►
From YouTube: 4/21/2021 - 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
C
A
Derrell
loop
here
and
thank
you
very
much
and
we
have
all
members
present
and
first
before
we
start,
I
think
everybody
knows
the
housekeeping
rules,
so
they
will
all
be
the
same.
We
are
we
are
in
person,
but
if
you're
on
zoom
same
things
apply,
please
press
star
six
to
unmute
yourself
and
please
join
us
in
the
committee
room.
A
If
you
have
a
reservation
so
other
than
that,
we
will
open
the
hearing
today
we're
going
to
hear
two
bills:
we're
going
to
hear
assemblyville,
48
and
assembly
bill
70.,
so
I'll
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
48.
It
authorizes
certain
retired
public
officers
and
employees
to
reinstate
insurance
under
the
public
employees
benefits
program.
A
Will
the
bill
presenters
please
proceed
when
ready?
Ms
rich,
with
pebb.
C
C
Prior
to
november,
30th
of
2008
local
government
retirees
were
eligible
to
join
the
public
employees
benefits
program,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
their
former
employer
participated
and
paid
into
the
program.
However,
senate
bill
544
of
the
2007
legislative
session,
amended
pebb's
eligibility
provisions
by
disallowing
the
retirees
of
local
governments
to
join
pebb.
If
that
local
government
that
had
employed
the
retiree.
C
Currently
pebb
has
eight
eight
active,
not
non-state
local
government
employees,
so
those
are
those
active,
non-state
employees
and
a
little
over
5
900,
non-state
retirees,
which
are
primarily
those
non-state,
the
non-state
population
that
was
grandfathered
into
the
plan
on
november
30th
of
2008.,
as
of
2011
pebb
requires,
with
some
exceptions,
medicare
eligible
retirees
to
participate
on
the
medicare
exchange
by
enrolling
in
a
plan
directly
through
via
benefits.
This
is
who
pebb
contracts
with
for
their
medicaid
exchange.
C
C
C
In
some
cases,
carriers
are
authorized
to
crosswalk
members
on
a
discontinued
plan
to
a
comparable
plan.
Should
the
member
not
actively
choose
one.
However,
in
some
cases,
there's
no
comparable
plan
available
and
the
member
is
required
to
actively
select
and
enroll
in
a
new
option.
If
the
retiree
fails
to
actively
choose
another
plan,
then
they
are
disenrolled.
C
C
Unfortunately,
there's
always
retirees
who
disenroll
and
end
up
losing
their
hra
subsidy
state
retirees
have
the
ability
to
mitigate
the
damage
by
using
their
one-time
opportunity
allowed
in
statute
to
reinstate
during
that
peb
open
enrollment
period.
But
non-state
retirees
lose
their
ability
to
participate
in
the
program
and
lose
their
hra
subsidies
permanently.
There
is
no
way
to
reinstate
them,
based
on
enrollment
data.
Pebb
estimates
that
over
1100
non-state
retirees
have
disenrolled
from
the
plan
in
this
manner
and
have
lost
their
hra
subsidies
since
2011.
C
C
Had
these
retirees,
not
disenrolled,
the
local
governments
would
have
been
required
to
provide
funding
regardless.
Now.
I
just
also
want
to
add
that,
while
there
is
no
impact
to
the
state
or
to
pub,
this
would
impact
the
local
government
where
those
those
retirees
came
from.
So
if,
for
example,
the
clark
county
school
district
has
a
large
number
of
retirees
who
used
to
participate
on
their
plan
and
made
this
mistake,
they
would
be
allowed
to
come
back.
C
Have
that
one-time
opportunity
to
come
back
and
so
clark,
county
school
district
would
then
have
to
start
picking
up
the
the
the
tab
for
those
hra
benefits
for
their
retirees.
C
That
being
said,
if
they
hadn't
made,
that
mistake
to
begin
with
clark,
county
school
district
and
I'm
just
saying
using
clark
county
school
district
as
an
example,
there's
other
non-state
participate
or
non-state
agencies
that
have
retirees
there's
a
list
of
them.
So
this
is
just
an
example,
but
they
would
have.
They
would
have
been
paying
that
anyway.
So
this
is
just
allowing
those
retirees
to
reinstate
their
benefits,
based
on
a
mistake
that
they
made
that
you
know,
because
of
the
way
the
statute
is
written,
they
could
not
walk
back.
