►
From YouTube: 5/17/2021 - 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
Good
afternoon
welcome
to
senate
government
affairs
we're
getting
organized
up
here.
Thank
you
for
your
patience,
all
right,
I'll,
ask
the
secretary
to
call
the
roll
and
then
we'll
get
started.
Thank
you.
A
A
C
Okay,
I
feel
like
I'm
second
grade
good
afternoon.
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
laura
freed
I
serve
as
the
director
of
the
department
of
administration.
I
am
here
to
present
sb
409,
which
is
a
budget
implementation
bill.
As
you
all
know,
collective
bargaining
is
the
law
of
the
state.
C
So
what
it
does
is
takes
off
the
personnel
assessment
and
puts
on
a
collective
bargaining
assessment
in
an
equivalent
amount.
The
assessment
is
per
fte
per
year
for
each
position,
that
has
an
exclusive
bargaining
representative
or
is
eligible
to
in
the
case
of
no
exclusive
representative
having
been
duly
certified
yet
so
that
is
pretty
much
what
the
bill
says.
I'd
be
happy
if
it's,
if
it's
the
wish
of
the
chair
to
go
through
section
by
section
and
but
if
you
guys
want
to
just
ask
questions,
I'm
happy
to
take
questions
too.
A
Thank
you,
miss
freed.
I
think,
in
the
lieu
of
time
we'll
go
right
to
the
questions.
It's
not
a
huge
long
bill.
So
I'll
just
go
to
questions
committee.
Senator
neil.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
only
have
like
one
question
so
when
you
talk
about
the
collective
bargaining
assessment,
when
I
looked
at
section
one
step,
five,
what's
the
number
of
employee
positions
currently
or
that
you're
expecting
or
or
that
will
be
represented
by
labor
org.
C
This
is
laura
freed
for
the
record.
Currently
we
only
have
four
exclusive
representatives
certified
that
represent
seven.
I
believe
bargaining
units,
and
so
the
assessment
would
be
charged
both
on
the
agencies
that
have
the
positions
that
are
represented
by
an
exclusive
representative,
but
also
would
be
charged
to
agencies
that
are
eligible
to
have
an
exclusive
representative.
In
other
words,
a
union
might
get
a
certain
bargaining
unit
under
288
to
organize
sometime
in
the
interim,
and
we
would
have
the
funding
in
the
budget
to
commence
bargaining.
C
A
E
A
Thank
you
very
much
that
was
kind
of
what
my
question
was
all
right.
If
I
see
no
more
questions,
then
I
will
close
the
hearing
on
yes,
sir
support
opposition.
Oh
sorry,
getting
ahead
of
myself,
I
have
to
go
into
the
public
and
do
support
opposition
and
neutral
in
the
room.
Is
there
anybody
in
support,
then
we'll
go
to
the
phone
lines
broadcasting
when
you're
ready.
F
A
F
A
A
Thank
you
very
much
I'll.
Take
a
second
second
from
senator
neil
any
discussion
on
the
motion.
Thank
you
very
much.
All
those
in
favor
say
aye
all
those
opposed
motion
passes
and
I
will
sign
that
floor
statement
to
senator
neil
how
about
that
all
right.
A
G
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
I'm
brian
mitchell,
the
director
of
the
office
of
science,
innovation
and
technology
for
the
record.
Sb
421
is
a
budget
implementation
bill
in
the
interest
of
time.
I'll
be
very
brief.
G
When
ocean
was
created,
all
employees
were
in
the
non-classified
service
to
the
state,
and
the
decision
was
made
to
bring
agencies
that
are
not
in
the
unclassified
classified
service
into
the
unclassified
and
classified
service,
and
the
executive
budget
recommends
the
conversion
of
all
of
those,
its
non-classified
positions
into
classified
and
unclassified
positions
respectively,
and
this
is
the
budget
bill
that
implements
that
change,
and
I
am
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Okay,
well
with
that,
I
will
go
right
into
public
testimony
of
support,
opposition
and
neutral
anyone
in
the
room
in
support
not
seeing
any
broadcasting
we'll
go
right
to
the
phone
lines.
F
F
F
A
A
A
H
Thank
you,
chair,
matthew,
tuma.
I
serve
as
the
deputy
director
for
the
department
of
administration
for
the
record,
I'm
here
to
introduce
senate
bill
422
a
budget
implementation
bill
that
would
transfer
the
responsibility
of
establishing
and
conducting
a
central
mail
room
from
the
division
of
state
library,
archives
and
public
records
of
the
department
to
the
mail
to
a
newly
created
mail
services,
division
of
the
department
and
aligning
the
the
powers
of
that
of
those
functions.
