►
From YouTube: 3/24/2021 - Senate Committee on Judiciary
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
so
much
miss
wells.
I
will
call
this
committee
to
order
on
thursday.
Whatever
day
it
is
march
24th.
This
is
the
senate
judiciary
committee
with
the
esteemed
secretary.
Please
take
the
role.
A
D
A
Here
and
if
you
could
please
mark
senator
harris
as
excused,
we
also
have
with
us
today,
mr
pat
geinin
from
the
legislative
council
bureau.
He
is
our
committee
analyst.
Our
committee
council,
nick
anthony,
remains
available
to
us
to
answer
questions,
though
he's
not
here
in
lifetime,
and
today
we
only
have
one
bill
presentation
and
then
we
will
have
a
couple
of
bdr
introductions
to
do
or
to
vote
on
at
the
end
of
the
meeting.
A
B
B
I
think
you
all
will
remember
that
in
last
session
we
passed
senate
bill
151,
which
included
some
modest
protections
for
tenants.
This
is
a
significant
issue,
because
I'm
talking
about
maslow's
hierarchy
of
needs,
every
individual
to
thrive
needs
food,
shelter,
clothing
and
this
bill
really
gets
to
the
heart
of
the
issue
of.
Can
somebody
who
is
a
renter
maintain
stable
housing
in
response
to
senate
bill
151?
B
And
so
what
happened
is
in
the
last
legislative
session
after
sb
151
passed.
What
one
of
the
things
that
sb-151
did
was
it
capped
late
fees?
We
had
some
seen
some
really
egregious
practices
when
it
came
to
piling
late
fee
on
late
fee
on
late
fee,
in
order
to
move
what
some
landlords
felt
were
undesirable
tenants
along.
B
So
we
capped
late
fees
and
in
response
to
that,
this
subset
of
landlords
tried
to
figure
out
how
they
could
fleece
their
tenants
for
money
in
other
ways,
and
so
some
of
the
things
that
happened
is
there
was
a
large
property
owner
in
in
las
vegas
that
sent
out
a
notice
to
5600
tenants
unilaterally
changed.
B
That's
okay,
senator
pickard
unilaterally.
I
was
just
making
my
most
important
point
too.
So
there
were
some.
B
It's
okay
senator,
so
there
are
so
again.
B
There
was
a
landlord
that
unilaterally
tried
to
change
the
conditions
of
every
tenant,
who
was
under
a
lease
one
of
the
most
significant
things
that
we
saw
is
that
there
were
landlords
that
had
had
a
grace
period
for
years
on
their
properties,
and
these
landlords
had
tenants
that
were
senior
citizens
and
if
you
are
above
a
certain
age
and
you
are
receiving
your
social
security
check,
you
know
that
that
social
security
security
check
arrives
like
clockwork
on
the
third
day
of
the
month,
and
these
landlords
had
worked
with
those
tenants.
B
B
So
what
this
bill
seeks
to
do
is
to
do
some
cleanup.
As
always,
whenever
we
pass
any
legislation,
there's
some
things
that
we
need
to
get
right,
but
what
it
really
seeks
to
do
is
codify
the
best
practice
of
providing
tenants
with
a
three-day
grace
period.
B
This
will,
in
one
legislative
action,
take
care
of
all
of
those
senior
citizens
and
people
with
disabilities
who
receive
their
social
security
check
on
the
third
and
pay
on
time,
so
that
they
won't
have
an
extra
twenty
five
dollar
or
fifty
dollar
late
fee
on
their
rent.
Just
for
no
for
no
reason
it
adds
some
clarifying
detail
on
security
deposits.
B
Another
thing
that
we
saw
is
that
some
landlords,
and
again
it's
a
small
subset
of
not
necessarily
our
best
actors,
who
became
more
aggressive
about
retaining
a
portion
of
the
security
deposits
and
I'll
pause
here
to
say
that
I
rent
an
apartment
in
carson
city.
During
the
legislative
session
we
rented
a
duplex
last
legislative
session.
There
were
tenants
that
we
were
familiar
with
on
both
sides.
In
both
cases,
the
landlord
withheld
a
significant
portion
of
the
security
deposit,
with
no
real
justification
for
the
tenants
that
were
next
door
to
us.
B
They
withheld
100
of
the
deposit
for
things
like
the
cleaning,
lady,
that
the
landlord
contracted
with
spilled
some
bleach
on
the
on
the
carpet
and
the
tenant
got
charged
for
that
as
an
example.
So
we
need
greater
clarity
for
when
and
when,
when
a
landlord
can
withhold
part
of
the
security
deposit
and
when
they
cannot.
B
That
needs
to
be
strengthened
in
our
laws
and
there
needs
to
be
an
expedited
process
for
a
tenant
who
is
operating
in
good
faith
and
is
doing
everything
right
because
right
now,
while
somebody
can
be
evicted
within
10
days,
they
often
don't
get
their
security
deposit
back
for
up
to
30
and
that
gap
in
time
between
that
eviction
and
when
they
get
their
security.
Deposit
means
that
they
don't
have
the
resources
necessary
to
pay
the
security
deposit
and,
first
month,
rent
on
their
next
property.
B
So
we
really
do
need
to
figure
out
from
a
timing
perspective.
How
that
tenant,
who
has
done
well,
can
rapidly
get
their
security
deposit
back
and
how
we
can
make
sure
that
predatory
landlords
aren't
withholding
a
security
deposit
in
a
situation
again
where
they
have
significantly
more
power
and
influence
than
that
tenant
in
the
same
contract.
B
And
then,
finally,
we
saw
a
slew
of
fees
that
had
never
been
seen
before,
and
my
email
address
got.
I
just
kept
hearing
from
many
of
my
constituents.
There
was
a
particular
landlord
in
in
northern
nevada
who
decided
to
dive
in
on
the
deep
end
on
this
one
light
bulb
fees,
dishwasher
fees,
cleaning
fees
that
hadn't
existed
before
you
name
it.
They
came
with
up
with
a
fee
for
it,
and
these
fees
were
not
disclosed
in
advance.
B
So
what
this
bill
seeks
to
do
is
say
that
any
fee
that
a
landlord
is
going
to
to
put
into
place
has
to
be
clearly
described
on
the
front
page
of
the
lease
so
that
when
a
tenant
signs
that
lease
they
know
what
to
expect.
They
know
what
their
monthly
cost
is
going
to
be,
and
they
know
what
occasional
fees
might
be
added
so
that
they
know
their
full
cost
before
they
sign
the
lease.
B
So
that's
generally,
what
the
bill
does
again.
I
brought
legal
counsel
this
time,
and
so
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
mr
virtual
to
present
to
you
the
walkthrough,
to
the
bill.
I
I
want
to
note,
and
I've
got
some
sources
for
you
if
you
need
to
hear
them.
This
is
not
just
what
I
saw
in
my
email
and
the
world.
B
According
to
julia,
it
was
well
documented
in
publications
like
the
las
vegas
review
journal
of
the
reaction
that
happened
after
the
last
legislative
session
and
in
the
middle
of
a
pandemic
when
housing
was
so
critical
for
so
many,
I
am
remain
very
committed
to
making
sure
that
tenants
have
the
protections
that
they
need
to
maintain
their
housing
and
what
I
think
are
modest,
not
particularly
aggressive
protections
for
tenants.
I
will
tell
you
perhaps
this
is
not
how
you
know
when
you
have
a
good
bill.
B
Neither
neither
tenants
didn't
think
I
took
it
far
enough
last
session
landlords
thought
I
went
too
far,
so
as
always,
I'm
looking
for
the
sweet
spot
in
the
middle
that
provides
some
reasonable,
modest
protections.
Because
again,
I
believe
that
the
tenant
is
in
a
much
more
vulnerable
position
than
the
landlord
in
these
cases
and
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
the
bad
actors
are
not
taking
advantage
of
vulnerable
tenants.
So
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
mr
burchill.
E
Thank
you,
senator
addie,
chair
members
of
the
committee,
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
help
senator
ratty
present
today,
as
senator
addy
indicated,
my
name
is
jim
burchtold.
I
am
the
directing
attorney
with
the
consumer
rights
project
at
legal
aid
center
of
southern
nevada.
E
B
E
I
apologize
for
that.
Thank
you,
senator
raddy.
This
is
jim
burchell
for
the
record.
Yes,
a
an
amendment
to
the
bill
was
submitted,
and
so
hopefully
everyone
is
working
off
that
that's
what
we
will
be
working
off
today,
so
section
one
simply
utilizes
some
definitions
that
will
be
codified
now,
you'll
all
be
pleased
to
hear
that
many
of
the
sections
simply
do
the
same
thing.
So
the
substantive
sections
are
not
quite
as
intimidating
intimidating,
as
the
bill
initially
appears.
E
So
some
of
the
definitions
that
you'll
see
throughout
are
security,
deposit,
find
fee
and
cost
you'll
see
repeated
amendments
related
to
those
again.
Those
are
not
substantive.
It
is
only
for
consistency
purposes.
So,
let's
jump
down
to
section
two
now
section
two
and
section
five,
I'm
sorry
section,
three
section:
three:
in
section
five
section
two
defines
cleaning
deposits
and
section
five
defines
security
deposits
previously
under
the
landlord
tenant
statutes.
These
were
combined
into
one
statutory
section,
even
though
they
are
actually
very
separate
and
distinct
types
of
things.
E
A
cleaning
deposit
is
a
non-refundable
deposit
that
the
tenant
pays
to
the
landlord
is
essentially
a
fee,
whereas
a
security
deposit
in
theory
is
100,
refundable
to
the
tenant
so
long
as
there's
no
damage
to
the
property.
So
those
two
things
have
been
separated
and
now
have
their
own
statutory
definitions.
E
Section
four
defines
grace
period.
The
senator
spoke
about
the
grace
period
issue.
This
is
one
of
the
sections
that
gets
at
that
issue.
I'm
going
to
skip
around
a
little
bit
because
I
think
it
will
make
more
sense
because
the
mechanisms
to
implement
the
changes
in
this
bill
are
actually
spread
out
in
various
sections,
so
race
period
here
is
defined
as
a
three-day
period
during
which
the
tenant
is
able
to
pay
rent.