C
So
with
that,
I
will
stop
there
and
give
the
committee
an
opportunity
to
ask
questions
or
any
other
information
that
is
necessary
and
happy
to
answer.
D
Thank
you,
madam
thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I'm
just
trying
to
get
it
clear.
In
my
mind,
it
seemed
like
ellen
covisto
brought
the
bill
and
I
thought
it
was
ab327
was
that
the
seven
or
nine
sessions
someplace-
and
I
thought
at
that
that
time
they
had
the
opportunity
to
go
back
into
pebb
at
that
point,
so
you're
saying
if
they
chose
not
to
do
it
at
that
point,
pre
08
then
now
this
is
going
to
give
them
give
them
another
bite
at
the
apple.
Is
that
correct?
C
Thank
you
for
the
question
laura
rich
for
the
record.
No,
it
is
so
these
are.
These
are
retirees
who
already
opted
to
come
back,
so
they've
been
grandfathered
in
already
they.
C
This
would
not
be
opening
the
floodgates
to
new
retirees.
This
is
the
same
bucket
that
was
opened
in
2008,
and
that
would
it's
just
the
those
retirees
who
were
part
of
made
a
mistake
were
terminated
off
the
program
and
had
lost
their
benefits
as
a
result.
D
C
C
What
they
did
was,
let's
say
that
during
the
medicare
open
enrollment
period,
they
switched
plans
and
instead
of
switching
plans
through
via
benefit
and
staying
in
that
marketplace.
What
they
did
is.
Maybe
they
went
to
a
health,
fair
or
a
retiree
fare
of
some
sort.
And
let's
say
that
you
know
there
was
an
aarp
representative.
C
That
said:
hey
there's
this
this
other
plan
that
could
be
more
beneficial
to
you,
enroll
directly
through
us,
and
so
when,
when
those
retirees
enroll
directly
through
the
carrier,
then
what
ends
up
happening
is
they
are
disenrolled
from
via
benefits
and
pep,
and
so
that
is
when
what
I'm
referring
to
as
a
disenrollment
is
that
they
were
on
a
medicare
plan.
They
went
to
another
a
different
medicare
plan
directly
through
the
carrier,
instead
of
through
the
peb
program,.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
senator
neil.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
B
So
I
kind
of
want
to
piggyback
on
what
senator
goldgate
was
talking
about,
because,
what's
not
clear
is
why
they
lapse
right.
So
it's
not.
It
can't
be
to
no
fall
of
their
own
there's,
a
reason
why
it
lapsed,
and
I
guess
the
question
that
I
have
is
well.
That's
the
one
question
I
have
and
then
I
have
a
second
one
is:
are
you
saying
we
should
just
re-enroll
them
no
fault
of
their
own
and
bring
them
back
in?
B
So
there
have
to
be
a
series
of
events
or
series
of
actions
that
were
either
taken
by
the
not
because
it
this
is
the
non-state
retiree
on
why
they
did
not
continue
their
plan.
So
can
you
at
least
put
some
of
those
actual
incidences
in
the
record
on
why
they
fail
to
continue
their
insurance?
And
then
I
have
a
second
question.
C
So
laura
bridge
for
the
record
of
the
the
example
that
I
just
that
I
just
provided
is
exactly
it
it's.
It's
really
the
prime
example
of
what
and
what
happens.
There's
a
retiree.
C
They
enroll
through
the
medicare
exchange
through
via
benefits,
and
then
they
go
to
an
a
job,
a
health,
fair
or
some
kind
of
retiree
event
and
the
carrier
directly.
C
So
whether
it's
aarp
or
let's
say
it's
hometown
health
or
any
of
these
medicare
carriers
they
enroll
directly
through
that
carrier,
and
so
when
they
do
that
it
is
in
the
insurance
world.
It's
called
a
record
of
agent,
sorry,
an
agent
of
record
change
and
so
they're
no
longer
they
are
still
on
a
medicare
plan,
but
they
enroll
directly
through
the
carrier
away
from
the
peb
sponsored
medicare
exchange
and
so
via
benefits
then
tells
ped.
C
B
And
and
then
does
that
make
sense
it
it
it
does,
but
it
sounds
like
it's
an
education
issue
and
I
and
and
you
know
the
thing
that
was
going
through
my
mind-
was
okay.