It's
important
to
note
that
this
doesn't
change
the
functions
of
the
mailroom.
H
This
was
reached
because
of
a
number
of
operational
concerns,
and
we
believe
that
this
transfer
and
the
creation
of
a
standalone
division
will
be
important
for
both
the
daily
operations
and
the
long-term
planning
of
the
essential
work
to
support
mail
distribution
and
improve
levels
of
service
for
all
of
our
client
agencies
being
able
current
currently
under
nsla
pr.
H
The
administrator
of
nslapr
is
required
to
meet
library
or
archive
education
requirements,
and
this
has
led
to
a
mismatch
of
expertise
to
oversee
mail
operations,
so
by
creating
a
standalone
division
within
the
department
of
administration
and
having
the
expertise
at
the
administrator
level
for
the
newly
created
administrator
position
that
was
in
the
budget
or
in
the
division's
budget
implementation,
we
believe,
would
be
in
the
long-term
interest
of
the
department.
So
I
can
go
through
other
aspects
of
the
bill
or
be
available
for
any
questions.
A
Thank
you
very
much
any
questions
from
the
committee
senator
neil.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
you
mentioned
in
your
testimony
that
there
were
operational
challenges.
What
what
are
they?
What
were
they.
H
H
So,
yes,
we're
going
to
continue
to
see
a
large
influx
of
male
needs
for
the
for
the
division,
as
unemployment
benefits
and
as
welfare
benefits
are
still
projected
to
be
at
high
volumes
for
the
foreseeable
future,
as
well
as
really
business
planning
for
future
needs
of
mail
services.
We
know
that
it's
a
changing
world
as
we
digitize
some
operations,
but
as
we
rely
on
mail
service,
physical
mailing
for
a
lot
of
the
secure
mailings
that
are
are
tied
up
in
benefits.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Vice
chair
orange
hill.
H
So
matthew
tuma
for
the
record,
so
in
the
budget
presentation
and
in
the
budget
submission
and
in
the
closed
budget
for
the
mail
services
budget
account,
there
are
two
additional
positions:
one
mail
clerk,
two
position
and
the
new
administrator
position.
So
those
are
the
only
additional
staff
we
foresee
right
now,
but
part
of
the
long-term
business
planning
aspects
that
we
really
need
to
do
with
the
mail
services
with
the
ideally
created
mail
services
division.
H
So
matthew
tuma
for
the
record,
with
the
department
of
administration,
so
the
so
mail
services
placement
in
nsla
pr
has
been
something
that's
been
for
the
about
the
last
decade.
In
the
last
recession,
mail
services
was
moved
from
buildings
and
grounds
to
to
nsla
pr.
Previously
it
had
been
in
in
buildings
and
grounds,
and
it's
it's
never
really.
H
It's
never
been
a
stand-alone
division
and
never
really
had
the
senior
management
on
site
with
that
budget
account
in
operations,
and
so
this
would
be
a
new
approach
to
it
and
having
its
own
standalone
division,
and
we
believe
that
the
uniqueness
of
the
role
of
what
they
feel
and
the
importance
of
the
business
that
they
that
they
administer
would
warrant.
This
kind
of
senior
leadership
in-house
in
the
budget
account.
A
So,
just
as
a
follow-up
to
senator
niels,
I
think
it
was
senator
neil
who
asked
if
this
would
be
needed
after
the
pandemic
and
after
we
get
everything
under
control.
So
will
there
be
a
point
where
I
guess
you
review
what
what
this
is?
I
mean
whether
it's
five
years
or
whether
it's
10
years
will
there
be
a
point
where
you
say
gosh.
Maybe
we
don't
need
the
mail
services
anymore,
we're
under
control
right.
H
So
I
I
think
the
the
correct
answer
is
that
we
need
to
evaluate
the
needs
of
all
of
our
divisions
on
a
biennial
basis,
and
so
that's
a
constant
thing
that
we
need
to
have
feedback
into
and
make
sure
that
we
have
the
appropriate
level
of
management
as
well
as
support
for
the
business
that
we're
we're
having
to
to
manage.
One
of
the
interesting
things
that's
happened
over
the
year
plus
is
that
we
do
have
to
manage
a
large
volatil,
a
large
volatile
business
base
for
mail
services.
H
A
Thank
you
very
much
any
additional
questions:
okay,
seeing
none
we'll
go
to
the
public
support
and
opposition
in
neutral
anybody
in
the
room
and
support
not
seeing
any
we'll
go
to
the
phone
lines.
