier
committee
hearing
for
mr
king's
benefit.
K
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
just
really
a
comment.
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
both
sides
have
come
to
an
agreement
on
this.
This
is
something
that's
been
debated,
not
only
in
the
commerce
and
labor
committee,
but
in
the
courts
for
years,
and
so
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
everybody's
recognizing
this
is
essentially
what's
going
to
happen
once
it
goes
to
court
and
this
should
simplify
the
process.
So
I
appreciate
that.
Thank
you.
Manager.
E
Yeah,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
only
have
like
one
question
so
in
the
amendment
it
the
redaction
language,
so
it
said
personal
and
private.
So
I
guess
I
was
trying
to
understand
the
distinction
between
the
two
words
and
what
would
actually
be
redacted.
K
Madam
vice
chair,
jesse
wadhams
for
the
record
you're,
probably
right
in
that
personal
and
private
information
may
be
a
tad
redundant.
I
guess
I
would
leave
it
to
the
lcb
drafters
to
make
sure
that
they've
clarified
that
personal
information
that
is
can
be.
You
know,
sort
of
this.
Oh
excuse
me
redacted,
excuse
me,
but
the
intent
is
to
keep
the
name
of
the
policy
holder
and
the
the
limits
to
be
shown.
So
there
may
be
other
things
on
that
page.
K
That
are
things
like
additional
insureds
are
also
on
the
deck
page
things
like
the
vin
numbers
of
cars.
So
it's
intended
just
to
simply
protect
the
personal
information
and
I
I'm
sure,
there's
a
vernacular
or
a
legal
term
for
that.
That's
the
intent.
F
A
D
A
Thank
you
so
much.
You
have
closing
comments.
The
closing
comments,
mr
adams.
Oh
okay,
all
right
all
right!
So
then
we
will
close
the
hearing
on
assembly,
bill,
277
and
we'll
go
back
into
work
session,
but
I
don't
see
senator
settlemyre.
So
let's
go
to
about
a
five-minute
recess
and
we'll
be
right
back.
C
C
Number
three
is
to
add
a
new
section
to
the
bill
to
amend
nrs638.127,
to
provide
for
biennial,
renewals
and
revise
various
requirements
for
renewal.
Number
four
is
to
add
a
new
section
to
bill
to
amend
nrs
638.134,
to
authorize
a
veterinary
technician
to
administer
certain
vaccinations
for
zoonatonic
diseases.
C
Number
five
is
to
add
a
new
section
to
bill
to
amend
nrs
638.1429,
to
revise
certain
requirements
governing
the
board's
investigation
and
disposition
of
a
complaint
and
number
six
is
to
add
a
new
section
to
the
bill
to
add
in
new
to
add
a
new
subsection
to
nrs
638.147,
to
authorize
the
board
of
to
adopt
regulations
which
provide
for
the
board
to
issue
non-disciplinary
letters
of
correction
for
certain
violations
and
manager.
That's
all
the
amendments.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
on
four
number.
Four
in
the
amendment
is
that
to
give
vaccinations
to
animals
other
than
people
or
to
people
included.
A
I
Hardy,
my
name
is
alyssa
nabe
worth
and
with
me
today
is
jennifer
pedeco
who's,
the
executive
director
of
the
nevada
board
of
veteran
medical
examiners,
who's
the
ones
requesting
the
majority
of
the
amendments
or
the
amendment.
But
yes,
I
believe
that
is
true.
It's
just
for
veterinary
technicians
to
administer
zoonotic
vaccinations
such
as
rabies
to
animals.
A
A
A
I
I
I
promised
some
folks
that
I
would
look
at
some
additional
information
on
yesterday
to
see
if
that
would
change
my
opinion
on
the
way
this
bill
is
written
and
just
want
to
say
I
I
don't
see
anything
in
assembly
bill
200
that
prevents
additional
veterinarians
coming
into
nevada,
and
I
just
don't
think
it's
too
onerous
to
have
to
establish
a
relationship.
A
A
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
appreciate
a
lot
of
the
work.
That's
gone
into
this
bill,
trying
to
help
some
of
the
concerns
that
the
veterinary
board
has
had
that
they
weren't
able
to
get
fixed
in
other
pieces
of
legislation.
It'll
still
maintain
our
standards
and
requirements
to
the
fda
for
programs
and
feed
sources.
So
it's
very
important
in
that
respect
that
the
bill
gets
passed.
I
am
still
very
concerned
that,
fundamentally,
you
know
at
two
o'clock
in
the
morning
and
you're
out
in
the
middle
of
nowhere.