If
we've
we've
known
about
this
since
roughly
2007
and
we
grandfathered
folks
in
and
then
we
have
this
flare-up
that
happened
in
2011,
this
was
an
education
moment
right
for
these
retirees,
either
in
a
mailer
or
hey,
don't
sign
up
for
random
plans
because
you're
going
to
cancel
your
stuff
right.
C
C
I
will
give
you
an
example
of
a
time
where
again
we're
talking
about
retirees
and
these
retirees,
you
know
a
lot
of
them
are
aging.
You
know
well
into
their
80s
90s
right
and
so
I'll.
Give
you
an
example.
Prior
to
being
a
being
the
executive
officer.
I
was
the
operations
officer,
and
so
I
I
would
say
at
least
a
couple
times
a
week.
I
would
have
an
exception
request.
Please
please,
please.
It
wasn't
my
fault
I
didn't
know
and
because
it's
in
statute,
we
can't
we
can't
make
that
exception.
C
One
one
example
was
a.
It
was
an
elderly
woman
who
falls
into
this
non-state
retiree
category
of
folks
that
were
grandfathered
in
and
she
was
no
longer
able
to
handle
her
own,
her
own
finances,
and
you
know
and
really
her
own
insurance,
and
so
she
had
family
handling.
This
and
I'll
tell
you
her
family
was.
They
were
attorneys,
and
so
they
they
didn't
know
when
they
changed
her
plan.
C
C
So
it's
it's
not
always
the
retiree
and
it's
not
always
education.
You
have
to
remember
that
we're
dealing
with
folks
that
are
potentially
aging
into
you
know
into
a
place
to
where
they're
not
necessarily
handling
their
own
enrollments
and
they're.
Not
necessarily
you
know,
aware
of
of
the
the
family
is
not
aware
of
the
consequences
and
are
just
picking
up
the
pieces.
C
So
this
is
where
this
situation
is
is
very
helpful,
not
to
say
that
you
know
state
retirees
do
the
same
thing.
They
just
have
one
shot
to
come
back.
They
have
that
that
one
period
in
statute
that
allows
them
the
one-time
mess-up.
If
you
want
to
call
it
that.
B
So,
madam
chair,
just
one
more
question,
so
so
now
it
gets
to
my
question
because
the
cost,
because
you
mentioned
the
tab
and
it's
a
real
tab
for
them
for
the
local
governments,
because
in
the
bill
you
have
county
school
district,
municipal,
corporation,
political
subdivision,
public
corp
or
other
local
government
agency
of
the
state
who
is
participating.
B
And
so
I
really
want
to
get
an
understanding
of
the
cost
of
this,
because
you
drew
us
all
the
way
back
to
2011..
You
didn't
discuss.
What's
the
retroactivity
period
on
the
medical
expenses,
that's
being
walked
back
right.
Is
it
just
the
one
month
prior
medical
expenses
that
if
they
get
back
on
with
the
with
the
local
government,
are
they
just
going
to
pick
up
the
prior
month
expenses?
Are
they
going
to
pick
up
the
year's
prior
expenses?
B
What's:
what's
the
what's
the
walk
back
period
and
what's
the
time
frame
and
are
you
capping
the
medical
expenses?
I
guess
that
would
be
for
the
state,
the
state
retirees
and
I
guess
since
you're,
trying
to
equalize
them.
It
would
be
probably
helpful
to
say
well
what
the
state
retirees
get
when
their
enrollment
period.
One
time
get
a
chance
to
get
back
in
moment
happens.
Does
that
make
sense?
Because
I
know
somebody's
talking
to
you
and
you're
like
looking
into
you're
like.
C
C
No
so
yes,
it
does
make
sense,
laura
rich
for
the
record.
It
does
make
sense
and-
and
let
me
just
clarify
this-
we're
talking
about
medicare
exchange
folks,
and
so
there
are
no
medical
expenses.
This
is
all
medicare
liability,
not
the
state
liability.
So
there's
not
any
medical
expenses
here,
the
the
expense
that
we're
talking
about
is
the
hra
contribution
benefit
and
that
today
is
up
to
260
dollars
a
month
per
retiree.
C
If
they
are
to
max
it
out,
so
it
depends
on
their
years
of
service.
