►
From YouTube: 5/7/2021 - 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
well
good
afternoon
and
welcome
to
senate
government
affairs
and
thank
you
everyone
for
joining
us,
those
in
person
and
on
zoom.
If
you
are
on
zoom,
if
you
will
please
turn
off
your
cameras
and
leave
your
microphones
muted,
we'll
watch
for
you
when
we're
on
the
bill
that
you're
presenting
and
will
the
secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
A
A
We'll
be
watching
for
him,
I
will
I'm
going
to
skip
all
the
housekeeping
items.
I
think
everybody's
been
in
enough
meetings
this
week
that
we
can
practically
recite
that
ourselves.
A
So
today
the
committee
will
be
hearing
three
bills:
assembly
bill,
211,
249
and
253,
and
we
have
our
very
own
assemblywoman
hagie,
who
I
have
spent
the
entire
day
with,
and
so
we
will
open
the
bill
on
assembly
bill
to
our
open.
The
meeting
on
assembly
bill
211
and
this
establishes
provisions
relating
to
a
plan
to
address
impacts
to
wildlife.
So
please
go
ahead
when
you're,
ready,
assemblywoman.
B
Thank
you
so
much
sharon.
Yes,
I
feel
like
we
are
glued
at
the
hip.
Today,
we've
been
together
since
8
am
this
morning
inseparable
good
afternoon
committee
members
good
afternoon,
chair,
I'm
assemblywoman
sandra
houdigi.
I
proudly
represent
assembly
district
41,
and
I'm
here
today
to
present
assembly
bill
211
for
your
consideration.
B
Process
existing
law
already
requires
numerous
state
and
local
agencies
to
review
tentative
development
maps,
including
agencies
like
the
division
of
water
resources
and
division
of
environmental
protection.
In
addition
to
water
and
environmental
reviews,
tentative
map
reviews
must
also
consider
access
to
utilities
schools.
B
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
kyle
davis,
and
I
appear
today
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
conservation
league.
Ab-211
is
a
priority
bill
of
the
nevada
conservation
network.
A
coalition
of
21
organizations
from
across
the
state
that
work
on
conservation
issues
ab211
is
an
attempt
to
bring
more
information
to
light
for
decision
makers,
as
our
state
continues
to
grow.
C
Ab-211
does
not
create
a
new
permitting
authority
for
the
nevada
department
of
wildlife.
It
simply
ensures
that
when
local
governments
are
making
decisions
on
new
development
that
they're
doing
so
with
the
benefit
of
knowing
the
potential
impacts
on
our
state's
wildlife
populations,
assemblyman
hargie
has
already
done
a
good
job
of
outlining
the
bill.
So
I
just
want
to
touch
on
a
couple
of
points.
C
C
As
a
result,
that's
why
you
see
the
revised
fiscal
note
on
the
bill
that
has
been
submitted
by
the
department
of
wildlife.
The
context
of
this
fiscal
note
is
important
to
understand.
In-Depth
budget
is
largely
composed
of
what
are
called
sportsmen's
dollars,
fees
and
taxes
provided
by
hunters,
anglers
and
trappers.
C
C
A
copy
of
the
tentative
map
must
be
forwarded
to
the
division
of
water
resources,
the
division
of
environmental
protection
and
the
public
utilities.
Commission.
If
the
subdivision
is
subject
to
nrs
704.6672
under
nrs.704.6672,
the
public
utilities
commission
has
the
authority
to
charge
a
fee
for
the
review
of
their
map
not
to
exceed
200
and
under
nrs
278.3295.
C
The
amendment
before
you
today
would
give
the
department
of
wildlife
the
same
abilities
as
the
division
of
water
resources
in
the
division
of
environmental
protection.
Setting
of
the
amount
of
the
fee
would
have
to
go
through
a
public
rulemaking
process
at
the
board
of
wildlife
commissioners
and
would
ultimately
be
approved
by
the
legislative
commission.
C
To
be
clear,
this
fee
would
only
be
assessed
if
the
department
reviews
a
map,
so
the
provision
in
this
bill
that
provides
for
an
exception
for
a
county
with
a
multiple
species,
habitat
conservation
program
would
still
exist.
They
would
not
need
to
pay
the
fee
if
the
if
the
department
is
not
reviewing
a
map.
C
This
is
a
simple
matter
of
fairness.
State
agencies
provide
a
service
to
the
developer.
By
reviewing
these
maps,
it
should
also
be
noted
that,
to
absent
this
fee
authority,
map
review
of
the
department
of
wildlife
would
be
funded
by
sportsman's
dollars,
money
that
otherwise
would
be
going
to
efforts
like
habitat
restoration,
that
benefits
our
state's
wildlife
and
that's
what
is
happening
now
on
a
scattered
basis
when
maps
are
provided
to
the
department,
although
there
is
no
provision
to
require
it,
why
should
our
state
sports
men
and
women
and
our
state's
wildlife
resources
subsidize
developers?
C
B
Thank
you,
mr
davis
and
madam
chair.
I
do
want
to
note
that
I
have
had
some
stakeholders
reach
out
to
me
today
to
talk
about
the
bill
and
the
amendment
we
presented,
but
you
know
that
we've
gone
from
ways
and
joint
finance
from
eight
to
twelve
and
then
commerce
and
labor
from
12
to
right
now.
So
I
have
had
not.
A
Okay,
perfect!
Thank
you
very
much.
So
it's
it
seems
pretty
straightforward,
though
it's
just
review
of
maps
when
property
is
purchased.
Am
I
correct.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
that
clarification.
Any
questions
senator
neil,
thank
you
so.
B
I
believe
I'm
yes
senator
neil.
That
would
make
this
a
two-thirds
bill.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
any
other
questions,
senator
hansen,
any
questions,
no.
E
Yeah,
of
course,
a
million
questions
on
this
one
kyle
nice
to
see
you
most
of
the
time
we're
doing
a
lot
better.
Nowadays,
we
used
to
want
some
bills,
but
this
this
one.
I
I
I've
got
some
issues.
I
I
didn't
with
the
amendment.
What's
the
estimated
cost
did
I
I'm
sorry,
did
I
hear
that?
What
are
they
if
I'm
a
developer-
and
I
want
to
do
a
subdivision
right
now-
you
know
I
pay
x
amount
of
dollars.
What
do
they
have
to
pay
to
get
this
particular
type
of
permit.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
kyle
davis,
for
the
record
through
you
to
senator
hansen.
The
the
amendment
provides
that
the
board
of
wildlife
commissioners
will
go
through
a
regulatory
process
to
set
the
level
of
that
fee.
So
it
doesn't,
it
doesn't
specify
what
that
fee
would
be
in
the
amendment.
C
But
what
I
have
provided
is
some
context
for
the
other
fees,
the
the
fees
that
that
are
paid
to
other
state
agencies
that
also
review
maps,
and
so
currently
the
public
utilities
commission
would
charge
200
if
they
were
to
review
a
map
and
the
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources
would
charge
four
hundred
dollars,
plus
three
dollars
for
every
buildable
lot.
That
is
included
on
that
subdivision
map.
So
that's
that
gives
you
some
context
of
what
you
might
be
able
to
expect.
C
The
other
thing
you
can
do
is
take
a
look
at
the
fiscal
note
that
has
been
provided
by
the
department
of
wildlife
on
this
bill,
and
that
gives
you
an
idea
of
what
they
would
expect
in
terms
of
the
in
terms
of
the
costs
that
they
that
they
might
incur,
because
the
overall
goal
here
is
cost
recovery.
So
it's
not
it's
not
designed
as
a
money
maker.
It's
just
designed
to
cover
the
costs
of
the
to
the
department
for
reviewing
those
maps
for
the
impacts
to
wildlife.
E
Okay,
other
question:
does
this
give
any
kind
of
okay?
You
know
as
someone
how?
How
did
he
point
it
out?
Nevada
has
got
incredible
amounts
of
biodiversity
and
there
are
a
thousand
different
species
of
lizards
and
snakes
and
scorpions
and
everything
else
out
there,
especially
in
like
clark
county.
Does
this
give
any
kind
of
like
a
veto
ability,
there's
nothing
that's
going
to
block
going
forward.
E
I
mean
that
you
know
the
desert
tortoise
issues
been
kind
of
a
disaster
in
a
lot
of
respects,
I'm
just
kind
of
worried
that
something
similar
because
there
there
are
so
many
unique
species
in
nevada
partially
because
of
the
isolated
valleys.
C
Madam
chair,
again,
through
you,
kyle
davis,
for
the
record
through
you
to
senator
hansen,
this
absolutely
does
not
create
any
regulatory
regulatory
authority
for
the
department
of
wildlife.
All
it
is
is
an
information
seeking
exercise,
so
the
department
of
wildlife
would
be
charged
with
providing
that
information
back
to
that
planning,
commission
or
local
government,
depending
on
the
depending
on
the
county.