E
E
The
third
part
of
this
mechanism
is
in
section
11.,
section
11
says
that
no
late
fee
can
be
charged
unless
until
the
grace
period
has
run
so
taking
taking
all
those
sections
together.
What
we
have
is
a
statutory
definition
where
a
grace
period
is
three
days
that
any
grace
period
has
to
be
specified
in
the
lease
agreement,
and
late
fees
cannot
be
charged
until
race
period
runs
so
effectively.
E
What
will
what
happens
is
that
every
lease
in
nevada
will
require
a
three-day
grace
period
now,
with
senator
ratty
eloquently
stated:
why
is
this
important?
There
was
a
huge
reaction
in
response
to
the
last
legislative
session
and
the
change
to
the
cap
on
late
fees.
E
E
So
this
would
simply
move
us
back
to
where
we
were
and
implement
what
is
really
the
gold
standard
of
a
three-day
grace
period
and
again
that
would
be
the
floor
if
a
landlord
wants
to
offer
a
three
to
five
or
some
some
number.
In
addition
to
the
three-day,
they
are
certainly
free
to
to
state
that
in
their
release
agreement,
but
at
the
minimum
it
would
be
a
three-day
grace
period.
E
E
In
section
seven
section:
seven
relates
to
security
deposits.
E
E
The
tenant
is
able
to
request
an
inspection
request
that
the
landlord
inspect
the
property,
at
which
time
the
landlord
is
required
to
give
the
tenant
a
list
of
the
things
that
the
landlord
believes
are
wrong
with
the
property
so
that
the
tenant
can
then
repair
those
things
before
the
tenant
leaves
the
property,
ideally
so
that
the
whole
security
deposit
issue
can
be
addressed
up
front
before
the
tenant's
gone,
because
after
the
tenant's
gone
it
just
gets
increasingly
difficult,
a
tenant
will
receive
a
notice
with
various
charges
on
it,
and
inevitably
those
disputes
end
up
in
court
and
by
that
time,
all
of
the
evidence
is
failed.
E
E
There
is
no
substantive
revision
to
that
definition.
The
definition
itself
was
somewhat
antiquated
and
slightly
confusing.
So
this
is
hopefully
just
providing
some
clarity
now
section
10.
We
really
get
in
to
the
e
issue,
so
section
10
revises
118
a
200,
which
is
the
statute
that
says,
if
there's
a
lease,
these
are
the
things
that
must
be
addressed
in
the
lease
now
under
section
3.
E
We
already
addressed
the
grace
period
issue,
but
if
you
look
under
subsection
e,
what
subsection
e
says
is
that
any
fees
that
are
authorized
by
statute
that
the
tenant
has
to
pay
have
to
be
expressly
stated
in
the
lease
now
that
is
part
of
the
mechanism
to
address
the
fee
issue.
So
if
you
look
at,
I
believe
it's
on
the
next
page
at
subsection,
5
in
also
in
section
10.,
subsection
5
says
that
all
fees
must
be
disclosed
to
the
tenant
before
the
tenant
signs
the
lease
agreement.
E
E
What
section
12
says
is
that
the
lease
cannot
say
that
the
tenant
agrees
to
pay
any
fee
that
is
not
authorized
by
statute
so
taken
together.
What
does
that
mean?
That
means
that
all
the
fees
that
the
tenant
has
to
pay
have
to
be
disclosed
to
the
tenant
in
writing
before
the
tenant
signs.
The
lease
agreement,
the
lease
agreement
on
the
first
page
of
that
lease
must
say
what
those
fees
are
and
any
fee
that
is
not
specifically
allowed
by
statute,
cannot
be
included
in
the
lease
agreement.
E
They
pay
x
amount
of
dollars
every
month
for
the
possession
of
that
property,
when
fees
vary,
which
some
of
the
fees
that
we
have
been
seeing
do,
depending
on
the
number
of
units
that
are
occupied
in
the
premises
or
when
fees
are
implemented
that
have
not
been
enforced
before
tenants
are
thrown,
because
that
is
not
what
they
pay
for
rent
every
month,
so
they
don't
understand
where
those
fees
are
coming
from.
For
someone
on
a
fixed
income,
an
additional
fee
of
50
can
break
the
bank.
E
E
E
Now
there
has
been
some
confusion
about
this
about
whether
or
not
landlords
would
now
be
required
under
this
provision
to
pay
all
the
tenants
utilities.
Absolutely
not.
Utilities
are
covered
in
separate
sections
of
the
nevada
nrs118a,
and
in
fact
that
is
one
of
the
things
that
a
landlord
and
tenant
must
address
in
the
lease
who
pays
the
utilities
and
if
the
tenant
fails
to
pay
the
utilities
that
is
actually
good
cause
under
the
statute
to
evict
the
tenant.
So
that
is
a
separate
consideration.
E
Bill
all
right,
so
section
13
of
the
bill,
really
gets
into
the
security
deposit
issue.
E
Now,
we've
already
seen
that
there's
a
mechanism
in
the
bill
for
some
kind
of
pre
pre-termination
mechanism
to
address
the
security
deposit,
hopefully
to
resolve
it
before
termination.
So
this
provision
addresses
what
happens
if
it's
not
resolved
pre-termination.
E
So,
first
in
subsection
b,
a
cleaning
deposit
can
only
cannot
exceed
50
of
the
base
rent
now
moving
forward.
What
this
contemplates
is
that
a
landlord
can't
report
any
amounts
claimed
until
the
landlord
has
actually
obtained
a
judgment
against
the
tenant.
The
landlord
has
60-day
sorry,
I'm
sorry,
six
months
to
obtain
that
judgment.
E
If
the
amount
the
landlord
is
seeking
is
less
than
the
statutory
limit
in
small
claims
that
pace
against
the
tenant
will
be
brought
in
small
claims
court
if,
after
the
tenant
leaves
the
property,
the
landlord
actually
has
21
days
to
provide
the
tenant
with
a
written
accounting,
a
statement
of
how
the
landlord
is
applying
that
deposit,
that's
actually
contained
in
current
law
as
well,
so
the
landlord
provides
a
statement
and
is
required
to
return
the
remainder
of
that
deposit
to
the
tenant.
E
If
the
landlord
fails
to
return
that
deposit,
there
is
now
an
expedited
mechanism
for
the
tenant
to
address
that
issue.
So
if
the
landlord
fails
to
return
the
deposit
or
provide
the
accounting
to
the
tenant
within
those
21
days,
the
tenant
then
has
30
days
to
file
a
verified
complaint
with
the
justice
court
and
ask
the
court
to
address
the
deposit
issue.
A
hearing
is
held
on
an
expedited
basis
and
the
judge
can
decide
whether
or
not
that
deposit
needs
to
be
returned
to
the
tenant.
E
E
E
So
most
tenants
rely
on
that
deposit
to
secure
additional
housing
or
if
they
have
already
secured
additional
housing.
They
have
struggled
to
come
up
with
that
new
deposit
and
are,
depending
on
that
past
deposit,
to
reimburse
themselves
the
current
system
takes
way
too
long.
Most
times
these
disputes
end
up
in
small
claims
court,
which
can
take
months
and
months
by
the
time
the
case
actually
comes
before
the
court.
There's
somebody
else
in
the
property
and
all
of
the
evidence
is
failed
and
it
ends
up
being
just
a
landlord's
word
against
the
tenant's
word.
E
So
this
is
a
mechanism
to
try
to
expedite
all
of
that
and
resolve
the
issue
for
the
benefit
of
the
tenant
and
the
landlord
have
the
issue
resolved
so
that
all
the
parties
can
move
on
now.
The
remaining
sections
of
the
bill,
sections
14
to
23,
are
really
just
revisions
for
consistency
purposes
to
implement
the
definitions
that
have
been
included
in
the
other
portions
of
the
bill.
E
E
Frankly,
that
provision
is
never
used
and
has
proved
to
be
incredibly
confusing,
so
we
recommend
that
it
just
be
removed.
The
other
provision
section
24
that
I
will
mention
this-
is
also
cleanup
from
the
last
session.
E
E
Section
24
clarifies
that
the
person
serving
the
notices
cannot
be
the
property
manager
who
manages
the
property
of
which
they're
serving
notices,
and
that's
essentially,
what
the
bill
does.
B
A
F
Thank
you
very
much,
chair
scheible.
Thank
you,
senator
roddy,
for
bringing
the
bill
for
mr
burktold
or
ms
bortolin
you're
in
the
trenches
trying
to
help
people
who
are
trying
to
stay
in
their
homes,
and
I
just
wonder
I've
looked
at
some
of
the
news
articles
and
I
you
know
it's
heart-wrenching
reading
some
of
them.
I
just
wonder
if
you
have
any
clients
you've
represented.
If
there's
any
stories
you
could
share
with
the
committee
about
the
the
kind
of
situations
that
your
clients
got
into
because
of
what's
happened
recently,.
G
E
Burch
told
for
the
record,
so
I'm
sure
bailey
can
chime
in
on
this
as
well.
But,
yes,
thank
you
for
the
question
senator
after
the
pandemic.
Kid
our
calls
to
our
eviction
hotline
tripled
overnight,
with
person
after
person,
desperate.
What
am
I
going
to
do?
I
can't
work
through
the
unemployment
system.
I
can't
get
any
money,
so
we
are
still
talking
to
tenants
who
apply
for
unemployment
in
march
last
march
and
have
not
seen
a
dime.
E
They
are
struggling.
They
are
desperate.
We
actually
had
a
one
of
our
advocates.
We
set
up
a
an
eviction
prevention
hotline,
one
of
the
advocates
who
answers
that
phone
to
help
tenants
to
try
to
kind
of
try
to
walk
them
through
the
eviction
process
actually
was
talking
to
a
tenant
the
other
day
who
was
in
complete
distress
because
their
neighbor
had
just
shot
themselves
because
the
constable
was
coming
out
to
the
door.
E
The
the
caller
was
similarly
facing
eviction,
and
so
was
panicked.
Our
advocate
walked
them
through
the
eviction
process,
told
them
what
steps
they
need
to
take
to
try
to
avoid
the
eviction,
but
then
also
gave
them
the
number
to
the
suicide
prevention
hotline.