So
that's
a
260.
It
tops
out
at
260
today
and,
depending
on
you
know,
our
budget
hasn't
closed,
but
it
it
will
in
our
budget
that
lowers
it
down
to
220
in
the
next
biennium.
So
there
is.
C
That
is
the
expense
that
we're
looking
at
is
that
220
a
month
for
the
retiree
if
they
were
to
max
out
that
benefit.
The
other
thing
that
we're
looking
at
is
again
these
folks
there's
about
1100
of
them.
They
have
since
dropped
off
of
our
plan,
so
we
know
that
11
1100
approximately
dropped
off
our
plan,
but
we
don't
know
what
have
happened.
What
has
happened
to
them
since
then,
so
the
there's
a
high
likelihood
that
a
very
small
percentage
of
them
would
come
back
to
the
plan.
C
There's
probably
many
of
them
who
have
again
we're
talking
about
an
aging
population
and
so
there's
a
good
chance
that
many
of
them
have
passed
away.
There's
a
a
chance
that
many
of
them
won't,
you
know,
won't
use
their
their
one-time
opportunity
to
come
back.
C
Again
it's
it's
worst
case
scenario.
It
is
highly
unlikely
that
you
know
even
50
of
them
would
come
back
at
this
point.
So
that's
that's
really
the
the
fiscal
impact
of
that
and
I'm
happy
to
provide
it
to
the
committee.
Just
so,
there's
you're
able
to
see
the
list
and
kind
of
go
through
and
and
see
what
the
impact
is
to
the
worst
case
scenario.
Impact
is
to
each
of
these
local
governments,
but
I
think
that
generally,
this
is
more
of
a
moving
forward,
because
what
ends
up
happening
is
these
non-state
retirees.
C
They
usually
figure
it
out
pretty
quickly
when
when
we
send
them
termination
notices
and
then
they
call
pep
and
they
plead-
and
you
know
and
beg,
can
I
come
back.
Can
I
come
back?
I
made
a
mistake
and
at
that
point
we
just
we
are
unable
to
to
provide
them
that
opportunity,
because
of
the
way
it's
written
in
statute
today,
and
we
can't
we
can't
make
an
exception
to
that.
So
that's
really
where
I
think
we're
going
to
catch.
The
most
members
is
moving
forward.
C
D
You,
madam
chair
and
I'll,
be
brief.
I'm
just
not
sure
I
understand
it,
it
says,
did
not
have
more
than
one
period
during
which
the
retired
public
employee
was
not
covered
by
insurance
under
the
program,
but
it
doesn't
give
you
a
time
frame
for
that
program.
Does
that
mean
you
could
have
withdrawn
in
2011
and
now
asked
to
come
back
because
that's
only
one
period.
C
D
A
A
So
as
a
teacher
when
I
retired
as
teachers
generally,
I
mean
we
have
to
get
another
job
to
qualify
for
medicare
or
you
don't
have
insurance
at
all.
So
would
teachers
fall
into
this.
C
Laura
rich
for
the
record:
yes,
so
so
if
they
were
a
part
of
that
grandfathered
in
group,
yes,
they
would
fall
into
into
that
group,
and
I
mean
I
have
the
list
in
front
of
me
and
I
can
tell
you:
churchill,
county
school
district,
carson
city,
school
district,
there's
about
15
retirees
in
carson
city,
school
district
that
were
dropped
off.
You
know
that
were
terminated
20
in
churchill
county.
C
Let
me
see
clark
county
school
district
has
391,
so
there's
there's.
Definitely
there's
some
there's
some
teachers
that
fall
into
that
category,
but
you
have
to
have
been
a
part
of
that
group
that
was
grandfathered
in
in
in
2008.
A
And
also
with
that
being
said,
so
if
you
know
there
are
15
people,
for
example,
in
carson
city,
have
those
15
people
had
a
letter
or
a
phone
call
or
something
to
alert
them
to
this,
or
is
it
on
the
onus
of
the
person
to
just
know
that
they
need
to
do
this?
How
are
they
being
notified.
C
For
the
record,
lord
rich,
we
we
can
actively
reach
out
to
pebb,
can
actively
reach
out
to
these
members
or
not.
So
you
know
this
is
something
that
once
the
bill
passes,
you
know
if
the
bill
passes
and
then
we
would
look
at
it
and
and
find
out
you
know,
can
we
do?