C
But
the
ultimate
decision-making
authority
still
rests
with
that
local
government,
so
the
local
government
will
still
be
making
the
decision,
whether
to
move
forward
or
whether
to
make
to
request
any
alterations
from
the
developer,
based
on
the
information
that
they
have,
but
they
still
have
the
ultimate
authority
to
approve
or
deny,
or
you
know,
to
make
those
decisions.
All
the
department
of
wildlife
would
be
doing
would
be
providing
information.
C
E
Okay
and
last
real
quick
question
time
frames,
you
know
one
problem
if
you've
ever
been
involved
with
the
permitting
process
is
by
the
time
you
go
through
one
agency,
then
another
agency,
another
agency,
or
six
months
a
year
out
or
more
in
so
many
cases.
Anybody
did
an
analysis
as
to
if
this
will
add
any
significant
time
into
the
permitting
process.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
kyle,
davis,
again
for
the
record
32
senator
hanson
under
the
provisions
of
the
bill.
What
this
does
is
it
puts
the
department
of
wildlife
under
nrs
278.335
and
that's
an
existing
portion
of
law
that
requires
the
other
agencies
that
I
mentioned,
the
department
of
conservation,
natural
resources
and
puc.
They
have
to
provide
that
feedback
back
to
that
local
government
within
15
days
of
upon
receiving
that
map.
So
the
department
of
wildlife
will
be
held
to
that
same
standard.
C
A
I
think
we've
lost
senator
gokuchiya
for
just
a
minute
so
with
that
assemblywoman,
if
you
don't
have
anything
else
to
say,
we'll,
go
to
broadcasting
and
see
if
we
have
anybody
in
the
public
out
there.
Thank
you
very
much
all
right
with
that
being
said,
I
don't
see
anyone
in
the
room,
so
we'll
go
to
the
phone
lines
broadcasting.
Do
we
have
anybody
in
support.
F
F
G
Madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
callie
wilsey
with
the
city
of
reno,
that's
c-a-l-l-I
w-I-l-s
is
in
sam
ey.
We
are
here
this
afternoon
in
support
of
av-211.
We
are
supportive
of
endow's
review
of
tentative
maps
that
come
through
the
city
of
reno.
In
fact,
we
currently
encourage
endows
involvement
in
our
agency
review
process
and
we
include
them
in
a
distribution
of
all
of
our
land
use
planning
cases
as
part
of
our
master
plan.
G
The
city
of
reno
aims
to
promote
the
protection
and
conservation
of
wildlife
habitats,
and
we
welcome
the
input
of
the
endow
in
this
area.
We
want
to
thank
the
bill
sponsor
for
working
with
us
in
the
other
house
to
resolve
the
procedural
issue
related
to
the
length
of
time.
We
really
appreciate
her
listening
to
our
concerns
in
that
area.
G
Additionally,
regulatory
process.
We
do
hope
that
the
conversation
around
fees
will
also
take
into
consideration
the
impact
to
local
housing
markets,
particularly
as
we
are
working
to
continuously
address
affordable
housing
issues.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
put
these
points
on
the
record
today
and
thank
you
have
a
great
afternoon.
F
H
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
rachel
r-a-c-h-a-e-l,
hamby
h-a-m-b-y
and
I'm
a
senior
policy
analyst
with
western
resource
advocates,
a
regional
non-profit
with
a
nevada
office
in
carson
city
which
works
to
protect
the
west
land,
air
and
water.
We
are
excited
to
support
employee
bill
assembly,
bill
211,
which
would
help
nevada,
maintain
connected
habitats
and
avoid
impacts
to
wildlife.
As
nevada's
population
grows,
the
need
for
housing
to
support
the
state's
economic
growth
will
only
increase
and
we
recognize
the
need
for
new
development.
H
At
the
same
time,
urban
sprawl
is
by
far
the
leading
driver
of
land
and
habitat
loss
in
nevada.
The
state
must
thoughtfully
balance
the
need
for
growth,
with
the
need
to
protect
our
iconic
wildlife
and
the
outdoor
recreation
economy.
They
support
by
ensuring
that
impacts
to
wildlife
are
considered
when
planning
new
development.
H
Taking
advantage
of
endow's
existing
data
and
expertise
can
help
local
governments
make
better
informed
decisions
and
lead
to
better
outcomes
for
the
people,
lands
and
wildlife
of
nevada.
We
also
support
the
amendment
proposed
by
the
nevada
conservation
league,
which
would
authorize
the
board
of
wildlife
commissioners
to
establish
reasonable
fees
for
in-depth
consultation.
H
Other
agencies
included
in
the
existing
review
process
already
have
this
authority,
and
it
is
only
fair
that
endow
also
be
allowed
to
cover
its
costs
rather
than
having
to
divert
sports
and
dollars
promised
to
other
programs.
I
urge
you
to
consider
this
proposed
amendment
and
to
vote
yes
on
ab211.
Thank
you.
F
F
F
I
W-I-L-L-P-Peter
r-e-g-m-a-n
nevada's
outdoors
are
home
to
numerous
unique
species
of
plants
and
wildlife.
However,
urban
development
can
harm
and
displace
wildlife
habitats
and
disrupt
migration
corridors.
It's
both
impacting
the
quality
of
air
and
water
in
the
ecosystem.
I
These
impacts
can
be
avoided
or
minimized,
with
ab211
to
protect
habitat
environmental
quality
for
for
the
benefit
of
wildlife
and
people
alike.
Ab-211
requires
developers
to
consult
with
the
department
of
wildlife
on
their
development
plans
with
permitting
authority,
considering
the
potential
impacts
to
wildlife
and
habitat
when
approving
or
denying
the
project.
This
would
encourage
developers
to
start
avoiding
impacts
to
wildlife
and
habitats,
protect
the
open
spaces
that
make
our
state
special.
F
F
J
I
want
to
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
testify,
in
favor
of
a
b
211
and
its
proposed
amendment,
we
strongly
support
department
of
wildlife's
review
of
proposed
development
as
in
impacts
on
our
wildlife
resources.
Sportsmen
presently
pay
for
the
great
majority
of
wildlife
management
in
this
state.
J
We
are
constantly
reminded
that
our
wildlife
resources
belong
to
all
of
the
public,
not
just
the
sport
sporting
community.
We're
tired
of
sportsmen
having
to
foot
the
bill,
however,
for
all
wildlife
protection
any
permitting
through
governmental
agencies
involves
fees,
whether
it
is
local
county
or
state
agencies.
J
F
K
Obviously,
the
costs
incurred
should
be
related
to
a
fee.
As
the
amendment
states
to
support
the
endow
in
their
operations,
the
15-day
turnaround
does
not
seem
to
add
any
undue
process
to
the
permitting
and
nevada
nevada
department
of
wildlife's
budget
is
obviously
already
allocated
and
doesn't
need
any
more
strain,
so
that
fee
is
a
small
addition.
K
F
I
Thank
you
chair
and
committee
members,
matt
walker,
m-a-t-t
w-a-l-k-e-r,
calling
in
neutral
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada
homebuilders
on
assembly
bill
211
we'd
like
to
extend
our
thanks
to
assemblyman
woman
howardegee
for
the
opportunity
to
review
the
amendment
prior
to
today's
hearing
and
crafting
the
bill
to
create
additional
wildlife
review
and
input
on
potential
impacts
of
new
development.
I
The
sponsor
was
careful
to
avoid
duplicative
review
for
areas
that
are
already
covered
by
a
multiple
speech
species
habitat
conservation
program,
and
in
that
vein,
I'd
like
to
thank
kyle
davis
for
the
clarification
on
the
record
during
today's
hearing
that
new
tentative
maps
that
would
otherwise
be
exempt
from
review
by
endow
because
of
their
location
within
areas
covered
by
the
clark
county
or
param
valley,
mshcps
would
be
exempt
from
any
fee
adopted
by
endow
to
facilitate
their
review
authorized
by
ab211.
F
G
J-A-M-I-E-R-O-D-R-I-G-U-E-Z,
I'm
the
government
affairs
manager
for
washoe
county
and
sorry
to
say
that
I'm
here
in
neutral
today
on
the
bill,
we
we
are
in
support
of
reprint.
One
endow
does
currently
review
subdivision
maps
in
washoe
county
and
we
have
absolutely
no
objection
to
that
process
being
formalized
in
statute.
G
However,
we
are
now
in
neutral,
while
we
work
to
understand
some
of
the
impacts
of
the
amendment.
I
do
want
to
thank
the
bill
sponsor
for
working
with
us
on
the
other
side
to
address
our
concerns
and,
as
stated,
she
did
state
that
we
will
be
speaking
following
this
hearing
at
some
point
here
to
discuss
the
amendment
our
the
bill
is
originally
drafted.
We
had
some
concerns
with
the
conformity
of
timing
for
map
review.