I
mean
that's
really
where
we
are
right
now,
so
there's
not
a
lot
of
tenant
can
do.
There
is
money
out
there.
E
E
So
so,
where
we're
at
we're
facing
a
march
31st
cliff
where
all
of
the
tenant
protections
end
and
evictions
are
gonna
going
to
start
going
forward,
but
yet
we
have
116
million
dollars
of
rental
assistance
there
for
the
specific
purpose
of
helping
those
tenants.
So
we
are
seeing
story
after
story
and
all
we
can
really
do
is
say
apply
for
rental
assistance
and
if
you
get
an
eviction
notice,
this
has.
This
is
how
you
respond,
so
it
has
been
an
incredibly
disheartening
and
frustrating
and
frankly,
sad
experience.
H
And
this
is
philly
borderland,
representing
the
nevada
coalition
of
legal
service
providers.
If
I
could
add
to
that,
I
think
absolutely
things
have
been
harder
lately,
but
a
lot
of
the
issues
that
this
bill
seeks
to
solve
are
not
necessarily
covet
specific.
We
know
that
koben
has
exasperated
the
situation
for
a
lot
of
people,
but
something
that
I
think
is
fairly
common
for
us
to
see,
but
also
for
the
courts
to
see
in
the
justice
court
system
is
tenants
who
sign
what
they
believe
will
be
a
more
affordable
lease.
H
The
first
page
of
the
lease
will
say
this
costs
600
a
month
and
they'll
believe
that
they're
signing
up
for
a
600
lease
and
the
lease
will
be
really
really
long,
which
is
why
we
have
a
lot
of
one
document
rules
in
other
areas
to
try
to
prevent
things
from
being
hidden
in
those
contracts
right
and
so
after
the
next
month
becomes
due.
H
For
the
common
space,
and
when
these
fees
that
aren't
labeled
as
rent
really
add
up,
we've
seen
situations
so
extreme
on
a
repeating
basis
that
where
someone
thought
they
were
paying
600
a
month,
they
actually
owe
1100
a
month
and
it
becomes
unsustainable,
which
is
why
we
end
up
in
court
before
that
lease
can
be
finished
through
to
try
to
figure
out
up
from
down,
and
so
we
do
believe
that
it
could
bring
a
lot
of
clarity
across
the
board
to
having
that
fixed
amount
on
the
first
page
of
the
lease,
so
that
people
really
understand
what
it
is
that
they're
entering
into,
and
you
can't
hide
things
on
page
17..
H
Send
demand
letters
essentially
saying
under
federal
law.
You
can't
be
discriminating
against
people
who
receive
social
security.
You've
had
this
understanding
with
them,
but
for
a
lot
of
people
that
haven't
reached
out
to
our
offices.
We
do
hear
that
there
are
a
lot
of
seniors
in
nevada
who
have
since
last
summer,
built
in
that
five
percent
late
fee
every
single
month,
because
they're
never
going
to
have
an
opportunity
to
catch
up,
and
there
are
landlords
who
have
just
been
able
to
count
on
that
additional
five
percent,
because
their
tenants
rely
on
social
security.
H
It's
essentially
become
a
rent
increase,
so
the
the
things
in
this
bill
are
very
limited
to
what
we
have
been
seeing
as
problems
in
mass.
F
A
Thank
you,
senator
orrin
shaw,
we'll
go
next
to
senator
pickard.
D
And
thank
you
church.
I
will
I
I.
I
have
more
questions
on
this
bill
than
we
probably
have
time
today.
D
So
I
want
to
just
ask
a
couple
of
kind
of
broad
general
questions
and
then
get
down
to
just
a
couple
of
details
that
I
need
some
understanding.
I
mean
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
the
idea
of
transparency
and
leasing.
You
know
many
of
you
know
that
the
first
many
years
of
my
pr
law
practice
was
in
landlord
tenant,
most
of
which
was
representing
tenants,
although
I
did
also
represent
some
landlords,
and
I
have
some
development
experience
and
and
I've
kind
of
seen
this
from
all
sides.
D
Now,
but
first
I'm
I'm
I'm
wondering
I
I'm
assuming
that
we're
trying
to
help
the
people
that
have
been
identified,
the
those
that
are
kind
of
on
the
bubble
financially,
those
that
are
in
need
of
affordable
housing
and
and
those
that
are
struggling
pandemic
or
not.
I
I
agree
with
miss
portland.
I
don't
think
this
really
has
anything
to
do
with,
or
it's
not
designed
to
deal
with
the
pandemic.
D
We
have
a
bill
to
address
dieter
and
and
all
that,
but
with
with
that
is
the
understanding
who
are
the
housing
economists,
those
that
are
that
understand
the
business
of
rentals,
whether
that
be
apartments
or
homes
who
consulted
on
this.
B
Bill
I'll
take
that
one.
No
one.
D
Okay,
let
me
then
ask:
are
we
trying
to
make
it
easier
for
people
who
rent
to
be
able
to
afford
their
rent,
or
is
this
purely
a
transparency
question.
B
I'll
go
ahead
and
start
with
that,
one
as
well
senator
julia
ready
for
the
record.
So
I
think
that
there's
an
argument
that
folks
are
trying
to
make
that
these
measures
will
raise
the
cost
of
rent
and
what
we're
seeing
is
that
that
cost
of
rent
has
already
gone
up,
they're,
just
calling
it
something
else
so
back
to
miss
borderlands
example
of
the
tenant
who
signs
a
lease,
that's
600,
but
then
because
of
some
fees
on
page
17
is
now
paying
900
or
a
thousand
dollars
they're
paying
900
or
a
thousand
dollars.
B
You
can
say
it's
fees,
you
can
say
it's
rent,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
that
landlord
has
built
a
business
model
that
includes
those
fees,
and
so
I
don't
believe
the
passage
of
this
bill
means
that
all
of
a
sudden
that
particular
unit
is
going
to
be
a
900
or
a
thousand
dollar
unit.
It
already
was
a
900
or
a
thousand
dollar
unit.
B
So
really,
this
is
about
the
transparency,
and
you
know
we
heard
last
time
and
I
do
spend
I'm
not
an
economist,
but
I
do
spend
an
awful
lot
of
time.
Reading
about
housing.
Having
done
a
significant
amount
of
work
in
this
legislative
legislature
on
affordable
housing
and
everything
that
I
read
is
the
number
one
driver
of
the
cost
of
housing
is
market
conditions.
B
So
we
have
seen-
and
I
live
in
northern
nevada,
where
market
conditions
are
through
control
on
a
supply
demand
curve
and
the
rent
is
going
significantly
up,
based
not
on
the
landlord's
cost
of
doing
business,
but
based
on
what
the
market
allows
that
landlord
to
charge.
B
And
if
there
is
a
correction,
those
rental
rates
will
go
down
based
on
what
the
market
allows
that
landlord
to
charge.
So
I'm
not
convinced
that
from
what
we
saw
from
the
arguments
on
sb
151
last
time,
nor
this
bill
that
this
bill
will
do
anything
to
inflate
the
cost
of
housing.
Though
I've
already
seen
the
ads
on
my
facebook
page
that
says
that
it
will.
D
Many
of
the
results
last
after
last
session
were
foreseeable,
but
I
I
want
to
just
because
I
don't
want
to
take
a
lot
of
time.
I
want
to
talk
about
just
a
couple
of
the
sections
so
that
I
understand
them.
I'm
looking
at
this
is
sub
5
of
sectional
section
12..
D
This
is
the
requirement
for
small
claims
court.
It
looks
like
we've
got
a
six-month
requirement
after
six
months.
It
must
go
to
small
claims
if
the
the
amount
is
less
than
I
believe
it's
fifteen
thousand
dollars
or
that
maybe
no
that's
the
the
district
court.
I
forget
what
the
threshold
is,
but
if
it's
less
than
the
four
five
six
thousand
dollars
whatever
the
threshold
is
for
small
claims,
it
must
go
to
small
claims.
D
That
means
that
the
there
are
no
attorneys
fees
in
small
claims
court
that
are
recoverable,
so
the
landlord
has
to
has
to
cover
the
cost
or
do
it
themselves.
Is
that
the
intent
of
of
that
bill,
or
that
section
of
the
bill.
E
E
I
apologize
jim
to
some
extent,
that
was
as
simple
as
possible
of
the
tenant.
Universally
is
not
represented,
and
sometimes
they
are
the
party
bringing
the
case
to
try
to
recover
that
money.
But
part
of
the
thought
is
keep
the
case
as
simple
and
inexpensive
as.
D
D
E
Jim
burkshope,
with
the
record-
yes,
I
believe,
is
written
that
is
correct.
Okay,
so.
D
All
we're
well,
and
so
anyway,
the
landlord
then
has
to
cover
the
cost
of
the
attorney
to
collect
where
otherwise
he
would
have
been
able
to
get
it
had
this
been
filed
in
justice
court,
so
that's
going
to
be
an
added
cost.
Looking
then,
at
section
13
sub
6
we've
got
the
mandatory
waiver
of
claims
after
three
weeks
and
we've
reduced
the
time
to
return
the
security
deposit
to
that
same
three
weeks.
Won't
this
induce
landlords
to
file
the
claim
before
the
expiration
of
their
ability
to
obtain
a
judgment.
D
E
So
jim
burch
won't
work
the
record
so
currently
under
nevada
law.
The
way
that
the
scheme
works
is
the
landlord
has
30
days
to
deal
with
that
deposit.
So,
within
that
30-day
period
the
landlord
is
required
to
give
the
accounting
to
the
tenant
and
to
return
the
remainder
of
the
deposit
and
under
current
law.
If
the
landlord
does
not
do
that,
they,
the
landlord,
is
potentially
liable
for
double
that
deposit
damages
double
that
deposit.
E
So
that
is
somewhat
the
way
the
current
system
already
works.
I
mean,
ideally,
what
will
happen
is
within
that
30
day
period,
all
the
parties
will
get
together
and
try
to
resolve
the
dispute
issue
and
the
landlord
will
provide
the
tenant
with
an
accounting
and
it
can
all
be
worked
out,
but
will
some
result
in
in
a
court
case?
Yep
probably.