H
They
went
out
of
town
because,
unfortunately,
even
my
area,
the
vet's
not
busy
enough
with
large
animals
that
he
actually
goes
to
elko
or
he'll,
go
over
to
california
and
then
he's
not
around
then
you're
trying
to
find
a
new
vet
at
two
o'clock
in
the
morning,
because
for
some
reason
that
seems
to
be
the
time
when
things
go
wrong,
at
least
on
a
ranch,
and
so
I
have
some
concerns.
I'm
gonna
vote.
Yes
on
it
with
reservations,
though,
because
I
still
need
to
try
to
talk
to
some
more
people
about
some
concerns.
Thank
you.
I
I
Three
sub
two
creates
an
exception
for
emergency
situations,
so
the
scenario
that
you
just
outlaid
would
would
absolutely
be
appropriately
covered,
and
so
you
would
be
able
to
call
a
new
veterinarian
if
you
cannot
access
your
current
veterinarian
in
that
scenario,
but
again
I
will
come
and
meet
with
you
on
that
issue,
and
we
really
appreciate
you
working
with
us
on
this
and
your
support
of
the
bill
with
reservations.
A
G
A
Yes
and
the
motion
carries
unanimously
vice
chair,
you
want
to
take
that
floor
statement.
C
Thank
you,
mayor
chairs,
cesar
mcgregor,
community
policy.
Analyst,
our
next
bill
and
work
session
is
assembly
bill
327,
which
requires
certain
mental
health
professionals
to
complete
continuing
education
relating
to
cultural
competency,
sponsored
by
assembly
members,
taurus,
naguian
brown
may
and
senator
donate
at
all,
and
it
was
heard
on
may
4th.
C
Senator
spearman
did
propose
the
following
conceptual
amendments,
which
is
to
add
senator
spearman
as
a
joint
sponsor
and
to
amend
sections
one
through
7.5
to
require
that
the
curriculum
for
the
required
training
be
based
upon
a
range
of
research
drawn
from
diverse
sources
and
that
the
instruction
address
persons
who
have
certain
different
cultural
backgrounds
and
made
I'm
sure.
That's
all
the
amendments.
F
Madam
sure,
we're
on
327
correct.
F
So
I'm
I
asked
a
question
I
think,
during
the
hearing
about
accounting
for
ethics
requirements,
when
we
start
looking
at
all
of
the
different
things
that
are
adding
up
on
specifics,
we
may
be
infringing
on
the
competency
of
the
care
that
we're
trying
to
was
the
original
reason
we're
trying
to
make
sure
that
they
don't
fall
short
of
learning,
relearning
and
learning
anew.
F
So
I
am
concerned
that
if
this
doesn't
co-exist
or
co-allowed
for
something
like
the
ethics
requirement
that
physicians
nurses
do
because
I
think
it
goes
along
with
ethics
that
maybe
we're
putting
an
extra
thing
in
that
takes
away
from
something
else.
That's
equally
important,
and
that
was
a
question
I
asked.
I
don't
know
if
I
got
a
serious
enough
answer
to
vote
for
it.
Thank
you.
D
Hi
good
good
morning,
I'm
gonna
need
a
question
repeated.
I
was
in
a
work
session
for
my
committee,
but
I'm
here
now.
F
Okay,
I
better
get
serious,
so
my
my
question
can
is
concerning
the
extra
in
additional
requirement
for
cme,
which
may
replace
some
other
things
that
are
important
for
learning
how
to
practice
medicine,
for
instance.
D
Thank
you
for
the
question
this
elementary
for
the
record
through
the
chair
to
the
senator,
so
there's
nothing
in
this
piece
of
legislation.
D
That's
saying
that
this
would
count
as
the
ethics
course,
but
that
would
be
up
to
the
individual
boards
to
determine
how
these
courses
work
and,
in
my
in
the
conversations
that
I've
had
with
many
of
the
boards,
I
don't
think
that
that
is
their
plan
at
all
for
this
to
count
as
an
ethics
plan,
but
I
mean
that
that
might
be
a
conversation
that
you
could
have
with
the
boards
offline
as
well.
D
Additionally,
right
now,
what
what
ends
up
happening
is:
there's
those
20
continuing
education
units
that
they're
required
to
have.
This
is
just
saying
that
two
of
those
have
to
be
in
this.
It's
not
saying
that
they
can't
take
these
other
courses
that
they're
not
available,
and
I
don't
think
that
there's
anything
preventing
them
from
taking
additional
courses
if
they
so
desire.