G
G
Currently,
in
washoe
county,
we
are
focused
on
addressing
our
lack
of
affordable
housing
and
when
we
look
at
the
review
cost
for
all
agencies
to
review
current
subdivision
maps,
those
totals
usually
average
about
five
thousand
dollars,
and
so,
as
originally
drafted,
that
could
potentially
double
those
costs.
And
while
I
do
absolutely
appreciate
that
the
amendment
would
only
give
the
authority
for
endow
to
be
able
to
create
some
cost
recovery
options.
G
But
we
do
have
concerns
the
cost
shared
by
the
proponents
of
a
cost
of
400.
Excuse
me
per
map
and
then
the
three
dollars
per
building
is
not
what's
charged
for
subdivision
maps.
The
cost
for
the
state
for
those
maps
is
a
hundred
dollars
per
map
and
then
one
one
dollar
per
building,
and
so
again
we
do
absolutely
appreciate
some
cost
recovery
for
the
agency
for
the
work
that
they
have
been
doing
and
would
continue
to
do
through
this
bill.
G
However,
we
do
need
some
time
to
better
understand
the
intent,
an
idea
from
endow
to
better
understand
what
that
might
be.
While
we
do
again
continue
in
washoe
county
to
focus
on
affordable
housing
and
as
we
know,
these
types
of
costs
are
always
pushed
down
to
the
buyers,
and
so
that's
why
we
just
want
a
little
bit
more
time
to
understand
why
we're
not
opposed
thinking
that
there's
probably
a
road
to
get
there,
but
do
want
to
express
those
concerns.
G
F
L
Good
afternoon
chairwoman
and
committee,
my
name
is
alan
jenae
a-l-a-n
j-e-n-n-e,
and
I
am
the
habitat
division
administrator
with
the
nevada
department
of
wildlife.
The
department
of
wildlife
appreciates
the
intent
of
this
bill
and
the
proposed
amendment
and
the
opportunity
to
testify
neutral
on
ab211.
L
The
proposed
amendment
for
fee
authority
is
greatly
appreciated
by
endow,
as
we
receive
less
than
our
less
than
three
percent
of
our
current
budget
from
the
state's
general
fund.
Despite
this
endow
has
a
very
active
technical
review
program
and
we
currently
review
over
600
projects
annually.
Most
of
those
are
associated
with
national
environmental
policy
act.
Projects
spread
across
federal
lands
across
the
state.
L
Despite
this
workload,
the
department
of
wildlife
only
has
one
full-time
position
dedicated
to
technical
review
and
all
other
involved
personnel
have
other
priorities
and
additional
duties
specifically
to
the
technical
review
program
and
its
funding
to
review
subdivision
maps.
The
review
is
funded
by
sportsman
fees
and
federal
grants
through
the
wildlife
and
sport
fish
restoration
grant
program.
L
The
use
of
the
sportsman
and
federal
funds
to
review
subdivision
maps
means
that
those
funds
are
not
available
for
more
beneficial
projects
to
improve
conditions
for
nevada's
fish
and
wildlife
species
across
the
state.
This
all,
while
mining
and
energy
industries
have
been
required
by
state
statute
to
pay
for
endows
technical
review
of
its
projects
for
years.
L
In
summary,
the
department
appreciates
the
opportunity
to
provide
comments
and
again
appreciate
the
proposed
amendment
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
provide
comment.
F
M
Thanks
good
afternoon,
this
is
jake
tibbetts
j-a-k-e-t-I-b-b
I-t-t-s,
I'm
the
natural
resource
manager
for
eureka
county
and
I'm
representing
eureka
county.
So,
madam
chair
members
of
the
community,
thanks
for
the
opportunity
today,
eureka
county's
neutral
on
ab211
today
very
similar
to
the
way
that
ms
rodriguez
outlined
for
washoe
county.
M
M
We
want
to
point
the
committee
to
our
submitted
written
testimony
on
nellis
that
we
provided
on
the
original
bill,
and
it
still
has
many
relevant
considerations
for
both
the
first
reprint
and
possibly.
The
proposed
amendment
also
want
to
address
a
couple
things
that
were
stated
earlier
previously.
Previously,
it
was
stated
that
nrs
278
0.3295
allows
the
state
environmental
commission
to
develop
fee
regulations
for
the
division
of
environmental
protection
and
the
division
of
water
resources.
M
So
it
is
a
bit
disingenuous
to
put
this
constraint
that
we
all
have
back
on
developers
as
if
it's
their
fault
and
and
finally,
we
agree
and
under
understand
and
agree
with
ms
rodriguez-
that
the
the
nevada
administrative
code
related
to
the
fee
for
ndp,
specifically
under
nrs
278
335,
is
in
nac
445
a
.342,
and
that
is
a
hundred
dollars
per
map,
plus
one
dollar
per
lot,
not
the
four
hundred
dollars,
plus
three
dollars
per
lot.
As
previously
stated.
M
M
With
the
housing
shortages
we
currently
have-
and
you
know
these
developers
just
pass
the
costs
on
down,
so
any
fees
will
continue
to
go
through
and
further
exacerbate.
Increased
costs,
we're
seeing
on
housing
and
development
and,
finally,
there's
a
lot
of
things
in
statute
already
related
to
conservation
and
wildlife
resources
and
there's
a
lot
of
ways
to
work
across
the
board
with
multiple
entities
to
address
the
things
that
this
bill
is
intending
to
do.
F
H
Begin
afternoon
chaired
on
daryl
loop
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
this
is
marlon:
mcdade
williams,
m-a-r-l-a-m-c
capital,
d-a-d-e
w-I-l-l-I-a-m-s,
with
strategies
360
representing
churchill
county.
As
mr
davis
noted
in
his
testimony,
the
issue
of
fees
was
negotiated
in
the
assembly.
We
were
able
to
come
to
a
point
where
we
did
not
oppose
the
legislation
and
extend
our
appreciation
to
the
bill
sponsor
for
the
changes
at
that
time.
Unfortunately,
the
amendment
just
came
to
our
attention
today
and
the
fee
structure
being
proposed
to
add
back
into
the
legislation
is
potentially
problematic.
H
F
H
Good
afternoon,
chair
don
darrow
loop
and
committee
members,
dagny
stapleton
d-a-g-n-y
s-t-a-p-l-e-t-o-n
executive
director
for
the
nevada
association
of
counties
naco,
I
don't
have
much
to
add
just
wanted
to
echo
the
comments
of
washoe
county
churchill,
county
and
eureka
county,
and
we
did
only
just
receive
the
amendment
a
few
hours
ago.
We
look
forward
to
conversations
with
the
proponents.
Thank
you
so
much.
B
So
we
ultimately
have
the
authority
to
set
those
reasonable
fees.
I
urge
your
support
for
ab211.
I
think
this
is
great
legislation
that
will
allow
us
to
continue
development
in
a
way
that
protects
our
natural
environment
and
the
wildlife
that
makes
the
silver
state
so
unique.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
B
Good
afternoon
again,
members
of
the
committee
and
chair,
I'm
assemblywoman
sandra
howardigi,
and
I
represent
assembly
district
41
and
I'm
here
to
present
assembly
bill
249
for
your
consideration
in
in
2019.
I
worked
on
a
bill
with
the
same
people
who
are
with
me
here
today.
Our
mission
in
2019
was
creating
a
safer
work
environment
on
construction
sites.
We
were
successful
in
passing
assembly
bill
290,
which
created
the
osha
registry
to
help
combat
the
growing
problem
of
fraudulent
osha
cards.
B
We
are
here
before
the
same
committee,
again
tackling
a
new
and
growing
problem
on
construction
sites,
a
less
tangible
problem,
heat
exhaustion
and
heat
stroke.
Those
in
the
construction
industry
are
uniquely
susceptible
to
heat,
related
injuries.
The
work
comes
with
inherent
risks
which
are
amplified
by
exposure
to
direct
sunlight
during
the
hottest
months
of
the
year
between
1992
and
2016
285
construction
workers
died
from
heat
related
causes
and
more
than
a
third
of
all
u.s
occupational
deaths
are
from
heat
exposure.
B
The
study
also
noted
that
78
of
heat-related
deaths
in
the
construction
industry
occurred
during
june
july
and
august
non-fatal
heat
injuries
are
far
more
prevalent.
A
study
conducted
in
north
carolina
showed
that
heat
related
injuries
as
the
as
the
most
common
is
the
most
common
cause
for
an
occupational
er
visit.
B
Injuries
from
heat,
exhaustion
or
heat
stroke
can
result
from
cognitive
impairment,
dizziness
sweaty
slippery
hands,
slowed
response,
time,
muscle,
fatigue
and
cramping
nausea
or
vomiting
and
clouded
eyewear
that
blocks
vision.
