►
From YouTube: 5/30/2021 - 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
Good
morning
and
welcome
to
either
the
last
edition
or
next
to
the
last
edition
of
commerce
and
labor
cindy
for
84
session,
madam
secretary
call
the
role
please.
A
A
Sure
so
I
mean
if
senator
solomon
comes
back
in
just
walking
present
when
he
gets
here
okay,
so
we
have
one
bill
to
discuss
today
and
that
is
senate
assembly
bill
280.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
cesar
montgorejo
committee
policy,
analyst
for
the
record
assembly
bill.
280
is
sponsored
by
assembly,
assemblywoman,
peters
at
all,
and
was
heard
yesterday.
C
There
is
an
amendment
attached
to
this
work
session
document
this
morning
that
was
submitted
by
assemblywoman
peters,
which
is
to
amend
a
subsection
3c
of
section
1
to
revise
the
definition
of
single
stall
restroom
and
similarly
revise
the
definition
of
single
star
restroom
throughout
the
bill.
Madam
chair,
there
is
an
additional
amendment.
That's
not
included
in
this
work
session
document
and
I
believe
legal
counsel
will
will
be
walking
us
through
that
amendment.
D
Thank
you,
chair
spearman,
for
the
record.
Will
keen
committee
counsel
it's
my
understanding
that
there's
two
additional
amendments?
One
would
be
a
grandfather
clause
of
type
which
would
remove
all
the
requirements
for
any
current
buildings.
It
would
still
keep
the
requirement
that
the
local
government
said
that's
in
section.
9
and
related
sections
would
have
to
update
their
building
codes
and
then
these
new
requirements
would
only
apply
to
bathrooms,
built
in
the
future
in
accordance
with
these
revised
building
codes.
So
the
actual
effect
of
this
would
get
pushed
out
pretty
far.
D
As
far
as
the
public
seeing
restrooms
be
concerned,
it
would
act
fairly
soon
with
regard
to
the
building
codes.
In
addition,
it's
my
understanding
there
was
a
request
to
add
a
provision
to
each
one
of
these
new
sections,
saying
that
it
does
not
create
a
private
right
of
action
and,
as
far
as
I
understand
those
the
two
additional
amendments.
A
Thank
you
committee
members,
additional
questions
or
comments.
Senator
picker.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I
really
do
appreciate
everyone's
effort
on
on
trying
to
make
this
bill
work.
The
thing
I
still
struggle
with
is
there's
a
reason
that
we
have
the
the
building
codes
require
one
for
each
gender,
or
maybe
I
should
say
just
for
the
the
to
deal
with
the
realities.
E
The
over
many
many
decades.
We've
developed,
building
codes
that
address
both
health
and
safety,
as
well
as
comfort
and
the
reason
we
required
a
men's
room
and
a
women's
restroom
was
because,
frankly,
women
have
more
sensitive
sensibilities
as
a
whole
for
being
close
to
the
realities
on
the
ground,
because
of
the
way
that
the
restrooms
are
used
and-
and
so
ultimately,
by
doing
this
we're
going
to
be
making
all
the
restrooms
men's
rooms
and
that
will
create
problems
for
a
good
number
of
women
in
in
society.
E
E
Well,
from
a
practical
standpoint,
because
what
it'll
do
is
it
removes
the
designation
from
a
women's
restroom
where
they
don't
have
the
same
things
occurring.
You
know
they
don't
have
urine,
dropping
right
in
front
of
the
toilet.
A
F
A
E
Sure,
madam
chair
and
and
I
appreciate
that
it's
let
me
be
a
little
clearer-
do
we
graduate
in
the
number
of
stalls
required
based
on
the
occupant
load
and
so
it
with
a
low
occupant
load?
And
I
forget
what
the
threshold
is.
But
if
there's,
if
that's
10
people
that
are
going
to
be
in
the
space,
then
you
have
to
go
to
two
restrooms
one
of
each.