Broadcasting.
F
A
Thank
you
very
much.
We
will
go
to
opposition.
Is
there
anybody
in
the
room
in
opposition
not
seeing
any
we'll
go
to
the
phone
lines.
F
A
I
Good
afternoon
jared
andero,
loop
and
members
of
the
committee,
I
am
kevin
doty
administrator
for
estate
purchasing
and
sb
45
445
is
another
budget
implementation
bill
for
the
department
of
administration,
so
my
boss,
director
freed,
is
there.
I
The
newspaper
advertising
requirement
was
implemented
in
1951
when
the
only
way
for
state
purchasing
to
reach
vendors
for
purchasing
furniture
and
manual
typewriters,
and
such
things
was
to
advertise
in
a
newspaper.
Our
business
model
has
changed
greatly
over
the
last
70
years
and
the
way
we
reach
our
vendors
and
award
to
our
vendors.
It's
also
changed
greatly.
I
For
instance,
we're
currently
evaluating
proposals
for
a
medicaid
contract.
That's
going
to
be
worth
more
than
a
billion
dollars
which
isn't
what
the
original
drafters
of
the
state
person
act
in
1951
could
have
possibly
contemplated.
I
I
I
Currently
any
member
of
the
public,
who
wants
to
see
anything
that
we're
doing
here,
state
purchasing
can
simply
go
to
nevadaepro.com
click
on
the
advanced
button,
click
on
bid
solicitations
and
then
hit
the
big
blue
search
button,
and
they
will
see
every
single
solicitation
we're
going
out,
for
that
is
helps
us
find
vendors
who
are
interested.
Let
the
public
know
what
we're
doing
and
all
of
our
awarding
is
done
to
vendors
who
are
registered
in
epro.
I
That's
so
that
we
can
collect
all
the
information
required
to
comply
with
our
statutory
requirements.
So
we
are
definitely
meeting
transparency
in
ways
we
never
did
four
years
ago,
even
and
certainly
not
70
years
ago.
I
Of
course.
Another
concern
I
have
is
that
I
I
don't
want
a
a
technical
requirement
that
doesn't
yield
any
benefit
to
the
department
to
somehow
derail
a
big
project.
I
We've
been
working
on
a
big
solicitation,
we're
doing
attorneys
who
challenge
our
our
bids
and
awards
are
always
looking
for
any
type
of
non-compliance,
no
matter
how
small
and
if
there
was
a
mistake
in
how
the
newspaper
advertising
was
done,
I
wouldn't
want
to
have
our
our
billion
dollar
medicaid
contract
or
our
100
million
dollar
smart
21
contract
or
any
of
our
multi-million
dollar
technology
contracts
have
to
restart
it
step,
one
because
of
a
new
missing
newspaper
advertisement
that
didn't
serve
a
purpose.
I
To
begin
with,
the
other
sections
of
the
bill
are
likewise
attempts
to
modernize
our
state
purchasing
chapter
section
two
suggested
by
the
ag's
office
states
that
we
won't
agree
to
jurisdiction
in
another
state
won't
agree
to
indemnify
any
other
parties.
I
Section
three
is
the
recommendation
of
the
division
of
internal
audits
and
their
report.
20-07.
It
was
adopted
recommended
by
the
executive
branch
audit
committee
meeting
at
their
february
26
2020
meeting.
I
Currently,
the
only
way
we
can
debar
suspend
a
vendor
is
that
they
are
declared
in
reach
of
a
contract,
but
that
rarely
happens
because
normally
the
state
gets
has
a
vendor
who's,
not
performing.
We
use
our
termination
for
convenience
language
and
don't
actually
declare
a
breach,
because
it's
just
cleaner
to
do
that
legally,
so
this
would
create
a
real
dubai
vendor
list,
like
overwhelming
majority
of
states,
have
and
I'd
like
to
clarify
for
the
record
that
subsection
a
when
it
talks
about
providing
false
or
misleading
information
for
purchasing
what
we're
looking
for.
I
There
would
be
vendors
who
lie
to
state
purchasing,
we're
not
concerned
with
someone
who
makes
a
mistake
and
something
they
file
with
us.
We
know
that
mistakes
can
be
made
and
they're
often
you
know
corrected
by
vendors
and
in
subsection
seven
of
section
three
of
one
three,
where
it
says,
failed
to
comply
with
any
provision
of
this
chapter.
What
that
goes
to
is
vendors,
who
violate
any
statutory
provision
of
chapter
333.
I
Section
5
of
the
bill
merely
makes
conforming
changes
to
go
along
with
the
bard
vendor
list
and
check
section
3.