The
risks
are
obvious
when
these
individuals
are
working
with
hammers
power
saws,
nail
guns,
welding
and
propane
torches
and
doing
so
suspended
several
stories
in
the
air
or
on
the
roof
of
a
home.
B
B
According
to
the
federal
agency,
the
national
institute
for
occupational
safety
and
health,
one
of
the
most
effective
ways
to
combat
this
is
to
schedule
higher
risk
jobs
for
cooler
parts
of
the
day,
and
that
is
exactly
what
assembly
bill.
249
aims
to
do
with
your
permission
chair.
I
do
have
other
co-presenters
here
you
what
you
have
before
you
is
the
first
repent
we
worked
with.
B
First
reprint,
we
did
work
with
stakeholders
in
the
assembly
to
get
to
a
place
where
we
could
all
compromise,
and
so
the
what
the
bill
before
you
today
states
is
that
a
common
interest
community
must
not
restrict
the
hours
that
construction
work
may
begin
during
the
months
of
may
through
september
other
than
those
hours
in
which
construction
work
may
begin,
pursuant
to
a
zoning
ordinance
by
the
governing
body
of
a
county
or
city.
B
So
if
a
city
start
time
is
7am,
then
a
cic
must
allow
work
in
the
community
to
begin
at
the
same
time
only
during
the
months
of
may
june
july
and
august
chair.
With
your
permission,
I
would
now
like
to
turn
it
over
to
victoria
carrillon,
with
the
division
of
industrial
relations,
osha,
to
speak
about
the
issue
and
the
growing
number
of
complaints
their
office
is
receiving,
followed
by
kelly
gaines
president
of
the
nevada
subcontractors
association.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
for
that
information,
ms
carrion,
would
you
like
to
go
first.
N
N
N
You
can
look
at
the
workers,
compensation
claims
related
to
heat
exhaustion
from
fiscal
year,
2018
to
2020,
there's
an
average
of
73
annual
workers
compensation
claims.
So
that
gives
you
a
sense
of
how
many
we
have
on
the
workers
compensation
side
and
then
in
osha.
We
also
receive
complaints
from
employees
about
heat
stress
in
their
workplaces,
so
there's
been
an
average
of
61
complaints
per
year
over
the
last
five
years
in
southern
nevada
and
eight
complaints
per
year
in
northern
nevada,
and
obviously
a
lot
of
that
has
to
do
with
the
difference
in
the
climate.
N
Some
of
the
complaints
do
result
in
inspections
by
nevada,
osha
and
so
we've
conducted
an
average
of
10
inspections
per
year
over
the
last
five
years
in
southern
nevada
and
three
per
year
in
northern
nevada.
So
it
is
an
important
issue
and
one
that
we
have
placed
a
high
priority
on
and
so
nevada.
Osha
has
proposed
a
regulation
to
address
heat
stress
and
that
is
currently
pending
in
our
office,
and
it
would
require
employers
and
employees
subject
to
certain
high
temperatures
to
do
the
following.
N
The
regulation
would
require
an
employer
to
leave
the
employee
from
duty
to
provide
the
employee
with
sufficient
means
to
reduce
their
body
temperature
and
to
monitor
the
employee
to
determine
whether
medical
attention
is
necessary.
So
we've
already
had
a
regulation
workshop
on
this
in
march
and
we
have
an
adoption
hearing
upcoming
in
june
and
we
think
that
this
regulation
that
we
are
currently
working
on
is
a
good
compliment
to
abt49.
A
O
Yes,
I'm
here.
Thank
you
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
committee
members,
for
the
record.
My
name
is
kelly.
Gaines,
I'm
the
president
of
the
nevada
subcontractors
association,
I'm
here
alongside
victorian,
assemblywoman
how
to
gain
support
of
ab249.
The
nevada
subcontractors
represents
roughly
150
residential
contractors,
subcontractors,
construction,
vendors
suppliers
and
other
businesses
alike.
These
companies
employ
thousands
upon
thousands
of
southern
nevada
residents.
O
O
However,
we're
coming
into
the
summer
months,
where
existing
employees
and
new
entering
the
workforce
will
not
be
able
to
work
full-time
and
provide
fully
for
their
households.
In
addition,
with
the
newly
passed
paid
time
off,
policy
limited
work
hours
would
not
qualify
would
not
qualify
for
future
pay
time
off.
For
some
of
these
employees.
O
O
We
believe
passing
of
this
bill
will
be
giving
employees
the
ability
to
work
full
time
during
the
summer
months
with
limiting
their
exposure
to
high
heat
indexes
overall,
creating
safer
workspaces.
I
want
to
thank
you,
madam
chair
and
committee
members,
for
consideration
and
assembly
woman
how
to
give
for
bringing
this
forward.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
this
is
for
miss
carrion.
So
if
you're
doing
regulations
what
happens
if
the
hoa
doesn't
comply,
are
there
penalties?
Because
I
wanna,
I
guess,
there's
an
example.
So
in
one
of
my
friends
neighborhoods
well,
he
lives
in
lake
las
vegas,
but
like
a
southwest
gas
guy
came
to
do
work
over
there
and
literally
got
into
a
shoving
match
or
liter.
Well
the
person
that
lived
there
shoved
the
southwest
guy
because
he
didn't
want
them
there.
D
B
And
I'm
I
can
jump
in
and
help
with
that
question
and
then
miss
carry
on
if
you
want
carrion,
if
you
want
to
jump
in
after,
but
I'm
working
on
a
similar
bill
that
deals
with
ages
who
violate
provisions
of
their
ccna
or
state
law
actually
and
right
now,
the
cic
actually
has
administrative,
fine
authority,
and
so
if,
if
an
hoa
is
in
violation
of
regulations
or
nrs,
you
can
file
a
complaint
with
the
cic.
B
A
Thank
you
other
questions.
Vice
chair
orange
hall,.
P
Thank
you
very
much
jared.
I
think
my
question
might
be
for
ms
carrion,
but
the
language
of
the
bill
administrator
khan,
is
you
know
if
the
governing
body
of
a
county
or
city
in
which
a
common
interest
community
is
located,
adopts
an
ordinance
restricting
hours
of
construction?
Do
you
know
have
any
as
of
now
adopted
such
ordinances,
trying
to
you
know,
restrict
construction
during
certain
times
during
the
hot
summer
months.
B
Local
governments
or
hoas
senator
governments,
local
governments-
oh
no,
so
local
governments
do
have
their
own
set
start
times
as
we
were
working
on
the
bill,
and
this
is
assemblywoman
sandra
howdy.
For
the
record.
I
apologize
madam
chair
and
miss
carrion.
If
you
want
to
jump
in
after,
but
as
we
were
working
on
the
bills
under
orange
shell,
we
did
notice
that
different
municipalities
do
have
different
start
times.
They
don't
restrict
start
time,
so
some
of
them
are
7,
am
some
of
them
are
6?
B
Am
some
of
them
are
8
am,
but
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
we're
not
trying
to
address
what
the
start
times
that
local
government
set
we're
trying
to
address
the
start
times
that
cics
hoas
set
that
are
way
beyond
what
the
local
government
has
said,
and
we
have
run
into
some
issues
where
a
local
like
a
cic
might
have
a
start
time
of
10
a.m
or
9
a.m,
which,
during
august,
if
you're
a
roofer,
isn't
a
great
time
to
be
getting
started.
P
A
Thank
you
very
much.
I
I
have
a
question
and
I
know
that
this
pertains
to
the
hoas,
but
do
we
have
any
laws
such
as
this
for
the
bigger
buildings
that
we
have,
whether
it
would
be
a
hotel
being
built
or
a
just
a
bigger
project,
because
those
same
people
are
out,
of
course,
in
the
sun?
A
B
Don't
know
if
we
have
similar
laws,
senator
our
chair
on
donderloop.
What
we're
trying
to
address
is
first
tackle
the
residential
problem,
but
I
mean
I,
my
intent
with
the
bill
has
always
come
from
a
place
of
worker
safety.
You
know
I've
worked
on
the
osha
issues
for
a
couple
of
sessions
now
with
administrator
carrion
and
some
of
our
local
stakeholders,
like
the
contractors
and
the
subcontractors
and
we're
taking
a
bite
of
the
apple
one
small
bite
at
a
time.
A
E
Thanks
madam
chair
actually
seems
like
a
good
idea.
My
brother
has
a
roofing
company
in
reno
and
you
know
those
poor
guys,
no
matter
what
the
weather
is
out
in
it,
but
starting
early
in
the
summer,
not
just
for
heat
stroke,
but
just
the
convenience
of
trying
to
work
in
reasonable
temperatures.
So
I'm
just
kind
of
I'm
curious.
I'm
trying
to
find
out
why
there's
some
opposition
at
all
in
the
assembly,
but
maybe
there'll,
be
some
opposition
testimony
to
help,
explain
that.
But
to
me
it
seems
like
a
very
good
idea.