E
E
When
you
get
to
the
point
where
you're
required
to
have
two
single
stealth
restrooms
for
for
all
practical
purposes,
because
men
are
going
to
be
using
both
now
they
become
men's
rooms
and
and
so
you're
going
to
have
a
fair
amount
of
discomfort
from
those
women
who
simply
won't
use
a
room
that
men
have
used.
So
because
I'm
trying
to
be
sensitive
to
all
of
those
people
and
in
cognizant
of
the
the
history
of
the
development
of
the
building
codes,
I
just
can't
quite
get
there.
But
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that.
F
So
it
sounds
to
me,
like
men,
are
the
problem
and
maybe
they
could
work
on
that.
But
in
the
meantime
I
think
the
bill
is
fine,
just
the
way
that
it
was,
and
I
understand
the
reason
for
the
amendments,
and
so
I
will
move
to
amend
and
do
pass
with
all
three
amendments,
as
suggested
in
today's
work
session.
G
F
I
can
clarify
my
motion,
chair
spearman.
F
I
would
like
to
move
to
amend
the
bill
with
the
amendment
listed
on
the
work
session
document,
revising
the
definition
of
single
stall
restroom,
as
well
as
the
amendment
mentioned
by
mr
keane
to
grandfather
in
or
grandparent
in
existing
buildings
that
have
a
men's
and
women's
room
that
would
not
fall
into
sorry
grandfather
or
grandparent
in
facilities
that
have
a
men's
room
and
a
women's
room
and
would
be
left
with
one
single
gender
bathroom
and
one
unisex,
bathroom
or
one
all
gender
bathroom
if
they
were
to
follow
the
the
letter
of
the
bill
strictly,
as
well
as
the
amendment
proposed
to
remove
to
add
a
clause
indicating
that
this
does
not
create
a
private
right
of
action.
F
So
those
are
the
three
amendments
that
I'm
proposing,
not
because
I
think
we
need
them,
but
because
I
understand
that
they
will
hopefully
help
some
of
my
colleagues
get
to
a
place
where
they
can
also
support.
This
very
sensible
bill.
A
G
To
move
this
along
without
just
knowledge
of,
what's
in
it
and
what's
not
in
it,
so
I
would
love
to
have
legal.
Tell
me
what
is
in
the
amendment
as
opposed
to
the
description
of
what's
in
it,
because
I
still
don't
understand
what
it
is
and
I
to
the
point
of
senator
pickard's
point.
There
is
a
distinct
anatomical
reason
that
the
men's
bathrooms
are
messy
and
the
floor
is
dirty,
and
that
is
because
of
the
membranous
urethra
that
it
never
contracts
fully.
G
If
the
men's
room
becomes
a
women's
room
and
vice
versa,
then
the
men
will
be
using
either
one,
and
so
both
restrooms
will
become
more
soiled,
I'll
call
it
on
the
floor,
and
so
I
would,
I
would
dearly
love
to
see
what
those
amendments
are
that
we're
talking
about
and
perhaps
easy
enough
to
say
which
one
on
our
work
session
I
can
cross
out,
because
I'm
not
sure
of
that.
Thank
you.
A
D
Will
king
committee
council
the
three
amendments,
as
I
understand
them,
the
first
is
the
one
that
is
attached
to
the
work
session
document
presented
by
assemblywoman
peters
and
it's
to
amend
every
definition
of
single
stall
restroom,
as
indicated
in
on
the
work
session
document,
so
that
the
restrooms
that
have
a
toilet
and
a
urinal
can
only
be
considered
single
stall
restrooms
if
they
are
not
separated
by
a
stall
which,
as
I
understand,
would
mean,
if
there's
some
kind
of
separation,
so
that
if
the
toilet
and
the
urinal
are
separated
by
some
kind
of
barrier,
then
it's
not
considered
a
single
stall
bathroom
or
restroom.
D
That's
that's
the
first
amendment.
My
understanding
of
the
second
amendment
is
that
we
are
going
to
take
out
all
of
the
requirements
with
regard
to
bathrooms,
being
changed
to
be
all
access
and
only
require
them
for
the
building
codes.