We
have
the
the
ability
to
reach
out
to
these
members,
which
I
believe
we
do
so
we
can
either
actively
engage
these
members
and
let
them
know
that
this
is
now
available.
C
We
can
work
with
the
advocacy
groups,
for
example,
retired
public
employees
of
nevada
r-pen.
I
know
that
they
have
been
very
supportive
of
this
bill.
They
contacted
contact
me
very
frequently
with
this
issue,
and
so
there
are
ways
to
engage
this
group
and
notify
this
group
to
let
them
know
that
they
would
have
this
opportunity.
Should
the
bill
pass.
A
B
B
C
So
laura
rich
for
the
record,
the
first,
the
first
part
of
your
question
is,
is
the
answer:
is
hers
determines
years
of
service,
so
pebb
coordinates
with
pers
public
employees,
retirement
system
to
get
years
of
service
information.
So
in
this
in
this
situation,
hers
would
then
provide-
and
we
have
this
already
in
the
system
for
these
folks
already.
C
This
is
this
is
information
that
we
received
when
they
retired
and
so
that
that
information
is
already
there,
but
that
was
determined
by
pers
at
the
time,
so
they
pers
would
tell
us
they've
got
you
know
15
years
or
20
years
of
service,
and
that
is
the
that
is
the
information
that
pebb
uses
to
determine
years
of
service
when
a
person
retires
in
this
situation.
C
That
years
of
service
determination
was
made
way
back
in
the
day.
It's
in
our
system,
we
under
we,
we
know
how
many
years
of
service
these
folks
have,
and
so
that's,
that
is
what
would
be
determined
to
to
figure
out
what
that
hra
benefit
would
be,
and
the
other
question
I'm
sorry
I
just
I
I
lost
it.
Well.
Can
you
repeat
the
second
part
of
your
question?
Please
it
was
sorry.
C
So
laura
rich
for
the
record,
the
actuary
there's,
because
this
is
a
medicare
plan.
We
do
not
use
the
actuaries
for
that
determination
because
we're
not
pebb
is
not
paying
medical
claims.
Medic
medicare
is
paying
those
claims,
so
pebb
is
really
the
only
benefit
that
retirees
are
receiving
in
this
situation
is
the
hra
benefit
that
contribution
from
the
employer?
C
B
B
I
guess
conflict
or
preemption
there?
Where
medicare
is
saying
you're
now
giving
me
a
claim,
because
you
did
say
it's
retroactive
and
then
so
they
could
potentially
get
a
medical
claim
that
could
be
a
year
old,
and
so
what
is
medicare
then
saying
to
this
non-state
retiree
in
terms
of
I'm
gonna
pay
this
right.
Like
yeah,
the
state
said
you
could
get
back
in
the
game
and
get
and
get
covered,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
I
federal
government
medicare
plan
want
to
walk
backwards
a
year
on
your
medical
expenses.
C
So
laura
rich
for
the
record,
these
folks
have
very
likely
been
on
a
medicare
plan,
the
entire
time
it
is
just
where
they
enrolled
in
that
medicare
plan,
and
so
the
federal
government
is
is
agnostic
to
the
fact
of
you
know
where
they
are
enrolled
in
which
medical
medicare
plan
and
how
they
enrolled
in
it.
A
medicare
plan
is
a
medicare
plan
to
them
for
peb
purposes.
C
So
these
retirees
have
most
likely
continued
their
medicare
plans
just
off
the
exchange
or
off
the
peb
medicare
exchange,
and
the
only
thing
that
they
lost
is
that
260
a
month
benefit
that
pebb
is
providing
them.
So
they
continued
their
medicare
plan,
but
pebb
and
their
through
their
employer
has
not
been
providing
them.
That
260
dollar
a
month
benefit
that
they
were
eligible
for.
A
A
E
E
F
F
The
bottom
line
is
this
is
an
existing
option
already
in
state
statute
for
the
state
retirees.
What
this
does
is
give
the
same
safety
net
for
the
local
governments
and
just
for
the
committee's
benefit.
A
few
years
ago,
the
estimated
retirees
amended
our
constitution
pursuant
to
to
agreement
with
our
international,
and
we
now
accept
as
members
local
government
retirees
as
well.