A
A
Okay
with
that,
then
we
will
go
to
public
support,
opposition
and
neutral
so
broadcasting
when
you're
ready,
we'll
start
with
support.
Thank
you.
F
F
I
Good
afternoon
sheridan
darrell,
loop
and
committee
members,
my
name
is
matt
walker,
m-a-t-t,
w-a-l-k-e-r,
testifying
and
support
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada
homebuilders
association.
I
would
like
to
thank
the
nsa
and
assemblyman
woman
howie
for
their
coordination
and
outreach
on
this
effort.
It's
a
great
bill
for
worker
safety,
it's
a
great
bill
for
business
and
we
urge
your
support.
Thank
you.
F
K
My
name
is
cyrus
hojati
c-y-r-u-s-h-o-j-j-a-t-y
good
afternoon.
Thank
you
so
much
for
bringing
this
bill.
I
think
this
is
kind
of
a
support,
slash,
neutral
testimony.
I
support
the
bill.
I
think
it's
very
important
that
we
improve
worker
safety
and
there's
certainly
a
lot
of
issues
with
construction
that
I
have
seen.
K
First
of
all,
I
was
hoping
that
this
would
be
a
more
about
land
use
planning,
but
even
though
it's
the
number
one
concern
here
in
las
vegas,
there
have
been
a
lot
of
injuries.
There
have
been
a
lot
of
unnecessary
disruptions.
Certainly
I've
seen
it.
The
rate
is
higher
than
many
other
states.
I
just
like
to
add
on
a
few
points.
First
of
all
that
a
lot
of
the
heat
in
las
vegas-
not
all
of
it,
is
natural
desert
heat.
A
lot
of
it
is
urban
heat
island
effect.
K
I
was
just
hoping
if
this
bill
does
not
disrupt
the
supply
of
construction,
because
we
are
having
short
supply
of
housing,
and
I
was
hoping
also
this
bill
would
address
the
3d
printing
construction
or
a
manufactured
unit
that
is
currently
being
set
up
as
delivered
as
a
way
to
set
up
new
units
that
would
reduce
cost
and
labor
dramatically,
but
other
than
that.
Thank
you
guys
so
much
and
I
will
yield
my
time.
F
B
You
chair
and
I'll
keep
this
brief,
because
I
know
it's
been
a
long
day
for
many
of
us,
but
summer
is
often
the
peak
con
speed
construction
season,
especially
with
it
being
the
busiest
season
in
the
housing
market,
and
so
there's
no
choice
sometimes,
but
to
go
out
there
and
work
even
on
the
hottest
days.
I
think
the
amended
ab249
that
you
have
before
you
helps
us
target
the
two
biggest
dangers
of
working
in
vegas
heat
heat,
stroke
and
heat
exhaustion.
B
A
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
kind
words,
and
I
really
think
that
you
should
just
sit
in
the
audience,
so
you
can
finish
your
day
with
me:
have
a
nice
weekend
assemblywoman.
Thank
you
very
much
with
that.
We'll
close
the
bill,
the
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
249
and
we
will
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
253
and
welcome
assemblywoman
considine
to
our.
A
Q
Thank
you,
chair
dunder
loop,
vice
chair
orange
hall
and
the
members
of
the
city
senate
committee.
Today,
for
the
record,
my
name
is
vinisha
considine
and
I
have
the
luck
of
representing
district
18..
I
am
here
to
present
ab253
first
reprint,
which
concerns
public
bodies
and
virtual
meetings.
I
will
be
joined
today
by
my
co-presenter
rosalie
borderlov,
who
is
chief
deputy
attorney
general
in
charge
of
boards
and
open
government
division
in
the
attorney
general's
office.
Q
She
will
be
presenting
the
bill
and
also
the
amendment
which
I
hope
you
have
it's
available
on
nellis
and
should
have
been
sent
to
each
of
you
today,
just
as
a
quick
background,
this
bill
sort
of
began
due
to
the
pandemic,
the
pandemic
sort
of
made.
All
of
us
learn
virtual
communications,
and
it
also
made
virtual
communications
more
accessible
to
folks.
So
what
this
bill
does
is
extends
the
options
for
virtual
meetings
to
go
beyond
the
the
emergency
order.
Q
This
is
an
option
for
public
bodies
if
they
choose
to
use
virtual
virtual
meetings
or
incorporate
it
into
any
public
meeting
that
they
have
during
after
the
assembly
hearing,
we
did
work
with
stakeholders.
So
that's
why
we
have
the
amendment.
We
hope
that
we
met
all
of
their
their
issues
and
ms
bordelov
will
go
over
that
and,
with
the
board's
permission,
I'd
like
to
kick
it
to
miss
bordelov.
R
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair,
thank
you
and
committee
members.
Thank
you
for
having
me
here
this
afternoon,
the
boards
again,
I'm
rosalie
bordelov,
and
the
boards
and
open
government
division
with
the
attorneys
general's
office
houses,
the
open
meeting
law
enforcement
unit,
which
is
why
we're
often
handling
working
with
it
every
day
and
have
worked
hard
on
this
bill
here.
R
The
governor's
emergency
directives
have
allowed
public
bodies
to
hold
completely
virtual
meetings
during
the
pandemic,
which
has
actually
increased
participation
from
the
public
for
many
of
them.
It
has
also
allowed
technology
to
evolve.
R
The
this
bill
is
intended
to
provide
a
permanent
avenue
for
public
bodies
to
hold
entirely
virtual
meetings.
The
proposed
changes
to
the
law
would
not
ever
require
a
public
body
to
hold
a
virtual
meeting,
but
it
would
be
optional.
It
would
provide
the
option,
along
with
certain
requirements
if
a
virtual
meeting
is
held
to
ensure
that
public
participation
is
protected.
R
R
In
addition,
they
require
that
the
means
for
attending
the
meeting
and
requesting
supporting
material
be
included
on
the
public
notice
agenda
and
the
section
two
also
removes
the
requirement
that
a
physical
copy
of
an
agenda
be
posted
at
three
separate
prominent
places
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
public
body,
but
requires
that
the
public
body
designate
a
location
as
its
principal
office
and
post
its
notice
there,
which
would
also
provide
a
little
bit
more
consistency
than
we've
had
in
the
past.
R
With
regards
to
where
public
bodies
choose
to
post
their
notices,
section
3
adds
additional
requirements
to
the
conduct
of
a
virtual
meeting,
including
live
or
recorded
public
comment,
but
removes
the
requirement
of
a
physical
location
so
long
as
there
is
that
virtual
option
available.
However,
if
there
isn't
those
extra
requirements
meant
for
virtual
option,
the
the
physical
location
would
still
be
required.
R
Section
five
clarifies
it
is
a
change
to
the
law,
not
regarding
the
virtual
meeting.
It's
regarding
the
privilege
that
individuals
have
when
making
public
comment.
It's
truly
just
a
clarification.
R
R
Section
six
also
amends
the
administrative
procedures
act
or
nrs
233b
to
remove
the
requirement
that
a
physical
copy
of
the
notice
and
text
of
proposed
administrative
regulations
be
placed
with
a
library
in
every
county
of
the
state,
but
it
adds
a
requirement
that
the
agency
provide
a
copy
to
any
person
who
requests
it.
So
the
idea
there
was
to
waste
a
little
less
paper
in
printing,
but
to
make
sure
that
we
have
the
same
if
not
more,
access
to
public
who
is
actually
interested
in
receiving
a
copy.
R
We
also
have
the
proposed
amendment
that
you
may
have
seen
today.
It's
a
product
of
working
with
stakeholders
to
resolve
concerns
regarding
any
of
the
bill's
language.
We've
tried
to
to
see
if
we
can
come
to
something
language
that
really
would
work
with
everyone.
R
Today's
amendment
proposes
removing
changes
to
the
definition
of
a
subcommittee
and
returning
the
language
to
that
which
is
in
the
existing
law.
That
definition
was
added
in
2019..
R
A
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
on
section
three,
which
is
similar
to
section
three
in
the
bill,
I'm
looking
at
the
amendment.
Have
you
guys
considered
now
that
we're
pretty
much
going
kind
of
a
hybrid,
closed
captioning
mandating
that
there's
closed
captioning,
like
even
at
the
legislature
like
we're
on
youtube,
but
we're
not
closed
captioned,
and
I
think
that
you
know
we've
left
out
some
communities
who
probably
need
to
be
able
to
read
what
is
being
said
versus
being
able
to
hear
it.
Q
Thank
you
for
the
question
through
the
chair
to
senator
neil
vanisha
considine
for
the
record,
I'm
going
to
ask
my
cobra
center
to
reply
to
that.
A
Q
R
Thank
you
closed.
Captioning
is
something
perhaps
that
could
be
added
in
the
future.