It's
just
saying
that
two
of
them
have
to
be
in
cultural
competency,.
A
Okay,
I
I
just
want
to
just
want
to
say
one
of
the
things
that
I
know
that
we
have
lacked
here
in
well,
it's
been
lacking
across
the
country,
but
since
I'm
in
nevada,
I'll
address
that
and
that
is
covert,
didn't
introduce
us
to
how
the
healthcare
system
had,
for
the
most
part
failed
members
of
bipolar
communities.
A
It
simply,
it
turned
the
light
on
turn
the
spotlight
on
and
I
think
in
some
cases
what
happens
is
that
if
people
are
not
aware,
or
at
least
culturally
sensitive
to
certain
ethnic
linguistic
and
even
when
we
think
about
cultural
competency,
there's
a
different
culture
among
the
deaf
community
than
there
is
among
those
who
are
hearing
and
a
different
culture
among
those
who
are
blind
or
sight
challenged,
and
so,
if
we're,
if
we're
going
to
become
better,
especially
since
we're
here
in
this
session,
we
don't
have
money,
we
don't
have
money.
A
You
know
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
we've
got
to
make
sure
we
do
is
people
in
all
walks
of
life,
not
just
medical,
but
I
think
I
think
it's
going
to
be
real
important
for
us
to
begin
to
seek
to
understand
the
different
cultures
and
why
people
do
what
they
do.
I'll
say
this
and
then,
madam
secretary,
get
ready
to
call
the
role
when
I
was
a
company
commander.
A
I
had
my
first
sergeant
to
come
in
and
he
wanted
to
discipline
one
of
the
new
soldiers
and
he
was
going
to
discipline
him
because
he
thought
he's
being
disrespectful.
He's
talking
to
him
and
the
soldier
is
looking
down
and
he
won't
look
at
him
in
his
eyes
and
I
had
the
soldier
to
come
in
and
immediately
realized
in
his
culture.
A
A
12
years
later
he
was
a
pfc
when
that
happened,
and
when
I
saw
him
oklahoma
he
was
a
e8.
So
I
think
that's
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why
we've
got
to
make
sure
that
cultural
sensitivity
goes
across
all
professions,
because
indeed
we
are
a
culturally
diverse
society.
So,
with
that,
madam
secretary,
please
call
it
all
motion
motion
motion,
move.
A
G
C
You
thank
you
man
of
chair,
cesar
margaret
community
policy,
analyst
for
the
record.
Our
next
bill
is
assembly,
bill
366,
which
revises
provisions
governing
mental
health
records
and
is
sponsored
sponsored
by
assemblywoman.
Tolls
was
heard
on
april
21
2021.
There
is
amendments
proposed
by
senator
spearman.
C
The
first
amendment
is
to
amend
subsection
1b
of
sections
two
three
four
and
five
to
require
the
informed
consent
to
be
in
writing
on
a
form
that
complies
with
the
regulations
by
the
applicable
board
and
retained
by
the
applicable
mental
health
professional
for
not
less
than
the
length
of
time
specified
by
the
applicable
board's
regulations.
C
Number
three
is
to
add
a
new
subsection
sections,
two
three
four
and
five
to
require
that
the
recording
comply
with
existing
health
insurance,
portability
and
accountability
act.
Regulations
to
ensure
that
these
recordings
cannot
be
reproduced
copied
or
stolen.
Number.
Four
is
add:
a
new
subsection
sections,
two
three
four
and
five
to
require
that
the
recording
not
contain
any
identifiable
information
relating
to
the
patient
unless
provided
with
written
written
consent.
C
To
do
so
number
five
is
to
add
a
new
subsection
sections,
two
three
four
and
five
to
require
the
applicable
boards
to
adopt
regulations
to
set
forth
requirements
for
the
form
to
be
used
to
obtain
the
informed
consent
specify
the
minimum
length
of
time
that
their
applicable
mental
health
professional
must
retain
the
informal
consent
specify
the
maximum
length
of
time
that
the
ethical
mental
health
professional
may
retain
the
recording
before
the
recording
must
be
destroyed
and
defined.
Training
activity
for
the
purpose
of
pro
of
a
program
of
education
for
mental
health
professionals.
C
Number
six
is
to
add
a
new
subsection
sections,
two
three
four
and
five
to
provide
for
the
provisions
of
these
sections.
Do
not
abrogate
alter
or
otherwise
affect
the
application
of
mental
health.
