►
From YouTube: 3/1/2021 - Senate Committee on Government Affairs
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
Thank
you
very
much
good
afternoon
and
welcome
to
the
senate
committee
on
government
affairs
thanks
to
everybody
joining
us
online
today
we
appreciate
your
participation,
members
and
audience.
Please
remember
to
mute
your
microphone
when
you
are
not
speaking
and
will
the
secretary
please
call
the
role.
C
A
Here,
thank
you
very
much
I'll,
remember
our
present
and
we
will
move
on
first
before
we
begin.
I
want
to
briefly
remind
everybody
about
the
ways
to
connect
with
us
through
this
virtual
platform.
Remember
that
you
can
participate
in
a
committee
meeting
through
dallas
through
nellis,
and
it
places
you
in
line
to
testify,
testify
on
a
bill.
You
can
also
submit
written
testimony.
A
You
can
share
your
opinion
via
the
legislature's
opinion
website
and
you
can
view
committees
online
through
nellis
or
on
the
legislature's
youtube
channel,
as
we
move
through
the
meeting.
If
you
have
any
difficulty,
please
make
sure
you
reach
out
to
our
staff
and
when
you
get
ready
to
speak,
if
you
are
doing
so,
please
remember
to
pay
attention
and
the
bps
will
let
you
know
when
it
is
your
turn
to
speak
and
when
how
to
press
and
unmute
yourself
so
that
they
can
call
on
you
to
speak.
A
We
have
a
period
of
public
comment
after
our
bills
and
at
that
time
we
will
be
limiting
your
speaking
to
two
minutes
per
speaker
and
today
the
committee
will
be
hearing
two
bills
and
then
we'll
have
a
work
session.
Following
that,
so
with
that
I
will
we
will
begin
by
opening
senate
bill
45.
A
D
Hello
good
afternoon,
can
you
hear
me
great
for
the
record?
My
name
is
jessica
adair
and
I
am
the
chief
of
staff
for
the
nevada
attorney
general's
office,
and
today
I
am
joined
by
my
colleagues
first
assistant,
kyle,
george
and
nicole
reilly,
who
serves
as
the
attorney
general's
domestic
violence,
ombudsman,
2
senate
bill
45
senate
bill.
45
is
a
bill
intended
to
enhance
the
state's
ability
to
combat
domestic
violence
in
the
state
of
nevada,
and
I
think
it
is
just
a
fitting
coincidence
that
we
are
hearing
this
bill.
D
D
This
shocking
number
does
not
account
for
the
many
domestic
violence
offenses
that
go
unreported
every
day
at
the
attorney
general's
office.
Combating
domestic
violence
and
supporting
survivors
is
a
key
priority
that
we
achieve
in
several
ways.
Nicole
reilly
has
served
as
the
office's
domestic
violence
ombudsman
for
several
years,
managing
many
statewide
programs
on
domestic
violence
and
assisting
individual
victims
by
connecting
them
with
services
and
even
holding
their
hands
in
court
attorney.
General
ford
also
chairs
the
statewide
committee
on
domestic
violence.
D
This
committee
is
comprised
of
diverse
stakeholders
and
experts,
who
help
lead
the
way
on
domestic
violence,
awareness
and
identifying
gaps
in
legislation,
services
and
systems
that
support
families
experiencing
domestic
violence.
This
bill
helps
strengthen
both
the
services
provided
by
the
ombudsman
and
the
committee.
D
I
would
like
to
bring
this
committee's
attention
to
an
amendment
provided
by
this
office.
This
amendment
reflects
changes
approved
by
the
committee
on
domestic
violence
and
other
stakeholders,
and
turning
to
the
amendment
itself,
sections
1
and
2
expand
the
duties
of
the
ombudsmen
to
include
services
provided
to
victims
of
sexual
assault
and
human
trafficking.
In
addition
to
victims
of
domestic
violence,
these
expanded
duties
reflect
a
common
reality
that
many
victims
of
domestic
violence
also
experience
sexual
assault
and
trafficking
service
providers.
Law
enforcement
and
other
stakeholders
frequently
serve
these
victims
as
well.
D
Section
4
makes
several
changes
to
the
committee
on
domestic
violence
to
better
serve
the
committee's
goals.
First,
while
the
ombudsman
will,
the
of
the
office
of
attorney
general
will
serve
victims
of
sexual
assault,
human
trafficking
and
domestic
violence,
the
committee
will
continue
to
focus
on
domestic
violence
issues
that
clarification
is
made
throughout
the
amendment.
D
Second,
the
amendment
adds
two
critical
members
of
the
committee.
Subsection
nine
adds
a
representative
from
the
office
of
the
court
administrator
from
protective
orders
to
sentencing
the
courts
are
a
key
partner
in
the
judicial
response
to
domestic
violence
and
adding
this
member
will
facilitate
communication
and
a
better
understanding
of
domestic
violence,
subsection
10,
as
a
representative
of
the
department
of
health
and
human
services,
division
of
public
and
behavioral
health,
who
has
experience
in
the
certification
of
programs
for
the
treatment
of
people
convicted
of
domestic
violence.
D
This
section
goes
hand
in
hand
with
subsection
2b,
which
removes
the
committee's
statutory
responsibility
of
certifying
treatment
programs.