I
section
6
has
just
a
minor
thing
to
make
sure
public
records
are
kept
regarding
certain
prescription
purchases
and
section
7
would
change
the
dollar
threshold
at
which
the
board
of
examiners
approves
contracts
or
services,
as
opposed
to
having
the
clerk
of
the
board
approve
them.
This
is
something
that
governor
sisilak
asked
for
at
the
february
2019
board
of
examiners,
meeting
that
there
wasn't
a
piece
of
legislation
that
we
could
amend
this
to
in
the
last
session.
So
we
put
it
in
this
legislation
here.
I
This
would
allow
the
members
of
the
board
to
concentrate
on
the
more
high
dollar
contracts.
It
would
also
put
the
100
000
limit
in
line
with
the
similar
requirements
in
the
the
local
purchasing
statute,
chapter
332,
and
it
would
align
with
our
requirement
that
rfps
for
contracts
of
100,
000
or
more
go
through
state
purchasing.
I
Finally,
allowing
contracts
under
100
000
should
be
approved
by
clerk
of
the
board,
would
streamline
our
process
and
eliminate
the
the
lag
time
of
five
to
six
weeks.
It
takes
for
an
item
to
go
through
the
entire
approval
process
by
the
board
of
examiners
of
their
monthly
meetings
and
that's
a
quick
rundown
of
sb
445
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
had
a
question
on
section
two
sub
one.
D
So
is
so
there's
two
parts,
this
question
number
one
is
this
retroactive
because
it
says,
may
not
require
the
following
of
any
action
or
arbitration,
and
then
it
says
or
indemnify
another
party
so
number
one,
how
many
groups
how
many
contracts
are
outside
of
the
state
where
this
would
come
into
play
and
is
it
retroactive?
I
Kevin
doty
for
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Senator
neil
the
language
says,
entered
into
or
renewed,
so
it
wouldn't
apply
retroactively
into
any
contract
that
has
already
been
entered
into
or
or
renewed
going
forward.
If
we
had
a
new
contract
or
we're
renewing
an
existing
contract,
this
these
sections
would
apply.
I
For
the
most
part,
this
wouldn't
cause
a
big
plu
problem,
even
if
it
was
retroactive,
because
the
ag's
office
almost
never
agrees
to
waive
the
state's
sovereign
immunity,
and
I
mean
sovereignty
and
agree
to
be
subject
to
the
jurisdiction
in
another
state.
So
I
don't
know
of
any
contracts
out
there.
I
That
would
section
two
subsection
one
would
apply
to
and
the
same
pretty
much
goes
for
section
two
subsection,
two
there's
a
lot
of
argument
when
the
lawyers
negotiate
on
behalf
of
the
state
and
lawyers
negotiating
on
behalf
of
vendors
argue
about
indemnity
provisions.
Hopefully
this
will
streamline
that
somewhat
and
make
it
clear
that
the
state
won't
agree
to
indemnify
vendors
and
currently
that's
our
position
in
negotiations,
but
this
would
help
streamline
that
process
and
alleviate
any
concerns.
D
Thank
you
for
that.
Madam
chair
can
ask
one
more
question.
Absolutely
so.
In
section
three
section,
three
sub
we'll
just
take
section
three
as
a
whole,
but
really
I'm
focused
on
b
in
this
contract
provision
where
you're
saying
did
not
perform
what
currently
is
the
right
to
cure?
That's
in
in
play
with
the
seller.
I
Thank
you
commentary
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question,
senator
neil.
Basically,
what
happens
currently
is
we
have
a
vendor
who
isn't
performing,
and
you
know
the
first
level
is
to
just
to
talk
with
them
to
try
to
get
them
to
perform,
and
then
we
send
letters
according
to
the
notice
provisions
in
the
contract,
usually
by
certified
mail.
I
If
there
is
something
we
want
to
rise
to
a
certain
level
and
say
that
they're
in
breach
and
that
it
needs
to
be
cured,
we
we
give
time
for
them
to
cure
non-performance
and
currently
simply
declaring
breach
that
hasn't
been
cured
is
the
only
way
for
us
to
to
debar
a
vendor
from
submitting
a
proposal
to
the
state
in
the
future.
I
This
full
dubard
vendor
list.
The
way
that
it
exists
in
other
states
gives
us
more
leverage
in
that
regard,
and
that's
really
what
this
section
is
about:
we're
not
looking
to
suspend
or
debar
a
bunch
of
vendors,
we're
looking
to
have
more
leverage
in
trying
to
get
vendors
to
comply
with
the
terms
of
their
contract
and
and
having
this
language
to
to
point
to
will
help
us
in
that
regard.