Professional
to
adhere
to
all
other
professions
of
provisions
provided
in
chapter
629
governing
healing
arts
generally
number
seven
is
to
change
the
effective
date
of
the
bill
to
effective
upon
passage
and
approval
for
purpose
of
adopting
regulations
and
performing
any
preparatory
administrative
tasks
and
on
july
1
2021
for
all
other
purposes.
A
H
Settlement,
well,
this
create
the
situation
where
a
deceased
family
member
will
not
be
able
to
get
the
records
that
was
kind
of
a
concern
that
I
had
particularly
within
the
hearing.
I
For
the
record,
nina
laxalt
representing
the
psychology
board
and
senator
settlemeyer,
I
I
think
the
the
president
of
the
board
sort
of
regretted
using
that
as
an
analogy,
because
that
actually
would
not
take
place.
But
yes,
this
no
family
members
would
be
able
to
see
your
your
health
records.
I
mean
I'm
sure
there
are
are
times
that
power
of
attorney
and
things
like
that,
where
a
family
member,
you
know,
gives
the
consent
to
turn
over
their
health
records.
But
this
does
nothing
to
allow
that
in
any
case
whatsoever,.
H
And
in
that
respect,
those
records
would
not
be
able
to
be
viewed
by
anyone
other
than
in
training
purposes.
So
not
in
a
big.
You
know
a
group
class
setting,
I'm
just
worried
that
somebody
may
say
something
in
confidence
and
then
have
that
revealed.
Then
it
gets
back
to
the
family
and
it
could
have
irreparable
harm
upon
their
memories
and
that's
my
concern.
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
clear
that
that
cannot
will
not
happen.
I
Senator
for
the
record
needle
axel-
yes,
that
cannot
and
will
not
happen.
They
they
do
have
hipaa
laws
to
follow.
There
are
all
sides,
all
all
the
sorts
of
guidelines
in
here
that
know
I
mean
if
they
do,
that,
they're
breaking
the
law,
so
that,
essentially,
you
know
hopefully
would
not
happen.
You
can't,
I
suppose,
guarantee
100
confidentiality
in
all
situations,
but
we've
done
everything
we
could
to
protect
this.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
all
of
these
proposed
amendments
are
making
me
feel
better.
I'm
not
sure
I
feel
better
enough,
but
I
like
the
concept.
So
if,
if
I'm
a
physician
and
I
make
a
recording
of
any
kind,
does
this
absolve
the
professional
from
the.
I
I
don't
think
it
absolves
them.
However,
if
you
look
at
the
way
this
amendment
is,
is
going,
nothing
can
be
done
with
that
record
without
the
explicit
consent
of
the
person
being
recorded,
so
they
have
actually
full
control
and
say
so
over
when,
if
how
and
for
how
long,
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
F
I
Senator,
I
guess
I'm
having
a
hard
time
trying
to
figure
how
they
would
be
used
against
the
doctor.
F
So,
okay,
I'm
gonna
play
attorney,
then,
okay,
so
I
I
do
a
training
film
of
somebody
who's
depressed
and
I
show
the
training
film
to
students
with
permission
of
the
patient
and
the
students
know
that
that
exists,
and
two
days
later
the
patient
commits
suicide
and
I
don't
even
know
the
patient's
committed
suicide.
Yet
and
on
the
day
after
the
person
commits
suicide,
then
I
destroy
the
record,
albeit
not
even
knowing
the
person's
committing
suicide
or,
if
I
did
know
the
person
committed
suicide
and
then
destroy
the
record.
I
I
do
see
where
you're
going
senator
and
I
hope
dr
owens
is
on
the
phone,
but
I'm
going
to
try
to
er
on
zoom,
but
I'm
going
to
try
to
answer
that
in
that
we
made
it
very
explicit.
As
far
as
the
understanding
of
the
length
of
time
that
that
video
is
is
kept,
it's
it's
in
the
agreement
between
not
only
the
the
patient
but
also
the
trainer,
so
there's
a
minimum
and
maximum
amount
of
time
that
is
agreed
upon.
I
F
L
So
dr
whitney
owens
for
the
board
of
psychologists
board
of
psychological
examiners,
so
the
way
that
it's
written
in
the
informed
consent,
the
recording,
is
never
a
part
of
the
patient
record.
So
in
the
informed
consent.
It's
clear.
What
is
a
part
of
the
patient
record
and
what's
not
a
part
of
the
patient
record
and
the
recording
explicitly
for
training
of
a
student
is
never
a
part
of
a
patient
record.
