►
From YouTube: 4/5/2021 - 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
Hey
good
morning,
everybody
welcome
to
senate
commerce
and
labor
senator
spearman
will
not
be
available
today.
So
we
will
try
to
have
a
good
meeting
all
right.
So,
madam
secretary,
please
call
roll.
C
D
B
And
chair
spearman
is
absent.
A
Thank
you
for
that
all
right,
so
we
have
two
bills
on
the
agenda
this
morning.
If
you
are
just
tuning
in
there
are
a
couple
of
ways
to
participate.
If
you
are
interested
in
these
two
bills
on
the
agenda
this
morning,
you
can
go
to
nellis
click
participate
and
then
you
will
receive
a
call-in
information
to
then
allow
you
to
come
in
and
testify
and
support
opposition
or
neutral.
A
If
you're,
not
the
person,
you
want
to
call
in
and
you're
kind
of
shy,
then
there
you
can
also
go
to
the
committee
agenda
and
you
can
send
an
email
stating
your
comments
with
any
kind
of
backup
information
about
your
support,
opposition
or
neutral
on
either
of
these
bills.
So
we
will
go
ahead
and
get
started.
We
have
two
bills:
sv
276
and
sb
282.
E
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
Hopefully,
can
you
hear
me?
Okay,
I'm
gonna.
Okay,
I
I
was
having
some
camera
issues,
so
it
seems
like
it's
fixed
now
I
am
moe
dennis
representing
senate
district,
two
in
clark
county
pleased
to
be
here
today
to
present
senate
bill
76.
E
I
am
presenting
two
bills
today
containing
various
provisions
that
are
interwoven,
which
means
you're,
gonna,
you're
gonna,
see
parts
of
this
that
look
exactly
the
same
between
the
two.
While
both
sb276
and
sb282
impose
a
15
technology
fee
sb276
establishes
the
accounts
within
the
state
general
fund.
The
fee
must
be
deposited
and
presenting
with
me
today
is
assemblywoman,
heidi
kasama,
also
to
help
answer
any
questions.
E
Every
year,
our
state's
information
technology
becomes
outdated
by
the
time
state
agencies
come
to
the
legislature
because
funding
for
it
modernization
as
you
as
you
know,
we
we
get
these
bills
all
the
time.
On
technology,
we
run
into
issues
of
trying
to
find
the
appropriate
funds.
Now
the
coven
19
pandemic
raised
demands
for
government
working
services
in
many
new,
unexpected
and
rapidly
changing
ways.
E
For
example,
the
rapid
transition
to
remote
work
required
more
automated
business
processes,
so
agencies
can
operate
with
minimal
paper
and
in-office
staff.
It
is
also
important
that
these
remote
capabilities
do
not
compromise
I.t
security
or
data
privacy.
It
is
quickly
becoming
clear
that
older
enterprise
systems
and
processes
cannot
keep
pace
with
many
emerging
government
needs.
As
we
look
ahead
to
the
post-pandemic
future,
we
need
to
acknowledge
the
revenue
decline,
which
makes
it
vital
to
identify
every
opportunity
for
cost
control
and
operational
efficiencies.
E
In
addition,
we
need
a
resilient
technology
platform
to
maintain
service
continuity
during
unforeseen
conditions
that
stress
or
disrupt
the
business
environment.
The
I.t
modernization
needs
vary
between
state
agencies,
but
ultimately
it
is
necessary
to
leverage
technology
to
meet
expanding
goals
and
streamline
services
offered
to
our
residents
and
consumer,
and
I
want
to
add
here
one
of
the
things
that
that
drew
me
to
this
legislation
was,
I,
just
I
changed
careers
five
years
ago
from
computers
to
real
estate,
and
so
this
actually
has
both
elements
of
that.
E
For
these
reasons,
sb276
imposes
a
fee
specifically
dedicated
to
improving
the
technology
needs
of
the
real
estate
division
of
the
department
of
business
and
industry,
and
I
can
give
you
one
example:
when
it
comes
to
technology
as
I've
had
to
take
continuing
education
as
a
realtor
as
a
real
estate
agent,
you
you
take
classes,
and
you
have
so
many
hours
and,
as
you
know,
I
brought
a
bill
last
time
that
actually
increased
the
hours
from
24
to
36,
and
so
every
time
you
take
a
class,
they
give
you
a
certificate.
E
You
have
to
hold
on
to
that
certificate
until
it's
time
to
to
register
or
to
re-register
for
your
license,
and
you
have
to
physically
have
that
in
hand,
because
the
the
places
that
you
took
the
classes
from
cannot
submit
them
electronically
to
the
division,
and
so
at
least
now
you
can.
You
could
take
a
picture
of
it
and
send
that
in.
But
what
having
the
opportunity
to
to
have
connection
between
schools
and
the
division
between
realtors
and
be
able
to
do
more
things
on
technology
is.
E
One
is
one
of
the
reasons
that
that
we
need
this
technology,
so
so
summit
senate
bill
276
establishes
that
15
technology
fee
imposed
on
for
each
applicant
for
the
issuance
or
renewal
certain
licenses
certificates
permits
registrations
issued
by
the
real
estate
division.
E
In
addition,
the
bill
creates
various
technology
accounts
for
chapter
645,
real
estate
brokers
and
salespersons
645c
appraisers
of
real
estate
and
appraisers
appraisal
management
companies,
645d
inspectors
of
structures
and
energy
auditors,
645
h,
asset
management
companies
and
asset
managers
and
119a
timeshares
of
the
nevada,
revised
statutes
in
the
state
general
fund
administered
by
the
division.
Any
interest
and
income
earned
must
be
credited
to
the
accounts
and
any
remaining
balance
in
in
the
account
does
not
revert
to
the
state
general
fund.
E
Finally,
the
bill
requires
that
money
collected
from
the
technology
be
deposited
in
the
respective
account
governing
certain
professions
or
occupations
and
be
accounted
for
and
used
for
acquiring
or
improving
technology
used
by
the
admission
for
administering
their
respective
professions,
and
before
I
I
finish,
I
have
assemblywoman
tama
here
with
me
to
give
some
comments.
B
Thank
you.
This
is
assemblywoman,
heidi
kassama,
for
the
record.
Thank
you,
senator
moe,
and
thank
you
vice
chair
for
and
members
of
the
committee
for
hearing
our
presentation
this
morning.
I
have
to
echo
some
of
the
comments
that
senator
dennis
made.
For
example,
we
have
a
training,
section
division
of
our
company
and
to
to
your
point
where
you
have
to
hang
on
to
those
paper
certificates.
B
We
have
people
that
took
a
class
18
months,
let's
say
before
trying
to
renew,
because
everybody
procrastinates
that
week
with
their
license
and
they're
frantically
calling
our
company
for
the
paper
copy
that
they've
lost
and
they
need
it
the
next
day,
otherwise
their
license
expires.
So
it
certainly
is
a
problem.
B
The
other
thing
I
can
speak
to
not
only
having
to
have
that
paper
copy,
but
right
now
there
is
an
option
with
the
real
estate
division
that
you
can
either
mail
your
apple,
your
renewal
certificate
and
copies
of
all
of
the
continuing
education
certificates
or
there
is.
There
is
a
program
where
you
can
upload
it
online
and
do
that
and
I
have
had
so
many
issues
with
my
agents.
I
have
about
230
agents
in
my
office
that
manage
and
so
many
issues
with
the
agents
when
they
upload
their
renewal
and
their
certificates.
B
It
seems
to
just
not
work
for
some
agents.
It
works
and
for
some,
it
doesn't
is
not
a
consistent
program.
Then
we'll
get
a
notice
from
the
real
estate
division
that
my
agent
has
not
renewed
their
license.
They
get
a
warning
if
they
don't
see
that,
then
their
license
expires.
So
I
can
actually
have
somebody
in
the
middle
of
a
transaction
which
has
happened
to
me.
B
They're
in
the
middle
of
helping
a
consumer
buy
our
home,
they
uploaded
their
renewal
to
the
to
the
platform
they
find
out
that
their
we
get
noticed
as
the
broker
that
their
license
is
expired,
even
though
they
tell
us
they
did
everything
the
way
they're
supposed
to
to
renew
online.
So
now
I
have
a
person
who
is
no
longer
licensed
and
can't
complete
that
transaction.
B
Certainly,
we
could
rush
down
to
the
real
estate
office
with
all
of
this
and
get
it
fixed,
but
with
covid
we
can't
so
it
has
really
magnified
the
issue
with
the
technology
issues
that
the
real
estate
division
is
having,
and
I
know
that
they
have
been
trying
their
best
but
they're
hampered
by
lack
of
funds
as
well,
and
so
that
is
a
big
reason
why
we're
presenting
this
is
so
that
they
have
the
funds
to
properly
upgrade
their
system.
Have
people
trained.
E
So
the
senator
dennis,
so
I
I
as
you
can
tell-
and
we
come
from
bearing
degrees
of
experience,
some
of
them
kasama
has
been
in
the
industry
for
many
many
years
and
I'm
fairly
new
she's
successful,
I'm
not
a
success,
but
it's
a
great.
It's
been
a
great
opportunity
for
me,
and
so
hopefully
you
understand
what
we're
trying
to
do
with
this
particular
bill
and
as
I
mentioned,
we
do
have
several
of
the
experts
here
with
us.
E
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
First
up
is
senator
picker.
C
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair,
and
thank
you
senator
dennis
I'm
a
broker
as
well,
although
inactive
at
the
moment.
I
certainly
appreciate
the
idea
of
bringing
the
the
real
estate
division
into
the
21st
century.
C
I
have
stood
in
the
long
lines
down
at
the
building
down
on
down
in
southern
nevada
and
waited
to
get
to
the
counter.
So
I
could
get
stuff
done,
I'm
not,
fortunately,
much
of
a
procrastinator
and
have
a
hard
time
justifying
putting
15
bucks
on
everybody,
because
people
tend
to
procrastinate,
but
that's
the
reality
of
the
situation
right.
We
need
to
be
able
to
do
things
and-
and
there's
no
reason
to
do
this
online.
C
It's
not
like
a
cosmetology
license
where
you
have
to
show
a
set
of
manual
skills
and
I
could
opine
on
the
education
that
we
have
to
suffer
through,
but
I
I'm
wondering
when
it
comes
to-
and
this
may
be
a.
C
A
question
for
director
chandra:
I'm
wondering
how
much
do
we
need
to
update
the
computer
systems
to
bring
us
into
a
modern
day
system
that
is
scalable
and
updatable
on
the
fly?
F
F
We
would
go
through
an
rfp
process
and
we
would
do
all
the
all
the
requirements
for
purchasing,
but
just
just
ballpark
you're,
looking
at
about
800
to
900,
000
initially
and
then
an
annual
contract,
because
nowadays
everything
is
cloud
computing.
Everything
is
storage.
Everything
is
online
so
to
create
something
that
meets
today's
standards,
we're
looking
at
about
close
to
a
million
dollars
on
the
front
end
and
then
about
150
000
annually
to
maintain
that
service
updates,
hosting
technology
enhancements,
etc,
etc.
So
that's
kind
of
a
ballpark
number
all
right
on
the
front
end.
F
You
know
those
things.
The
models
are
different.
Each
company
so
we'd
have
to
go
out
and
see
what's
out
there,
but
that's
about
a
general
ballpark.
C
All
right,
I
I
expected
that
to
be
an
order
of
magnitude,
larger,
given
dmv
can't
fix
their
system
for
less
than
40
million.