F
So
this
will
affect
some
of
our
members
as
well
and,
and
the
problem
is
that
again,
people
don't
realize
during
open
enrollment
time
every
year
and
somebody
can
come
along
and
say
hey,
I
can
get
you
a
much
better
deal
than
you're
getting
from
pebb.
You
go
by
this
policy
and
it
turns
out
not
to
be
such
a
great
deal
and
they
lose
as
miss
rich
just
stated.
They
lose
the
contribution
from
their
former
employers
through
the
state
of
nevada's
peb
medicare
exchange.
F
They
lose
that
260
dollars
and
they
don't
realize
they're
doing
it
so,
prior
to
this
time,
when
the
agency
hadn't
put
through
this
bill,
there
was
no
relief
for
the
person
in
that
situation
and
in
local
government
as
a
retired
worker,
so
that
senator
neil
is
just
to
direct
madam
chair
to
address
senator
neil
directly.
That
is
the
problem.
That's
trying
to
be
solved
here
and
we
are
in
full
support
of
that.
Thank
you.
E
F
F
This
bill
would
directly
would
not
would
not
directly
impact
me,
but
would
allow
our
members
that
qualify
for
this
program
to
save
precious
health
care
dollars
each
year
and
every
month,
by
allowing
them
access
to
the
exchange.
I
urge
you
to
support
this
bill
and
help
our
senior
citizens
across
the
state
gain
access
to
affordable
health
care.
F
Please
consider
as
you
move
forward,
the
active
educators
and
support
professionals
need
to
access,
have
access
to
quality,
affordable
health
care
when
they
retire
working
together.
You
can
help
us
solve
this
problem
for
employees
that
handle
these
life-changing
assignments
on
a
daily
basis.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you
good
afternoon,
chair
dondero
lube
vice
chair,
orrin,
shaw
and
senators,
hanson,
goku,
chia
and
neil.
My
name
for
the
record
is
terry
laird
l-a-I-r-d,
I'm
the
executive
director
at
the
retired
public
employees
of
nevada,
r-pen
established
in
1976
to
protect
the
pension
and
benefits
earned
by
all
public
employees.
G
Tab
and
our
pen,
through
our
quarterly
newsletter
to
all
our
members,
always
reminds
medicare
participants
of
this
risk
during
open
enrollment,
but
unfortunately,
as
priscilla
maloney
referenced.
Many
retirees
living
on
a
fixed
income
are
always
looking
for
ways
to
save
money
and
therefore
are
more
susceptible
to.
G
E
G
G
Many
of
them
are
living
on
fixed
incomes
and
are
always
looking
for
ways
to
save
money
and
therefore
are
more
susceptible
to
the
solicitations
promising
lower
premiums,
and
unfortunately,
many
are
not
aware
by
selecting
what
may
appear
to
be
a
better,
more
affordable
offer
are
forfeiting
their
hra
and
other
benefits.
And
for
these
reasons
we
are
very
hopeful
that
you'll
be
able
to
support
ab48.
E
D
Hello
good
afternoon,
senator
dondero,
loop
and
committee
members.
This
is
kent,
irvin
k-e-n-t
e-r-v-I-n,
for
the
nevada
faculty
alliance.
We
support
ab48.
It
does
not
affect
our
members
or
state
employees,
but
in
solidarity
with
the
non-state
retirees.
We
support
this
extension
of
this
benefit.
D
That
was
added
by
ab76
in
2011
and
we
believe
it's
unnecessary
and
punitive
to
these
retirees
and
really
should
just
be
removed
for
all
state
and
non-state
retirees
and
but
of
course,
state
hires
after
2011
will
have
no
health
benefits
at
all
when
they
retire
due
to
other
actions
taken
around
that
time.
But
we
do
support
ab48
as
written,
because
it
fixes
this
this
problem
with
just
the
non-state
retirees.
Thank
you.
E
F
Good
afternoon,
chair
don
darrell,
luke
and
members
of
the
committee,
the
record,
my
name
is
stephen:
that's
s-t-e-v-e-n
corner,
that's
h-o-r-n-e-r
and
I
am
a
resident
of
assembly
district,
35
senate
district
9..
I
am
the
current
vice
president
of
the
nevada
state,
education,
association,
retired
and
the
clark
retired
education
association.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
with
that
ms
rich,
do
you
have
any
closing
comments?