D
And
I'm
sorry,
I
could
have
probably
been
a
little
more
precise.
I
wasn't
referring
to
the
times
when
a
landlord
hasn't
returned
the
deposit,
and
those
were
most
of
my
cases
with
when
I
represented
a
tenant
where
they
didn't
get
their
their
deposits
back.
But
in
instances
where
the
the
I
mean
this
bill
also
requires
a
mandatory
face-to-face
between
the
landlord
and
the
tenant,
and
I
can
tell
you
most
of
the
time
tenants
won't
do
that.
D
They
don't
want
that
confrontation,
so
they
just
move
out,
and
but
this
would
preclude
a
landlord
who
cannot
enter
the
premises
without
the
the
tenant's
consent.
At
that
point,
it
would
prevent
them
from
making
a
claim,
except
within
three
weeks,
so
we
this
bill
limits
the
they
waive
their
claims,
which
has
never
been
the
case,
is
not
the
case
under
existing
law.
D
E
Jim
burch
hope
for
the
record.
Thank
you
senator
so
so
a
couple
of
things
there
is
no
mandatory
based
space
between
the
landlord
and
the
tenant.
The
tenant
has
the
option
prior
to
determination
of
requesting
an
inspection,
and
if
the
tenant
requests
that
then
the
landlord
can
expect
and
ideally
resolve
the
issue
up
front
on
the
back
end,
the
landlord
doesn't
have
to
bring
a
case
within
three
weeks.
What
that
is
saying
is
within
three
weeks.
The
landlord
has
to
provide
an
accounting
of
how
that
deposit
is
going
to
be
applied.
D
Okay,
that
that's
a
clarification
I
needed,
because
that
was
scary
to
me.
I
guess
I
don't
read
it
that
way,
but
I'll
go
back
and
read
it
again.
I
I
just
I
didn't
get
the
amendment
until
just
minutes
before
the
hearing,
so
I
apologize
for
that.
D
I
guess
my
last
question
I'll
ask
I've
got
a
dozen
more,
but
it
has
to
do
with
the
very
last
section
on
24,
where
we're
talking
about
service,
and
this
has
to
do
with
eviction,
which
is
probably
90
percent
of
my
practice,
where
we're
we're
making
it
so
that
a
landlord
must
hire
a
third
party
to
post
the
notice.
D
So
can
this
be
a
someone
who
is
simply
a
third-party
contractor
for
the
landlord,
I'm
thinking
in
the
large
apartment
complexes,
where
they've
got
three
four
five
evictions
every
month
that
they've
got
to
deal
with?
Are
you
saying,
or
is
this
bill
requiring
that
they
would
go
out
and
hire
a
separate
process
server
in
every
case,
or
can
they
hire
an
independent
contractor
who
would
come
in
and
on
their
behalf
post
the
notices?
I
I'm
thinking
again
about
the
additional
cost
to
the
landlord?
How
how
does
that
work.
E
So
jim
burch
told
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question
senator
in
some
instances
that
is
already
happening,
and
that
would
still
continue
to
be
allowed
under
this
bill.
There
are
third-party
eviction
services
that
are
often
run
by
an
attorney.
That's
the
agent
of
the
attorney
language
and
apartments
will
contract
with
those
eviction,
services
and
those
eviction
services
will
serve
those
eviction
notices
on
behalf
of
the
lamb.
D
H
I
just
really
borderline
for
the
record.
I
wanted
to
clarify
on
that
last
piece,
senator
that
those
changes
were
from
last
session,
and
so
I
do
believe
that
the
vast
majority
of
landlords
are
complying
with
them,
where
we've
seen
some
confusion
from
in
the
courts
and
there's
been
some
confusion
amongst
interpretation,
and
so
I
I
do
think
this
is
a
clarification.
The
judiciary
will
appreciate
a
clarification
coming
on
is
there
was
negotiated
language
that
the
agent
of
the
attorney
could
be
in
that
list.
H
D
Sure
and
we've
seen
lots
of
attorneys
who
are
kind
of
crafty.
You
know
looking
for
ways
around
things
to
make
it
easier
for
their
clients.
I
I
get
that
I
tend
to
agree
that
the
vast
majority
of
landlords
are
good
actors
in
this
space,
but
certainly
will,
and
I
don't
think
that
this
bill
or
any
bill
will
get
rid
of
those
that
intend
to
try
to
take
shortcuts.
D
B
Senator,
if
I
may
please,
I
want
senator
rowdy
for
the
record.
I
want
to
agree
that
this
bill
and
nobel
will
get
rid
of
bad
actors.
However,
when
a
tenant
seeks
to
resolve
something
in
court
or
in
that
situation,
it
will
make
a
difference
to
that
tenant.
A
I
Settlemeyer,
thank
you.
I
think
you
could
hear
me.
I
appreciate
that
I'm
concerned
with
the
bill,
to
say
the
least.
I'm
I
run
into
more
and
more
people.
I
know
that
are
just
that
have
rentals
that
are
getting
out
of
it,
and
I
have
friends,
of
course,
that
are
in
rentals
and
they're
indicating
that
their
landlords
are
telling
them.
You
know
it's
time
for
them
to
get
out.
I
You
know
they
kind
of
feel
that
they've
already
had
them
a
little
bit
more
than
three
year
grace
periods,
I
mean
some
bad
actors:
they've
almost
had
a
year
grace
period
with
a
pandemic,
but
speaking
to
the
actual
parts
of
the
bill,
it
talks
about
the
pre-inspection
period.
What
do
you
do
if
you
have
bad
renters?
I
was
in
college
once
and
so
sometimes
there
may
have
been
a
hole
in
the
wall
and
maybe
before
you
left
you,
you
know,
put
a
picture
over
it
or
something
that
nature.
When
you're
doing
an
inspection.
I
How
do
you?
How
do
you
deal
with
those
type
of
situations
or
does
the
person
who's
doing
the
pre-inspection
basically
have
the
right
to
move
all
the
furniture.
Remove.
All
the
paintings
move
everything
around
during
that
pre-inspection
process
in
order
to
try
to
figure
out
things
that
may
be
hidden
at
that.
E
E
So
this
jim
virtual
for
the
record,
so
there
is
no
waiver
in
conjunction
with
that
pre-inspection
period.
In
other
words,
if
the
lab,
if
the
tenant
requests
the
inspection
landlord,
does
the
inspection
provides
the
tenant
with
the
list?
The
idea
is
that
the
tenant
will
repair
and
they'll
be
able
to
come
to
some
agreement
regarding
the
return
of
the
deposit,
but
if,
after
the
tenant
is
gone,
the
landlord
comes
in
and
realized
that
there
is
additional
damages.
E
That
could
potentially
be
the
the
the
rebuttable
presumption
exists
in
in
in
a
court
case,
but
in
any
court
case
that
the
landlord
would
have
to
prove
that
the
whole
was
there.
So
I
don't
know
that
it
would
change
the
context
of
that
court
case
or
the
outcome
of
that
court
case
at
all.
I
I
think
it's
just
a
burden
of
proof
and
I
think
it
could
be
considered
a
little
bit
problematic.
The
other
section,
the
bill
I
was
looking
at
it
talks
about
you're
not
allowed
to
incur
certain
hard
costs.
You
know
like
running
a
rental
application.
I
You
know,
there's
credit
checks,
background
checks,
you
know
you
get
into
the
realm
of
you
know
some
places
I
remember
written
in
college.
You'd
have
a
discussion,
it's
like
if
you
want
outside
parking
fine,
but
if
you
want
to
park
in
the
garage
there's
a
garage
fee.
Does
that
preclude
all
those
different
type
of
contacts
from
happening
for
this
bill.
B
If
I
could
jump
in
on
this,
one
first
senator
julia
ready
for
the
record,
so
it
doesn't
preclude
that
it
just
suggests
that
should
be
part
of
your
rent.
I
But
that
would
raise
the
cost
of
the
rent
because,
again
certain
places
I've
been
at.
You
were
given
options,
you
know,
so
you
here's
the
base
rent,
but
by
the
way,
if
you,
through
the
course
of
time
frame,
you
know
you
really
wanted
to
have
a
covered
park
and
for
your
rig
because
it
was
hot
and
so
now
all
sudden
that
comes
up-
and
this
kind
of
seems
to
preclude
the
concept
of
being
able
to
charge
that
person
the
additional
corresponding
free
for
the
additional
corresponding
benefit.
For
my
rom.
B
I
B
B
It
would
just
be
very
transparent
that
the
total
cost
of
that
tenant
is
a
thousand
dollars.
It's
a
thousand
and
fifty
dollars,
whether
you
call
it
a
fee
or
whether
you
call
it
part
of
the
rent,
but
what's
happening
is
these
fees
are
getting
hidden
because
they're
buried
and
we
want
people
to
know.
This
is
what
your
monthly
cost
is
going
to
be.
I
Okay,
I
I
kind
of
see
what
you're
trying
to
hit
at.
I
think
that
when
you're
talking
about
bad
actors,
I
could
completely
understand
you
know
what
you're
trying
to
do.
Maybe
we
need
to
put
something
in
the
build
also
to
go
after
bad
renters
at
the
same
time,
so
that
way
we're
trying
to
actually
address
both
bad
actors,
which
there
are
bad
landlords
out
there.
I
B
I
apologize,
I
missed
the
question
on
the
application
fee,
so
the
other
thing
that
we're
seeing
and
again
I
live
in
northern
nevada.
I
think
senator
settlemeyer,
you
are
quite
familiar
with
what's
happening
with
the
rental
market
in
northern
nevada,
so
you
have
one
unit.
You
have
50
people
who
are
interested
in
that
unit.
A
landlord
at
this
point
can
charge
all
50
of
those
folks.
An
application
fee
and
49
of
those
folks
are
never
going
to
get
that
apartment.
I
Okay,
I
I
can
see
where
you're
trying
to
go
with
that.
I
just
get
a
little,
because
obviously,
if
you're
a
landlord,
you
want
to
make
sure
you
have
the
best
possible
person
in
there
and
you'd
want
to
have.
You
know
the
application
process
which
you
know.
Theoretically,
you
probably
use
that
rental
application
process
to
cover.