So
I'm
glad
to
hear
it's
that
cheap.
So
that
raises
a
follow-up,
and
that
is
with
all
the
biden
bucks
we're
about
to
get
we're
about
to
get
four
billion
dollars.
C
Why
would
we
charge
fifteen
dollars
for
renewals
on
the
backs
of
the
licensees,
so
it
sounds
like
senator.
Dennis
has
yet
to
make
a
killing
at
this.
Why
would
we
do
that
instead
of
using
some
of
the
biden
bucks
to
just
pay
for
it
up
front?
You
know
a
million
dollars
in
our
budget
is,
as
as
we
hear
in
finance
committee,
it's
budget
dust,
it's
less
than
a
rounding
error.
C
Why
don't
we
take
some
of
this
this
this
windfall
that
we're
getting
from
the
federal
government
that
has
you
know
we
already
are
sitting
on
a
bunch
that
hasn't
been
spent.
Why
don't
we
use
some
of
that?
Instead
of
charging
the
licensees.
E
So
this
is
senator
dennis
I'll
I'll
start
there,
and-
and
before
I
forget,
I
jumped
the
gun.
I
still
have
two
other
people
that
that
could
make
up
that
are
ready
to
present,
also
and
might
answer
some
of
these
questions
as
they
go
through
their
presentation.
But
let
me
so,
as
we
know,
technology
there's,
there's
you've
got
the
issue
of
putting
in
a
new
system,
but
then
you
also
have
a
system
of
maintaining
that
system,
and
you
also
have
a
system
of
training
on
how
to
use
that
system.
E
So
it's
always
going
to
be
an
ongoing
cost.
So
while
you
could
possibly
use
some
one-shot
funds
to
do
this,
what
we're
looking
for
is
a
permanent
solution.
One
of
the
things
that
I
didn't
talk
about
and
probably
we'll
talk
about
more
in
the
next
bill.
You
know
with
pandemic.
Actually
we've
increased
the
number
of
licensees.
E
You
know
because
people
lost
their
jobs
and
they
decided
to
switch
over
and-
and
you
know
right
now-
for
real
estate
prices
are
really
great
right.
Now,
not
a
lot
of
inventory,
but
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
people
selling,
and
so
we
what
we're?
Looking
for
is
permanent
solutions
to
help
be
more
efficient,
and
you
know
with
the
thousands
of
realtors
out
there,
and
we
really
need
to
have
that
ability
to
do
that.
C
And
I
completely
agree
with
you:
this
is
definitely
an
ongoing
issue,
particularly
since
technology,
as
as
your
presentation
mentioned,
we
roll
into
new
technology.
It
seems
every
day
and
so
there's
certainly
an
ongoing
amount.
But,
unlike
the
technology
fee
that
we
see
in
so
many
other
agencies
of
a
dollar
or
two
dollars,
this
is
15
and
it's
on
the
backs
of
the
licensees.
C
C
I
and
it's
just
it's
an
honest
question
to
the
extent
that
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
why
you
chose
this.
Instead
of
the
other
options,
I'm
not
saying
that
we
shouldn't
have
an
ongoing
technology
fee,
but
if
we
have
the
biden
bucks
that
could
pay
for
the
the
system
in
a
one-shot
and
then
continue
with
a
a
technology
fee
to
someone,
can
you
just
walk
us
through
the
rationale
for
why
you
chose
what
you
chose
yeah
so
so.
E
Actually,
because
we
have
two
other
people
that
need
to
present,
I
think
if,
as
they
go
through
their
presentation,
that
might
become
clearer.
So
if
it's
okay
with
your
metabolic
chair,
if
I
could
have,
I
believe
we
have
let's
see
teresa
mckee
who's
with
the
nevada
association
of
realtors
and
then
we
have
shirauth
also
has
the
director
also
has
some
comments,
so
if
we
could
do
that
first,
I
think
that
might
answer.
Some
of
these
questions
is
that,
okay.
Madam
question.
B
A
E
All
right,
so
if
we
could
have,
if
miss
mckee,
if
she
could
go.
G
Thank
you
senator
dennis,
and
thank
you,
madam
vice
chair
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
theresa
mckee,
I'm
the
ceo
of
nevada,
realtors,
the
largest
trade
organization
in
nevada,
with
more
than
18
000
members.
I
would
also
like
to
thank
senator
dennis
who's
who's.
The
realtor
member,
like
you,
said
for
working
with
us
on
this
bill
and
agreeing
to
carry
it
on
our
behalf.
G
We
have
met
with
the
division
multiple
multiple
times,
with
varying
degrees
of
leadership
over
the
past
three
years,
to
identify
the
problems
with
the
division
and
and
with
licensing
issues,
and
to
find
solutions
for
those,
and
we
haven't
always
met
eye
to
eye
on
the
solutions.
G
But
over
the
course
of
the
last
two
years,
and
especially
the
last
year,
we've
really
come
to
a
meeting
of
the
minds
on
what
needs
to
be
done.
We
have
as
realtors
as
the
realtor
organization.
We
have
requested
this
technology
fee
be
added.
G
It's
the
number
one
issue
for
our
members
in
dealing
with
the
division
that
there
just
simply
is
not
the
technology
that
we
should
have
to
allow
the
transactions
to
go
through
smoothly
and
that
15
technology
fee
will
be
payable
every
two
years
for
the
licensee,
so
that's
seven
dollars
and
fifty
cents
per
year.
G
This
will
help
support
the
needed
upgrades
to
the
online
services
beyond
just
the
simple
licensing
abilities
currently
in
place,
and
I
think
you
know
when
you
hear
that
from
the
practitioners
like
heidi
kasama,
the
assemblywoman
and
senator
dennis,
and
we
have
a
couple
other
members
who
also
be
talking-
you
can
see
how
it
will
improve
education,
tracking
the
change
of
licenses
between
brokers,
just
some
very
simple
things
that
should
be
able
to
be
done
online
that
aren't
and
real
estate
should
be
one
of
the
very
top
low
levels
of
technology
that
are
available.
G
It's
one
of
the
largest
transactions
that
people
make
in
their
lives
and
we
shouldn't
have
to
do
pen
to
paper
and
snail
mail
licenses
and
and
other
licensing
related
documents
in
order
to
make
this
facility
function.
So
the
real
estate
industry,
as
represented
by
nevada
realtors,
stands
in
full
support
of
sb
276,
and
we
ask
that
you
vote
in
favor
of
this
bill.
Thank
you.
F
Thank
you
senator
dennis,
madam
vice
chair
members
of
the
committee,
again
shirat
chandra
administrator
for
the
real
estate
division,
the
technology
and
I
believe
every
member
in
this
committee
has
has
been
on
in
different
forms
where
we've
talked
about
some
of
the
challenges
that
the
division
has
had
in
as
far
as
technology
and
senator
dennis
and
assembly,
when
kasama
talked
about
it,
we've
got
different
components:
we've
got
education,
we've
got
licensing,
we've
got
new
licensee
applications,
we've
got
pre-licensing,
post
licensing,
continuing
education,
there's
all
these
levels
that
the
division
deals
with
and
and
so
trying
to
create
something
where
we
kind
of
bring
the
technology.
F
Since
the
time
I've
been
here
so
the
technology
has
evolved,
but
our
our
foundation
is
has
really
remained
the
same,
and
I
think
it
costs
the
division
more
to
do
anything
even
small
announcements,
and
I
think
this
pandemic
has
really
kind
of
brought
to
light
some
of
the
deficiencies
and
it
kind
of
created
a
existential
crisis
for
us,
because
when
this
pandemic
first
happened,
one
of
our
first
things
was
to
try
to
turn
on
everything
in
the
software
that
we
currently
have.
F
That
would
enable
people
to
do
stuff
online
and
it's
very
limited.
Anything
more
would
require
painstaking
upgrades
and
you'd
have
to
get
a
specialist
to
recode
and
it's
just
complicated,
and
so
we
turned
everything
on,
but
again
that's
limited,
and
so
so
then
we
had
to
rely
on
the
mail
and,
of
course,
with
the
usps
challenges
the
office
being
closed
folks
trying
to
telecommute
it
just
has
exasperated
the
the
situation
and
we've
done
everything.
F
I
think
we've
tried
to
explore
as
many
possibilities
to
go
to
every
corner
and
try
to
figure
out
email
it
to
me.
Send
it
to
me
take
a
picture
whatever
we
need
to
do
to
get
folks
renewed
license
will
do,
but
I
think
there
is
a
fundamental
problem
with
the
way
we're
operating
technology-wise
and
it's
just
not
the
front-facing
technology.
F
That
should
be
able
to
be
provided
seamlessly.
You
know
it's
it's
a
classic
case
of.
If
someone
can
renew
you
know,
why
would
you
come
to
the
division
and
so
trying
to
create
a
process
where
everything
can
be
sent
in
and
really
we
want?
We
we're
open
you.
We
want
you
to
come
in,
but
only
if
you
want
to
we
don't
want.
We
don't
need
to
force
you
to
come
in
just
to
get
a
renewal,
and
so
thinking
of
those
things
and
then
long
term.
F
Of
course
we
need
to
keep
enhancing
the
technology,
we
need
to
build
the
reserve,
so
in
case
there
are
other
things
we
need
to
do.
So
it's
just
not
a
one
time,
but
it's
a
constant
evolution
and
to
be
sustainable
and,
like
teresa,
talked
about
it's
fifteen
dollars,
but
it's
seven
dollars
and
fifty
cents
a
year,
because
it's
a
two-year
renewal
and
it's
really
it's
only
licensees,
and
so
that
that
was
the
idea.
F
The
goal
is
not
to
burden
the
licensees,
but
also
create
a
sustainable
way
for
us
to
continue
to
enhance
the
technology
and
just
operate
more
efficiently.
Thank
you.
E
Okay,
thank
you
and
matt,
and
madame
vice
chair.
I
also
have
david
tina,
who
just
going
to
give
some
quick
comments
that,
from
at
least
from
the
association,
okay,.
H
Good
morning,
madam
vice
chair,
neil
and
members
of
the
committee,
I
do
not
want
to
repeat
everything,
so
I
say
my
name
is
dave
tina.
I
am
the
legislative
chair,
but
I'm
also
owner
broker
of
urban
nest
of
500
agents
in
las
vegas.
H
Every
one
of
them
said
yes,
because
it's
renewal,
it's
changing
to
an
llc,
it's
changing
the
company.
Every
single
realtor
is
in
favor
of
this,
because
we
have
to
bring
our
technology
up
to
the
2021
and
the
state
surrounding
us,
and
this
cost
is
very
minimal
to
get
us
where
we
want
to
be.
Thank
you.
E
So
with
that,
madam
meister,
we
can
resume
questions.
C
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
just
if
we
could
get
into
if
we
can
persuade
the
powers
that
be
and
it's
in
our
hands
actually
to
decide
that
we
do
this
in
a
one
shot
through
the
the
recovery
act.
I
forget.
I
mean
I've
been
using
the
term
biden
bikes.
Just
because
it's
it's
a
shortcut.
I
don't
remember
what
the
name
of
the
the
various
acts
are,
but
if
we
could
get
that
money
to
cover
the
the
one
shot,
could
we
reduce
the
fee?
C
I
think
that
if
we
were
to
ask
the
realtors
or
the
licensees,
rather
that
even
those
that
said,
yeah
we'd
pay
this,
because
I'm
I
agree
completely.