C
The
joys,
the
joys
of
working
from
home-
I
I
just
like
to
thank
the
committee
and,
as
you
heard,
there's
a
lot
of
support
for
this
bill.
I
know
personally,
I
have
been
approached
by
dozens
and
dozens
and
dozens
of
folks
who
have
fallen
into
this
category
and
are
just
begging
and
pleading.
Oh,
no,
I
made
a
I
made
a
mistake.
A
Well,
I
appreciate
that,
and
I
know
there
are
lots
of
retirees
out
there
that
will
as
well.
So
we
appreciate
your
time
today
and
with
that
we'll
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
48..
Thank
you
very
much
I'll
now
open
the
hearing
on
assembly,
bill
70,
and
this
measure
revises
provisions
governing
the
deposit
of
child
support
payments
collected
by
the
division
of
welfare
and
supported
services
of
the
department
of
health
and
human
services,
and
will
the
bill
pre-centers
go
ahead
when
you're
ready.
Mr
lewis,.
H
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
present
today
the
state
collection
and
dispersion
unit,
known
as
skadoo,
receives
and
processes
all
child
support
payments
for
the
state
of
nevada
per
federal
regulations.
The
state
agency
must
establish
and
operate
a
unit
for
the
collection
and
disbursement
of
payments
under
support
orders.
H
Cadoo
has
a
payment
processing
system
through
our
vendor
to
process
child
support.
Payment
cadu
receives
over
220
million
dollars
per
year
in
child
support.
Child
support
payments
are
received
via
electronic
funds
transfer
eft
credit
cards.
Cash
and
skadoo
receives
approximately
22
000
mailed
in
payments
per
month,
averaging
more
than
ten
thousand
dollars
per
day
due
to
the
dollar
amount.
State
law
requires
us
to
deposit
all
payments
by
the
close
of
the
next
business
day.
H
Payments
with
accurate
child
support
information
and
financial
instrument
information
passed
directly
through
the
system
without
staff
intervention
payments
lacking
information
are
researched
by
staff
which
could
include
contacting
the
individual
or
employer
who
sent
the
payment.
This
cannot
always
be
done
within
the
established
statutory
time
frame.
H
Also,
almost
daily
payments
cannot
be
properly
identified
because
the
payment
was
never
met
for
nevada,
depositing
these
payments
requires
to
do
to
issue
a
refund
check
back
to
the
payer.
Instead
of
returning
the
payment
with
an
explanation,
letter
assembly
bill
70
will
allow
skidoo
one
additional
business
day
to
deposit
identified
payment
which
will
align
with
the
federal
requirements
for
disbursing
payments
to
families
for
unidentified
payments
assembly.
Bill
70
will
allow
a
total
of
five
business
days
to
identify
and
deposit
or
return
to
the
payer.
H
H
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
had
a
question
because
I
I
understand,
like
the
the
money,
is
accumulating,
but
is
the
money
accumulating
from
because
I
know
you
guys
subtract
the
welfare
benefits
from
the
child
support.
That's
received
right,
isn't
that
the
setup
and
then
I'll
do
the
next
part
of
that
question.
B
B
Am
I
so
I'm
wondering
if
the
accumulation
of
the
dollars
that
you
have
in
this
account
are
coming
from
the
subtraction
that
you
guys
are
having
from
the
welfare
benefits?
So
it's
my
understanding
that
when
a
person
gets
child
support
and
they're
getting
a
welfare
benefit,
you
subtract
from
the
welfare
benefit.
You
actually
subtract.
I
think
it's
you
subtract
from
the
child.
Support
is
one
of
them,
but
I
want
to
know
if
that
is
playing
into
this
at
all,
because
I
know
they
they
there's
a
reduction.
You
can't
have
both.
I
B
Yeah
it
does,
and
so
how
do
you
guys
and
then
my
second
question,
which
is
slightly
different
so
since
you
guys
received
the
payments,
how
do
you
coordinate
with
the
the
da
to
make
sure
that
the
payment
has
been
made,
because
I
know
that
if
a
person
fails
to
pay
their
child
support,
they
can
have
a
driver's
license
suspension,
and
so,
if
you
guys,
are
documenting
what's
going
into
the
account,
how
do
you
guys,
like
kind
of
interact
and
coordinate
there,.