Currently,
those
who
are
convicted
of
domestic
violence
offenses
must
attend
treatment
programs
as
part
of
their
sentence.
Those
programs
are
recommended
by
the
committee
and
then
officially
certified
by
the
division
of
public
and
behavioral
health.
This
bureaucratic
process
is
inefficient
and
also
often
leads
to
a
delay
in
certification,
as
the
committee
meets
quarterly,
and
one
of
those
meetings
is
dedicated
to
the
statewide
fatality
review.
D
D
Sections
5
and
6
make
conforming
changes
in
section
7,
subsection
4a
makes
a
correction
to
the
sentence
for
those
convicted
of
domestic
battery
against
a
pregnant
victim.
In
the
2019
session,
this
legislature
passed
assembly
bill
60.
assembly
bill
60
was
sponsored
by
the
attorney
general's
office
and
made
many
sweeping
changes
to
the
domestic
violence
statute.
D
D
Additionally,
pregnant
people
who
experience
domestic
violence
have
greater
health
risks
due
to
their
medical
condition
and
pregnant
people
experiencing
abuse
are
also
more
likely
to
delay
prenatal
care.
Nrs
201.481
states
that
a
first
offense
for
a
domestic
battery
against
a
pregnant
victim
is
a
gross
misdemeanor.
D
The
standard
sentence
for
a
gross
misdemeanor
is
incarceration
from
one
day
to
364
days.
In
practice,
this
is
leading
to
absurd
and
unjust
results
when
compared
to
the
mandatory
minimum
and
maximum
sentences
for
misdemeanor
domestic
violence
or
battery.
If
a
victim
is
not
pregnant
under
interest,
200.485,
a
first-time
misdemeanor
domestic
battery
offense
is
punished
punishable
by
a
minimum
of
two
days
incarceration
and
a
maximum
of
six
months.
D
A
second
time
misdemeanor
domestic
battery
offense
is
punishable
by
a
minimum
of
20
days
incarceration
and
a
maximum
of
six
months,
because
the
standard
sentence
for
a
gross
misdemeanor
is
incarceration.
From
one
day
to
364
days,
a
person
can
convicted
of
the
more
severe
crime
of
domestic
battery
against
a
pregnant
victim.
Gross
misdemeanor
could
be
incarcerated
for
a
fewer
number
of
days
than
a
person
convicted
of
a
standard
misdemeanor
battery.
This
is
not
fair
and
it
defeats
the
intent
of
this
statute.
D
On
the
other
hand,
punishment
of
364
days
incarceration
is
heavy-handed
for
a
battery
that
did
not
result
in
substantial
bodily
harm,
particularly
considering
the
maximum
for
a
standard.
Misdemeanor
is
six
months.
This
amendment
seeks
to
strike
a
balance
that
is
fair
just
and
reflects
the
intention
of
the
statute.
D
The
new
sentence
proposed
for
a
first
offense
of
domestic
battery
against
a
pregnant
victim
as
a
minimum
of
30
days
incarceration
and
a
maximum
of
six
months.
The
statute
also
clarifies
that
offenders
must
attend
treatment.
Programs
like
those
who
are
convicted
of
standard
domestic
violence
battery
and
the
fines
associated
with
this
statute
are
also
equal
to
the
fines.
For
a
standard
domestic
violence
battery,
thank
you
for
hearing
our
bill
presentation
and
we
look
forward
to
answering
your
questions.
E
I
had
a
question
on
that
was
the
behavioral
health
language
that
was
in
the
bill.
I
believe
it's
in
section
four,
but
it's
the
sub
b
I
was
trying
to
understand
like
so
this
is
new.
So
what
do
you
seek
to
gain
by
having
the
representative
now
a
part
of
this
conversation.
D
That's
why
it's
separated
in
that.
In
that
way,
what
we
seek
to
gain
here
is
a
greater
communication
between
the
department
of
public
and
baby
behavioral
health,
who
are
already
certifying
these
treatment
programs
and
the
committee
on
domestic
violence.
So
one
of
the
things
that
this
committee
has
already
been
looking
at
and
wants
to
improve
is
the
efficacy
of
these
treatment
programs.
D
So
when
someone
is
sentenced
under
the
domestic
violence
statute,
they
must
attend
these
treatment
programs,
formerly
called
batterers
intervention
programs
that
seek
to
to
break
the
cycle
of
domestic
violence,
so
not
just
punishment
but
also
rehabilitation,
and
what
we're
finding
is
that
some
of
these
programs
are
really
effective.
Some
of
these
programs
are
not
very
effective
and
we're
trying
to
make
sure
that
the
programs
that
are
certified
by
this
state
as
batterers
treatment
programs
are
effective
and
that's
something
that
the
committee
on
domestic
violence
takes
very
very
seriously.
D
E
Thank
you
for
that,
madam
chair.
Can
she
address
that?
Because
I
guess
what
I
was
trying
to
find
out
because
you
know
they're
commas,
so
it's
domestic
violence,
sex
trafficking,
well,
sexual
assault
and
then
sex
trafficking,
and
so
it
says
the
person
who
has
committed
the
act.
So
I
guess
I'm
trying
to
understand
like
what's
the
reformation
or
of
someone
who's,
a
sex,
trafficker
and
a
certified
program
for
that.