You
know
background
checks,
you
know
credit
checks
and
things
that
make
sure
to
make
sure
that
you
have
the
best
possible
person,
especially
in
situations
which
I'm
more
familiar
with
in
my
counties
where
you're,
usually
renting
a
house.
I
That's
next
to
your
house,
so
you
want
to
try
to
have
some
renter,
that's
going
to
be
there,
for
you
know
a
good
tenant.
You
know
it's
going
to
be
there
for
a
long
time,
someone
that
you
become
friends
with
over
time,
just
because
of
proximity.
You
know
to
you
and
you
want
to
try
to
find
the
best
possible
person
in
that
respect,
you're
trying
to
use
this
information
so
all
right!
Well
I'll,
have
to
look
at
that.
B
B
That's
basically,
what
we're
doing
to
tenants
to
try
to
get
a
place
to
live
and
that
this
is
one
of
the
parts
of
the
bill
that
I
feel
most
passionate
about
because,
again
in
northern
nevada.
Right
now,
a
tenant
may
need
to
try
many
many
times
to
get
a
unit,
because
it
is
such
a
competitive
market
and
to
have
them
paying
a
50
fee.
Just
for
the
privilege
of
applying
it's
just
not
acceptable.
I
I
H
Bailey
bordelin
for
the
record.
I
know
you
asked
for
mr
virgil
but
I'll.
Let
him
follow
up.
I
think
something
that
was
helpful
for
me
when
we
talked
through
this
was
I
I
too
wanted
to
know.
H
How
will
the
landmark
prove
right
that
there
was
damage
my
husband's
in
the
military,
so
we
rent
properties
a
lot
when
he's
stationed
other
places
and
recently,
when
we
finished
a
lease
in
colorado,
they
sent
me
the
long
list
of
reasons
they
weren't
giving
my
security
deposit
back
and
I
argued
with
them
and
walked
through
it,
and
one
of
them
was
well.
H
You
didn't
mow
the
backyard
and
I
said
the
backyard
was
in
terrible
shape
when
we
moved
in,
and
I
really
believed
that-
and
they
immediately
responded
with
a
picture
of
the
backyard
they
stamped
to
the
day
before
we
moved
in
showing
that
they
moved
mowed
the
backyard.
So
I
assume
from
my
conversations
with
some
property
managers
that
it
is
a
common
practice
to
document
the
property
just
by
quick
pictures
before
a
tenant
moves
in
and
that
would
be
used
to
show
what
the
state
of
the
property
was
prior
to
the
tenant.
E
I
H
Bailey
bordelin
for
the
record.
I
there
is,
in
our
opinion,
a
strong
power
imbalance
here,
and
so
we
believe
that
it's
appropriate,
because
it's
easy
to
do
it's
easy
to
take
pictures
of
a
property,
and
I
believe,
already
in
the
best
practices
of
going
through
that
process,
so
that
it's
appropriate
that
the
burden
lie
with
the
party
that
has
a
better
position
to
do
so.
I
All
right
I'll
take
my
other
questions
off
the
line
chair.
Thank
you,
kylie
for
letting
me
give
me
the
freedom
to
ask
those
questions.
I
I
do
very
much
concerned
that
this
will
just
exacerbate
the
issue
where
I'm
saying
where,
sadly,
we're
losing
a
lot
of
rental
opportunities,
because
people
are
just
deciding
to
sell
for
the
cash
value.
Thank
you.
A
All
right,
if
the
record
could
please
reflect
that
majority
leader
cannizzaro
has
joined
us.
A
She
joined
us
quite
a
while
ago,
and
I
have
just
forgotten
to
mention
it,
and
we
still
have
some
questions
on
this
bill.
It
looks
like
we
will
go
next
to
senator
hansen.
F
Thanks
chair,
actually,
there
is
an
irony
that,
because
the
political
climate,
especially
in
california,
that
we're
seeing
this
massive
influx
in
nevada,
that's
forcing
these
rents
up
and
housing
prices
to
the
roof,
well
kind
of
a
weird
irony
there,
like
my
colleague,
senator
pickard.
I
too
have
practiced
a
good
portion
of
my
life
in
the
the
field
of
landlord-tenant
relationships,
but
only
being
a
plumber
and
actually
I'm
quite
sympathetic
to
the
concept
of
the
power
relationship.
F
Because
you
know
the
old
concept
of
nine
possessions
is
nine
tenths
of
the
law
when
it
comes
to
holding
the
deposit,
the
actual
cash,
if
you
will,
it
gives
them
a
significant
leg
up
and
I,
as
a
plumber,
had
to
collect
from
a
lot
of
these
landlords
and
while
I
met
many
lousy
tenants,
I
also
saw
some
really
serious
what
I
would
call
slumlords,
who
were
rotten
human
beings
and
did
everything
possible
not
only
to
cheat
their
their
tenants,
but
also
the
plumbers
that
came
to
fix
the
problems,
and
I
had
to
go
into
car
to
collect
the
money.
F
So
I
understand
the
power
relationship
and
perhaps
a
different
way
than
some
of
you.
The
transparency
angle
of
this
is
great,
I
think,
that's
again
a
huge
thing
that
needs
to
be
addressed,
so
I
I
totally
support
that.
I
I
share
the
concerns
of
senator
pickard
and
and
senator
settlement
with
a
lot
of
this,
though
you
know,
in
some
cases
the
the
cures
are
often
worse
than
the
problem.
The
one
question
I
had,
though,
that
isn't
directly
related
to
the
bill,
but
mr
birchhold,
you
brought
it
up.
B
Thank
you
for
the
question
senator
hansen.
This
is
senator
raddy
for
the
record
and
I'll
take
the
first
crack
at
that
and
then
ask
attorney
virtual
and
attorney
bortlen
to
chime
in
so
we're
talking
about
the
federal
settlement
dollars,
not
settlement
dollars.
B
I'm
sorry
stimulus
dollars
that
have
flowed
into
nevada
to
specifically
to
help
with
rental
assistance
those
rental
assistance
programs
were
set
up
through
the
cares
act
and
then,
through
some
of
the
subsequent
stimulus
they
were
sub
managed,
if
you
will,
by
different
local
entities
in
many
of
the
counties,
those
dollars
are
flowing
out
and
tenants
are
applying
for
that
aid
and
that
aid
when
they
are
given
that
aid
that
check
is
written
directly
to
the
landlord.
B
So
it
doesn't
go
to
the
tenant
first
for
the
tenant
to
decide
what
to
do
with
it's.
It
goes
to
the
landlord
in
clark
county.
There
has
been
a
slower
process
than
we
had
hoped
for
to
get
some
of
that
money
out.
There's
a
significant
amount
of
work
happening
right
now
in
clark
county.
B
They
sub
granted
it
out
to
14,
separate
agencies,
and
what
they've
found
is
that
having
a
single
portal
would
probably
be
more
efficient
for
both
tenants
and
landlords,
and
so
that
single
portal
has
been
developed
and
I
think
there's
some
good
work.
Moving
forward.
That
you'll
see
some
of
that
money
flowing
out
more
quickly.
So.
B
I
think,
like
many
of
the
stimulus
dollars
that
we've
seen
in
each
version
of
stimulus,
they
come
with
a
different
set
of
rules,
and
so
we've
had
to
adjust
to
those
different
sets
of
rules,
and
so
I
think
the
adjustments
have
been
made
and
I
think
in
pretty
short
order,
you'll
see
some
good
money
flowing
out.
I
I
understand
the
number
to
be
significantly
bigger
more
in
the
300
million
dollar
range
of
money.
B
We
can
work
through
this
next
precarious
couple
months,
while
we
hopefully
are
winding
down
the
pandemic,
that
we
get
that
money
to
tenants
who
need
the
support
which
then
actually
goes
to
landlords
right.
300
million
dollars
to
go
to
landlords
would
be
a
huge
economic
impact
for
our
state
and
for
those
landlords,
and
so
I
think
we
all
are
going
to
need
to
work
together
to
make
sure
that
that
happens
not
in
this
bill.
B
But
since
mr
virtual
brought
it
up,
certainly
something
we
all
need
to
work
together
on,
and
I
will
say
that
also
landlords
have
been
eligible
to
apply
for
the
pets
program,
the
small
business
program
and
so
for
some
landlords
who
are
creation
of
the
tenant
who
participate
in
that
rental
assistance
program.
They
have
been
eligible
to
apply
for
the
small
business.
That's
small
business
loans
as
well.
F
Very
good,
I
just
was
concerned
that
we
may
have
another
dealer
situation.
You
know
so
apparently
you're
already
more
much
more
on
it
than
I
am
as
honestly.
That's
my
first.
I
didn't
know
that
existed.
So
thank
you
for
that.
I
guess
the
the
point
that
you
brought
up
senator
attic
and
that
is
look.
We're
gonna
have
lousy
actors,
tenants
and
landlords,
and
I
don't
think
any
bills
that
we
can
pass
is
going
to
change
the
reality
of
human
nature.
F
F
Frankly,
you
know
trying
to
save
700
bucks
that
your
your
landlord
is
essentially
holding
unfairly
and
then,
if
you've
never
gone
through
the
small
climb
process,
it's
actually
pretty
efficient,
but
it
is
drug
out
and
it's
it's
cumbersome
and
it's
can
be
kind
of
humiliating,
and
so
just
let's
see
if
we
can
come
up
with
a
way
that
we
can
get
this
resolved
a
little
more
quickly
with
both
parties,
hoping
hopefully
having
some
opportunity
to
resolve
it
short
of
court.
Well,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
B
Thank
you,
senator
hansen,
for
the
comments
and-
and
I
will
just
add
one
thing
and
again,
not
necessarily
in
this
bill,
but
I
do
think
again,
senator
reddy
for
the
record.
I
do
think
that
there's
an
important
starting
point
that
we
need
to
have
context
for
on
this
bill.
I
am
in
100
agreement
that
there
are
bad
tenants,
no
question
about
it.
I
am
a
mom-and-pop
landlord
if
you
will,
although
I
don't
know
how
mr
kavanaugh,
who
I'm
married
to,
would
feel
about
being
called
pop,
but
I
am
one
of
those.