We
need
to
bring
it
up
to
speed,
but
if
we
knew
that
there
was
other
money
available,
so
it
didn't
have
to
be.
You
know
money
out
of
our
pocket.
My
guess
is
they
they
would
agree.
Is
there
any
appetite
on
your
end
to
maybe
seek
one-shot
money
from
the
billions
that
we're
getting
to
do
that
and
lower
this
fee?.
E
Well,
senator
dennis,
while
I
think
that
you
know
if
we
can
find
those
funds,
that
would
be
great
but
as
as
you
already
know,
we've
got
probably
about
a
thousand
different
entities,
all
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
spend
the
same
dollar
and
we
can't
afford
to
say
yeah
we're
gonna
do
this
later
and
and
put
this
off,
we
we
have.
I
mean
this
is
something
that
was
needed.
You
know
two
years
ago
or
four
years
ago
or.
C
E
Yeah,
exactly
and-
and
I
know
as
a
realtor-
you
know
pay
750,
so
I
don't
have
to
do
all
this
other
stuff.
I
mean
just
my
little
piece
of
it
and
I
know
there's
a
million
other
things,
so
you
know
I
I
think
the
most
important
thing
right
now,
because
I
know
this
is
going
to
end
up
in
in
finance.
E
Anyways
that
you
know,
we've
got
to
get
make
sure
that
the
policy
is
right
and
then
we
can
figure
out
whether
you
know
as
as
we
look
at
the
budgets
overall,
how
we're
going
to
be
able
to
figure
out
who's
going
to
get
what
and
how
that's
going
to
work.
So
all
right.
C
Yeah,
I
appreciate
that
and
I'm
I'm
certainly
supportive
of
the
bill.
I
just
hate
to
you
know,
pass
up
an
opportunity.
I
don't
think
we
are
spending
the
same
dollar.
I
think
there's
plenty
to
go
around
with
the
4
billion.
On
top
of
all
that
we're
likely
to
get
we've
already
received
almost
30
billion
this
last
year,
that's
been
pumped
into
our
economy,
so
my
guess
is:
there's
going
to
be
enough
money
to
do
it,
I'm
just
trying
to
think
about
ways
of
reducing
the
cost
of
these
realtors,
because
not
all
of
them.
C
A
B
Thank
you
vice
chair
neil.
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
this
would
be
a
permanent
increase
in
the
fee
correct,
so
this
would
also
enable
the
real
estate
division
to
continue
to
keep
up
with
technological
advances
beyond
just
the
initial
investment
this
year
to
bring
them
up
to
speed,
but
in
coming
years
as
technology
improves
or
or
we
change
the
other
standards
for
real
estate
agents.
Add
requirements
remove
requirements
for
education
stuff,
like
that.
E
E
You
have
to
make
sure
that
you're
that
you're
doing
all
the
updates
and
and
keeping
that
and
when
it's
time
to
switching
to
a
new
one
so
being
able
to
have
the
fee,
allows
you
to
to
know
for
sure
that
it's
going
to
be
there
and
then
you
can
continually
be
your
plans
for
the
future
to
make
sure
that
your
technology
keeps
up
is,
is
is
more
secure
so,
which
is
something
that's
very
important
in
the
in
the
industry.
H
A
Okay,
so
any
additional
questions
I
know
I
have
a
couple
senator
dennis.
I
had
a
question
on
the
reversion,
which
is
in
section
four
line.
Nine
I
mean
it
shows
up
in
several
of
the
accounts,
but
maybe
I
don't
know
if
I
should
ask
this
to
director
sean
or
has
the
reversion
always
been
there
or
has
the
money
typically
gone
back
to
the
general
fund.
F
Morning,
madam
vice
chair,
chandra
administrator
for
the
real
estate
division,
I
think
that's
a
great
question.
I
think
it
ties
into
the
next
senator
dennis's
bill
I'll,
try
to
answer
this.
Yes,
so
the
reverse.
The
way
senator
dennis's
bill
is
crafted
this
one
sb
276
essentially
says
that
the
technology
fee
will
remain
in
the
division
to
be
used
for
technology
purposes
and
so
at
the
end
of
the
year.
F
F
So
really,
if
you
talk
about
a
15
technology
fee
across
the
licensees,
it's
about
250
a
year,
and
so
you
would
have
to
build
that
reserve
and
even
if
you
have
ongoing
maintenance
of
150
200
000,
that
leaves
about
50
55
000,
and
then
you
build
that
until
you
know,
like
you
said,
there's
more
technology
requirements
for
education
or
whatever
the
new
standards
are,
would
use
that.
And
so
that's
the
idea
is
the
account
stays
with
the
division
and
then
it
rolls
over
to
the
next
year.
If
there's
money
left.
A
Yeah,
I
thank
you
for
that,
and-
and
I
understand
that-
and
this
probably
because
senator
dennis
has
been
on
finance
for
a
while-
I
guess
I
was
just
wondering:
has
the
real
estate
division
always
kept
their
funds
since
you're
an
executive
agency,
or
does
it
go
into
the
general
fund?
Is
this
a
new
change?
That's
I
guess.
That's
that's
how
I
should
have
phrased
in
the
first
time.
E
Yeah,
no,
that
I
I
think
that
that's
one
of
the
challenges
in
it.
This
will
come
and
become
even
more
apparent
in
the
next
bill
is
that
you
know
the
way
that
the
funds
have
come
in
to
to
the
division
and
then
a
portion
of
that
stays
with
you
to
fund
the
division
and
the
rest
has
been
going
back,
and
so
there
hasn't
been
any
additional
funds
in
there
to
be
able
to
do
this.
A
Okay,
I
have
another
question
but
I'll
let
senator
hardy
go
senator
hardy.
I
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair
to
your
point
and
when
I
look
at
the
250
000
per
year,
that's
a
half
a
million
in
the
two-year
period
of
time,
so
the
the
technology
fee
is
going
to
accrue
until
it's
stopped.
At
what
point
do
we
say
we
want
to
sunset
this
fee?
Is
it
after?
I
I
So
what
what
guard
rails
do
we
have
on
this
because
bottom
line
is
it's
going
to
accrue
and
unless
we
have
some
idea
of
you
know
what
the
technology
fee
is,
because
if
we're
looking
at
this
technology
fee
to
buy
new
computers
to
buy
new
hardware
to
buy
a
new
place
for
it,
you
know
at
what
point
or
where
do
we
say
this
technology
fee
is
or
isn't
allowed
to
be
used,
and
I
I
don't
know
that
you've
got
an
answer
other
than
we're
just
going
to
save
money
in
a
special
account.
I
That
will
be,
I
hate
to
use
the
word
slush
fund,
but
that's
what
it
sounds
like
as
technology
slash
fund,
because
we
don't
know
where
we're
going
to
use
it.
Yet.
E
So
this
is
senator
dennis,
we
know
where
it
needs
to
be
spent
now
and-
and
the
director
can
address
specifically,
but
as
I've
mentioned
before,
these
are
going
to
be
ongoing
costs.
I
don't
anticipate
that
there's
going
to
be
this
money,
that's
going
to
continue
to
accumulate
because
it's
going
to
be
spent
on
on
keeping
that
technology
up
to
date.
Up
up
till
now
that
hasn't
been
the
case.
E
They've
had
to
come,
and
sometimes
they
get
the
funding,
sometimes
they
don't
and
as
in
the
technology
that
we
have
today
in
the
division
that
hasn't
been
able
to
keep
up
with
with
the
demand.
And
so
I
don't
anticipate
that
this
is
just
going
to
continue
to
get
big
because
it
needs
to
be
spent.
It
needs
to
be
spent
now
and
that
ongoing
cost
is
always
going
to
be
there.
But
the
the
director
could
probably
address
specifically
how
that
works.
F
F
That
is
far
exceeds
what
we're
going
to
collect
and
then,
as
we
as
we
go
through
the
process,
there
is
going
to
be
a
maintenance
and
a
hosting
service
and
you've
got
to
pay
to
maintain
those
services,
and
so
that
the
remainder
money
that
we
collect
every
year
is
going
to
maintain
that
there
may
be
some
money.
That's
left
over
that
can
accumulate
a
little
bit,
which
then
can
be
used
for
enhancing
that
technology.
So
I
don't
believe
it's
designed
in
any
way
to
accumulate,
and
I
just
do
not
anticipate
that
happening.
F
The
the
idea
is
to
use
it
for
technology
not
just
to
buy
hardware
but
really
technology,
because,
as
the
industry
changes
you've
got
to
enhance
the
technology,
you've
got
to
use
other
upgrades
to
whether
you
increase
the
education
requirements
or
there's.
You
know
applications
for
new
licensees,
whether
it's
pre-licensing
schools,
continuing
education,
whatever
those
technology,
things
that
are
done,
we're
going
to
use
this
fee
to
actually
enhance
the
technology
that
goes
towards
developing
that
software
or
that
extra.
You
know
set
of
tools
that
we'll
need,
but
also
on
the
back
end,
helps
the
process.
E
In
addition
to
senator
dennis,
in
addition,
they
still
have
to
present
budgets
to
the
legislature.
They
stopped.
You
know,
give
a
budget
to
the
governor,
so
I
mean
there's
still
that
oversight
as
far
as
the
money
going
in
and
how
it's
being
spent.
I
I
mean
madam
chair
vice
chair,
but
I
I
I
appreciate
the
elucidation
of
you
know
how
it's
going
to
be
used
and
where
it's
going
to
be
used-
and
I
I
think
that's
wonderful,
I
I
think
to
say
you
know
it's
going
to
go
to
a
good
use.
It's
very
honorable.
I
I
I
appreciate
the
explanation
and
at
the
same
time
I
recognize
that
we're
making
an
ongoing
fund
that's
going
to
last
for
more
than
two
years
and
we
have
in
two
years
we'll
have
another
legislative
session
and
we'll
have
an
idea.
You
know
how
much
money
we
used
and
what
it
went
for
and
we'll
have
an
accounting
right
now.
I
If
we
pass
this,
as
is
there's
no
accounting,
there's
no
there's
no
going
back
to
the
general
fund,
for
instance,
if
we
have
leftover
of
a
hundred
thousand
dollars,
it
doesn't
go
back
to
the
general
fund
budget
dust
as
it
may
be.
So
I
I
think
that
you
know
if,
if
we
have
something
that
says
okay,
this
is
a
great
idea
and
it's
a
good
idea,
and
I
think
it
is
then
at
what
point
do
we
say
this?
I
Is
our
bank
account
that
we
have
and
at
what
point
do
we
say
we
just
want
to
keep
gathering
money
in
it
or
you
know
what
what's
our
our
responsibility
to
our
people,
who
were
paying
this
to
the
ratepayers
as
it
were,
the
the
people
who,
right
now
they
say
they
want
it?
What
are
they
gonna
say
in
two
years
and
I
I
don't
think,
there's
anything
wrong
with
saying
this
is
a
two-year
thing
and
then
we
have
a
reporting
in
the
next
session.
Thank
you,
madam
vice.
A
A
All
right
so
in
the
bill,
it's
a
couple
questions,
so
it
shows
up
so
section
17
sub
four
there's
this
line
in
the
bill
that
talks
about
all
claims
and
it
shows
up
in
several
places.
What
are
the
kinds
of
claims
that
come
against
these
accounts?
A
Where
you're
saying
the
language
in
the
bill
basically
says
all
claims
shall
be
paid
in
the
same
manner
such
and
such.