D
Yes,
so
thank
you
senator
jessica.
Dare
for
the
record.
I
think
that
this
is
that
language
might
be
a
remnant
of
the
old
language
and
we
need
to
strike
sexual
assault
or
human
trafficking.
It
should
only
be
for
the
treatment
of
persons
who
commit
domestic
violence,
that
is
in
accordance
with
the
with
the
rest
of
the
statute
that
sentences
people
to
commit
domestic
violence
to
those
treatment
programs
that
are
certified
by
dpbh.
D
So
I
I
can
make
that
clear.
Any
further
amendment,
if
you
wish.
A
A
I
I
actually
have
one
I'd
like
some
clarification
on.
You
were
talking
about
and
I'm
not
sure
what
section
it
was
it
might
have
been.
A
Actually,
I
think
it
was
on
page
eight,
like
section
seven
section,
four,
a
where
you're
talking
about
the
imprisonment
issues.
So
so,
when
you
were
talking
about
that,
it
changes
the
penalty
penalties
for
not
substantial
bodily
harm.
How
do
they?
How
do
they
know
with
the
mental
health
piece
of
that
we
know
what
bodily
harm
is
right?
We
can
see
the
bruises.
A
We
can
see
the
actual
things
that
have
happened
to
a
person,
but
how
do
we
generate
mental
health
into
that
and
somebody's
fear
in
somebody's
other
pieces
because
because
perhaps
they
haven't
been
hit
but
they've
been
beat
down
in
a
mental
way?
If
you
could
answer
that,
that
would
be.
D
Helpful,
thank
you,
chair,
jessica,
dare
for
the
record,
so
the
the
reference
to
substantial
bodily
harm
is
taken
from
other
p
references
in
nrs
in
terms
of
domestic
violence.
There
is
a
separate
statute
that
addresses
domestic
violence
battery
that
results
in
substantial
bodily
harm,
and
that
is
a
b
felony
in
terms
of
the
mental
distress
you're
right
that
is
so
difficult
for
a
court
to
quantify.
D
I
think,
though,
that
the
harm
committed
towards
a
victim
is
something
that
a
judge
and
jury
would
take
into
account
when
sentencing
someone
to
any
crime,
including
these
statutes.
But
I
just
for
clarification.
I
want
to
walk
through
the
4a
a
little
bit
more
in
detail
or
just
reiterate
what
we're
trying
to
get
at
so
right
now
in
the
standard
domestic
violence
battery
penalty
scheme
a
first
time,
domestic
violence,
offense
is
a
minimum
of
two
days
incarceration
and
a
maximum
of
six
months.
D
A
second
time.
Domestic
by
violence,
simple
battery
within
seven
years,
is
a
minimum
of
20
days
incarceration
and
a
maximum
of
six
months.
The
third
time
is
a
b
felony
in
this
statute,
the
gross
misdemeanor
for
domestic
violence
against
a
pregnant
victim
it
the
sentence,
could
be
anywhere
between
one
day
and
364
days,
because
that's
a
standard
sentence
for
a
gross
misdemeanor.
D
But
on
the
flip
side
you
also
have
someone
who
could
have
committed
a
a
battery
domestic
violence
battery
against
someone
who
is
a
pregnant
victim,
be
sentenced
to
up
to
364
days
so
virtually
a
year
when
that
person
did
not
commit
a
crime
of
substantial
bodily
harm,
which
is
a
separate
statute,
the
b
felony,
and
that's
what
we're
trying
to
rectify
here.
But
I,
but
to
your
question,
chair
about
mental
harm.
D
A
Thank
you
very
much.
I
appreciate
that
explanation.
Additional
questions
from
the
committee
vice
chair
or
in
shell.
Please
go
ahead.
F
Thank
you,
chair,
dondero
loop
and
thank
you
for
presenting
the
bill
to
general
ford
and
your
chief
deputy
attorney
general
and
chief
of
staff.
My
question
on
the
with
the
enhanced
penalty
that
was
passed
in
ab60
for
a
domestic
violence
battery
against
an
expectant
mother.
F
Has
there
been
any
tracking
do
we
know
if
there
have
been
many
prosecutions
of
these
kind
of
cases?
Have
there
been?
You
know,
a
checkerboard
of
sentences
that
haven't
that
have
been
less
than
if
it
had
still
been
a
misdemeanor
and
do
we
know
maybe
has
there
been
a
preventative
effect?
Have
there
been
less
incidences
of
these
batteries
on
on
pregnant
mothers
since
the
passage
of
ab60
order?
Vinnie,
that's
tracked.
D
Thank
you,
senator
jessica,
dare
for
the
record,
so
I
do
have
anecdotal
evidence
that
there
are
offenders
who
are
being
sentenced
to
a
to
a
sentence
that
is
less
than
the
standard
misdemeanor
and
that's
actually
what
brought
this
bill
or
this
portion
of
this
bill
in
terms
of
overall
stats.
I
don't
have
that.
E
Chair,
I
just
had
one
more
sure,
absolutely
okay,
so
miss
adair.
I
had
a
question.
There
was
language
in,
I
believe
it's
on
page
five
and
it
was
a
review
and
evaluate
existing
programs
by
peace
officers
for
training
related
to
domestic
violence,
sex
assault
and
human
trafficking.