E
I
I
So
for
you
know,
45
years,
all
of
our
bids
and
solicitations
the
only
right
of
appeal,
someone
had
was
to
ask
the
administrator
to
override
the
decision,
and
that
was
changed
by
statute,
and
we
now
have
a
a
hearing
with
the
hearings
division
as
far
as
the
dubai
vendor
list.
This
is
consistent
with
how
other
states
do
it.
I
It's
not
something
that
would
be
taken
lightly
and
the
vendor
would
of
course
be
given
an
opportunity
to
explain
why
they,
wouldn't
they
shouldn't
be
devoured,
and
the
statutory
limitation
in
here
is
two
years,
so
it
couldn't.
Last
beyond.
Beyond
that
time,
limit.
E
C
The
only
thing
I
I
mean,
as
you've
heard
already
sorry
laura
freed
for
the
record
department
administration,
mr
doty
is,
of
course,
the
authority
on
all
things.
Nrs
333
in
the
department
of
administration-
and
the
only
thing
I
have
to
add-
is
that
part
of
the
reason
we
brought
this
bill
is
because
we
received
an
executive
branch
audit.
That's
audit
report
20-07,
which
specifically
recommended
establishing
a
statewide
debart
vendor
list,
and
so
there's
no
method
for
state
agencies
to
ensure
they're
doing
business
with
reputable
vendors
ignores
their
data
to
track
non-compliant
vendors.
C
So
this
increases
the
risk
for
agencies
in
the
state,
because
non-compliant
vendors
might
continue
to
do
business
with
state
agencies
and
we'd
like
to
reduce
the
state's
potential
liability.
By
doing
that,
so
again,
you
know
part
of
the
reason
we
did
need
to
modernize
nrs
333,
but
we
were
also
stimulated
by
an
audit
finding.
A
F
A
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
alexis
motorex,
with
the
nevada
chapter
associated
general
contractors
representing
the
commercial
construction
industry
in
northern
nevada.
We
are
here
in
support
of
section
four
of
the
this
bill,
but
have
significant
concerns
with
the
changes
in
sections
two
and
three
unless
are
opposed.
J
The
removal
of
the
requirement
to
post
bids
in
the
newspaper
and
section
4
seems
logical,
seems
a
logical
change
that
keeps
pace
with
technology
in
the
evolving
way
in
which
we
consume
news
and
information.
This
will
result
in
significant
savings
and
we
believe
it
should
actually
be
amended
to
include
nrs
332
as
well.
J
Although
this
will
result
in
another
lost
source
of
income
for
print
media,
it's
a
necessary
change
to
ensure
good
stewardship
of
taxpayer
dollars.
Our
first
concern
with
with
sb
45
is
the
change
included
in
section
2
sub
2..
It
provides
immunity
to
state
purchasing
and
puts
the
full
burden
of
any
damages
on
the
vendor,
regardless
of
fault.
The
law
already
allows
for
this
to
be
negotiated
into
contracts
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
We
feel
strongly
that
vendors
to
the
state
should
not
be
required
by
law
to
assume
all
liability,
regardless
of
circumstances
or
fault.
J
Section
3,
sub
1
b
is
written
so
broadly
that
any
minor
deviation
could
be
caused
for
breach
of
contract
and
debarment
and
section
3,
sub
c
sub.
1
c
could
result
in
the
debarment
of
someone
for
up
to
two
years
for
any
minor
non-compliance
with
the
chapter.
This
could
include
something
as
insignificant
as
an
administrative
error
on
a
bid.
This
seems
extreme
and
puts
all
vendors
and
potential
vendors
ability
to
do
business
to
do
business
with
the
state
at
the
discretion
of
the
administrator.
J
F
F
F
K
My
name
is
richard
carpel,
I'm
testifying
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
press
association,
the
spelling
for
the
record
of
my
last
name
is
k-a-r-p-e-l,
testifying
exactly
opposite
of
the
the
previous
caller.
We
are
opposed
to
one
particular
section
of
the
bill
section
four,
as
mr
doty
testified,
it
would
eliminate
the
existing
requirement
that
the
administrator
publish
a
notice
in
the
newspaper
whenever
the
division
issues
a
bid
or
proposal.
K
The
fact
that
it
is
published
these
that
these
notices
are
published
in
a
vehicle,
that's
independent
of
the
government
and
is
pushed
into
homes
via
newspapers
and
newspaper
websites,
is
designed
to
give
citizens
confidence
that
the
underlying
process
is
being
conducted
fairly
and
in
the
light
of
day,
allowing
the
notices
to
be
posted
solely
on
the
e-pro
website.