So
what
are
the
kinds
of
claims
that
will
potentially
be
attached
to
this
15
fee,
because
this
is
all
going
in
as
a
lump
sum,
so
I
just
wanted
to
understand
the
kinds
of
claims
that
are
being
brought
under
these
chapters.
F
That
senator
character
administrator
for
the
real
estate
division.
That
I
believe
is
just
standard
language
that
I
think
I
think
it's
it's
referenced
throughout
our
statute.
All
claims
against
this
account
must
be
paid
just,
I
think
it's
general
practice
and
I'm
not
sure,
I'm
not
sure
it
has
anything
to
do
with
this
technology
fee
per
se,
but
I
think
it's
repeated
across
all
the
statutes.
I
think
it's
standard
language
that
I
believe
is
in
the
next
next
bill
too.
F
H
A
No
I'll
I'll
clarify
because
if
this
whole
thing
is
about
savings
right
and
the
additional
fee
is
about
getting
more
money
into
the
accounts.
When
I
saw
the
claim
language,
the
question
that
popped
up
in
my
mind
was
what
are
the
kinds
of
claims
that
typically
pop
up?
Will
that
eat
away
at
the
fee,
because
I'm
separating
the
fee,
because
this
is
what
you
guys
are
adding
in?
But
this
is
this
will
then
just
go
into.
A
E
This
is
senator
dennis
I
that
probably
would
be
more
appropriate
to
ask
legal
counsel
that
drafted
the
bill.
You
know,
as
we
know,
as
has
already
been
mentioned
by
this,
the
director
there
are.
There
are
some
language
that
just
gets
reused
in
the
thing,
so
it
might
be
better
to
get
to
ask
that
question
to
see
why
they
put
that
in
there.
A
A
So
I
was
wondering
about
the
application
there.
If
they're
going
to
be
sharing
in
this
fifteen
dollar
fee.
Since
you
just
you
get
in
that
section,
you
just
drop
the
whole
chapter
in
one
one,
one,
one,
nine
a
and
so
in
the
way
that
it
reads
it's
like
it
will
apply
to
all
sub-sections
within
that
chapter,
which
includes
developers,
global
governments,
and
so
I
wanted
to
get
a
real-life
understanding
of
the
application
of
this
fee.
F
Sherrod
chandra
administrator
for
the
real
estate
division
said:
madame
weiss
chair,
so
the
the
the
way
I
read
this:
the
application
of
this
technology
fee
so
in
timeshare,
the
real
estate
division
licenses,
timeshare
agents
and
timeshare
representative
there's
two
categories:
the
timeshare
agents
are
the
closest.
You
would
come
to
a
real
estate
agent.
They
have
to
take
a
test
and
it's
actually
a
license.
So
the
technology
fee
just
goes
on
that
license
type.
So,
we've
we've
got
two
sectors
in
time
share,
and
these
are
just
licensees.
F
It
doesn't
apply
to
developers,
builders,
all
of
the
other
companies
that
register
with
the
division.
It's
only
for
a
license
so
in
timeshare.
The
timeshare
sales
agent
is
the
licensee,
and
this
would
this
15
technology
fee
would
just
go
on
that
license.
So
at
the
time
of
renewal,
just
like
a
real
estate,
licensee
or
anybody
else
at
the
time
when
they
renew
every
two
years,
they
would
there
would
be
a
15
technology
fee
which
works
out
to
buy
seven
dollars
and
50
cents.
So
that's
the
only
thing
that
this
is
applicable
to.
F
F
That
is
my
understanding.
Yes,
this
is
only
for
the
licensees
that
apply
to
the
division
for
renewal.
A
Okay,
well,
that
was
the
last
of
my
questions.
Senator
pickard,
really
quick.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
just
want
to
confirm
that
director
chandra
that
you
said
that
the
this
technology
fee
will
generate
about
250
000
a
year,
so
it'll
take
four
years
before
we
can
actually
make
the
change.
Is
that
correct.
F
Technically,
yes,
sir,
that
is
correct
again
we
may
we
may
have
to
think
through
on
the
front
end.
If
we
can
maybe
borrow
against
it,
you
know
get
an
appropriation
from
the
general
fund
to
get
this
started
and
then
repay.
I
think
that's
something
that
we
have
to
discuss
with
the
budget
folks
and
see
if
that's
even
possible,
but
yes
technically,
would
have
to
build
a
reserve
to
actually
use
it,
but
I'm
sure
there
could
be
some
discussions
further
on
the
budget.
C
All
right,
I
appreciate
that,
and
so
I
would
encourage
senator
dennis
to
use
your
position
in
the
finance
committee
to
see
if
we
can't
spend.
I
I
think
I
calculated
it
out
to
be
two
hundredths
of
a
percent
of
the
dollars
we're
about
to
receive.
I
I
completely
support
this.
I
would
like
to
see
it
done
this
year,
so
I
would
love
to
see
if
we
can't
figure
out
a
way
to
get
it
done.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
Senator
hardy.
I
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair.
I
I
mean
to
the
points
being
made.
If
we
get
the
finance
committee
given
more
money
to
play
with
I'll
call
it,
and
we
get
the
one
million
dollars
to
institute
the
change
right
now
and
what
becomes
of
the
250
000
per
year
other
than
you
know,
just
in
case
we
need
it.
I
Are
you
saying
that
if
we
get
the
one
million
dollars,
then
we
don't
need
this,
or
are
you
saying
if
we
get
the
if
we
get
the
million
dollars
from
keith
pickard's
biden,
bucks
verbiage?
What
are
we
using
the
money
for
and
what
guardrails
do
we
have
on
that
money?.
E
This
this
senator
dennis,
as
I
mentioned
before,
there's
going
to
be
ongoing
costs.
So
it's
there
isn't
any
money,
that's
just
going
to
be
sitting
there,
at
least
not
all
of
it
in
a
year,
because
you're
going
to
have
the
the
upgrade
fees
that
have
to
be
paid
every
year,
the
support
fees
the
fee
could
be
used
for
the
people
that
actually
maintain
the
system.
E
So
there's
all
of
those
things
have
to
continue
to
happen.
This
isn't
a
one-shot
thing
you
put
in
the
system
and
then
you
have
no
other
costs.
That's
that's
the
reason
for
the
fee.
If
it
was
just
a
one-time
thing,
we
would
just
be
asking
for
a
one-time
amount
of
dollars,
but
in
order
to
be
able
to
keep
up
with
the
technology,
we're
going
to
need
that
money
to
to
continue
to
come
in
every
year
so
that
it
can
be
spent
on
maintaining
the
system.
E
If
this
is
this
senator
dennis
yeah,
we
we
need
to
put
the
system
in
which
is
the
bigger
cost,
and
then
we
need
the
maintenance
so,
and
you
know
we're
going
off
the
estimates
of
what
that's
going
to
cost.
There
hasn't
been.
You
know.
Until
this
is
approved,
they
can't
do
the
the
the
ifp
and
the
irp
and
to
be
able
to
do
that,
and
so
you
know
and
knowing
how
much
those
ongoing
costs
are
going
to
be
all
that
is
part
of
that
process.
E
You
know
there
can
and-
and
it
still
has
to
go
through
the
budget
process
and
has
to
be
approved
every
two
years
on
how
they're
going
to
spend
the
funds
in
there.
So
there's
there
is
that
that
oversight.
You
know
as
far
as
the
the
budget
issues.
E
So
right
now
we're
asking
for
this
committee
to
look
at
the
policy
on
whether
this
makes
sense
to
do,
and
then
we're
going
to
have
to
go
to
the
finance
committee
to
figure
out
how
what
the
you
know.
We
don't
know
what
the
rules
are
on
that
fund
funding.
That's
coming.
We
don't
know
if
it
can
be
used
for
that
or
not
I
mean
we
are
not
asking
in
this
budget
for
a
million
dollars
today,
because
that
was
something
that
was
not
contemplated
when
we
were
putting
together
the
bill.
E
If
that
is
something
that
that
wants
to
be,
you
know
that
that
can
be
discussed
or
whatever,
as
we
go
through
this
process
in
the
budgeting
process
in
this
session,
then
that's
something
that
we
couldn't.
You
know
we
can
look
at,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
need
to
change
the
way
that
we
do
technology
in
the
division
so
that
we
can
be
up
to
date
and
be
able
to
service
the
the
realtors
who
make
their
living
with
this
and
need
this
help.
So
that's
that's
kind
of
where
we're
at.
I
J
Thinking
about
advice
here,
I
greatly
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
ask.
I
just
wanted
to
get
a
couple
things
on
the
record.
I
appreciate
the
concept
of
a
million
dollars
to
establish
said
program,
and
I
understand
and
senator
dennis
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong-
that
your
concept
would
be
potentially
to
seek
a
million
dollars
for
this
technology
so
that
way
to
help
bring
us
into
the
future
in
the
department
into
the
future
and
then
have
the
fee
for
the
ongoing
cost
structure.
J
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
I
got
that
on
the
record,
because
I
tend
to
agree
100
with
that.
We
should
not
in
any
way
shape
or
form,
in
my
opinion,
be
looking
at
the
idea
of
these
revenues
coming
in
some
people
call
them
biden.
Bucks
should
be
not
ever
utilized
for
ongoing
costs.
You
should
be
for
situations
where
we
get
into
it,
and
I
was
just
making
sure
that
that
was
on
the
record
and
if
you
agree
with
that
statement,
but
also
myself
I'd
love
to
see
an
amendment,
a
million
dollars
for
that.
J
E
Yeah,
thank
you
and
yeah.
I,
and-
and
I
I
think
I
mentioned
this
earlier-
that
you
know
the
when
you
put
technology
in
you
can
use
one-shot
funds
to
put
technology
in,
but
there's
an
ongoing
cost
that
needs
to
occur
and,
as
you
already
mentioned,
we
don't
know
well,
we
know
what
the
needs
are.
We
don't
know
how
we
can
spend
that
money.
That's
coming,
and
so
you
know
this
bill
doesn't
pretend
to
to
try
to
figure
that
out
what
we're
trying
to
figure
out
with
this
bill
is
just
how.
E
How
is
it
that
we
can,
on
an
ongoing
basis,
be
able
to
have
this
technology
in
place
and
maintain
it,
and
you
know,
should:
should
the
legislature
decide
that
this
is
how
you
know
that
we
want
to
do
some
things
and
with
one-shot
monies,
because
I
agree
with
you,
you
know
you
can't
you
can't
do
ongoing
costs,
that's
not
a
that.
E
Doesn't
work
in
this
situation
we're
looking
for
an
ongoing
solution
to
the
problem
which
is
having
the
the
appropriate
technology
so
that
people
can
get
their
in
the
industry
can
get
the
their
job
done
in
the
most
efficient
manner
possible.
J
Thank
you
senator
greatly
appreciate
that
answer.
I
look
forward
to
trying
to
work
with
you
on
this
point.
I
I
could
actually
see
myself
voting
for
the
technology
fee
for
this
particular
purpose,
but
I
would
like
to
make
sure
that
we
include
some
other
things
in
there
that
are
critical
to
the
citizens
of
the
state
of
nevada.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair,
for
allowing
me
to
ask
that
question.
Thank
you.
A
You're
welcome,
thank
you,
so
I
think
we've
run
the
spectrum
on
how
to
be
prudent,
with
federal
money
or
and
state
money.