E
And
I
guess
the
question
is
who's
who's,
reviewing
the
the
peace
officers
and
then
what
is
the
standard
because
it
says
recommendations
by
post.
But
whenever
I
watch
like
the
I
guess
it
would
be
the
the
finance
meetings
they
don't.
They
seem
to
be.
You
know
not
have
a
lot
of
time
to
implement
certain
things
because
they
haven't
implemented
certain
things
that
we
brought
up
for.
I
think
it
was
implicit
bias,
and
so
I'm
wondering
how
does
how
does
this?
E
How
will
this
work
going
through
post,
I
guess
and
then
who
is
reviewing
them
outside
of
post.
D
Thank
you,
senator
jessica,
dare
for
the
record,
so
that
is
an
existing
statutory
duty
from
the
for
the
committee
and
in
the
amended
version
of
this
bill
we
remove
the
references
to
sexual
assault
and
human
trafficking,
so
it's
only
domestic
violence,
so
this
bill
does
not
seek
to
change
any
of
the
statutory
duties
of
the
committee
as
they
relate
to
recommendations
for
programs
for
peace
officers.
D
D
In
the
past
two
years,
a.g
under
ag
ford's
tenure,
we
also
created
a
training
subcommittee
that
reviews
and
addresses
training
issues,
specifically
whether
that's
peace
officers,
court
officials,
judges,
schools,
etc.
So
that's
in
terms
of
who
is
already
doing
that
the
committee
on
domestic
violence
as
a
whole
and
the
training
subcommittee
in
in
terms
of
the
ability
for
peace
officers
to
absorb
and
implement
and
attend
trainings.
We
know
that
that
is
an
ongoing
issue
that
we
hear
all
of
the
time.
D
Peace
officers
by
nature
of
their
job
have
a
difficult
time
getting
off
of
work
in
order
to
attend
those
trainings,
even
though
it
is
part
of
work,
we
know
that
many
localities
have
problems
making
sure
that
they
have
coverage
and
also
having
folks
attend
training.
That
was
a
something
that
we
actually
put
in
our
recommendations
when
we
did
a
statewide
fatality
review
of
a
fatality
two
years
ago
in
tonopah
was
an
issue
with
the
night
county
sheriff's
office,
having
limited
number
of
deputies
in
that
area,
to
be
able
to
attend
programs
for
training.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
that
information
and
just
as
a
note
to
committee
members,
there
is
a
proposed
amendment
on
nellis,
so
that
is
there
for
us
to
review.
So
that
is
what
misadare
is
re
reflecting
on
or
speaking
to.
D
Yes
chair,
that
is
correct,
though
I
will
say
that
legislative
drafting
might
not
be
one
of
my
strongest
skills,
as
senator
neil
already
pointed
out,
one
of
the
things
that
I
missed.
So
I'm
happy
to
work
with
lcb
to
ensure
that
this
is
up
to
snuff,
but
no,
we,
we
did
submit
an
amendment
that
does
reflect
what
I
was
speaking
to
when
I
went
through
the
bill
section
by
section
earlier
in
the
presentation.
A
A
Okay,
well,
if
we
have
no
more
additional
questions
from
the
committee,
we
will
move
to
support
opposition
and
neutral,
and
so,
if
you
will
stand
by
we'll
give
broadcasting
just
a
minute
and
we'll
move
into
that.
Thank
you
very.
A
G
C
L-I-Z-O-R-T-E-N-B-U-R-G-E-R
and
I'm
the
ceo
for
safe
nest
and
thank
you
to
the
attorney
general's
office
and
to
the
committee
for
hearing
this
bill
today.
Safeness
is
a
domestic
violence
agency
in
clark
county.
We
regularly
serve
over
25
000
victims
of
domestic
violence
each
year
we
are
unique
as
an
agency
because
we
also
serve
batterers
in
the
domestic
violence
space,
we're
in
support
of
the
name,
change
and
the
overlapping
duties
in
the
on
ombudsman's
title,
because
we
see
every
single
day
the
overlap
between
domestic
violence,
sexual
assault
and
human
trafficking
as
a
provider
of
batters
treatment.
C
We
are
also
in
support
of
having
a
new
member
of
the
domestic
violence
committee,
be
someone
from
the
department
of
health
and
human
services.
That's
overseeing
that
program
to
decrease
bureaucracy
and
long
committee
meetings.
This
will
be
essential
to
continue
to
move
our
state
forward
in
this
space.
Thank
you.
B
A
And
as
it
we
had
done,
felicia
we
had
done
support.
Does
that
mean
we
might
have
more
in
support.
B
G
Oh,
you
can
hear
me
I'm
so
excited.
Thank
you,
chair,
I'm
so
sorry
for
the
difficulties
there.
We
I
do
have
another
caller
in
support.
She's
been
patient
enough
to
wait
on
the
line,
the
entire
time
caller.
You
may
go
ahead,
please
slowly
spill
and
state
your
name
for
the
record.
You
have
two
minutes
and
may.
G
C
All
right
good
afternoon,
this
is
jennifer
noble
from
the
nevada
district,
attorney's
association.
Hopefully
I'm
heard
at
this
point
I'm
calling
today
in
support
of
senate
bill
45..