I
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and,
and
I
this
is
kind
of
off
off,
I
think
a
little
bit,
but
I
know
during
the
height
of
the
unemployment
there
were
unemployment
checks
being
or
deductions
made
in
unemployment
checks
and
in
fact
child
support
was
sent
to
you
know
on
behalf
of
to
the
da's
or
whatever,
on
the
behalf
of
the
child
support,
and
yet
they
were
fraudulent
claims,
and
I
know
that
in
my
district
alone
I
had
people
reach
out
to
me
and
say
you
know
I
got
1200
worth
of
child
support
paid
and
I
hadn't
filed
for
unemployment.
I
Kathy
kaplan
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
So
we
have
been
working
with
beater
to
identify
unemployment
claims
that
are
fraudulent
when
we
flag
them
and
we
catch
them
timely.
We
do
refund
that
money
to
dieter
as
far
as
the
collection
for
any
fraudulent
claims,
where
somebody
has
been
afforded
a
benefit
to
that.
That's
going
to
be
on
the
deter
side
on
how
they
plan
on
collecting
that.
D
Thank
you.
So
it
was
just
good
luck
on
those
guys
part
that
somebody
did
file
a
fraudulent
claim,
because
I
know
a
number
of
constituents
that
have
contacted
me
and
they
did
benefit
from
this
because
they
had
unemployment
benefits,
paid
or
unemployment,
as
child
support
payments
paid
for
them
out
of
a
fraudulent
unemployment
claim,
and
so
they
didn't
have
to
make
the
payments,
and
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
how
you're
going
to
true
that
up.
Because
that's
part
of
the
bill.
I
Kathy
kaplan
for
the
record,
I
don't
know
that
it's
part
of
ab70
what
mr
lewis
is
presenting
is
when
they
get
a
payment
that
they
can't
identify,
they're
asking
for
additional
days
to
go
ahead
and
research
that
payment
to
find
out
if
it
was
truly
meant
for
nevada,
or
it
should
be
refunded
back
to
the
payor,
the
unemployment
side
of
it.
It
is
an
electronic
fund
that
comes
in
from
dieter
directly
to
us
and
it
doesn't
take
anybody's
intervention
to
process
those
payments.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
I
have
a
just
a
clarifying
question
so,
if
you're
going
to
take
an
additional
two
days
right,
so
it's
not.
Is
it
five
days?
Is
it
two
days
like
what's
the
timeline
there?
First
of
all,.
H
Jason
lewis,
for
the
record,
so
if
we
receive
the
payment
and
we
are
able
to
identify
it,
it
is
two
days
sometimes
we
receive
payments,
though,
that
there's
not
enough
information
to
identify
what
family
to
send
it
to
that
will
allow
us
five
days
in
order
to
contact
the
paper
and
fire
up
the
situation.
So
we
can
identify
the
proper
family
to
send
it
to.
A
H
It's
approximately
20
percent
could
be
a
little
more.
We
have
to
put
into
what
we
call
research.
Excuse
me,
jason
lewis,
for
the
record.
Approximately
20
percent
come
in
that
are
unidentified
and
we
put
it
into
our
research
to
follow
up
with.
A
So
out
of
that,
20
then
do
are
some
of
them
actually
nevada
people,
I
mean
people,
you
just
have
to
research
to
where
it's
going.
I
guess
where
I'm
going
with
this,
the
only
thing
that
I'm
a.
F
A
H
When
we're
unable
to
identify
a
payment,
we
we
still
have
to
do
the
research
and
contact
the
person
who
sent
it,
who
is
either
the
employer
or
the
non-custodial
parent
from
there
once
we
contact
them,
we
can
identify
the
proper
child
support
case
and
send
it
through.
So
this
will
have
no
impact
on
the
families
whatsoever.
E
A
H
Jason
lewis,
for
the
record
once
again,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
present
today.
If
you
have
any
questions
in
the
future,
I
am
available
to
answer
at
any
time.
Thank
you.
A
E
E
A
Very
much
and
with
that,
if
we
have
no
public
comment,
I
will
close
the
meeting.
Thank
you,
members
for
our
first
in-person
meeting,
we'll
see
you
again
we're
making
decisions
on
friday's
meeting
as
bills
are
being
processed,
so
stay
tuned
for
that
and
we
are.