The
building
codes
need
to
be
updated
and
then
the
requirements
would
only
apply
to
buildings
built
in
accordance
those
building
requirements
in
the
future.
D
The
last
amendment
that
I
understand
is
that
we're
going
to
add
to
each
new
section.
That's
left
there
won't
be
that
many,
a
subsection
specifically
providing
that
there
will
not
be
any
private
right
of
action
connected
to
a
violation
of
the
section.
Those
are
the
three
amendments,
as
I
understand
them,.
G
D
With
your
permission,
your
experiment.
D
The
third
bullet
point
will
be
different.
The
third
bullet
point:
there
will
not
be
any
civil
action
anymore
and
but
the
exist,
the
provision
that
for
enforcement,
the
local
government
enforcement
and
the
government
enforcement
would
be
applicable
in
the
future
after
buildings
are
built
in
accordance
with
the
new
building.
G
I'm
a
little
confused.
Well,
the
third
bullet
point
says
provides
that
any
person
who
derives
interferes
with
or
punishes
another
person
for
accessing
single
stall.
Restroom
is
guilty
of
a
misdemeanors
liable
to
the
person
whose
access
is
affected
for
actual
damages
that
are
recoverable
by
a
civil
election.
Does
that
disappear.
D
D
As
of
the
effective
date
of
the
act,
which
is,
it
refers
to
20.1
they're
put
on
local
governments
to
update
building
codes
and
buildings
that
are
built
in
accordance
with
those
building
codes
in
the
future
will
have
to
follow
the
requirements
of
having
the
all-access
bathroom
as
described
in
the
build,
and
in
any
case
we
are
getting
rid
of
any
private
right
of
action.
D
G
So
if
I
could
summarize
it,
if
you
have
a
single
stall
bathroom
that
has
a
lock
on
it,
then
the
person
can
go
into
that
single
stall
bathroom
that
is
labeled
as
a
restroom,
not
necessarily
any
particular
sex
or
orientation,
and
they
will
be
able
to
use
that
restroom.
G
D
Currently,
with
your
permission,
sheriff
spearman
for
the
record
will
committee
council
I
currently
currently
know
this-
would
only
my
understanding
of
the
amendment
is
that
this
requirement
to
have
all-access
bathrooms
will
never
be
put
to
any
existing
building.
D
It
will
only
be
available
to
build
these
are
built
in
the
future
in
accordance
with
revised
inputs,
and
then,
at
that
point
after
we
have
a
building,
that's
built
in
accordance
with
provides
building,
and
someone
deprives
or
interferes
with
someone
using
one
of
the
all-access
bathrooms.
Then
there
would
be
the
misdemeanor
requirement
and
there
will
there
will
never
be
a
private
right
of
action.
D
D
Thank
you,
so
my
understanding
is-
and
certainly
the
committee
can
do
this
differently.
If
the
committee
would
like
to
is
that
the
building
codes
will
be
updated
and
then
buildings
will
be
built
in
accordance
those
new
building
codes.
D
There
will
not
be
any
private
right
of
action,
but
there
still
will
be
the
governmental
enforcement
so,
and
so
yes,
as
I
understand
the
commitment
currently,
there
would
still
be
a
possible
misdemeanor
for
someone
who
interferes
with
the
use
of
an
all-access
bathroom,
which
is
part
of
a
building
that
is
built
in
the
future,
in
accordance
with
the
building
codes
which
are
going
to
be
revised
in
accordance
with
this
bill.
D
As
of
october
1st
of
2021,
I'm
sorry
that
that's
actually
very
complicated,
as
I
say
it,
I
understand
it's
complicated,
I'm
happy
to
clarify
in
any
way
possible.
A
We
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
floor,
any
additional
questions.
G
E
A
B
B
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Committee
members.
Additional
comments,
okey
doke,
I
don't
know
if
we'll
be
back,
but
if
we're
not
thank
you,
everyone
for
all
that
you've
done
broadcast.
You
all
have
been
fabulous,
absolutely
fabulous.
So
with
that
we
are
now.