In
other
words,
for
access
only
to
insiders
who
are
already
attuned
to
the
bid
process
would
subvert
that
important
purpose
and
undermine
trust
in
the
state's
purchasing
process.
K
And
for
that
reason,
it's
the
the
activists,
the
larger
the
contract,
in
other
words
like
the
billion
dollar
medicaid
contract
that
mr
doty
referred
to
the
larger
the
contract,
that's
being
contemplated
the
more
important
it
is
that
the
notices
actually
get
published
in
a
vehicle
that
is
independent
of
the
government.
Thank
you.
F
F
A
Thank
you
very
much,
we'll
go
to
neutral,
neutral
in
the
room.
See
no
one
in
the
room
will
go
to
the
phones.
Broadcasting
go
ahead
when
you're
ready.
F
A
Thank
you
very
much,
we'll
close
that
part,
and
I
think
we
have
a
couple
questions
from
a
couple
of
our
committee
members,
so
vicente
orange
shaw.
Please
go
ahead.
B
I
Kevin
dude
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Vice
chair
warren
shaw.
We
spend
more
than
seven
thousand
dollars
a
year
with
the
las
vegas
review
journal
for
these
bids
and
solicitations
and
yeah.
I
Kevin
doty
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question
senator
neal.
The
reason
for
this
change
is
to
make
sure
that
agencies
keep
these
records
because
that's
the
first
place.
Auditors
look
for
them.
I
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I'm
just
going
to
walk
through
this,
make
sure
I'm
clear
on
it.
Now
any
contract
up
to
a
hundred
thousand
again
goes
to
the
board
of
examiners,
but
they
can
buy
an
executive
order
or
something
by
order
they
can.
They
can
send
contracts
under
a
hundred
thousand
just
to
the
administrator.
E
I
All
right,
kevin
dude
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Senator
goffitti
you're,
absolutely
correct.
All
these
contracts
get
approved
by
the
board
of
examiners.
What's
the
issue
here
is:
when
does
the
full
board
have
to
approve
it
in
one
of
their
monthly
meetings,
or
when
can
they
delegate
that
approval
to
clerk
of
the
war.
E
C
Yeah
any
contract
over
900
999
must
go
to
either
the
clerk
of
the
board
or
the
the
full
board
of
examiners.
This
this
legislation
anticipates
making
any
contract.
That's
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
be
an
action
item
that
requires
clerk
of
the
board
action
and
right
now
it
is
anything
fifty
thousand
dollars
and
over,
but
anything
again
from
nine
thousand
nine
hundred.
Ninety
nine
dollars
up
to
ninety
nine
thousand
nine.
C
Ninety
nine
under
this
bill
would
be
eligible
to
be
signed
by
the
clerk
of
the
board
and
would
go
to
the
monthly
board
of
examiners.
Meeting
on
a
information
item
and
any
member
of
the
clerk
of
the
board
could
ask
to
have
that
polled
and
discuss
it,
but
otherwise
it
would
just
go
as
a
consent.
Item.
A
I
Yeah
kevin
doty
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Sheridan
darrell
loop.
Currently,
the
only
way
we
can
prevent
a
debar
vendor
or
preventive
vendor
from
submitting
a
better
solicitation
is
if
we
first
find
them
in
breach,
and
that
is
you
see
that
language
referenced
in
section
5
of
this
bill?
It's
currently
interest
333.365
and,
as
I
explained
earlier,
that
that
doesn't
happen
for
various
legal
reasons.
We
don't
go
the
breach
route,
we
normally
just
terminate
for
convenience.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
It's
like
you're
reading
my
mind,
but
so
okay,
so
because
this
is
what
I'm
hearing
currently
you
can't
you,
the
breach
is
super
hard
to
go
after,
but
it
appears
like
you're
you're,
creating
a
lower
standard
to
go
after
them
to
me,
but
I
guess
in
the
process
of
you
creating
this
lower
threshold
to
then
debar.
D
How
did
you?
How
did
you
come
up
with
these
standards
to
say,
okay?
Well,
this
now
will
be
our
trigger.
I
heard
the
audit,
but
did
the
audit
specifically?
Did
the
audit
speak
to
recommendations
of
what
you
should
put
in
place
in
order
to
trigger
debarment
and
then
have
a
lower
threshold,
or
did
you
guys
just
say
well,
I
think
this
is
the
best
way
to
catch
our
fish.