So
we
will
go
ahead
to
the
lines
who
have
called
in
for
support
for
sb
276.
B
D
Yes,
this
is
keith
lynum,
k-e-I-t-h,
last
name
lynum
l-y-n-a-m
good
morning
vice
chair
neil
and
members
of
the
community
committee.
I
would
like
to
thank
you
for
allowing
us
the
opportunity
to
speak
in
support
of
sb
276..
I
would
also
like
to
thank
senator
dennis
for
bringing
this
bill
forward,
as
well
as
his
as
he
mentioned,
bringing
the
professional
standards
to
a
higher
level
for
us
in
a
bill
in
previous
sessions.
D
D
So
I
just
want
to
talk
about
one
thing
and
I
think
it
brings
up
a
couple
points.
I'm
also
a
senior
faculty
member
in
las
vegas
and
as
part
of
that,
we
have
to
submit
classes
for
the
to
the
division
for
approval,
and
in
doing
so
I
submitted
a
class
with
materials
with
a
few
pdf
files
and
a
video
clip
and
and
very
nicely.
I
was
called
even
jokingly.
D
So
asking
me:
please
do
not
email,
those
they're
too
big
and
they
will
crash
the
system
they
went
on
to
say
I
had
to.
I
could
open
it
up
on
my
phone,
but
I'm
afraid
that
the
system
would
crash
that
that
was
only
just
a
few
years
ago
that
that
occurred,
and
so
I
I
just
want
to
make
one
thing
really
clear,
because
there's
been
maybe
some
confusion
on
the
one-shot
funds,
this
technology
fee,
the
industry
is
begging
for
this
fee.
D
D
And
it's
great
that
we
are
here
and
we
would
like
to
have
this
this
support
of
this
bill.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
for
your
comments
and
I
forgot
to
say
this
so
rather
than
the
three
minutes.
It's
the
two
minutes
per
caller
and
since
senator
dennis
has
very
similar
bills.
We
will
try
to
keep
the
testimony.
10
minutes,
support,
10
minutes,
opposition
10
minutes
neutral
to
then
get
to
the
second
bill,
where
we'll
probably
have
very
similar
conversations.
B
H
Good
morning,
jared
davis
j-a-r-r-y-d-d-a-b-I-s
good
morning
vice
chair,
neil
and
members
of
the
senate,
commerce
and
labor
committee,
I'd
like
to
speak
this
morning
to
urge
support
for
sb
276
authored
by
senator
mo
dennis
technology
and
related
regulations
in
the
industry,
are
often
outdated
in
reflective
pre-internet
reality
and,
if
not,
property
remedies.
These
shortcomings
can
adversely
affect
consumers
and
real
estate
professionals
by
denying
government
officials
modern
tools
that
can
help
them
more
effectively
conduct
their
work.
H
We
believe
at
zillow
that
the
economy
and
the
real
estate
market
of
today
will
require
continuous
innovation
and
leveraging
technology
to
stay
relevant.
So
sp276
represents
a
much
needed
new
approach
to
support
modernization.
Efforts
by
government
officials
who
we
know
are
working
diligently
to
serve
nevada's
consumers
and
real
estate
professionals
in
the
internet.
Age
zilla
would
like
to
thank
everyone
this
morning
and
please
urge
lawmakers
to
support
sb
276..
B
B
B
B
B
Yes,
thank
you.
Please
begin
your
testimony.
K
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair,
appreciate
your
time
without
going
down
a
long
road
of
recapping.
K
Just
briefly,
you
know
we
worked
last
session
with
senator
dennis
on
the
bill
that
increased
our
pre-licensing
and
continuing
education
requirements
across
the
board,
and
our
goal
continues
to
be
to
increase
the
professionalism
of
our
members
that
serve
our
communities
and
when
we
did
that,
we
understood
that
this
would
create
an
additional
burden
on
the
real
estate
division
to
process
these
additional
continuing,
educations
and
newly
created
classes
and
since
last
session,
our
real
estate
license
counts
have
grown
steadily
and
we
really
have
now
reached
the
pre-recession
highs.
K
B
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
So
we
will
go
to
anybody
who
is
signed
in
in
opposition.
B
B
E
I
think
you've
heard
thank
you,
madam
chair
senators,
for
the
record.
I
think
you've
heard
that
there's
a
huge
need
that
you
know
that
our
folks
in
the
industry
are,
are
you
know
asking
for
this
and
so
that
we
can
better
do
the
work
that
needs
to
be
done,
and
so
I
hope
you-
and
you
know
this
is
you're-
going
to
hear
similar
things
in
the
next
bill,
but
these
are
things
that
are
important
to
make
sure
that
people
can
get
work.
E
E
Thank
you
madame
vice
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
I'm
still
mo
dennis
and
I
still
represent
senate
district
2
in
clark
county
and
I'm
pleased
to
be
here
today
to
present
senate
bill
282,
which
seeks
to
require
that
certain
money
collected
by
the
real
estate
division
of
the
department
of
business
and
industry
be
used
solely
for
the
purpose
of
carrying
out
the
provisions
governing
the
profession
and
occupations
regulated
by
the
division,
and
I
still
have
some
loom
and
kasama
here
also
to
help
answer
any
questions,
as
well
as
director
shirat
chandra,
minister
of
the
real
estate
division,
tiffany
banks,
general
counsel
for
the
nevada
association
of
realtors
teresa
mckee,
ceo
of
the
nevada
association
realtors
and
david
tina
legislative
chair
of
the
association.
E
That
will
give
brief
comments
and
also
be
able
to
help
answer
any
questions.
As
you
know,
we
are
facing
unprecedented
budget
shortfall
at
a
time
when
demand
for
services
has
increased
more
than
ever,
while
several
federal
funding
sources
have
emerged
to
help
state
and
local
governments
ensure
business
continuity
during
this
challenging
time.
Together,
these
federal
funding
sources
have
given
the
state
an
invaluable
opportunity
to
confront
the
challenges
caused
by
the
pandemic.
However,
these
sources
are
temporary.
E
There's
a
lot
of
work
that
needs
to
be
done
and,
as
was
mentioned
during
the
pandemic,
actually
we've
increased.
The
number
of
of
licensees
and
realtors
have
been
selling
homes,
even
though
the
the
inventory
is
is
low
at
this
time.
But
it's
been
a
good
time
for
real
estate.
E
I'd
like
to
discuss
the
substantive
provisions
of
the
bill.
However,
there
is
an
amendment
available
on
nellis
that
mr
chandra
will
present
to
the
committee
senate
bill
282
has
introduced,
creates
various
administration
accounts
within
the
state
general
fund
administered
by
the
division.
E
In
addition,
the
money
deposited
in
the
separate
accounts
must
be
used
solely
for
the
purpose
of
defraying,
the
cost
and
expenses
incurred
in
carrying
out
the
administration
of
the
respective
professions
and
occupations
governed
by
the
division.
As
I
mentioned,
there
is
an
amendment
in
this
part
of
it
that
mr
chandra
will
present.
The
the
bill
also
has
what
we
just
discussed
in
the
previous
one.
The
15
technology
fee
imposed
on
teach
applicant
for
the
issuance
or
renewal
of
certain
licenses
certificate
permits
registrations
issued
by
the
real
estate
division.
E
This
is
not
an
additional
15
technology.
It's
the
same.
One
just
happens
to
be
included
in
this
bill.
So
with
that
I
I'd
like
first
to
give
assembly
women
kasama
she'd
like
to
give
any
comments,
and
then,
if
we
could
go
to
mr
chandra
on
the
amendment,
because
I
think
that'll
help
answer
some
of
the
questions.
B
Thank
you
senator
dennis
vice
chair,
neil
and
committee
members.
Again,
I
think
senator
dennis
gave
a
great
recap:
it's
it's
basically
becoming
a
self-funding
division
now
and
I
look
forward
to
director
sharoff's
input
as
well.
I
think
we're
one
of
the
few,
if
not
the
only
departments
that
have
all
of
our
funds
coming
through
the
general
fund,
while
other
divisions
are
self-funded,
so
this
bill
corrects
to
be
self-funded
plus
adding
the
technology
fee,
and
I
yield
my
time
now
to
director
chandra.
F
Good
morning,
madam
vice
chair,
members
of
the
committee
against
chandra
administrator
for
the
real
estate
division
want
to
sincerely
thank
senator
dennis
and
the
association
of
realtors
for
this
bill
and
for
the
considerable
amount
of
time
and
effort
they've
had
to
they've
had
to
put
into
this.
Before
I
start,
I
see
director
reynolds
in
the
zoom
call.
I
just
want
to
give
him
a
brief
minute
to
kind
of
give
the
committee
just
an
overview
from
bni's
perspective
and
then
I'll
go
into
some
of
the
technical
details
of
the
bill.
L
You
you,
mr
chandra,
this
is
terry
reynolds
director
for
the
department
of
business
and
industry.
I
wanted
to
kind
of
just
do
a
kind
of
a
short
overview
of
how
kind
of
how
we
got
here.
We've
been
working
with
the
real
estate
community,
as
indicated
for
the
last
several
years,
and
trying
to
come
up
with
an
overall
solution
for
the
real
estate
division
and
how
to
how
to
really
properly
fund
it.
L
Over
the
years
we
have
seen
basically
through
the
recession,
kind
of
a
drop
back
in
the
number
of
employees
that
we
have
within
the
division
and
just
when
we
think
we
can
get
ahead
and
license
licensees
are
increasing.
L
We
ended
up
in
the
pandemic
and
we
had
to
take
up
over
a
20
percent
hit
to
to
this
general
fund
division,
funded
division
and
basically,
we've
had
to
lay
off
people,
and
it's
really
kind
of
hurt
us
during
a
peak
time
within
the
real
estate.
So
we
were
discussing,
as
we
have
been
with
the
real
estate
community
on
how
to
how
to
fund
this
over
the
last
probably
10
to
12
years
we've.
L
The
the
real
estate
division
has
basically
sent
back
to
the
general
fund
over
90
million
dollars,
above
and
beyond
what
it
takes
to
run
the
agency.
So
we
generally
with
the
real
estate
division,
collect.
You
know
upwards
of
seven
to
eight
million,
but
we
only
have
expenditures
of
about
four
and
a
half
to
five
million
within
that
agency.
L
So
I
think
that's
really
the
best
way
to
operate
this,
to
be
able
to
do
the
things
that
we
need
to
do
to
keep
up
with
the
the
increases
when
the
market
increases
and
then
back
to
where
we
were
when
it's
when
it's
not
increasing,
we
have
and
traffic
can
go
through
the
numbers
of
employees
we
have
and
where
we're
at
today
versus
where
we
were
back
trying
to
come
out
of
the
recession.
So
that's
that's
kind
of
what
we're
trying
to
do.
L
A
Yeah
administrator
go
ahead.
I
think
I
think,
because
you're
an
executive
branch
agency,
I
think
it
it.
I
think
it's
very
important
to
spell
out
the
employees
associated,
and
I
would
also
like
you
to
put
the
what
is
the
history
on
why
you
are
an
executive
branch
agency.
F
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
thank
you,
madam
vice
chair
members
of
the
committee
of
shroud
chandra
administered
for
the
real
estate
division.
F
Briefly,
I'll
just
talk
about
the
conceptual
amendment
and
and
this
bill
that
senator
dennis
has
has
brought
forward
just
to
align
those
two
things
and
then
I'll
talk
a
little
more
about
where
the,
where
the
division
is.