L
M
Thank
you,
madam
sheriff.
The
record
will
king
committee
council.
There
are
a
lot
of
questions
there,
so
hopefully
I
will
be
able
to
address
them
all,
and
if
I
missed
something
please
let
me
know
so.
State
law
cannot
cannot
make
hipaa
not
apply.
Hipaa
is
going
to
apply
and
state
law
cannot
conflict
with
that.
M
So
many
of
the
questions
would
simply
be.
If,
if
hipaa
does
not
allow
that
information
to
be
released,
then
it's
not
going
to
be
released,
no
matter
what
this
bill
says.
However,
the
amendment
does
include
specific
language
so
that
the
bill
will
be
amended
to
say
that
nothing
here
conflicts
with
hippa,
which
it
could
not
anyway,
as
far
as
as
far
as
how
this
could
be
used
in
in
court.
M
The
bill
does
not
specifically
address
that,
but
any
information
which
which
is
handled
in
accordance
with
law,
it
seems
unlikely
to
me-
and
this
is
just
my
my
opinion-
it
seems
unlikely
that
if
a
doctor
is
following
the
law
and
destroying
evidence
and
following
the
law
with
regard
to
who
the
doctor
is
letting
see
the
the
documents
that
that
would
be
taken
into
account
in
any
in
any
court
proceeding,
because
if
the
doctors
following
the
law,
then
there
wouldn't
be
any
male
intent
attributed
to
the
doctor.
F
A
Thank
you
vice
chair
and
then
senator
picker.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
it's
it's
kind
of
similar
concerns.
I
just
had
the
one
question
on:
if
it's
destroyed
the
recording
is
destroyed,
and
I
understand
I
guess
the
concept
that
they're
going
after.
But
the
question
that
I
had
is
if,
during
the
recording,
which
is
a
part
of
the
training,
you
find
out
information
where
someone
could
then
assume
that
you
had
knowledge
that
a
person
was
going
to
harm
someone
or
harm
someone
else.
E
What,
then,
is
the
relationship
for
number
one,
the
recording
and
number
two,
the
liability
that's
put
on
the
trainee?
Who
is
then
using
that?
Because
there
could
be
circumstances
where
you
are
recording
someone
and
it's
a
part
of
your
training
where
you
then
are
apprised
of
information,
or
you
receive
knowledge
that
a
person
is
intending
to
harm
another,
and
I
don't
think
I
saw
the
explicit
exclusion
well.
E
If,
if
you
find
out
about
I,
I
won't
even
say
criminal
intent,
but
it
could
be
something
less
than
criminal
intent
that
at
least
you're
responsible
for
reporting
and
I'll
and
I'll
put
this
in
this
framework.
So,
even
within
a
school
setting,
a
teacher
counselor
or
whatever
is
responsible
for
certain
reporting
requirements.
If
they
get
knowledge
of
certain
things-
and
I
guess
in
this
context-
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
is
dealt
with,
because
that
could
happen.
You
know
what
I'm
saying.
L
Yeah
so
dr
whitney
owens,
we
we
are
required.
We
have
a
duty
to
warn
that
whether
we're
recording
the
session
or
not,
we
have
a
duty
to
warn.
So,
if
somebody,
if
somebody
states
in
in
a
session
with
a
trainee
that
they
have
intent
to
harm
someone,
the
student
will
immediately
come
get
their
supervisor.
We
don't
rely
on
the
reporting
to
provide
that
information
to
the
supervisor.
The
student
is
immediately
to
come,
get
the
supervisor
we
problem
solve
with
the
patient.
We
work
on
keeping
them
safe.
L
G
Thank
you
ma'am
chair,
and
I
I'm
going
to
pile
on
here
as
someone
who's
handled
personal
injury
cases.
G
This
was
my
principal
concern
during
the
hearing
was
the
question
you
know:
does
this
constitute
spoliation
of
evidence
and
to
use
senator
hardy's
analogy
with
a
slight
change?
It's
unlikely
that
someone's
going
to
threaten
suicide
and
then
action
not
be
taken.
But
what
happens
if
they
don't?
What
happens
if
the
and
this
is
made-
I
recognize
this.
This
is
supposed
to
apply
only
to
videos
that
were
taken
for
purposes
of
training.
G
So
my
first
question
becomes:
what
happens
if
a
physician
or
a
psychologist
or
psychiat
psychologist
were
to
inquire?
They
work
with
the
patient,
and
maybe
they
don't
ask
the
proper
questions.