C
I
Kevin
doty
for
the
record,
if,
if
I
made
a
senator
neil
one
of
our
problems
with
only
relying
on
breach,
is
that
there
are
vendors
who
don't
make
it
to
a
contract
who
who
lie
to
us
in
the
solicitation
process,
and
so
they
would
never
qualify
for
a
debarment,
because
there
would
never
be
a
breach.
They
would
never
reach
contract
with
us,
but
we
want
to
discourage
lines
say
purchasing
when
it
comes
to
what
they
submit
to
us
either.
As
in
response,
you
know
as
a
bid
or
a
proposal
and
it's
a
problem.
D
Thank
you
for
that.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
the
line.
That's
like
I'm
perfectly
fine
with
that.
It's
it's
the
performance
piece,
it's
the
performance
or
a
non-performance
piece
and
that
threshold,
because,
even
when
you
think
about
contracts
right,
there's
always
the
shading
right
of
non-conformance
right
so
rejecting
for
material
or
minor
breach,
etc.
Right,
but
but
you
just
you
just
pretty
much
say-
did
not
perform
according
to
the
terms
of
the
contract
right
and
so
typically
within
the
terms
of
a
contract,
an
individual,
a
seller
or
vendor.
D
There
was
a
no
non-compliance
of
a
term,
but
this
doesn't
allow
that
to
happen,
and
I
don't
know
if
you
were
trying
to
do
this
in
reg
or
you
were
just
I
don't
I
don't.
I
don't
know
what
you're
trying
to
do
here,
because
it's
just
it's
very
broad
and
typically
broad
means.
You
know
I
decide
what
that
means.
On
the
agency
front.
I
Kevin
doty
for
the
rec.
Thank
you
for
the
question
senator
neal
this
our
goal
here
isn't
to
change
the
rights
in
an
existing
contract.
Our
contracts
all
speak
to
how
the
rights
go
back
and
forth
between
the
parties.
I
For
example,
if
you
had
like
what
happened
with
tech
mahindra
and
the
dmv
in
that
situation,
where
there
was
a
a
complete
failure
to
meet
what
the
state
was
looking
for
in
that
contract,
even
though
we
didn't
technically
hold
them
in
breach,
that's
the
kind
of
contract
where
we
would
be
looking
to
potentially
bar
a.
D
Vendor
thanks,
madam
chair,
I
mean
I
don't
I
don't
want
to
get
further
into
this,
but
I
I
feel
like
I
feel
like
I
mean
I
don't.
I
know
I
mean
it's
the
chair.
I
mean
I
just
feel
like
you
that
section
that
one
in
particular,
you
might
need
to
be
set
up
with
a
couple
more
sentences,
or
at
least
or
at
least
try
to
make
it
align
with
you
know,
ucc,
something
something
that
makes
it
a
person
feel
an
who
doesn't
understand.
D
This
hearing
could
be
like
okay,
contractually
the
way
they
understand
the
terms
and
what
their
wiggle
room
is.
I
hear
what
you're
saying,
but
I
don't
think
this
section
says
what
you're
saying
I
think
you
know
what
I'm
saying
like
I
get
it
you're
like.
I
can
debar
you,
because
you
failed
completely
to
do
this,
but
if
you
just
said
you
know
that,
then
that
would
be
different,
but
I
think
that
this
says
a
little
bit
more
than
that.
A
I
Kevin
doty
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Sheridan
darrell,
the
the
statute,
and
you
see
the
existing
language.
It
says
that
in
at
least
one
newspaper
of
general
circulation
in
the
state,
the
selection
of
the
newspaper
to
carry
the
advertisement
must
be
made
in
the
manner
provided
by
this
chapter
for
other
purchases.
On
the
basis
of
the
lowest
price
to
be
secured
in
relation
to
the
paid
circulation.
I
The
las
vegas
review
journal.
It
actually
costs
less
to
run
a
legal
notice
in
the
rj
than
in
the
rgj,
and
the
rj
has
about
five
times
the
circulation.
A
If
the
committee
is
okay
with
it,
I
think
we're
going
to
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
445,
and
we
will
have
a
very
quick
but
fruitful
discussion
because
we're
running
out
of
time
and
we'll
see
if
we
can
process
and
and
repair
some
of
the
language
that
needs
to
be
done.
But
before
I
actually
close,
this
hearing
speak
now
or
forever
hold
your
peace.
A
Anybody
on
the
committee,
not
that
you
can't
talk
to
them
offline,
but
I
just
mean
if
you
want
to
put
anything
on
the
record
or
have
a
question:
okay,
miss
reed!