B
I
am
familiar
with
the
concept
that
there
are
bad
tenants
and
the
thing
that
gives
me
some
comfort
is
that
nevada
is
a
very
unusual
state
in
that
we
are
the
only
state
in
the
nation
that
has
summary
evictions
and
what
that
means
is
in
the
state
of
nevada,
as
opposed
to
any
other
state.
B
B
B
We
don't
want
everybody
going
into
the
courts,
but
when
they
need
a
remedy,
as
in
a
landlord,
is
withholding
what
is
it
first,
first
and
last
month
and
a
cleaning
deposit
in
northern
nevada
right
now
is
a
significant
chunk
of
cash
and
that's
cash,
that
in
the
state
of
nevada,
where
50
percent
of
people
who
live
here
are
renting
and
a
very
high
percentage
of
those
are
rent
burdened,
meaning
that
more
than
30
percent
or
more
than
in
many
cases,
50
percent
of
their
income
goes
to
rent.
B
They
don't
have
an
extra
three
four
thousand
dollars
sitting
around
that
they
can
move
into
their
next
apartment.
So
when
that
landlord
chooses
to
withhold
that
cleaning
deposit
and
there's
no
remedy,
we're
really
talking
about
individuals
who
are
homeless,
so
that's
why
this
is
something
that
I
feel
is
important
to
bring
forth.
A
Thank
you
senator
ratty,
and
I
see
that
senator
sillenberger
has
another
question.
If
you
can
be
brief,
go
ahead.
I
It
was
just
a
follow-up
from
something
she
just
said:
I've
been
trying
to
get
this
information
for
a
long
time.
You
know
the
pets
program
was
originally
supposed
to
be
open
for
two
weeks,
but
due
to
the
success
and
need
of
the
industries
that
are
out
there,
it
was
only
open
for
48
hours.
So
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
might
be
able
to
obtain
any
information.
I
What
percent,
because
you
brought
it
up?
What
percent
of
landlords
who
applied
for
pets
received
it
because
again,
there's
a
lot
of
people
that
applied
for
pets
who
did
not
get
it?
You
know
certain
industries
were
categorized
as
more
important
and
they
were
allowed
to
get
the
pets
grant
money
first
and
other
industries
had
to
wait.
B
All
right,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
senator
meyer
for
the
question
senator
raddy
for
the
record.
I
don't
have
that
information
close
at
hand
and,
as
I'm
sure,
you're
very
familiar,
because
you
were
part
of
the
solution.
We
just
dumped
a
good
chunk
more
money
into
that
program.
I
don't
know
if
there's
anybody
who's
here
that
can
answer
that
question
at
this
point,
but
if
not
we'll
endeavor,
to
get
that
information
back
to
you.
H
Bailey
borderland
for
the
record,
if
I
could
just
add
so,
the
calculations
have
been
difficult
to
do
from
different
pots,
but
to
broaden
the
scope
of
your
question
a
little
bit
to
other
relief
programs.
H
While
I
don't
have
the
pets
numbers
and
we
can
certainly
try
to
get
those
for
you,
the
rental
assistance
pot,
I
believe
throughout
different
iterations,
with
still
hundreds
of
millions
left,
but
I
think
we're
around
496
million.
I
don't
want
to
say.
I
know
that
for
a
fact,
but
we
are
we're
around
that
range,
and
so
there's
been
a
lot
of
money
that
way
and
those
checks
are
cut
directly
to
landlords
when
they're
196.
H
Yes
and
then
and
those
are
still
available
so
just
if
I
could
for
educational
purposes,
because
we've
been
trying
to
get
the
information
out
there,
the
reno
housing
authority
is
doing
all
of
the
greater
washoe
county
area.
The
rural
housing
authority
is
doing
the
rurals
and
clark
county.
Social
services
is
administering
clark
counties,
so
those
pots
are
available
and
again
the
cut
the
checks
are
cut
directly
to
landlords
and
then
also
I
wanted
to
mention
that
the
recent
federal
package
that
was
just
passed
does
include
9.9
billion
in
a
homeowner
assistance
fund.
H
So
I
don't
off
the
top
of
my
head
know
what
the
nevada
cut
of
that
will
be,
but
for
those
that
the
rental
assistance
program
isn't
working
quite
right,
there
is
a
whole
nother
program
coming
from
the
federal
government
that
is
again
directly
for
homeowners
for
the
homeowner
assistance
fund.
So.
I
Since
you
brought
that
up,
if
you
could
do
me
a
favor,
could
you
send
me
those
programs
and
also
any
strings
that
me
may
be
attached
working
with
the
federal
government?
Since
I
was
about
10
years
old,
I
tend
to
realize
that
sometimes
the
federal
government
they
tend
to
have
certain
strings
attached
when
they
decide
to
give
you
funds.
So
actually
let
you
actually
use
your
old
funds.
B
Again,
senator
ready
for
the
record.
I
think
we
will
be
able
to
provide
that
for
you
for
the
programs,
but
just
as
a
reminder
to
everyone
when
the
recent
stimulus
was
passed.
Part
of
the
bill
gave
the
treasury
department
60
days
to
come
up
with
guidance.
So
we
are
all
anxiously
awaiting
to
know
what
the
strings
on
all
of
the
money
will
be,
but
we
don't
have
the
details
on
the
strings
of
anything
just
yet.
A
Sure,
thank
you.
Senator
roddy
looks
like
we
also
have
another
question
from
senator
orrin
shaw:
go
ahead.
F
Thank
you
very
much
chair.
Thank
you
for
the
second
question
and
my
question
I
believe,
would
be
for
either
of
the
attorneys
from
legal
aid.
The
proposed
amendment,
a
language
that
says
landlords
must
not
report
alleged
debt
to
a
credit
reporting
agency
or
collection
agency
until
a
judgment
is
obtained
against
the
tenant.
F
Are
you
finding
now
with
many
of
your
clients
that
you
know
this
is
being
reported
to
collection
agencies
and
credit
bureaus
prior
to
going
to
court
to
try
to
obtain
a
judgment
and
that
often
it
might
have
been
incorrect
and
maybe
a
judgment
was
never
sought
or
that
it's
helping
preclude
that
person
from
being
able
to
qualify
for
renting
somewhere
else?
I
just
wonder
if
either
of
the
attorneys
could
talk
to
that.
E
This
is
jim
burchell
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question
senator
yes,
we
are
seeing
that
frequently
oftentimes
when
a
tenant
leaves
the
property
the
way
they
learn
that
the
landlord
thinks
they
owe
money
is
because
they
go
to
apply
for
another
place
or
they
get
a
collection
agency
calling
them
or
they
pull
a
credit
report
and
see
that
there's
a
tag
on
their
credit
report
so
and-
and
this
has
gone
through
no
verification
process
at
all.
Those
numbers
are
simply
numbers
that
the
landlord
is
saying.
E
This
is
what
I
believe
the
tenant
owes.
So
I'm
going
to
report
that
to
the
collection
agency,
or
I'm
going
to
report
that
to
the
credit
reporting
agency
that
can
be
hugely
problematic
for
tenants
in
a
number
of
ways,
as
it
would
be
for
any
of
us
who
found
out
that
there
was
something
negative
on
our
credit
report
and,
unfortunately,
the
remedy,
for
that
is
very
problematic.
E
The
tenant
can
file
a
dispute
with
the
credit
reporting
agency
and
say
I
disagree
with
this,
but
all
the
credit
reporting
agency
does
is
go
back
to
the
landlord
and
say:
is
this
correct
and
the
landlord
will
say
yes
and
it
remains
on
the
credit
report.
So
there
is
really
no
affirmative
way
for
the
tenant
to
remove
that
from
the
credit
report.
F
I
appreciate
the
answer
so
that
there
might
be
less
litigation
with
if
this
is
in
the
statutes.
This
is
what
you're
saying.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
chair.
J
J
F
Good
afternoon
committee,
my
name
is
shane
pitchenini,
a
n
p.
I
c
c
I
n
I
n.
I,
I
manage
government
relations
for
the
food
bank
of
northern
nevada
and
for
a
long
list
of
reasons
that
are
too
detailed
to
go
in
here.
J
G
Thank
you,
jerry
scheible
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
benjamin
chandler.
I
serve
as
the
policy
director
for
faith
in
action
nevada.
I
am
here
to
speak
in
support
of
senator
rowdy's
senate
bill
218,
as
it
looks
to
fix
the
severe
imbalance
of
power
between
tenants
and
landlords.
One
piece
of
advice
that
I
was
given
in
college,
as
I
was
applying
for
off-campus
housing,
was
to
not
expect
your
security
deposit
back
because
you
will
never
receive
it.
G
I
unfortunately
took
that
as
a
truth.
The
actual
truth
is
more.
Concerning
forty
percent
of
adams
are
renters
and
of
those
two
thirds
are
people
of
color
and
oftentimes.
They
are
low
income
renters
or
on
a
fixed
income.
Many
of
these
renters
often
have
every
penny
accounted
for
and
find
it
difficult
to
come
up
with
a
new
security
deposit.
G
G
Here
at
faith,
interaction,
nevada-
we
have
heard
from
members
of
the
community
that
they
never
were
returned
their
security
deposit,
even
after
taking
care
of
the
property
and
cleaning
it
upon
vacating.
The
reasons
often
given
to
them
were
ranging
from
a
cleaning
charge
to
painting
or
replacing
a
carpet.
Even
though
there
wasn't
any
damage,
it
will
now
be
on
the
landlord
to
prove
that
this
damage
was
beyond
normal,
wear
and
tear
and
that
it
was
actually
caused
by
a
tenant
senate
bill
218
also
looks
to
tackle
purgatory
fees
and
rental
agreements
and
clearly
state
any.
G
We
have
also
heard
from
the
community
that
they
have
additional
fees
that
are
often
hard
to
keep
track
of
by
seeing
it
on
page
one
how
much
they
owe
each
month,
both
in
rent
and
justified
fees.
It
will
make
it
clear
in
how
much
is
total
is
how
much
in
total
is
allowed,
is
owed
and
allow
for
tenants
to
properly
budget
for
their
housing.
G
J
J
G
Good
afternoon
sheriff
scheibel
and
members
of
community
committee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
ben
ennis,
that
is
b-e-n-I-n-e-s-s.