C
I
am
the
chief
deputy
district
attorney
of
the
washoe
county
district
attorney's
office
as
well,
and
we'd
like
to
thank
attorney
general
ford
for
bringing
this
important
piece
of
legislation
forward
to
better
serve
our
survivors
of
sexual
assault
and
domestic
violence
and
to
ensure
more
equitable
sentencing
in
domestic
battery
cases,
especially
those
involving
pregnant
women
who
have
the
highest
chance
of
being
murdered
while
they
are
pregnant
than
at
any
other
point
in
their
lifetime.
We
are
in
full
support
of
the
bill.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
and
thank
you
for
your
patience
as
we
work
through
this
on
monday.
Any
additional
comments
for
support.
G
G
H
Good
afternoon,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
this
is
john
pirro
from
the
clark
county
public
defender's
office
j-o-h-n-p-I-r-o.
We
are
in
opposition
to
only
one
section
of
the
bill
section,
seven
subsection
four.
A
this
bill
does
a
lot
of
great
things
and
the
position
the
part
of
the
bill
that
we
are
in
opposition
to
is
the
mandatory
minimum
we'd
like
to
thank
mr
dair
and
the
attorney
general's
office
for
working
with
us
and
for
even
their
proposed
amendment.
H
H
It
has
neither
deterred
nor
fixed
the
problem
because
we
are
still
leading
in
all
of
the
bad
categories
when
it
comes
to
this
issue,
perhaps
more
focus
should
be
on
funding
places
like
safe
nest
and
other
places
that
support
victims,
because
housing,
a
victim
of
domestic
violence,
has
shown
to
be
the
most
effective
way
to
get
them
out
of
a
situation,
but
yet
we
continue
to
increase
mandatory
minimums,
and
that
is
why
we
are
in
opposition
at
this
time.
That
concludes
my
testimony.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
mr
pirro.
Additional
callers
in
opposition.
G
I
I
I
You
need
more
money
than
usual
to
take
care
of
one
having
a
mandatory
minimum
of
30
days
is
going
to
discourage
reporting,
because
you
know,
half
of
the
income
is
gone
for
a
month.
I
So
this
will
not
actually
help
these
people
get
out
of
abusive
situations.
It
will
just
discourage
them
from
getting
help,
and
so
for
that
reason
we
oppose
it.
Thank
you.
B
A
G
C
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
kendra
burchie
k-e-n-d-r-a
b-e-r-t-s-c-h-y.
First,
I
want
to
thank
ms
adair,
as
well
as
the
attorney
general's
office
for
speaking
with
us
regarding
this
bill.
We
really
appreciate
the
hard
work
that
they
are
due
to
doing
to
improve
our
laws
regarding
domestic
violence
and
sexual
assault
and
human
trafficking
victims.
C
One
of
I
would
like
to
start
with
thanking
them
for
their
hard
work
on,
especially
with
looking
at
and
researching
the
efficacy
of
our
current
laws
and
our
current
practice
and
how
we
are
treating
those
who
are
perpetrating
perpetrating
domestic
violence
on
others.
Our
only
concern
is
what
you
heard
mr
pirro,
and
mr
hoffman
indicate
is
just
regarding
the
mandatory
minimum.
The
department
of
justice
has
done
a
study
on
the
efficacy
of
increasing
and
having
mandatory
minimums,
and
it's
found
that
increasing
the
severity
of
the
punishment
does
little
to
deter
the
crime.
C
I
can
say
that
I've
had
at
least
two
cases
involving
this
charge
where
the
person
who
is
a
perpetrator,
it
was
a
first-time
domestic
battery,
and
so
we
are
just
concerned
with
having
people
who
may
have
been
involved
in
the
criminal
justice
system
for
just
this
incident,
where
there
was
no
prior
incidences
of
domestic
battery
domestic
violence,
of
treating
them
with
a
mandatory
minimum
of
30
days,
and
with
that
I
do
really
appreciate
the
attorney
general's
office,
bringing
this
forward
and
with
their
amendment.
And
so
thank
you.
That's
my
testimony.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Miss
berkey
additional
callers
in
opposition.
G
G
A
Thank
you
very
much.
May
we
move
to
neutral,
please.
G
G
A
I
am
sorry
we
will
move
to
miss
adair
and
ask
her
if
she
has
any
final
comments.
D
Thank
you
chair.
I
think
I
want
to
specifically
thank
ms
burchie
for
working
with
me
prior
to
this
hearing
on
this
amendment.
I
would
just
note
that
we
do
have
mandatory
minimums
for
other
for
the
simple
domestic
violence
battery
misdemeanor,
so
the
the
mandatory
minimum
here
is
not
out
of
character
or
out
of
step
with
our
current
statutory
scheme
when
it
comes
to
domestic
violence
penalties.
D
I
also
want
to
note
that
this
mandatory
minimum
of
30
days
is
because
of
the
gross
misdemeanor
in
this
case
and
the
fact
that
pregnant
people
are
of
the
most
vulnerable
during
this
time.
But
I
also
want
to
note
that
you
know
as
much
as
I
respect
the
opinion
of
the
nacj
and
mr
pirro.
D
The
reverse
is
true.
If
there
is-
and
I
I'm
not
sure
I
believe,
the
the
effect
the
deterrent
effect
of
the
mandatory
minimum
or
the
economic
effect
of
a
mandatory
minimum,
the
reverse
is
true.