As
far
as
like
the
budget
and
and
kind
of
our
our
current
situation,
how
we've
kind
of
come
over
time
so
very
briefly,
section
one
of
this
bill
really
all
it
does.
Is
it
essentially
says
that
we're
creating
an
account
in
the
division
which
is
in
the
conceptual
amendment
we
call
it.
F
Every
chapter
of
law
that
was
645
of
c
d
was
created
a
separate
account,
but
really
the
idea
is
to
create
an
account
in
the
division
and
where
all
the
monies
that
we
generate
and
collect
goes
into,
that
account
against
which
we
could
balance
out
our
expenditures,
and
then
the
overage,
like
direct
rentals
indicated
after
we
keep
a
reserve
could
be.
You
know
talked
about
about
a
reversion
to
the
general
fund.
F
The
way
it
is
currently
structured.
The
money
is
kind
of
bifurcated
into
a
couple
of
different
pots,
and
you
know
we
only
get
a
certain
amount
of
money
which
we
balance
our
budgets
and
then
the
rest
of
it
goes
directly
to
the
general
fund
and
over
the
years
we've
had
these
massive
cuts
that
have
resulted
in
just
the
division
being
stretched
beyond
any
reasonable
way
of
operating.
So
that
is
kind
of
what
the
bill
does
section.
F
One
really
talks
about
the
creation
of
the
account,
and
then
the
amendment
really
all
it
does
is
because
we've
already
discussed
the
technology
fee.
Essentially,
this
amendment
says
that
technology
fee
goes
into
that
same
account,
as
opposed
to
the
previous
bill,
where
we
had
to
create
a
separate
account.
This
just
flows
right
into
the
division,
and
so
the
same
changes
that
are
in
645
are
repeated
across
all
the
sections
of
law.
F
There
is
one
section
that
talks
about
116,
which
is
the
hoas
that
really
is
already
self-funded
and
for
most
of
you
folks
that
know
the
division
has
the
hoas,
also
under
it,
and
that's
separately,
funded
under
116.
So
we
just
removed
that
language
from
here,
because
I
believe
the
drafters
probably
thought
it
was
one
general
account,
but
it
is
two
separate
accounts,
and
so
those
are
the
only
modifications
in
this
account
and
there
is
also
a
education
account.
That
was
a
separate
account,
which
is
just
now
being
combined
into
645
real
estate
administration
account.
F
So
that's
really
the
conceptual
amendment
that
makes
the
changes
to
the
bill.
The
the
nothing
in
the
intent
of
the
bill
has
been
altered.
It's
just
the
mechanics
of
how
that
money
has
been
talked
about
in
the
bill
is
being
changed
in
this
amendment.
I'll
stop
there.
As
far
as
the
the
actual
amendment
and
the
bill
is
and
metabolize
chair
I'll,
just
quickly
kind
of
you
know
summarize
where
the
division
was
back
before
the
financial
crisis.
F
The
division
had
about
37
000
licensees,
we're
all
the
way
up,
just
40
000.
Now
right
when
the
recession
hit,
I
believe
the
division
went
down
to
about
24
employees
from
a
high
of
32
in
in
the
real
estate,
and
then
we
were
given
a
couple,
more
positions
back
and
then
we
remained
at
26
employees
throughout
the
rest
of
the
time.
So
essentially,
we've
had
about
a
30
cut
and
we've
never
recovered
from
that.
F
This
budget
cycle
this
cycle
we've
had
to
cut
about
400
000
in
in
resources,
we've
lost
three
positions,
a
deputy
administrator
position,
and
so
so
the
the
goal
is
to
try
to
get
the
division
to
a
point
where
we
can
actually
sustain
operations,
build
a
reserve
and
actually
do
the
things
that
we
wanted
to
do,
and
the
15
technology
fee
just
adds
that
resource
also
towards
achieving
that
goal.
F
A
Okay,
senator
pickard.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Just
a
couple
of
things.
I
mean
we've
kind
of
hashed
out
most
of
it.
This
has
to
do
with
the
now
the
changes
at
the
division
and
at
the
department.
Mr
reynolds,
you
mentioned
that
we
moved
90
million
back
to
the
general
fund.
Was
that
just
from
the
real
estate
division,
or
was
that
across
all
of
bni.
L
Terry
reynolds
for
the
record,
that
was
just
the
real
estate
division
so
over
time
the
real
estate
division
has
generated
more
revenues,
basically
than
their
expenditures
to
operate
the
division.
So
they've
actually
returned
quite
a
bit
of
money
back
to
the
general
fund
over
the
years.
C
All
right,
so,
with
that
in
mind,
are
we
unable
to
do
the
technology
upgrades
and
the
holding
the
positions
and
and
making
sure
that
we
have
enough
employees
to
service
the
needs
of
of
the
licensees
is?
Is
this
bill
fixing
that
structure
so
that
we
can
now
retain
those
employees
and
spend
the
money
on
the
technology
because
it
certainly
seems
like
we
could
have
changed
this
system
over
90
times
in
the
last
biennium,
and
we
didn't
even
need
the
last
bill?
Had
we
been
able
to
keep
that
money?
L
Terry
reynolds
for
the
record
senator
picker.
Thank
you
for
that
question.
This
is
what
the
the
intent
of
these
two
items
are.
The
first
one
you
just
heard
on
the
technology
fee
and
the
second
one
to
be
able
to
return
the
revenues
back
to
the
division,
to
be
able
to
support
that
as
you're
probably
aware,
98
percent
of
our
divisions
are
fee,
funded
real
estate
and
labor
are
the
only
ones
that
are
are
not
labor
office
labor.
L
Commissioner,
real
estate
is
kind
of
a
hybrid
has
the
common
interest
community
side,
which
is
is
not
self-funded
or
assuming
is
self-funded,
and
the
real
estate
side
is
general
funded.
So
we're
hoping
to
you
know
close
that
gap
all
the
way.
L
Through
the
recession,
we
actually
generated
more
income
in
the
real
estate
side
of
that
and
to
be
able
to
support
the
division,
but
we
were
tied
to
the
general
funds
so
that
any
funds
in
excess
of
that
went
back
into
the
the
general
fund
and
we
could
not
carry
up
a
reserve
or
be
able
to
support
those
activities
that
we
needed
to
do.
L
The
real
estate
community,
as
you
know,
is
asked:
why
does
this
happen
and-
and
why
are
we
put
in
that
position,
and
so
we
have
met
with
them
over
the
years
and
trying
to
to
work
on
their
concerns
and
be
able
to
come
up
with
a
solution
that
basically
provides
them
the
services
that
they
have
for
the
fees
that
they're
paying
into
the
division.
So
to
answer
your
question,
yes,
this
would
this
would
rectify
that
issue?
L
C
All
right,
I
really
do
appreciate
that
answer,
because
this
was
one
of
the
questions
that
I
had
years
ago
when
I
was
first
involved
in
in
this
endeavor
in
in
this
industry.
Why
were
we
sending
so
much
money
back
when
other
boards
that
I
dealt
with
like
the
contractors
board?
Generally?
Don't
or
at
least
they're
self-funded?
C
They
don't
get
to
store
money.
Any
excess
goes
back
to
the
general
fund,
but
they
are
allowed
to
cover
all
of
their
operating
expenses,
including
upgrades
expansions
employees
that
sort
of
thing,
and
so
what
I
think
you
just
did
was
you
convinced
me?
We
don't
need
276,
we
don't
need
sb.
I
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair,
mr
reynolds,
along
that
same
line
it
what's
the
difference
that
would
have
not
occurred.
Had
we
been
fee
based
for
the
number
of
employees
in
the
pandemic
versus
what
we
had
to
go
down
to
said
26
or
whatever
it
was
employees.
Would
we
have
been
able
to
retain
those
employees
in
the
real
estate
division.
L
Terry
reynolds
for
the
record
senator
hardy-
that
is
the
case
we
would
have
been
able
to
had
we've
been
able
to
keep
the
fees
that
came
in
to
the
division.
We
would
have
been
able
to
retain
those
employees.
L
There's
two
components
to
that:
senator
this
is
terry
reynolds
for
the
record.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we,
the
real
estate
community,
is
assured
that
there's
going
to
be
technology
improvements,
and
so
the
fee
was
going
to
be.
The
technology
fee
is
dedicated
to
making
sure
that
those
technology
improvements
happen.
L
We
can,
with
the
current
bill
that
we're
talking
about
which
would
take
monies
that
are
collected
in
the
division,
coming
back
into
the
division
to
be
able
to
use
for
that,
we
could
add
that
technology
fee.
What
we're
trying
to
do,
though,
is
not
is
to
keep
the
the
general
fund
somewhat
whole
in
terms
of
expenses
to
to
revenues,
and
so
we
didn't
want
to
create
a
bigger
hole
in
the
general
fund
and
that's
the
amendment
that
that
administrator
shirat
has
gone
over.
L
So
we
can
look
at
a
balancing
that
and
making
sure
that
we
have
the
funds
for
technology
improvements,
but
also
to
run
the
division
from
the
funds
not
in
increase,
but
for
the
funds
that
are
correct,
collected
and
be
able
to
use
those
funds
within
the
real
estate
division.
So
that's
the
issue
that
we're
looking
at
and
making
sure
that
that
that
can
happen.
So
we
appreciate
that
question.
I
think
that's
the
heart
of
whether
do
we
need
to
have
a
technology
fee.
L
Now
I
have
no
problem
with
reviewing
that
over
a
couple
years
and
making
sure
that
we're.
You
know
that
if
we
go
to
proving
the
current
bill
that
we're
talking
about
that,
we
are
not
basically
creating
a
lot
more
funding
that
we
need
and
having
huge
reserves
and
and
having
quote
unquote,
that
slush
fund
that
you
would
mention.
L
So
I
I
think
that
you
know
we're
happy
to
to
go
through
and
have
a
review
of
that
every
two
years,
every
biennium,
to
make
sure
that
we
are
proceeding
in
an
efficient
fiscal
manner
that
we
need
to
to
be
at
when
we
collect
those
funds
back
into
the
division.
I
I
appreciate
that
one
of
the
things
I
appreciated
was
hearing
that
that
concept
existed
and
if
we
had
too
much
money
it
would
go
back
into
the
general
fund,
so
we
in
essence,
have
those
guard
rails
that
I
was
talking
about
in
in
another
bill.
I
think
that's
a
correct
perception.
If
I
can
ask
that
question.
L
So
we're
happy
to
have
that
under
review
and
it's
very
similar
to
what
we
did
with
the
athletic
commission
when
we
took
them
out
of
the
general
fund
and
had
them
supported
by
their
fees
that
they
collect
senator
librielli,
and
I
worked
on
that
balance
to
make
sure
that
that
would
happen.
And
then
we
reviewed
it
going
down
the
road
to
make
sure
that
that
was
correct
and
they
didn't
have.
L
A
Thank
you
for
that.
So
so
I
had
a
quick
question
and
I
guess
I'm
I'm
just
coming
from
a
different
perspective
of
you
know
like
the
way
this
conversation
has
been
framed
around
sv
282,
as
if
the
general
fund
is
this
metaphorical
overseer,
that
is
siphoning
off
money
from
the
real
estate
division
and
what
I'm
trying
to
understand
and
get
a
grapple
on
is
you're
an
executive
branch
agency.
A
I
want
to
understand
the
history
on
why
you
are
an
executive
branch
agency.
I
don't
see
a
fiscal
note.