I'm
a
social
work
intern
with
the
progressive
leadership
alliance
of
nevada
here
in
support
of
senate
bill
218..
First,
we
want
to
thank
senator
batty
for
bringing
toward
forward
this
important
piece
of
legislation
to
help
nevada,
renters,
sb
218
works
to
level
the
power
and
balance
between
landlords
and
tenants
by
clearly
defining
terms
limiting
and
preventing
fees
and
offering
tenants,
larger
windows
of
time
to
operate
in
will
allow
renters
to
maintain
safe
and
stable
housing.
G
G
J
C
Nevada
for
the
common
good
supports
bill,
sb2
212.,
I'm
sorry
senate
bills,
218,
and
we
strongly
urge
that
you
pass
it
because
it
will
provide
greater
certainty
and
security
and
their
monthly
housing
obligations
for
thousands
of
nevada
residents.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
J
K
These
victim
survivors
often
search
for
a
long
time
before
they
find
housing
that
they
are
comfortable
in,
let
alone
that
they
can
afford
and
oftentimes
a
previous
security
deposit
is
relied
on
to
be
able
to
obtain
their
new
housing.
It
is
imperative
that
landlords
provide
full
transparency
of
the
lease
that
tenants
are
entering
into
so
that
the
tenant
can
calculate
the
true
cost.
It
is
predatory
for
landlords
to
create
spontaneous
fines
and
to
withhold
security
deposits
for
undisclosed
reasons.
We
urge
you
to
pass
senate
bill
218
to
help
protect
nevada
families
and
victim
survivors.
J
C
Thank
you
all
very
much
for
your
time.
My
name
is
bo
jones,
I'm
the
owner
broker
for
bdj
realty,
and
I
speak
on
behalf
of
a
hundred
different
landlords
here
that
don't
necessarily
live
in
nevada,
but
on
property
here
in
nevada
and
I'm
hearing
one
person
after
the
after,
after
the
other
standing
in
opposing
and
saying
for
this
bill
for
all
of
the
people
that
live
out
there.
C
A
Okay,
there
will
be
an
opportunity
for
you
to
call
in
to
voice
your
opinion
later
during
the
hearing.
But
right
now
we
are
taking
testimony
in
support
of
sb218.
J
C
C
I
am
calling
this
first
of
all.
I
want
to
thank
chair,
scheible
and
senator
raddy
for
this
bill,
and
I
I
want
to
tell
you
that
I
support
sb
218
for
the
two
principles
in
my
faith.
One
is
the
use
of
democratic
process
in
society
at
large
and
and
provide
justice
for
all,
which
is
another
one
of
our
principles,
and
I
have
lived
in
three
four
different
state
jurisdictions
and
none
of
them
have
summary
evictions.
The
landlords
are
making
buku
buffs.
C
I
know
people
who
own
property
and
and
making
the
due
process
fairer
or
equal
for
tenants
is
not
going
to
cost
them
that
much
they
make
plenty
of
money
and
the
market
has
driven
the
rates.
Sorry,
the
rentals
way
high.
So
so
it's
not
going
to
be
an
undue
burden
and
they
somehow
manage
because
I
used
to
rent.
I
am
now
a
landowner.
I
own
up
my
property.
C
I
used
to
rent
up
until
I
was
about
6
55
years
old,
and
I
can
tell
you
that
that
most
most
landlords
are
good
actors
and
most
renters
are
good
actors,
but
the
ones
that
are
bad
actors.
We
need
a
fair,
transparent,
due
process
for
everybody,
both
sides
of
the
fence
and
right
now,
it's
heavily
in
favor
with
the
summary
evictions
for
the
landlords.
C
It
is
not
in
favor
and
everybody
else.
Who's
spoken
in
favor
of
this
bill
has
said
the
reasons
why
we
need
to
make
venting
possible
for
our
growing
population,
because
I
have
seen
that
dramatic
increase
of
homeless
people.
I
do
a
lot
of
volunteer
work
with
them
and
it's
mostly
due
to
rent
they're
all
looking
for
safe.
C
Most
of
them
are
looking
for
safe,
secure,
affordable
places
to
rent
and
not
get
evicted
for
unknown
reasons,
so
this
bill
will
go
in
a
long
way
and
somebody
who
anybody
who
says
that
it's
going
to
cost
the
landlords
a
lot
of
money,
they're
still
making
plenty
of
money
and
they
can
add
it
in
the
cost
of
doing
business.
There's
tax
deductions,
everything
else
for
them,
whereas
renters
do
not
have
significant
tax
deductions,
and
I
urge
you
all
to
push
this
bill
forward
and
pass
it.
Thank
you
very
much.
J
J
L
Good
afternoon
and
thank
you
for
hearing
this
bill
for
the
record,
my
name
is
wesley
ewell,
that's
w-e-s-l-e-y.
Last
name
is
j-u-h-l
and
I'm
the
director
of
communications
and
outreach
for
the
aclu
of
nevada.
We
support
sb
218,
because
we
believe
that
housing,
justice
and
racial
and
economic
justice
are
all
connected.
That's
why
the
aclu
of
nevada
is
a
member
of
the
nevada,
housing
justice
alliance,
nevada
renters,
are
experiencing
more
hardship
than
ever
before,
and
the
legislature
can
and
must
act
to
give
them
some
relief
retaliatory
and
predatory
fines
and
fees.
L
Things
like
light
bulb
fees
and
microwave
fees
have
no
place
in
equitable
housing
policies.
We
like
that
sb218
will
ban
these
fees
and
add
clarity
for
tenants,
so
they
know
exactly
what
their
expenses
will
be
each
month
me
personally,
I
especially
love
the
parts
of
this
proposal
related
to
security,
deposit
I'll,
tell
you.
I've
been
a
renter
in
nevada
for
much
of
my
adult
life
and
still
am,
and
I've
never
once
had
a
deposit
return
to
me
and
my
home
is
like
a
sacred
space
to
me.
L
I'm
not
the
type
at
all
to
trash
the
place
by
any
means.
Clarifying
the
reasonable
wear
and
tear
language
can
help
thousands
of
nevadans.
Like
me,
we're
in
the
midst
of
an
unprecedented
housing
and
economic
crisis,
please
pass
sb
218
and
continue
to
consider
measures
to
protect
tenants
and
bring
some
semblance
of
housing
justice
to
the
state
of
nevada.
Thank
you.
J
C
My
name
is
shannon
thompson:
s-h-a-n-n-n-o-n
t-h-o-m-p-s-o-n,
I'm
a
strong
supporter
of
this
bill
because
there
are
some
good
landlords
out
there.
Actually,
a
lot
of
good
landlords
out
there,
like
anybody
on
this
planet
situations
happen
that
make
people
look
at
other
people
differently,
but
all
it
is.
You
have
to
sit
back
and
put
trust
in
people
in
this
day
and
age
because
of
when
covet
19
happened.
C
J
K
Good
afternoon
senators
and
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak
today
and
for
the
record,
I'm
in
I'm
speaking
in
support
of
sc
218.
My
name
is
robin
franklin
f-r-a-n-k-l-I-n
with
now
nevada,
the
national
chapter,
I'm
speaking
to
you
on
behalf
of
those
women
and
children
who
are
negatively
impacted
by
low
or
little
regulation
to
ski
to
fee
schedules
that
landlords
are
able
to
assess.
K
I
have
a
sister
who
has
five
children
who
was
in
low-income
housing
and
she
recently
left
an
apartment
upon,
leaving
they
charged
her
over
two
thousand
dollars
in
fees,
basically
having
her
to
refurbish
this
apartment
that
she's
lived
in
for
over
five
years.
These
charges
are
paying
for
the
carpet
the
weather
stripping
for
the
refrigerator
and
the
stove,
just
to
name
a
few.
K
They
have
these
fees
placed
on
their
credit,
preventing
them
or
making
it
even
harder
for
them
to
have
housing,
creating
an
even
greater
chance
for
them
to
be
homeless
or
having
housing
and
security,
and
because
of
that
fact,
they
cannot.
They
can't
afford
to
get
it
off
of
their
credit.
I
say
this
today
that
it
needs
to
change.
We
have
women
and
children
who
are
suffering
from
housing
instability
and
because
of
that,
they
have
sometimes
have
to
see
me
in
my
professional
capacity
as
I
work
in
child
welfare,
ultimately
they're
at
risk
of
being
separated.
K
K
J
J
J
This
is
yet
another
bill
that
protects
tenants
who
have
been
under
unique
stresses
throughout
this
pandemic,
and
before
that,
this
bill
gives
certainty
to
renters
on
how
much
they
can
expect
to
pay
each
month
shields
them
from
surprise
fees
and
unreasonable,
grace
periods
on
payments
and
ensures
their
security
deposits
are
returned
in
a
timely
manner.
That
last
piece
is
essential
to
help
renters
secure
their
new
housing
upon
leaving
the
property
to
move
forward
with
their
lives,
while
landlords
certainly
have
an
interest
in
receiving
payments
on
time.
The
same
courtesy
must
be
afforded
to
the
renter.
J
This
bill
helps
balance.
This
relationship
keeps
the
payment
structure
predictable
and
encourages
better
relationships
between
tenants
and
their
landlord.
As
so
many
nevadans
who
rent
have
struggled
to
make
their
payments
over
this
past
year,
we
should
see
it
as
imperative
to
help
renters
have
stable,
affordable
shelter.
Thank
you
senator
rider
for
ratty
for
bringing
this
bill,
and
we
encourage
the
committee
to
pass
it.
Thank
you.
J
C
Good
afternoon,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
tess
opferman,
that's
spelled
o-p-f-e-r-m-a-n
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
women's
lobby.
One
of
the
top
priorities
of
the
women's
lobby
is
housing
security.
We
work
hard
to
support
legislation
that
ensures
women
and
families
are
able
to
maintain
affordable
and
stable
housing,
something
made
even
more
difficult
by
the
current
pandemic
and
the
incredibly
high
rates
of
unemployment,
unemployment
that
has
disproportionately
affected
women
and
women
of
color.
We
want
to
thank
senator
rowdy
for
her
hard
work
on
affordable
housing
and
for
bringing
this
bill
forward.