I
think
right
now,
I'm
not
sure
the
technology
is
entirely
there
to
add
that
as
a
requirement,
I
know
with
with
physical
meetings-
that's
not
something
that's
usually
required
or
offered.
I.
I
worry
that
a
lot
of
our
smaller
public
bodies.
R
There
are
many
public
bodies
that
at
times,
are
just
a
subcommittee
of
some
other
smaller
public
body
that
offering
the
closed
captioning
may
be
an
expense
that
could
be
go
beyond
a
lot
of
their
means.
I
don't
know
that
the
technology
is
there
yet
for
computers
to
be
able
to
provide
it
very
easily,
although
I'm
not
well
versed
on
that
technology,
but
it
is
possible
that
in
a
couple
years
that
technology
will
be
very
available
and
that's
a
requirement
we
could
look
to
add
then.
D
Madam
chair,
quick
follow-up,
so
and
then
you
also
mention
in
your
testimony
about
placing
notices
at
public
libraries
which
that's
been
the
standard
practice,
but
in
certain
communities
in
the
south.
Specifically,
so
in
part
of
my
district,
there
is
no
library
right.
The
nearest
library
may
be
five
miles
away
and
like,
for
example,
in
east
las
vegas.
They
just
recently
got
their
library,
and
so
when
we
talk
about
public
library
and
and
other
spaces,
maybe
other
other
other
ways
that
a
community
can
actually
get
notices.
D
I
think
that
library
is
fine,
but
I
think
thinking
about
the
expansion
of
that
is
super
super
important
just
because
they
don't
all
go
to
the
library
or
there
is
no
library
in
their
vicinity
for
them
to
even
get
the
notice
or
what
I
have
noticed.
Typically,
when
you
go
to
the
bulletin
board
like
in
west
las
vegas
library,
it's
like
a
million
things
on
the
bulletin
board.
D
You
see
the
public
one,
but
you
also
see
I'm
selling
the
books,
the
laptop
my
I
lost
a
sweater
all
on
there
too,
and
so
there
is
no
clear
designation
of
that.
This
is
set
apart
so
that
individuals
go
and
identify
it
and
find
it
right
so
like
when
you
go
to
circulation
or
you
go
to
the
desk
or
you
go
to
the
computer
lab
more
than
likely.
D
If
I'm
going
to
go,
renew
my
library
card,
I'm
going
to
the
front
desk
but
checking
out
the
bulletin
board.
I
mean
it's
rare
that
people
do
that.
But
you
know
if
we're
talking
about
access
access
is
about
putting
it
in
places
where
people
will
actually
see
it.
Even
if
it's
just
a
note,
you
know
if
you're
interested
in
any
kind
of
public
meeting
go
check
out
the
bulletin
board
right.
Q
Thank
you
for
the
question
statement.
I've
threw
the
chair
to
a
senator
neil.
I
actually.
I
appreciate
that
one
of
one
of
the
things
that
this
pandemic
brought
up
is
requiring
the
public
notices
to
be
in
libraries.
It
was
kind
of
a
problem
because
the
libraries
were
closed,
so
there
was
almost
no
point
to
have
having
it
in
the
library
if
no
one
could
get
into
the
library
to
see
it.
E
Thanks,
madam
chair,
first
of
all,
it's
very
nice
to
meet
you
this
morning
for
the
first
time.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
coming
on
the
postings
question.
I'm
not
sure,
does
the
law
right
now.
I
know
it
requires
it.
I
think
on
I
posted
a
library
or
whatever,
but
is
there
an
in
law?
Now
I
don't.
If
anybody
knows,
are
you
allowed
to
do
it
by
email
or
something
else?
In
addition
to
that,
I
mean
it's
not
like
it's
only
limited
to
postings
or
in
a
newspaper
or
something
is
it.
Q
R
Thank
you
so
currently
in
the
law,
the
requirement
is
to
post
at
the
the
principal
office
of
the
public
body
or
the
location
of
the
meeting,
plus
three
additional
physical
locations
and
post
online
on
the
public
bodies
website.
If
they
maintain
it
as
well
as
nevada's
notice
website.
R
If
requesters
have
requested
a
copy
of
the
agenda,
they
can
have
a
standing
request
as
well
and
if
they
request
by
email
that
can
be
delivered
to
them
by
email,
I
don't
think
a
public
body
is
required
to
email
it.
If
the.
If
the
request
is
emailed,
they
are
required
to
mail
it.
If
the
request,
though
I
have
yet
to
find
a
public
body
that
doesn't
email,
if
that's
the
request,
because
that's
much
easier
for
them
to
do
so.
R
In
addition,
they
are
always
permitted
to
send
it
by
email
to
anyone
who
asks
they're
required
to
send
it
to.
Anyone
who
asks
in
general
and
people
list
for
someone
can
make
a
standing
request
for
up
to
six
months
to
receive
agendas
of
every
meeting,
and
they
just
need
to
renew
that
request.
Every
six
months.
E
Okay,
thank
you.
I
have
to
admit.
I
have
an
issue
with
the
bill
with
the
idea
of
zoom
meetings,
because,
frankly,
while
I
understand
it
during
the
covey
thing,
I've
also
noticed
that
it
it's
very
convenient
to
as
an
elected
official,
to
kind
of
like
skip
out
on
meetings
pete,
but
I
won't
bring
up
any
names
or
anything
like
that.
But
in
all
seriousness,
I
do
get
a
little
worried
that
you
know
when
I
have
any
issues
with
public
bodies.
E
It's
nice
to
know
that
all
the
members
are
supposed
to
be
in
one
location
during
a
meeting,
and
I
can
talk
to
them
all
face
to
face
the
whole
zoom
concept
makes
me
uncomfortable,
so
I
you
know,
I
could
see
it
during
it
like
if
you're
a
sunset
in
this
or
something
so
during
covet
type
situations,
it
would
be
allowed.
My
fear,
though,
is
that
for
convenience
of
people
who,
frankly,
don't
always
like
to
face
the
public.
E
It
might
be
kind
of
a
little
bit
of
a
way
for
them
to
avoid
showing
up
in
places
like
this
and
when
there's
a
crowd
full
of
hostile
people.
It
might
be
kind
of
handle
handy
at
times
to
be
able
to
sit
behind
my
computer
screen
at
home
and
and
do
it
from
a
zoom
zoom
location
which,
if
I
understand
it
right
this
law
would
allow.
Am
I
reading
that
correctly.
Q
E
It's
another.
I
read
that
that
is
in
the
law.
You
have
to
have
a
public
location,
but
the
elected
person
or
whoever
serving
on
the
board
does
that
person?
My
understanding
is
what,
if
this
passes
that
they
can
participate,
the
elected
or
appointed
official
can
can
still
meet
the
the
requirements.
The
open
meeting
law,
but
not
literally
physically,
be
in
the
physical
location
that
that
is
still
required
under
this
law.
Is
that
my
understanding,
correct.
R
Thank
you
senator
hansen.
I
I
can
answer
that
one.
The
law
does
not
require
that
members
of
the
public
body
attend
in
person.
The
current
law
does
not
require
it.
The
members
of
the
public
body
are
permitted
to
attend
virtually
or
in
person
all
that
is
required
under
the
law
as
it
stands
today
is
that
there
be
a
physical
location
where
members
of
the
public
can
attend
and
can
participate
to
the
same
level
as
members
of
the
public
body.
So
members
of
the
public
body
are
simply
attending
via
telephone.
R
There
needs
to
be
a
meeting
location
where
there
is
a
phone
on
speaker,
conferenced
in
and
and
it's
the
public
can
make
public
comment
and
can
listen
to
the
same
level
as
other
members.
So
this
law
would
not
change
that.
What
it
would
allow
is
for,
when
a
virtual
meeting
is
being
held
instead
of
a
physical
location,
they
can
provide
that
electronic
format
to
the
public,
but
the
law
as
it
stands
today
does
not
require
physical
attendance
by
members
of
the
public
body.
I.
E
I
was
not
aware
of
that.
Thank
you.
That's
an
interesting
point.
I
always
thought
they
had
to
be
physically
a
point
so
right
now
they
can
still
well
that's
true.
I've
seen
him
calling
in
conference
calls,
but
that
seems
to
be
an
unusual
exception,
but
I
don't
guess
I
have
to
do
a
little
more
homework
on
that,
because
my
concern
is
that
I
want
people
on
boards
or
whatever
to
be
at
the
physical
location,
that
you're
describing
unless
there's
some
pretty
pretty
reasonable,
practical
things
that
that
would
preclude
them
from
doing
that.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
before
we
go
to
vice
chair
orange
shawl,
miss
carson.
Would
you
clarify
that,
within
this
body,
not
just
in
general
but
for
the
legislature.
Q
For
the
record,
this
is
heidi
clarkson,
with
the
legislative
council
bureau
2.1.
The
legislature
is
not
subject
to
the
open
meeting
law,
regardless
of
whether
the
circumstances
are
in
a
pandemic
or
not.