This
conversation
has
been
that
administrator
chandra
literally
drafted
the
amendment
to
to
reduce
the
fiscal
impact
to
the
general
fund
and
basically
you're
you.
This
is
a
power
shift.
I
that
the
understand
the
real
estate
fee
side
generates
money,
but
but
this
this
this
is
the
power
shift
in
order
to
hold
on
to
money,
be
self-funded
and
not
have
to
start
from
ground
zero.
A
L
Bill
terry
reynolds
for
the
record,
chair
neil.
Let
me
basically
say
there
will
be
a
fiscal
note
on
this
and
we
are
in
working
on
preparing
that.
So
a
very
good
point-
and
I
agree
with
you-
keep
in
mind
that
we
went
through
the
recession.
L
We
were
building
our
budget
back
up,
we've
been
discussing
since
2017
and
then
prior
to
that
the
state
had
increased
taxes.
During
that
time,
the
real
estate
community
was
looking
at
what
was
going
to
happen
during
that
time
to
be
able
to
what
the
cumulative
effect
was
going
to
be
on
their
realtors
and
their
agents.
L
The
real
estate
division
has
not
raised
fees
since
2003,
and
so
you
know
that's
that's
part
of
that
issue.
L
I
think
they've
been
running
very
efficiently,
but
they've
also
been
producing
revenues
above
and
beyond
that,
and
I
think
that's
something
that
we
looked
at
with
the
with
the
administration
during
that
time
and
we're
looking
at
coming
back
with
an
overall
plan.
And
here
we
are,
I
think
the
pandemic
has
really
kind
of
emphasized
the
need
to
be
able
to
have
control
over
their
own
distance
destiny
in
terms
of
the
fees
that
they
generate,
but
still
returning
funds
back
to
the
general
fund.
L
So
we're
not
trying
to
hurt
the
general
fund
we're
basically
trying
to
have
a
steady
income
stream
coming
back
to
the
real
estate
division,
so
they
can
operate
because
they've
had
to
swing
from.
You
know:
30
positions
down
to
26
and
now
being
cut
another.
You
know
percentage
of
of
positions,
and
so
we've
been
lucky
to
be
able
to
to
be
able
to
take
some
of
the
individuals
that
are
working
in
the
real
estate
division
and
transfer
them
over
to
other
other
areas.
L
But
you
know
it's
really
kind
of
a
band-aid
approach.
So
we're
looking
to
try
to
settle
this
and
stabilize
this
out
so
that
we
don't
have
these
swings
and
here
you're
in
a
position
where
the
real
estate
market
has
truly
kind
of
on
fire
and
you've
got
40,
000
plus
licensees,
but
you're.
Reducing
your
your
your
staffing
levels,
down
20,
30
percent
and
so
that's
been
very
difficult
and
we're
trying
to
just
come
up
with
a
solution
to
be
able
to
stabilize
the
funding
with
that
division.
A
So
let
me
ask
you
this
because
an
administrator
chandra's
in
his
amendment,
you
know
it
originally
had
300
000
and
then
it
said
ability
to
retain
100
000.
What's
the
effect
of
that
retention
right
because
it.
A
What
is
your
perspective?
Fiscal
note?
That's
going
to
be
to
the
general
fund.
If
this
goes
forward,
I
and
then
I
have
a
second
question.
F
Madam
vice
chair,
shirat,
chandra
administrator
for
the
for
the
division,
so
essentially
the
the
piece
that
you
were
looking
for
looking
at
was
an
education
fund.
So
essentially
licensees
have
forty
dollars
that
they
pay
to
work
every
two
years
towards
a
fund
that
pays
for
any.
It's
called
a
recovery
fund
so
essentially
that
had
an
artificially
high
balance
of
300
000
that
needed
to
be
maintained
over
time
and
the
way
fiscal
folks
were
interpreting
it.
F
F
I
think
the
larger
question
was
like
director
reynolds
said,
is
how
do
we
reduce
the
gap,
the
general
fund,
because
right
now
we're
contributing
x,
amount
of
dollars
to
the
general
fund
and
but
at
the
same
time,
the
division
is
just
reduced
to
such
a
level
of
staffing
and
resources
that
how
do
we
adjust
back
and
but
yet
be
contributing
a
certain
amount
of
money
to
the
general
fund
without
hurting
the
division?
And
so
what
does
that
balance?
Look.
A
So,
thank
you
for
that,
and
so
this
is
more
of
a
comment
because
listen,
I
understand
wanting
to
control
your
your
destiny
right,
but
what
I,
what
I,
what
I
have
concerns
with
are
the
pandemic
people.
People
are,
you
know,
they're
they're,
saying
they
don't
want
to
do
the
bandit,
but
ultimately,
when
we
start
looking
at
federal
money
for
whatever
it
is
to
walk
into
a
state
to
then
help
fix
one-time
issues
that
we
have
that
are
long-term.
A
We
run
into
another
issue
right
and
I
and
I
just
because
I
feel
like
it's
very
narrow,
because
the
assumption
is
we're
gonna
get
this
federal
money,
as
my
colleague
wants
to
call
it.
The
biden
bucks,
but
we're
gonna
get
this
federal
money
that
everybody
feels
will
fill
the
whole
of
the
general
fund.
But
the
question
that
always
looms
in
my
mind,
is
when
this
federal
money
expires
and
it
will
and
it
will
dry
up
or
it
will
have
limitations.
A
What
then
happens
to
the
general
fund,
which
is
the
state's
money
that
funds
services?
What
then
happens
to
that
hole?
Because
individuals
are
thinking
about
right
now,
but
they're,
not
thinking
about
2023
they're,
not
thinking
about
when
the
money
goes
away.
What
should
the
state
do
and
perform
mechanically
to?
I
guess,
stabilize
themselves
and
put
themselves
in
a
position
where,
if
you,
if
you
take
80
million
dollars,
because
you
want
to
you-
want
to
control
your
destiny,
where
does
the
state
then
get
the
80
million
dollars
two
years
from
now?
A
And
I
think
that
I
think
this
is
a
it's
a
broader
issue.
That's
that's
happening
right
now,
because
everybody
sees
this
waterfall
and
I'm
just
like
yeah,
okay,
waterfalls,
dry
up
and
the
state
has
a
responsibility
to
stabilize
itself
and
stand
on
its
own
two
feet
that
crutch
of
federal
money
is
not
going
to
be
there
forever.
A
It
is
also
has
a
very
short
window
on
it,
and
I
just
and
I-
and
I
worry
you
know,
because
we
act
like
it's
going
to
save
this
state
and
fix,
or
already
existing
issues
with
managing
our
budget
and
being
able
to
effectively
fund
all
of
the
services
and
agencies
that
we
need
to
take
care
of.
And
I
just
you
know
I
I
don't
know
you
know.
I
hear
what
you're
saying,
but
I
think
on
the
broader
context.
A
I
think
this
bill
is
just
drawing
out
for
me
the
broader
context
of
how
we
treat
money
in
this
state
and
how
we
effectively
plan
and
what
we
and
how
we
need
to
be
thinking
about
the
future
in
in
regards
to
what
happens
when
it's
just
us
when
there's
no
umbrella
of
money
coming
down,
and
we
have
to
fend
for
ourselves
as
a
state
and
when
you
take
away
money
from
the
general
fund
and
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
where
is
it
going
to
come
from
after
the
federal
money
expires?
A
A
If
every
agency
does
this
and
pulls
their
money
out
of
the
general
fund
and
we're
assuming
that
the
federal
money
will
save
the
day,
then
we
are
all
have
walking
around
with
blinders
on
and
in
denial,
and
I
feel
like
I'm
living
in
2011,
where
people
felt
like.
Let
the
federal
government
save
me
and
then
at
the
end
we
didn't
have
any
money
when
they
left
and
walked
away,
but
whatever
I'm
done.
E
Madam
chair
of
the
senator
dennis,
so
let
me
put
a
little
bit
different
twist
on
on
that,
because
I
I
get
that
right.
But
what
I'm
seeing
is.
We've
got
one
specific
division,
that's
put
90
million
dollars
back
into
the
general
fund
and
they
are
being
unfairly
budgeted
concerning
everybody
else
because,
as
was
already
said,
98
of
those
divisions
are
already
self-funded.
E
So
we're
asking
the
realtors
to
do
more
than
everybody
else,
and,
and
so
what
this
bill
is
trying
to
do
is
saying:
let's
put
the
realtors
on
the
same
level
as
everybody
else,
and
then
so,
when
you
say
what
do
we
do
to
with
the
general
budget?
So
if
the
realtors
aren't
putting
that
money
in
where's
that
coming
from
well,
we
as
a
state
need
to
be
budgeting
across
the
whole
state
and
not
just
say:
okay,
you
realtors
we're
going
to
ask
you
to
do
a
lot
more
than
everybody
else.
E
We're
going
to
ask
you
to
to
pay
to
take
all
your
we're
going
to
ask
you
to
do
with
less
with
you
know,
to
do
more
things
with
less
and
we're
going
to
take
all
your
money
and
and
use
that
to
fill
holes
in
the
general
budget.
What
this
is
saying
is,
at
least,
if,
if
they're
going
to
have
to
sacrifice
and
do
less
and
do
more
with
less
then
at
least
make
that
the
same
as
what
everybody
else
is
having
to
do,
because
it's
unfair
that
we're
asking
them
to
do
all
this
work.
E
And
then
you
know
it's
kind
of
like
a
step
child.
We're
just
saying
you
know,
do
everything
and
then
we're
going
to
take
all
the
money
away
from
you
and
give
you
some
pitens
back
and
and
expect
you
to
do
all
the
work.
So
really
that's
what
what
this
is
trying
to
do
is
just
even
that
playing
field,
and
because
I
agree
with
you,
we
don't
have
enough
funds
and
we
continue
to
have
to
cut
things.
But
it's
just
unfair
when
you
ask
one
division
to
do
more
than
everybody
else,.
E
Madam
vice
chair,
I'm
not
sure
if
the
other
folks
that
gave
testimony
in
the
other
one,
they
may
still
have
some
quick
comments
that
they
can.
A
Okay,
so
who
misses
we
have
miss?
Is
it
it
was
tina.
E
Yeah
teresa
mckee
from
the
division
of
real,
the
the
I'm
sorry.
E
And
david
tina
and
who
else
was
it.
G
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
Again,
my
name
is
teresa
mckee,
I'm
ceo
for
nevada,
realtors
and
again,
thank
you
to
to
senator
dennis
for
carrying
the
spill
and,
like
I
did
before.
I
wanted
to
thank
terry
reynolds,
the
business
and
industry
director
and
administrator
chandra.
G
I
just
wanted
to
emphasize
that
we
have
met
with
them
over
a
period
of
years,
actually,
as
we
discussed
self-funding
and
how
it
works
for
the
the
division
and
for
the
licensees
and
it's
you
know
very
apparent
that
this
is
a
complex
type
of
solution
that
took
us
a
several
years
to
get
around
to
being
on
the
same
page,
with
the
division.
On
that
we
had
many
many
many
discussions
about
creating
self-funding
as
a
viable
mechanism
to
support
better
services
and
maintain
that
flow
of
revenue
to
the
nevada
general
fund.
G
That
was
very
important
as
part
of
this
process.
We
do
now
share
a
common
goal
of
self-funding,
with
the
division,
as
well
as
the
needed
technology
fees
we
have
discussed.