If
this
amendment
is
not
passed
and
we
stay
with
the
status
quo,
the
offender
could
be
punished
up
to
364
days.
I
would
argue
that
a
year
incarceration
would
have
a
significantly
more
deterrent
effect
for
reporting
if
we
do
not
pass
this
amendment.
D
So
therefore,
I
I
think
that
that
argument
is
a
bit
short-sighted,
though
I
do
respect
their
position
and
thank
miss
bertie
specifically
for
working
with
us
in
advance.
Thank
you
so
much
committee
for
hearing
this
bill.
It's
something
that
I
find.
I
know
it's
very
dear
to
my
heart,
it's
very
dear
to
the
heart
of
of
our
staff
and
attorney
general
ford,
and
so
I
want
to
thank
you
for
your
for
your
time
and
for
your
patience
in
hearing
this
bill
today.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
for
that
information
and
we
will
now
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
45
and
will
open
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
127..
A
This
measure
revises
provisions
related
to
the
charter
of
the
city
of
mesquite,
and
if
the
bill
presenters
are
ready,
I
think
we
have
senator
dr
hardy
and
others
ready
to
present.
I
I
My
role
for
the
presentation
is
to
introduce
warren
hardy,
who,
in
one
way
or
another,
has
represented
mesquite
literally
for
decades
and
mayor
allen,
littman
who
is,
and
between
the
two
of
them
they
will
present
the
bill
and
we
have
the
city
manager,
aaron
baker
and
two
of
the
charter
committee
members,
brian
waste
and
adam
anderson
available
to
answer
any
questions.
I
With
your
permission,
I
would
turn
the
time
over
to
them,
depending
on
what
you
would
like
to
do.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
That
sounds
fine,
senator
hardy,
we'll
go
ahead
and
ask
warren
hardy
and
mayor
littman
to
come
forward.
J
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
warren
hardy,
representing
the
city
of
mesquite,
as
senator
hardy
indicated,
I
have
been
involved
with
mosquito
in
one
capacity
or
another
since
1991.,
when
we,
when
we
adopted
this
charter
a
couple
of
sessions
ago,
with
significant
help
from
then
assemblywoman
senator
neal.
I
I
said
we
we've
struck
on
the
perfect
charter
and
bragged
that
we
never
have
to
come
back
to
make
any
adjustments
here.
J
We
are
a
couple
of
seconds
later
proving
me
wrong,
because
our
current
mayor
noticed
a
what
what
what
he
felt
was
a
weakness
in
our
charter
with
regard
to
filling
nominations
for
the
position
of
city
manager
and
city
attorney.
The
way
the
legislation
was
initially
drafted
and
adopted,
it
could
lead
to
a
stalemate
in
that
position.
If
the
mayor's
the
mayor
is
unable
to
get
the
two-thirds
majority
vote
required
for
these
positions.
J
J
The
committee
did
that
and
what
this
legislation
proposes
to
do
is
in
the
on
the
issue
of
hiring
a
city
manager
or
a
city
attorney
that
the
mayor
would
make
the
initial
motion
or
suggestion
fulfilling
that
position.
If
the
mayor
is
then
able
to
get
a
two-thirds
majority
or
four
of
the
five
council
members
plus
himself,
which
he'll
be
part
of
it
because
he
made
the
motion
but
then
that
that
individual
is
is
appointed.
J
However,
if
that
position
fails,
then
we
would
like
to
have
it
open
to
the
floor
open
to
the
rest
of
the
city
council
to
make
nominations
which
then
would
have
the
same
requirement
for
at
least
four
affirmative
votes.
The
mayor
would
be
a
voting
member
in
all
circumstances
under
this,
although
under
the
charter,
he
breaks
ties
and
has
the
ability
to
veto
ordinances.
So
it's
pretty
simple
to
change.
Madam
chair,
we
just
think
it's
gonna
be.
J
We
haven't
had
this
issue,
yet
we
hope
it
doesn't
become
an
issue
but
wanted
to
do
a
preemptive
strike
here
and
resolve
this
issue.
Our
charter
commission
worked
on
it.
J
I
have
on
the
phone
adam
anderson,
who
was
the
chartered
commission
chairman,
while
most
of
the
work
was
done,
he
was
replaced
by
burton
wiest
who's,
also,
the
current,
or
also
on
the
line
he's
the
current
chairman
and
with
that,
madam
chairman,
since
this
was
the
mayor's
idea,
if
it
pleases
a
chair,
I'd
like
to
maybe
have
him
have
an
opportunity
to
just
say
a
couple
of
words
about
the
need
for
the
change.
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
committee
for
the
record
mayor
a
little
bit
of
mesquite.
I
I
had
noticed
this
some
time
back
and
I
thought
this
is
a
minor
change,
but
it
doesn't
need
to
be
corrected
because
sometimes
you
could
run
into
a
potential
stalemate
where
the
nomination
would
go
to
the
council
and
they
would
reject
that
nomination
of
mine
and
it
would
go
to
another
council
person
and
bounce
back
eventually
to
me.
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
That
I
think,
concludes
our
our
presentation.
If
there's
questions
we'll
be
more
than
happy
to
answer
them,.
A
J
Madam
chair
senator
nail
asked
an
excellent
question:
we're
attempting
to
avoid
a
back
story.