So
this
bill
does
not
impact
the
requirements
for
the
legislature
to
hold
meetings
again,
because
the
legislature
is
not
subject
to
the
open
meeting
law
under
the
existing
provisions
of
the
open
meeting
law
just
to
clarify
there
is
existing
authority
under
normal
circumstances,
for
a
meeting
for
members
to
participate
through
teleconference
or
video
conference,
so
that
is
already
an
existing
law.
Q
P
Yes
and
thank
you
assembling
consulting
for
bringing
the
bill-
and
I
agree-
there's
been
many
evenings
that
I've,
you
know,
thought
you
know
about
heading
down
to
the
town
board
meeting
and
you
know
I
if
zoom
had
been
an
option
even
before
the
pandemic.
I
think
I
might
have
been
more
likely
to
log
in
and
and
jump
in
on,
zoom.
P
One
question
I
have,
I
think,
for
the
deputy
attorney
general
on
section
two
of
the
bill
for
sub
a
and
I'm
looking
at
the
first
reprint
the
deleted
language.
The
minimum
public
notice
is
posting
a
copy
of
the
notice
that
the
principal
office
of
the
public
body
and
then
the
red
deletion
says
or
if
there
is
no
principal
office
at
the
building
in
which
the
meeting
is
to
be
held
and
at
not
less
than
three
other
separate
prominent
places
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
public
body
not
later
than
9
a.m.
R
P
Thank
you
and
then,
if
I
could
have
just
a
couple
follow-ups.
Thank
you
chair.
So
if
the
meeting
is
going
to
be
held
completely
virtually
then
the
only
posting
would
need
to
be
on
the
website.
There'd
be
no
physical
posting
in
that
new
language
right
after
they're
in
the
blue
and
I'm
looking
at
page
7
lines
36
through
43
of
the
first
reprint.
R
So,
actually,
the
clarification
in
that
language
is
because,
under
the
prior
law,
the
public
bodies
have
always
been
required
to
post
to
their
website
if
they
maintain
one
as
well
as
nevada's
notice
website.
However,
nevada's
notice
website
doesn't
actually
have
the
ability
to
host
a
document.
So
if
a
public
body
does
not
maintain
its
own
website,
it
can't
actually
post
to
nevada's
notice
website.
R
So
there's
there's
an
exception
in
the
law
that
allows
for
those
public
bodies
to
not
post
to
nevada's
notice
website,
due
to
technical
difficulties
of
nevada's
notice
website,
and
that's
been
our
interpretation
when
they
don't
have
a
way
to
host
the
document.
The
agenda
doesn't
end
up
on
the
website,
because
nevada's
notice
website
doesn't
have
the
ability.
So
this
is
trying
to
close
that
loophole
for
an
entirely
virtual
meeting
to
say,
a
public
body
must
find
a
way
to
have
its
agenda
hosted
online
to
hold
an
entirely
virtual
meeting.
R
P
Oh,
thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
answer.
I
think
the
only
thing
that
maybe
causes
me
just
a
little
concern
is,
I
know
it's
it's
old-fashioned
to
have
the
three
posting
of
the
three
notices
at
some
prominent
place,
but
it
just
seems
like
there
have
been
times
where
I've
seen
one
at
the
grocery
store,
and
I
thought
oh,
I
didn't
realize
that
zoning
change
was
up
at
the
town
border.
P
P
I
just
think
that
that's
the
one
part
that
I
hate
kind
of
hate
to
see
us
lose
that,
and
I
know
that's
old-fashioned
to
have
you
know
the
three
postings,
but
but
otherwise
I
really
like
the
bill,
and
I
think
that's
just
my
concern
is
that
maybe
some
people,
you
know
see
it
at
the
grocery
store
and
aren't
subscribing
to
the
the
bodies.
You
know
to
get
the
agendas
and
online,
but
but
thank
you.
I
appreciate
the
bill.
Thank
you
sibling.
Thank
you
attorney
general.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
have
you
guys
considered
also
with
with
this
bill
so
currently
now,
like
you,
can
get
on
city
of
las
vegas
or
you
can
get
on
north
las
vegas,
and
sometimes
they
have
a
video
link
where
you're
supposed
to
watch
the
video
watch,
the
the
meeting
and
you
can't
access
the
link
right
or
it
won't
pop
up,
it
won't
show
it
has
to
download
or
it
won't
download,
and
so
I
I
have
always
felt
like
number
one.
D
Sometimes
it's
hard
to
get
to
the
link
is
hard
to
get
to
it's
not
readily
available,
even
when
they
have
their
set
aside
and
and
trying
to
make
sure
that
there
must
be
an
immediate
fix
that
happens.
If
they
get
noticed
that
folks
cannot
watch
the
watch.
The
meeting
online
that
there
needs
to
be
an
admin
staff
or
tech
there
to
fix
it,
so
that
it
is
readily
seen
because
that's
a
problem
because
you
can't
watch
it
from
home
and
so,
but
that's
currently
going
on
in
the
space.
D
Q
Thank
you
for
the
question
through
the
chair
to
senator
neil
and
vinish
considine
for
the
record.
There
are
some
there
is
some
language
in
here
about
reasonably
making
the
efforts
to
to
work
on
that
from
the
side
of
the
public
body.
But
I
would
like
to
ask
ms
bordelov
to
to
elaborate
on
that.
Q
R
Thank
you
assemblywoman.
I
will
point
to
the
well
first,
you
mentioned
north
las
vegas,
or
some
I'm
guessing
you're,
pointing
towards
city
councils.
Those
actually
would
not
be
able
to
have
an
entirely
virtual
meeting
under
this
law.
They
would
still
need
a
physical
location
because
they're
an
entirely
a
city
council
is
an
entirely
elected
body.
R
However,
I
will
still
note
that
for
bodies
that
are
doing
it
entirely
virtual
they,
if
they
received
notice
that
the
public
was
not
able
to
view
they
would
be
required
to
pause
their
meeting
to
recess
until
they
can
fix
the
issue,
and
that
is
a
risk
that
they
may
take
if
they
choose
this
entirely
virtual
option
now.
The
main
reason
we
were
putting
this
together
is
because
many
public
bodies
have
to
schedule
a
special
meeting
because
they
need
to
hear
or
decide
on.
R
But
when
you
have
a
lot
greater
attendance,
there's
more
possibility
for
technological
issues
and
a
public
body
would
be
taking
the
risk
that
they
may
have
to
recess.
If
they
receive
phone
calls
that
the
public's
not
getting
in,
because
if,
on
the
broader
sense
their
live
stream
isn't
working,
then
they
would
be
in
violation
if
they're
continuing
the
meeting.
Now,
if
they
do
offer
a
physical
location
for
the
public
to
attend
and
participate,
they
will
have
met
the
minimum
requirements
under
the
physical
meeting,
which
would
be
under
the
law
as
it
even
stands.
R
Today
they
could
meet
that
requirement
and
just
we
hope
that
they
would
still
offer
virtual
options
just
because
the
technology's
there
today
and
we'd
love
to
see
both.
But
this
is
creating
kind
of
just
that
option
and
public
bodies
do
need
to
pay
attention
and
make
sure
that
their
live
stream
is
working.
D
So
yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
it.
It
wasn't
about
the
city
councils
going
completely
virtual.
They
currently
have
a
video
or
live
stream
now,
and
sometimes
you
can't
get
to
the
meeting
or
old
people
can't
get
to
the
meeting,
and
you
cannot
see
it,
and
so
I
wanted
to
know
if
in
the
bill
it
could
address.
D
You
know
what
you
just
said:
the
immediate
remedy
or
reasonable
time
to
fix
it,
but
I
feel
like
that's
an
infringement
upon
citizens
to
not
be
able
to
see
it
because
older
people
they're
not
just
trying
to
get
up
and
go
to
meetings
a
lot
of
old
people
do,
but
a
lot
of
old
people
are
disabled.
They
don't
want
to
walk
the
distance
between
the
parking
lot,
so
they
end
up
watching
the
virtual
version
which
currently
is
in
play.
R
Go
ahead.
Okay,
thank
you
at
this
point.
We
do
not
have
a
requirement
that
there
be
virtual
options.
I
would
love
to
see.
Public
bodies
always
have
a
virtual
option,
but
a
lot
of
the
smaller
public
bodies.
That's
just
not
something
feasible,
and
so
they
will
be
going
back
to
entirely
physical
meetings,
and
I
I
don't
think
technology
is
quite
there
to
the
point
to
be
able
to
require
every
single
public
body
in
nevada
to
have
it.
R
I
really
would
like
to
see
as
many
public
bodies
as
ca
as
are
able
to
continue
to
have
these
hybrid
meetings,
but
since
this
applies
to
every
public
body,
many
of
which
are
small,
we're
talking
some
rural
town
boards,
we,
I
don't
think
we're
there
yet
to
the
point
to
be
able
to
require
a
hybrid
model
to
require
both,
because
I
think
that
would
make
meetings
not
feasible
for
some
of
these.