If
you,
if
you
and
mr
dodie
don't
mind,
if
you'll,
take
some
of
the
suggestions
and
put
them
back
into
the
queue
and
we'll
revisit
this
shortly.
A
L
L
Let
me
present
sb447
simply
this
is
a
bill,
extends
permanently
the
consumer
affairs
unit
within
the
department
of
business
and
industry,
and
also
changes
the
name
from
the
consumer
affairs
division
to
unit
there's
nothing
special
about
that,
but
typically
because
it
is
not
one
of
our
divisions
and
it
is
a
small
unit.
We
felt
that
was
probably
termed
unit
now
to
go
back
just
a
little
bit
in
history.
L
The
unit
then,
was
continued
for
every
two
years
during
that
time
in
the
13
15,
17
and
19
sessions.
So
every
biennium
we
have
come
back
to
the
legislature
and
asked
to
have
it
recon
instituted
and
budgeted
for
the
unit.
The
unit
consists
of
about
six
full-time
positions,
one
half-time
position
split
five
in
the
director's
office
down
in
southern
nevada
and
one
and
a
half
in
the
director's
office
in
carson
city.
L
L
We
have
fairs
where
we
go
out
in
the
community
and
talk
to
citizens
that
are
interested
in
what's
happening
in
terms
of
consumer
issues
with
scams
for
fraud.
We
work
with
the
fight
fraud
task
force
in
southern
nevada,
as
well
as
the
attorney
general's
office.
We
get
about.
10
percent
of
our
cases
from
the
attorney
general's
office
referred
back
to
us.
Those
are
cases
typically
that
are
not
criminal
in
nature,
but
civil
and
but
we
work
with
the
attorney
general's
office
and
the
fight
fight
fraud
task
force
on
a
weekly
basis.
L
So
we
get
cases
through
that.
We
get
cases
that
people
come
in
through
call
in
we
get
walk-ins.
We
get
emails
on
that.
We
get
about
a
thousand
general
calls
a
year
from
consumers
asking
about
certain
types
of
business
activity
and
what
they
can,
what
they
can
do
about
it,
and
so
it's
fairly
fairly
busy
organization
for
that.
So
the
your
session
of
the
assembly,
ways
and
senate
have
actually
reinstituted
in
the
budget
for
the
biennium,
the
positions
that
were
cut
during
the
21
budget
and
we're
very
grateful
for
that.
L
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Any
questions
committee
vice
chair,
arne,
shaw,.
B
L
Thank
you
senator
orange
hall.
This
is
terry
reynolds
director
for
the
department
of
business
and
industry.
We
anticipate
staying
the
same,
so
we
have
gone
forward
and
requested
the
six
full-time
positions
in
one
half-time
position,
and
we
will
continue
with
those
positions.
So
we're
not
we're
not
increasing
that,
but
keep
in
mind
that
we
also
work
with
the
11
divisions
within
business
and
industry.
L
So
if
we
have
a
matter
with
real
estate,
we
can
partner
with
the
real
estate
division
or
if
it's
an
insurance
issue
or
a
another
consumer
issue
that
involves
mortgage
lending.
For
example,
we
can
team
up
with
their
investigative
staff,
so
we
have
those
resources
available
to
us,
but
our
core
group
we
will
keep
the
same,
but
we
have
the
benefit
of
being
able
to
work
with
our
other
divisions
on
consumer
matters.
A
Okay,
all
right!
Well
with
that,
then
mr
reynolds
looks
like
you
answered
all
the
questions,
so
we
will
go
to
public
testimony,
not
seeing
anybody
in
the
room.
We
will
go
to
the
phone
lines
to
see.
If
we
have
anybody
broadcasting
go
ahead
when
you're
ready.
F
A
F
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
with
that
seeing
no
one
in
the
room
will
go
to
neutral
online.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
with
that
we
will
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
447
and
we
will
I'll
ask
the
committee
if
they're
interested
in
taking
a
motion.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
A
second
second
from
senator
neil
vice
chair
orange
hall
made
the
motion
do
pass
any
discussion
on
the
motion,
no
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye,
those
opposed
hearing,
none
motion
passes
and
senator
goku.
Would
you
like
to
take
that
floor
statement
all
right?
Well
with
that,
then
we
have
finished
the
bills
that
we
need
to
work
session
and
here
today.
A
So
thank
you,
mr
reynolds,
for
your
time
and
I'm
sure
maybe
we'll
see
you
again
soon.
L
A
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that.
Then
I'm
not
sure
exactly
when
our
next
meeting
will
be,
but
I
would
mark
your
calendars
for
3
30
on
wednesday
and
with
that
we
are.