If
we
can.
E
A
E
J
A
So
disappointed
us,
mr
hardy,
we
were
so
ready
for
it.
Thank
you
very
much
any
additional
questions
from
the
committee
senator
grumkachia.
Please.
B
J
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
and,
and
I
think
that's
an
important
point,
so
thank
you,
senator
gleickich.
Although
the
charter
commission
is
not,
it
was
unanimous
vote
of
the
charter
commission.
Although
the
charter
commission
is
not
required
to
take
it
to
the
legislature,
excuse
me
to
the
city
council
for
approval.
We
we
always
do
that
as
a
matter
of
practice.
In
fact,
since
I've
been
representing
the
city,
we
don't
bring
an
issue
to
carson
city
unless
we've
worked
it
out
locally,
and
so
this
was
unanimous
in
both
the
charter,
commission
and
the
city
council.
A
Okay,
looking
across,
I
don't
see
any
okay.
Thank
you
very
much
and
with
that
we
will.
If
we
have
no
more
questions,
we
will
go
to
support
opposition
and
neutral.
Just
as
a
reminder
will
you
have
two
minutes
and
broadcasting
when
you're
ready?
Please
go
ahead.
G
G
G
C
G
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that,
mr
hardy
or
senator
dr
hardy.
Do
you
either
one
of
you
have
any
closing
comments.
I
J
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I'd
like
to
thank
senator
hardy
and
the
711
black
for
their
support
and
help
with
this
and
to
you,
madam
chair,
as
always
for
the
good
work
of
the
hard-working
hardest
working
committee
on
senate
government
affairs.
That
has
a
special
place
in
my
heart,
so
we
now
we
now
have
the
perfect
charter.
A
A
And
with
that,
we
will
move
on
to
our
work
session.
A
And
I
would
like
to
remind
everybody
that
we'll
be
taking.
We
will
not
be
taking
testimony
on
the
work
session.
However,
I
may
ask
bill
proponents
to
participate
as
necessary
and
to
ask
questions
as
we
move
through
our
policy.
Analyst
lisa
keller
will
be
walking
us
through
work
sessions,
so
miss
keller.
Please
proceed.
K
B
A
See
no
questions
we'll
take
the
motion
of
from
senator
gokuchiya.
Do
I
have
a
second
second
from
vice
chair
orange,
all
discussion
on
the
motion
and
will
the
secretary
please
call
for
the
vote.
Thank
you.
E
A
Yes,
thank
you
very
much
and
the
motion
carries
and
I'll
assign
that
floor
statement
to
senator
kokochia.
A
All
right
and
miss
keller,
if
you'll
go
ahead
with
our
next
bill,.
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
The
next
bill
for
the
committee's
consideration
is
senate
bill
39
and
is
sponsored
on
behalf
of
the
attorney
general
and
was
also
heard
on
february,
8th
senate
bill.
38
authorizes
the
attorney
general
or
any
other
officer
agency
or
employee
of
the
executive
branch
enter
into
a
pro-bono
contract
with
an
attorney
or
law
firm
engaged
in
private
practice
for
legal
services.
K
Any
fully
executed
pro
bono
contract
be
posted
on
the
attorney
general's
website
and
the
attorney
general
submit
an
annual
report
to
the
director
of
the
legislative
council
bureau
setting
forth
information
about
pro
bono
contracts.
In
effect,
the
committee
will
recall
that
at
the
hearing
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
proposed
a
conceptual
amendment
which
is
included
in
the
work
session
document
to
clarify
that
the
bill
does
not
intend
to
require
disclosure
of
otherwise
privileged
material
and
to
provide
that
any
law
firm
or
attorney
offering
pro
bono
legal
services
is
deemed
ineligible
for
outside
council
contracts.
K
I
Thanks,
madam
chair,
I'm
gonna
have
to
vote
no
on
this
one
after
the
after
the
hearing
and
thinking
about
it.
Frankly,
you
could
have
not-for-profit
political
advocacy
groups
that
would
in
effect
be
able
to
be
picked
up
in
this
and,
in
effect,
be
given
the
credibility
and
the
authority
of
the
attorney
general
of
the
state
of
nevada,
I'm
very
uncomfortable
with
that
they're.
Just
too
it's
too
broad.
The
way
it's
written
gives
too
much
flexibility
to
the
attorney
general.
I
So
I'm
gonna
have
to
be
a
no
on
this
one.
That
chair.
A
Thank
you
very
much
additional
discussion
from
the
committee.
A
All
right,
if
not,
I
would
ask
that
for
a
motion.
A
E
A
A
K
In
addition,
senate
bill
46
authorizes
certain
persons
employed
by
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
to
request
that
the
department
of
motor
vehicles
display
an
alternate
address
on
the
individual's
driver's
license
or
identification
card,
and
finally,
senate
bill.
46
authorizes
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
to
obtain
permits
from
the
department
of
public
safety
to
own
and
operate
emergency
vehicles
in
the
performance
of
its
duties,
and
no
amendments
were
proposed
for
the
measure.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Any
questions
from
the
committee.
A
I
A
A
K
The
next
bill
for
the
committee's
consideration
is
senate
bill
47,
sponsored
on
behalf
of
the
state
treasurer
and
heard
by
this
committee.