G
The
self-funding
in
the
long
run,
does
provide
a
safety
net
for
the
division,
it'll
be
less
susceptible
to
the
ebb
and
flow
of
real
estate
licensees.
Since
I've
been
involved
with
nevada
realtors,
I've
seen
my
membership
with
nevada
realtors
start
out
in
2006,
at
about
22,
000
and,
of
course,
dropped
in
the
next
two
years
to
about
50
percent
of
that,
so
it's
very
hard
to
budget
with
those
types
of
numbers.
Then
this
will
help
create
stability
for
the
services
that
we
need
to
have
the
division
be
run.
G
We've
also
seen
the
loss
of
the
northern
division
office
almost
completely.
It's
only
an
administrative
office.
I
think
at
this
point
and
provides
no
services
to
either
the
the
consumers
or
real
estate
licensees.
Everything
has
to
be
done
through
the
southern
office,
so
self-funding
is
an
achievable
goal.
It
is
something
that
we
feel
will
help
the
division
and
help
licensees
and
help
provide
better
services
to
consumers
as
well.
We
stand
in
full
support
of
sb
282
and
also
the
amendment
that
was
announced
by
the
division.
G
A
E
I
I
thought
we
also
had.
This
is
tiffany
banks.
I
think
she
was
going
to
give
some
comments.
She's
the
general
counsel
for
the
nevada
association
of
realtors.
B
Hi
senator
dennis,
and
vice
chairman,
you
all
know,
I
I
deferred
to
theresa.
A
Okay-
and
I
saw
you
had
a
mr
fenseth
on
or
he's
just
on-
for-
support
anchor.
A
Okay,
all
right,
so
then
we
have
one
more
question
from
senator
pickard
and
we're
going
to
go
to
the
line
and
support.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
think
it's,
it's
really
more
a
comment,
but
maybe
a
question
in
terms
of
trying
to
confirm
my
understanding.
If
anything,
the
the
discussion
today
has
pointed
out
that
there's
the
self-funding
really
is
the
model
that
all,
but
I
think
one
other
board
or
division
currently
uses.
And
I
my
understanding-
and
this
comes
from
my
discussion
back
in
2017
when
we
were
looking
at
this-
was
that
the
division
gives
back
90
million
or
whatever.
C
But,
as
ms
mckee
said,
the
the
revenues
generated
are
are
fluctuating
each
year.
C
We
happen
to
be
in
a
boom
because
there's
a
lot
of
market
activity,
although
what's
happened,
is
we
end
up
with
more
realtors
out
there
or
more
licensees,
rather
that
are
fighting
for
those
few
sales
that
are
currently
existing,
so
there's
more
competition
that
drives
revenue
down
for
the
real,
the
the
the
licensees
and
so
but
the
the
licensing
contribution
or
the
the
inred
contributions
fluctuate
each
year
if
they
were
self-funded
and
retained
like
most
of
the
other
large
boards,
they
wouldn't
have
to
downsize
in
the
midst
of
a
growing
need,
and
my
understanding
is-
and
this
is
where
I
may
need
some
clarification
or
confirmation-
is
that
the
division
actually
or
I'm
sorry,
the
department
will
have
costs
that
if
this
went
self-funded
would
no
longer
go
against
the
general
fund.
C
We
move
both
of
these
components
over
and
it
would
be
a
relatively
small
hole
as
my
understanding
that
we
would
need
to
fill
and
so
again,
if
we're
talking
about
a
small
hole
to
fill,
that's
probably
something
we
can
do
within
the
budgeting
process,
and
if
it's
small
enough,
we
won't
feel
that
where,
by
the
same
token,
we're
not
going
to
be
reducing
the
size
of
the
service
or
the
the
ability
of
the
division
to
service
the
demand
by
moving
that
money
out
of
the
division
before
is
that
is
that
a
fair
statement,
mr
reynolds.
L
This
is
terry
reynolds
for
the
record.
Yes,
senator
picker,
that
that
is
exactly
it.
I
look
at
it
really
in
a
simplistic
way,
just
for
numbers
sake.
L
The
real
estate
division,
for
example,
would
contribute
10
to
the
general
fund
and
it
only
takes,
for
example,
five
dollars
to
operate,
that
they're,
appropriated
back
out
of
the
general
fund.
The
xs
5,
for
example,
goes
right,
stays
in
the
general
fund
so
and
over
time
the
real
estate
division
has
contributed
more
to
the
general
fund
than
they
have
expended
and
been
appropriated
back
to
operate.
So
that's
that's
kind
of
how
the
how
how
it
works,
and
so
you're
essentially
correct.
C
I
I
think
vice
chair
neal's
point
is
a
very
important
one,
and
that
is
that,
if
we
were
to
say
move
the
division
to
completely
self-funded,
if
we're
not
contributing
more
than
we're
spending,
that's
going
to
create
a
need
to
get
money
from
other
somewhere
else
to
fill
that
hole
in
the
general
fund.
But
it
was
always
my
understanding
that
the
actual
difference
between
the
what
the
the
total
department
and
division
expenses
were
relative
to
the
contribution
that
nred
alone
makes
isn't
that
it's
not
a
50,
it's
more
like
a
20.
C
L
Vice
chair,
neil,
through
you
to
senator
pickard,
basically
over
the
last
10
to
15
years,
the
real
estate
division
has
contributed
more
to
the
general
fund
that
it's
taken
to
expend
to
provide
for
them
all.
The
funding,
essentially
from
the
real
estate
division,
either
goes
into
specified,
accounts
or
goes
into
the
general
fund.
The
real
estate
division
receives
an
appropriation
back
to
operate
out
of
the
general
fund.
L
So
what
we're
saying
is
that
the
real
estate
division
wants
to
keep
the
fees
that
they
generate
up
to
a
point
where
they
can
basically
pay
for
their
expenditures
and
have
a
basically
a
small
reserve.
The
rest
goes
back
to
the
general
fund.
It
is
not
going
to
really
impact
the
general
fund
and
we're
looking
at
you
know,
making
sure
we
can
close
that
that
gap
to
make
sure
the
general
fund
is
whole
and
the
real
estate
division
gets
the
funds
that
they
need
to
operate.
L
So
it's
really
it's
complex
and
in
a
sense
of
how
to
do
that
from
a
budget
perspective.
But
it's
simple
in
terms
of
they
get
to
keep
what
they
generate
and
making
sure
that
the
the
balance
goes
back
to
the
general
fund
so
that
they
do
not
impact
the
general
fund
over
a
period
of
time.
L
And
I
and
I
share
the
the
same
concerns
because
you,
you
know
there
are
a
lot
of
demands
on
the
general
fund
and
we
don't
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
hurt
those
other
entities
that
rely
on
the
general
fund.
But
in
this
case
we're
trying
to
make
sure
that
we
can
stabilize
the
the
expenditures
and
the
revenues
that
come
into
the
real
estate
division.
So
they
don't
have
the
seesaw
up
and
down
over
the
years
and
able
to
be
able
to
support
the
real
estate
community
as
they
have
in
the
past.
C
All
right,
I
really
do
appreciate
that,
so
that
makes
me
feel
better
that
we're
not
actually
creating
a
hole
to
that.
Someone
else
is
going
to
have
to
fill
in
the
general
fund,
but
ultimately-
and
I
think
senator
dennis
was-
was
spot
on
when
he
said
that
realtors
are
essentially
paying
a
tax
there.
They
pay
an
additional
tax
to
be
realtors
that
no
one
else
has
to
to
pay,
and
I
think
that's
probably
worthy
of
looking
at
as
well
anyway.
I've
occupied
too
much
time.
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair,
for
your
indulgence.
A
Thank
you,
okay,
so
we
will
move
to
the
lines
in
support
of
sb
282.
B
B
B
D
Keith
lynum
l-y-n-a-m
good
morning
vice
chair,
neil
and
members
of
the
committee
again,
my
name
is
keith
lyndon,
a
long-standing
realtor
and
very
involved
with
the
nevada
realtors
association.
I
wanted
to
thank
senator
dennis
again
for
bringing
forward
sb
282.
D
We
are
simply
requesting
the
real
estate
division
be
treated
as
virtually
every
other
division
has
already
been
treated.
I
would
respectfully
submit
this
is
not
about
paying
more
money
to
government.
This
is
not
about
receiving
one-shot
money,
regardless
of
what
it's
being
called.
This
is
about
providing
badly
needed
services
to
our
licensees
and,
most
importantly,
protecting
the
consumer
we
serve
and
in
doing
so,
be
treated
as
every
other
division.
D
B
K
Brad
spiers
s-p-I-r-e-s.
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair
and
members,
I'm
speaking
as
president
of
the
nevada
realtors
and
I
want
to
go
to
a
little
different,
take
than
has
been
discussed
last
session.
Not
only
did
we
increase
pre-licensing
and
continuing
education,
but
we
also
in
that
bill,
clarified
the
use
of
nicknames
and
required
that
our
license
numbers
be
included
on
all
of
our
advertising.
K
B
H
Jared
davis,
j,
a
r
r
y
d
d,
a
davis
good
morning,
vice
chair
o'neal
and
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
jared
davis.
I
manage
government
relations
for
zillow
group
in
the
state
of
nevada
and
we'd
like
to
speak
this
morning
to
earn
support
for
senate
bill
282
authored
by
senator
mo
dennis
I'll.
Be
brief
much
of
the
conversation
about
the
importance
of
the
division
modernizing
has
already
been
had
this
morning,
which
I
think
we
all
agree.
H
It's
a
good
thing
for
the
industry
and
for
consumers
and
for
the
state.
What
we've
also
heard
from
the
division
administrator
directly.
As
we
know,
the
division
isn't
fully
equipped
to
best
serve
the
fast-paced
technology-driven
demands
of
today's
consumers
and
real
estate
professionals,
largely
due
to
financial
and
technological
barriers.
H
H
B
A
B
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
So
we
will
switch
to
opposition.
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
So
I
just
really
quickly.
I
wanted
to
like
explain
to
the
callers
that
were
that
were
listening.
I
know
we
got
caught
up
into
a
broader
conversation
on
budget
and
the
mechanics
of
it
and
extra
this
whole
federal
thing,
but
I
understand
the
issue
right
of
the
destiny
piece
and
controlling
the
funding.
I
just
it
just
it.
A
Just
the
the
conversation
just
brought
us
into
a
broader
conversation,
and
so
I
wanted
to
make
that
clear
that
I'm
I
am
hearing
the
testimony
and
I'm
understanding
the
bill
and
what
it
does.
I
just
went
off
into
a
big
picture
scenario,
so
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that
so
people
who
were
tuning
in
were
like
she
doesn't
get
the
bill,
but
I
do
senator
dennis
any
closing
comments.
E
I
you
know,
as
you've
heard,
I
mean
we're
just
trying
to
make
put
something
in
place
that
will
make
it
fair
for
realtors
to
be
able
to
get
the
the
services
that
they
need,
so
that
they
can
provide
the
services
that
they're
providing
for
our
our
citizens
here
in
nevada
and
when
it
comes
to
real
estate-
and
you
know
this
this
bill
helps
to
to
to
put
in
place
the
things
that
we
need,
so
that
they
can
continue
to
offer
those
services,
and
it
also
provides
for
the
technology
to
be
upgraded,
which
is
part
of
that.
E
That
needs
to
happen,
and
so
I
would,
I
appreciate
the
time
to
have
the
the
discussion
today
and
would
urge
support.
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair,.