Maybe
they're.
You
know
because
we're
talking
about
a
training
situation,
they
they
just
don't
do
a
very
good
job
and
then
a
couple
weeks
down
the
road
the
person
commits
suicide.
G
Would
this
not
be
important
evidence
in
a
case?
My
thought
is
that
if
the
physician
or
the
psychologist
were
to
get
from
a
lawyer
a
records
retention
letter
which
is
a
standard
practice,
we
send
those
letters
out
and
say:
save
all
your
records
because
they're
going
to
be
part
of
a
lawsuit
and
then
the
psychologist
destroys
the
record
because
it
was
made
for
purposes
of
of
training.
L
Whitney
owens
for
the
record,
my
understanding
of
the
of
the
I
mean
the
intention
of
the
recording
is
for
training
purposes
and
we're
really
trying
to
to
walk
a
middle
path
here
between
you
know.
We
could
have
trainees
seeing
patients
without
without
any
recording,
and
they
could
not
ask
the
correct
questions
for
for
a
long
period
of
time.
The
recording
is
there
to
make
sure
that
they're
getting
good
supervision
so
that
we
make
sure
that
they
are
asking
the
good
questions.
L
If
we
don't
have
the
t,
you
know,
if
we
don't
use
the
recordings,
one
of
two
things
happened
either
a
we
just
trust
that
the
what
our
trainees
are
saying
is
accurate,
which
a
lot
of
times
it
is,
and
sometimes
it's
not.
And
then,
if
we,
you
know,
if
we
are
in
session
with
them,
then
we're
cutting
the
nevada
workforce
by
50.
So
the
recordings
are
really
there
to
provide
really
high
quality
training,
making
sure
that
you
know
our
students
are
asking
the
right
questions.
L
They
are
doing
their
due
diligence
to
make
sure
that
they're
keeping
their
patients
safe
and
keeping
others
safe,
and
it
is
a
part
of
the
informed
consent
that
the
patient
knows
that
this
is
not
a
part
of
the
record
and
so
from
from
the
beginning
legal
paperwork
that
we
have
patients
sign
saying
this
is
not
a
part
of
the
legal
record
until
the
destruction
of
the
tape.
It's
that's
that's
an
understood
part
of
the
relationship.
It's
an
understood,
part
of
the
medical
record
that
that's
not
included.
G
All
right,
I
appreciate
that,
but
often
the
reach
for
particularly
under
a
subpoena,
goes
beyond
the
official
medical
record.
It
goes
to
any
record,
including
personal
notes
and
and
other
things
which
may
be
litigated
later.
G
L
G
Sure,
let
me
ask
it
this
way.
I
want
to
make
sure
we're
talking
about
recordings
that
are
made
for
the
purpose
of
training
only
so
that
a
psychologist
could
not
come
back
and
say,
oh
well,
you
know
I
destroyed
that,
because
I
was
intending
this
to
be
for
training
in
the
future
right,
which
would
be
a
great
excuse
under
this
bill
to
absolve
themselves
of
of
the
spoliation
charge,
when
in
fact,
there
was
no
intent
going
in
that
there
was
training.
So
from
an
evidentiary
standpoint.
G
The
the
purpose
of
training,
the
the
expectation
that
this
was
going
to
be
used
in
training
would
have
to
pre-date
or
pre-exist
or
exist
prior
to
the
actual
recording,
and
that
would
have
to
be
documented
somewhere
is
is.
Is
that
the
case.
L
L
A
L
A
M
A
That
the
questions
are
important,
but
but
you
know,
if
we
we
can,
we
can
go
add
in
for
an
item
in
terms
of
what
scenarios
might
be,
but
what
I
want
to
do
here
is
I
want
to
get.
I
want
to
get
our
council
to
weigh
in
these.
Are
I
I
appreciate
the
questions.
I
respect
the
questions,
but
we
can't
we
can't
just
keep
going
back
to
another
scenario.
A
So,
mr
king,
can
you
can
you
weigh
in
and-
and
please
don't
take
that
personal,
but
we
did
this
with
another
bill
last
week
and
it
was
a
mess.
So
will,
can
you
weigh
in
please.
M
Certainly,
thank
you
spearman,
for
the
record.
Will
king
community
council?
Hopefully
this
will
address
a
few
of
the
points
recently
all
this
bill.
Does
it
doesn't
change
the
rules
of
evidence?
It
doesn't
change
disclosure
requirements
under
hipaa.