On
february,
10th
senate
bill
47
authorizes
the
state
board
of
finance
to
continue
to
issue
certain
interim
debaters
to
pay
for
the
general
operations
of
the
state
beyond
the
current
expiration
date
of
june
30th
2021.,
the
bill
permits
the
board
to
issue
not
more
than
150
million
dollars
in
interim
insurers.
K
There
were
no
amendments
proposed
and
just
a
special
special
note.
The
committee
will
recall
that
senate
bill
4
of
the
31st
special
session,
authorized
the
board
to
issue
certain
interim
devensures
to
pay
for
the
general
operations
of
the
state
until
june.
30
of
and
representatives
from
the
office
of
the
treasurer
are
available.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
are
there
any
questions
from
the
committee?
Madam
chair?
Yes,
senator
neil,
thank
you
so.
E
I
will
be
voting
no
on
sb
47..
I
I
can't
accept
the
expansion
of
power.
Sv
4
came
to
the
legislature,
not
just
the
ifc,
and
I
also
had
a
problem
doing
sb
doing
the
special,
but
because
it
was
a
special
session
because
we
were
in
the
middle
of
the
pandemic
and
we
didn't
know
where
our
finances
were
going
to
go.
E
I
was
okay
for
the
special
to
agree
for
unpledged
revenues
to
be
a
part
of
the
conversation
in
a
limited
sense,
but
with
making
this
permanent,
I
cannot
agree
with
using
unpledged
and
unrestricted
revenues
within
this
kind
of
power
structure
where
within
15
days
of
no
response
by
ifc
it
becomes
approved,
and
so
I
cannot
support
this
expansion
of
power.
A
Thank
you
very
much
additional
comments.
Senator
please.
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
my
only
question
is:
it
has
to
be
brought
before
the
ifc
in
15
days
and
request
and
deliver,
but
it
doesn't
really
say
in
the
bill
that
the
ifc
can
deny
it.
I
want
to
make
sure
about
something
right.
A
K
Yes,
that
is
correct.
I
could
not
admit
myself
that
the
state
treasurer
is
available.
I
Senator
gokuchi
that
that's
absolutely
right,
it
goes
before
ifc
and
then
ifc
has
the
opportunity
to
approve
it
deny
or
change
the
dollar
amount
so
functionally
under
the
bill.
If
there
was
a
concern
and
the
ifc
didn't
want
to
approve
it,
they
would
simply
move
the
dollar
amount
to
zero,
and
that
would
functionally
stop
the
process.
A
Thank
you
senator
gokutiya,
any
additional
comments
on
senate
bill,
47
senator
orrin
shaw.
Please.
F
A
A
Okay,
go
ahead!
Please
senator
ornsshaw.
A
A
Passes
motion
passes
three
to
two
and
senator
orrinshaw.
Will
you
please
take
that
floor.
A
Thank
you
all
right,
ms
keller,
I
think
we
have
one
more
work
session
bill.
Am
I
right
that
is
correct.
K
Go
ahead,
please.
The
final
measure
for
the
committee's
consideration
is
senate
bill
68,
sponsored
on
behalf
of
the
state
treasurer
and
heard
by
this
committee
on
february
10th
senate
bill
68
revises
various
provisions
governing
the
investment
of
certain
money
held
by
the
state.
Specifically,
the
bill
eliminates
the
prohibition
against
investment
of
the
state's
general
portfolio
and
reverse
repurchase
agreement
increases
from
50
million
to
75
million
the
maximum
amount
of
money.
K
The
state
treasurer
is
authorized
to
transfer
from
the
state
permanent
school
fund
to
a
corporation
for
public
benefit,
to
provide
private
equity
funding
to
businesses
engaged
in
certain
industries
that
are
located
or
seeking
to
locate
in
nevada
and
increases
from
40
million
to
60
million
the
maximum
allowable
amount
of
the
state
permanent
school
fund.
The
state
treasurer
is
authorized
to
use
to
guarantee
outstanding
bonds
issued
by
a
school
district,
and
no
amendments
were
proposed
for
this
mission.
A
Thank
you
very
much
any
questions
from
the
committee.
I
I
Treasurer
conan
for
the
record
absolutely
positively,
not
we're
talking
about
the
nevada
capital
investment
corps
which
has
been
in
place
since
now.
Lieutenant
governor
marshall
passed
it.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
will
be
voting
no
on
this.
Although
I
support
the
public
education
component
and
that
has
been
functioning
well,
I
don't
support
the
reverse
repurchase
agreements.
I
didn't
support
it
in
2015.
I
didn't
support
it
in
2017
and
I
haven't
changed
so
I'm
voting
no
on
sv68.
A
Okay,
if
not
with
that,
I
will
take
a
motion.
A
Thank
you
vice
chair
orange
shell
and
a
second.
I
I
F
A
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
The
motion
carries
and
I
will
assign
that
floor
statement
back
over
to
senator
oran
shaw.
Would
you
take
this
floor
statement
as
well.
F
A
Thank
you
very
much
all
right,
and
so
with
that
we
are
done
with
our
work
session,
and
so
we
will
move
to
public
comment
and.
A
Time,
thank
you
very
much.
We
will
wait
just
a
minute
to
make
sure
nobody
joins
us
before
we.