A
Bodies,
thank
you
very
much
all
right
with
that.
I
think
that
we
have
exhausted
our
questions.
So,
with
your
permission,
assemblywoman
we'll
go
to
support
opposition
and
neutral
broadcasting
when
you're
ready,
we'll
start
with
support.
F
F
J
J
We
believe
this
bill
is
good
public
policy
and
provides
further
clarity
on
some
of
the
language
from
ab-70
that
was
passed
in
the
2019
session,
while
balancing
the
need
for
government
transparency
and
public
participation,
while
providing
an
effective
mechanism
to
ensure
that
local
governing
bodies
can
adhere
to
the
spirit
in
a
letter
of
the
open
meeting
law,
ab253
provides
common-sense
measures
to
allow
for
virtual
participation
in
our
public
process,
while
not
overburdening
local
governing
bodies,
while
they
conduct
the
public's
business
in
an
open
and
transparent
forum.
J
Finally,
naco
would
like
to
thank
the
sponsor
and
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
for
presenting
ab253
nako
has
been
a
participant
in
the
attorney
general's
open
meeting
law
task
force
since
its
creation,
and
we
appreciate
the
attorney
general's
office
for
bringing
together
such
a
wide
range
of
interested
stakeholders
and
including
counties
on
that
task
force.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
committee
members
for
hearing
the
bill.
We
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
testify
in
support
of
ab253.
F
H
Tanya
brown
spelled
t-o-n-j-a-p-r-o-w-n
advocates
for
the
inmates
and
the
innocent.
We
support
this
bill,
but
it
is
vague
in
a
certain
area
dealing
with
the
material
that
is
provided
from
the
private
citizen
to
the
board.
H
For
an
example,
I
have
attended
many
many
board
meetings
over
the
years,
including
that
of
the
pardons
board
over
the
last
15
years
or
20
years
anyway,
ballot
question
number
three
passed
in
november
of
2020
dealing
with
pardons
board.
It
allowed
to
set
us
it
allowed
four
hearings
per
year.
So
on
march
22
march
23rd
2021,
I
appeared
before
I
called
aunt
because
nobody
in
person
that
had
to
be
called
in
anyway
in
dealing
with
ballot
question
three.
H
I
was
asking
the
pardons
board
to
consider
allowing
the
four
hearings
one
of
those
hearings
to
be
set
aside
for
the
family
members
of
those
who
have
lost
their
loved
ones,
who
were
wrongfully
convicted
and
were
appealing
their
convictions
and
they
have
passed
away
either
through
natural
causes,
a
deadly
virus
disease,
those
types
of
things,
so
the
material
that
I
had
provided
to
the
parties
board,
and
I
have
provided
material
departments
board
over
the
years
and
it's
always
been
accepted.
Except
now.
H
This
time
it
was
not
accepted,
they
did
contact
the
attorney
general's
office
and
after
they
reviewed
my
material.
The
attorney
general's
office
would
not
allow
my
material
to
be
a
part
of
the
public
record
for
the
pardon
sport,
and
this
is
the
first
time
that
that
has
ever
happened
now.
I'm
not
sure
whether
there's
something
because
if
you're
not
in
person,
they
won't
accept
your
material,
but
then
again
another
person
called
in
and
her
material
was
accepted.
H
So
something
is
just
not
right
with
this
bill
here,
it's
a
good
bill,
but
why
is
one
person's
material
allowed
and
another
is
not,
but
I
do
support
the
bill.
Thank
you
and
have
a
great
day.
F
S
When
my
brother
was
killed,
the
commissioners
were
neglecting
their
duties
under
nrs
211.020,
when
my
brother
was
killed,
the
death
rate
at
the
jail
was
five
times
the
national
average
in
six
hundred
percent
higher
when
sheriff
chuck
allen
took
office.
Of
course,
I
wanted
to
make
my
feelings
known
and
be
a
voice
for
my
brother
during
their
weekly
county
commissioner
meetings
and
other
public
meetings
in
the
state
where
my
brother
was
killed,
because
I
do
not
live
in
your
state,
I'm
from
boston.
I
could
not
physically
attend
the
meeting.
S
I
would
email
my
public
comment
to
the
county
clerk,
but
they
would
acknowledge
it,
but
they
would
not
put
it.
On
the
record,
I
filed
an
open
meeting
complaint
70
plus
pages
long,
which
I
submitted
during
the
assembly
judiciary.
Meeting
the
washer
da's
response
to
the
complaint
was
that
I
wasn't
attending
in
person
and
therefore
they
didn't
have
to
put
the
substance
of
my
remarks
in
the
minutes
and,
sadly,
the
ag's
office
concurred
fast
forward.
S
Three
years
later,
they
now
conduct
zoom
meetings
and
it
allows
me
to
have
a
voice
for
my
brother
and
address
the
shortcomings
of
the
commissioners
who
oversee
the
sheriff's
budget.
They
did
start
accepting
email,
public
comment
and
voicemail
public
comment
which
they
were
playing
into
chambers
truth
be
told
only
myself
and
my
brother
were
the
ones
emailing
and
leaving
a
voicemail.
This
went
on
for
a
couple
months
when
bob
boomsie
county
commissioner
suddenly
stated
on
the
record.
He
was
changing
the
rules
and
they
would
not
read
or
play
the
emails.
S
I
fully
believe
it
was
an
attempt
to
science,
myself
and
my
brother.
Not
only
do
remote
meetings
help
me,
but
they
will
also
allow
and
encourage
more
of
your
community
members
who
perhaps
wouldn't
have
participated
in
the
meeting
now
to
do
so
from
their
own
home,
whether
it's
because
they
are
disabled,
have
a
scheduled
conflict,
no
means
of
transportation,
etc.
Elected
officials
are
supposed
to
be
the
voice
of
the
people.
No
one
wins
when
government
business
is
conducted
in
the
dark
without
opportunity
for
review.
S
F
F
H
M
H
F
G
Madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record
callie
wilson
with
the
city
of
reno,
that's
c-a-l-l-I-w-I-l-s's
and
sam
ey.
I
am
testifying
today
on
behalf
of
the
urban
consortium
which
includes
the
cities
of
reno,
sparks
henderson
and
las
vegas,
we're
calling
in
neutral
today
and
want
to
thank
assemblywoman
considine
and
ms
bordelov
for
working
with
us
on
the
amendment
brought
forward
to
you
today.
G
A
Q
A
F
F
F
S
My
brother
was
38
years
old
when
he
was
hog-tied
by
reno
police
for
over
40
minutes
during
mental
health
crisis.
He
was
then
dumped
at
the
wausau
county,
jail,
still
hog
tied
and
put
phone
and
then
fixated
to
death.
Today,
I'd
like
to
talk
about
mike
abby,
who
was
33
years
old
when
he
lost
his
life
to
reno
police
12,
25
2011..
S
He
was
in
a
group
home
for
mentally
disabled
folks.
He
got
into
a
virgo
verbal
argument.
At
the
end
of
time,
with
one
of
his
peers,
reno
police
came
by
the
time
officer
keith
like
daniel
barnes,
scott
rasmussen
in
bed,
brad
d
metropolis,
arrived
michael,
was
resting
peacefully
and
calmly
in
his
bedroom
by
himself
sitting
on
his
bed,
micah
did
apparently
attempt
arrest
who
would
want
to
go
to
jail
on
christmas.
S
However,
the
police
reaction
was
to
chase
him
22
times
of
which
12
of
those
he
was
handcuffed
and
face
down
with
officers
on
his
neck
and
back.
They
also
hugged
himica,
like
they
did
to
my
brother,
thomas
purdy.
They
used
a
baton
on
him
as
well.
He
never
made
it
out
of
his
room
alive.
I
personally
know
mike
is
stanley,
and
so
many
families
living
the
nightmare
police,
killing
your
loved
one.
Without
consequence,
christmas
is
a
dreaded
day
for
denise
mike's
mom.
She
was
killed
on
christmas
day.
S
She
worked
in
a
mental
hospital
for
years
and
they
didn't
kill
anybody.
Truth
be
told.
The
only
community
member
to
die
at
a
mental
facility
was
ronald
beach,
who
was
a
patient
shot
in
the
parking
lot
of
the
mental
hospital
by
bnopd.
Please
support
bills
that
promote
transparency
and
accountability
from
law
enforcement.
Thank
you
have
a
nice
weekend
and
happy
mother's
day
to
all
the
mothers.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
with
that
we'll
wish
all
the
mothers
happy
mother's
day,
and
we
appreciate
all
the
staff
and
broadcasting
have
a
nice
mother's
day
to
you.
Miss
burkett
and
we'll
see
you
on
monday.