It
simply
allows
for
these
very
specific
mental
health
professionals
which,
by
the
way,
does
not
include
medical
doctors
or
do's
that
the
chapters
are.
M
Those
chapters
are
not
amended
here.
All
this
does
is
allow
these
particular
recordings
or
these
particular
circumstances
to
be
to
be
made
and
then
used
in
accordance
with
the
rules,
much
of
which
is
going
to
be
done
by
the
boards
pursuant
to
regulation
and
then
destroyed.
The
bill
requires
that
they're
going
to
be
destroyed
at
a
time
certain
and
as
in
pursuant
to
the
regulations,
and
that's
all
it
does
it
just
carves
that
out
as
for
evidence,
I
noticed
I
heard
that
people
are
bringing
up
the
pterosaur
letters.
M
Those
are
the
letters
they're
known
as
tarisoff
letters
when
a
patient
says
that
he's
gonna
harm
himself
or
others,
and
I
had
a
chance
to
look
that
up
in
nrs,
49.213
subsection.
M
Six
nevada
law
codifies
the
the
known
concept
of
the
tariffs
off
letter,
where,
if
a
psychologist
has
a
patient
who
says
he's
gonna
harm
himself
or
others,
that's
not
confidential,
and
the
patient
or
the
the
doctor
has
an
obligation
to
to
tell
so.
M
As
far
as
the
rule
of
evidence
go,
that
came
up
too.
M
This
would
be
if
these
documents
are
out
there,
they
certainly
would
not
be
any
more
available
than
any
other
record
that
the
doctor
had
and
the
rules
of
privilege
by
the
way
chapter
49
does
have
a
subhead
all
about
the
rules
that
apply
for
evidence
for
psychologists,
and
none
of
that
is
being
changed.
So
all
of
the
the
same
rules
would
apply,
and
certainly,
if
a
doctor
had
kept
notes,
this
recording
would
not
be
any
more
available.
M
Those
notes,
with
the
exception
of
being
able
to
be
used
for
training
activities.
I
hope
that
addresses
the
questions,
but
I'm
certainly
happy
to
to
go
in.
If
there
are,
if
there
are
more
thank.
A
You
thank
you
and
let
me
just
say
again
to
the
committee
and
please
do
this
we're
we
won't
have
meeting
we
want
to
have
committee
meeting
tomorrow.
We've
got
about
14
bills,
I
think,
to
work
session
on
friday.
So
I
would
just
encourage
everyone.
Go
through
whatever
bills.
A
So
that
that's
where
I
am.
I
appreciate
your
question.
Senator
picker
appreciate
your
question.
Senator
hardy
and
senator
sotomayor,
but
what
I
don't
want
to
do
is
go
back
into
a
hearing
and
that's
that
seemed
like
where
we
were
going.
A
Let
me
ask
this
question
of
our
council,
so
mr
kane,
the
bill
as
it
is
and
as
it
is
amended,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
I
get
this
right,
but
I
I
think
I
heard
you
start
your
response,
indicating
that
the
amendment
the
bill
and
the
amendments
were
spoke
with
specificity
to
what
this
was
supposed
to
do
in
training.
Did
I
get
that
right.
M
Yes,
the
the
build
simply
allows
with
with,
by
the
way
advanced
notice.
I
mean
the
patient
has
to
sign
the
disclosure
in
advance.
It
can't
be
done
after
the
fact,
because
that's
not
how
the
bill
is
structured,
but
with
advance
approval
of
the
patient.
A
recording
can
be
made
and
used
for
these
training
activities
which,
pursuant
to
the
amendment,
would
have
to
be
clearly
defined.
The
training
activity
itself
would
have
to
be
clearly
defined.
M
The
maximum
length
of
time
that
the
tape
could
be
retained
before
it
had
to
be
destroyed
has
to
be
defined
in
regulation
and
then
a
minimum
length
of
time
for
retaining
all
of
those
informed
consents,
so
that
those
informed
consents
would
have
to
be
available,
and
that
is
that's
what
the
bill
does.
A
A
G
D
A
Yes,
let
the
record
show
that
the
motion
does
carry
and
senator
scible
don't
take
that.
Thank
you.
C
Cesaro
greyjoy
community
policy
analyst
for
the
record.
Our
next
bill
and
work
session
is
assembly
bill
442,
which
revises
requirements
concerning
training
of
certain
providers
of
health
care,
sponsored
by
assembly
committee
on
commerce
and
labor.
On
behalf
of
the
legislative
committee
on
health
care
and
madam
chair,
there
are
no
amendments
to
this
measure.
A
A
Need
to
make
sure
everybody,
nobody
has
questions,
and
please
hear
this
the
right
way.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
questions.
I
just
don't
want
us
to
spend
20
minutes
during
every
hearing.
Okay,
so
that
was
a
motion
senator
hardy.
So
a
motion
from
senator
hardy
have
a
second
from
senator
salmer.
Just
some
comments.
A
C
Yes,
madam
chair,
that
we're
done
with
the
work
session
document
that
was
provided
on
nellis.
However,
the
chair
has
chosen
to
work
session
ab277,
which
was
heard
this
morning
and
sponsored
by
assembly
assemblyman,
duran,
flores,
taurus,
gonzalez,
considine,
summers,
armstrong
and
thomas.
C
As
the
committee
would
note,
there
is
an
amendment
that
is
provided
on
nellis,
which
they
were
both
parties
describe
the
amendment.
So
at
this
moment
the
emotion
would
be
a
men
do
pass.
A
Thank
you
and
I
think,
senator
hardy,
you
got
a
picture
of
that
right.
Okay,
all
right!
All
right,
so
I'll,
entertain
a
motion.
A
men
do
pass,
have
a
motion
from
center
lane
have
a
second
from
that
senator
hardy
was
that
your
secretary
hardy
questions
comments.
A
Yes
and
the
motion
does
carry
senator
settlemyre.
You
want
to
take
the
floor
statement.
Thank
you,
sir,
and
I
think
that
ends
our
floor.
Our
work
session
for
today,
as
I
said,
we
will
not
have
a
committee
meeting
tomorrow
on
thursday,
but
we'll
be
back
bright
and
early
on
friday
at
8
o'clock.
We
have
several
bills
that
we
need
to
work
session.
A
Please
look
over.
Please
look
over
those
bills
and
if
there
are
extensive
questions
that
you
will
need
to
be
clarified
prior
to
the
vote,
please
make
sure
you
reach
out
to
to
the
sponsor,
so
we
can
make
sure
that
that
happens.
Senator
I
know
I
know
that
there
are
several
committees
that
will
meet
in
the
afternoon
that
are
going
to
try
to
meet
in
the
morning
to
make
sure
that
we
can
get
the
bills
out
of
here
that
have
been
presented,
and
this
is
a
point
of
point
of
personal
privilege.
A
One
of
the
things
that
I
want
us
to
be
mindful
of
is
that
it's
someone
else's
bill
this
time
that
we
need
to
take
time
to
get.
We
need
to
make
sure
we
have
time
to
do
it
on
another
occasion.
It
may
be
yours,
it's
this
committee,
this
time
there
may
be
the
next
time
it
may
be
your
committee,
and
so
during
this
time
this
time
in
the
legislative
process
and
those
who
have
been
around
for
a
minute
or
two
know
it.
It
gets.
A
A
We
cannot
do
a
rehearing,
so
I
have
no
problem
whatsoever
with
questions
a
specific
question:
let's
get
to
a
point.
If
it's
going
to
be
another
scenario,
another
scenario,
another
scenario:
what
I
would
encourage
you
to
do
is:
if
you
can't
support
it,
then
always
reserve
your
right
and
please
get
with
the
sponsor,
so
that
we
can
make
sure
that
we're
redeeming
the
time
in
a
very
valuable
way,
so
14
bills
on
friday.
A
Please
make
sure
that
you
familiarize
yourself
with
that
and
if
there
are
extensive
questions,
please
make
sure
that
you
address
those.
We
have
one
more
item
and
that
is
public
comment
broadcast.
Do
we
have
any?
First
of
all,
we
have
anyone
here
in
the
room.
Don't
see
anyone
broadcast,
let's
go
to
the
phones.
D
A
You
so
senator
sotomayor.
What
is
your,
what
is
your
niece's
name
and,
what's
her
degree,
rosalie
education?
A
Is
that
rosalie?
That's
me
education,
so
we
want
to
say
congratulations
to
her.
She
will
be
graduating
tomorrow,
and
this
is
only
the
beginning.
At
9
years
old
you
can't
wait
to
become
an
adult
and
then
at
30.
You
wish
you
wish
you
hadn't.
So
this
is
just
the
beginning,
but
congratulations
to
her
and
enjoy
the
the
time
off
tomorrow,
and
so
with
that
we've
done
everything.
We've
come
here
to
do
any
additional
questions
or
comments
committee
members
seeing
none.
We
are
adjourned.