C
J
H
Good
afternoon
chairwoman,
schreibel
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
I
am
mary,
janet
ramos,
m-a-r-y-j-a-n-t
r-a-m-o-s
and
I'm
representing
the
culinary
workers.
H
Culinary
union
members
and
their
families
incredibly
hard,
while
hospitality
workers
are
slowly
returning
to
work,
tens
of
thousands
of
workers
are
still
unemployed
and
struggling
with
housing
and
securities.
Since
last
march,
the
culinary
union
has
awards
with
our
housing
fund
and
other
organizations
to
keep
workers
in
their
homes.
Unfortunately,
there's
still
too
many
nevadans
who
have
lost
their
home
during
this
pandemic.
H
Sc
218
addresses
retaliatory
and
predatory
behavior
that
has
been
on
the
right
in
nevada's
rental
market
in
the
last
year,
ensuring
that
renters
get
back
their
security
deposits
back
in
a
timely
fashion,
requiring
that
any
fees
owed
are
cleared
to
the
renter
and
instituting
grade
series
for
rent
will
help
keep
tens
of
thousands
of
culinary
union
members
in
their
apartments.
In
the
middle
of
this,
endemic
working
families
and
people
of
color
have
been
disproportionately
impacted
by
housing
and
security.
H
J
C
A
C
To
assist
my
niece
who's,
a
school
teacher
in
her
30s
and
extremely
financially
responsible
is
that
every
rental
that
comes
available
will
still
take
an
application
fee
from
you.
Even
though
they've
had
50
applicants-
and
I
believe
one
of
the
representatives
earlier
brought
that
up.
There's
no
reason
for
that.
You
are
not
going
to
rent
that
to
50
people
and
look
at
the
amount
of
money
that
they're
making
just
by
taking
application
fees
and
misleading
people
to
think
they've
got
a
chance.
C
J
A
At
this
point,
we're
going
to
go
into
a
very,
very
brief
recess
and
we'll
be
we
will
return
at
the
call
of
the
chair.
It
will
truly
just
be
a
few.
A
A
Thank
you,
senator
settlemyre,
thank
you
senator
hansen,
and
so
today
we
have
five
bdrs
that
you
all
received
via
email.
You
may
have
also
received
written
copies
since
this
morning.
A
And
if
there
are
no
questions,
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
introduce
these
bdrs.
As
always,
introduction
of
a
bdr
is
not
the
same
as
approving
of
the
bill
or
asking
that
we
pass
the
bill.
It
is
simply
the
mechanism
to
allow
us
to
have
those
bills
drafted
and
introduced
on
the
senate
floor.
I
do
see
a
question
or
a
hand
from
senator
pickard
go
ahead.
D
And
I'm
wondering
have
have
we
prevented
because
of
200
620?
Have
we
nrs200
620?
Have
we
prevented
the
interception
of
these
calls?
I
thought
these
were
routinely
intercepted
because
in
an
emergency
situation,
law
enforcement-
I
thought-
was
allowed
to
intercept
these
things
and
then
obtain
a
warrant
retroactively.
A
I
appreciate
the
question
that
you're
asking
that
sounds
like
a
policy
question
that
we
could
definitely
dive
into
in
a
hearing
right
now.
These
were
questions
about
introduction
of
the
bill.
A
D
I
I
I
A
Yes,
and
with
that,
the
motion
carries
to
introduce
these
five
bdrs
that
I
just
read
out
on
the
record.
I
appreciate
everybody
taking
the
time
to
do
that
and.
A
We
can
we
can
now
return
to
the
hearing
on
sb,
218,
so
reopening
the
hearing
on
sb218
we
had
heard
testimony
from
those
in
support
of
sv
218.
A
Our
fantastic
staff
at
broadcast
has
informed
me
that
there's
nobody
else
on
the
line
or
there
was
nobody
else
on
the
line
in
the
support
position
at
the
time
that
we
took
our
recess.
So
that
leads
us
now
to
testimony
in
the
opposition
position.
Please
go
ahead.
Everybody
will
have
two
minutes
to
speak
and
I
would
like
to
remind
you
that
that
is
a
maximum,
not
a
minimum.
A
J
J
M
T-I-F-F-A-N-Y-B-A-N-K-S
and
I'm
general
counsel
for
the
nevada
realtors,
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
the
more
than
18
000
members
of
the
nevada
realtors,
I
would
like
to
thank
senator
rowdy
for
speaking
with
us
on
the
bill
and
asking
us
to
get
our
concerns
on
the
record.
Today.
We
are
opposed
to
nearly
every
section
of
the
bill
and
the
proposed
amendment
submitted
by
legal
aid.
This
bill
will
only
harm
nevada's
families
and,
if
passed,
sb
218
could
have
dangerous
consequences
on
their
ability
to
find
sustainable
housing.
M
I
will
only
discuss
a
few
of
the
sections
in
my
testimony
today
we
oppose
section
7
of
the
amendment
allowing
a
tenant
to
request
the
landlord
to
conduct
an
initial
inspection
up
to
two
weeks
before
move
out.
This
request
is
not
really
a
request,
as
it
becomes
mandatory
on
the
landlord
to
comply.
It
would
be
impossible
for
some
landlords
to
comply
with
this
time
frame
if
the
landlord
lives
out
of
town,
if
the
landlord
or
property
manager
schedule
does
not
match
up
with
the
availability
of
the
tenant.
M
Only
after
a
full
and
thorough
evaluation
of
the
property
can
a
final
assessment
be
made
as
to
whether
or
not
tenant
damage
exists
that
will
be
charged.
The
tenant
deposit
landlord
cannot
see
what
stains
are
being
covered
up
with
rugs.
What
holes
are
in
the
walls
that
exist
under
the
pictures
and
what
damage
will
be
done
on
move
out
or
before
during
the
two-week
period
between
the
initial
inspection
move
out,
it
is
far
worse
for
the
tenant
to
expect
to
get
something
back
and
then
fail
to
because
of
their
own
actions.
M
One
of
the
most
concerning
sections
of
the
amendment
is
section
13,
where
the
landlord
must
provide
proof
of
actual
costs
incurred
by
the
landlord
to
repair
the
damage
or
three
written
repair
estimates.
If
the
damage
has
not
yet
been
repaired,
fenders
are
difficult
to
schedule,
especially
if
the
repair
is
a
small
but
necessary
repair.
Vendors
may
be
reluctant
to
spend
the
time
to
provide
an
estimate
for
a
small
repair
job
for
which
they
may
not
be
compensated.
M
This
will
leave
the
landlord
with
no
remedies
for
repair.
If
a
vendor
does
charge
for
an
estimate
for
repair,
this
cost
will
be
paid
by
the
deposit,
leaving
less
deposit
available
for
the
tenant.
For
example,
if
there
is
an
issue
with
a
garbage
disposal
and
three
plumbers
charged
eighty
dollars
each
for
three
estimates,
that
would
be
two
hundred
and
forty
dollars
when
the
cost
for
repair
is
only
two
hundred
a
total
cost
of
four
hundred
and
forty
for
a
repair
that
is
less
than
half
that
cost.
M
A
We
don't
generally
allow
questions
during
the
public
testimony
portion
of
the
hearing.
I
would
ask
that
you
follow
up
with
them
offline.
A
J
J
C
C
This
still
presents
several
problems
for
our
members
already
struggling
one
year
into
an
eviction.
Moratorium.
Sb
218
undoubtedly
places
undue
burdens
on
landlords
in
a
time
that
many
are
struggling
just
to
stay
above
water.
Removing
our
ability
to
charge
a
fee
for
rental
applications
does
not
eliminate
the
cost
to
process
the
application.
C
Not
only
do
our
banks
charge
our
members
a
fee
if
a
check
bounces,
but
without
a
fee,
there
would
be
nothing
to
deter
tenants
from
writing
faulty
checks
and
would
eventually
force
landlords
into
not
accepting
checks
altogether.
We
additionally
have
several
concerns
with
section
13
of
the
bill.
As
practice,
we
already
offer
tenants
the
chance
to
remedy
deficiencies
and
make
necessary
repairs,
but
more
often
than
not,
we
can't
see
the
actual
extent
of
the
damages
to
the
unit
until
the
final
walk
through
when
the
unit
is
completely
empty.
C
In
some
instances,
tenants
can
feel
damage
and,
as
drafted,
landlords
would
be
on
the
hook
for
damage
that
would
never
be
discoverable
during
a
walk
through.
Furthermore,
an
inspection,
two
weeks
prior
to
move
out
limits
our
ability
to
see
the
actual
extent
of
damages
if
something
happened
during
those
two
weeks
and
in
the
same
token,
the
provisions
limiting
cleaning
fees
to
15
of
periodic
rent
offers
us
little
to
no
room
to
make
the
necessary
repairs.
C
We
see
in
vacated
homes,
our
rentals
typically
fall
under
900
per
month,
and
15
percent
of
that
would
only
leave
us
with
135
dollars
to
make
necessary
repairs.
We've
seen
a
mass
exodus
of
landlords
leaving
the
state
as
a
result
of
some
of
the
burdens
and
policies
that
have
made
the
cost
of
doing
business
in
the
state
of
nevada
just
too
much
to
bear,
and
this
will
only
continue
if
we
continue
to
present
similar
kinds
of
hearts,
undue
hardship
onto
landlords.
I
appreciate
you
hearing
our
testimony
and
that
is
it.
J
J
N
Good
afternoon,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
judiciary
committee
for
the
record
dan
morgan,
that's
d-a-n-m-o-r-g-a-n,
and
I
am
the
ceo
of
the
builders
association
of
northern
nevada.
The
builders
association
represents
home
and
multi-family
builders
and
developers
throughout
northern
nevada
and
engages
on
issues
of
concern
to
the
home
building
industry.
The
multifamily
rental
market
is
an
important
part
of
the
home
affordability
equation
throughout
nevada.
The
builders
association
consistently
advocates
for
policies
that
encourage
residential
construction
in
a
manner
that
does
not
increase
the
price
of
housing.
N
Sb
218,
like
several
other
landlord-tenant
bills
being
considered
by
the
legislature.
This
session
makes
it
less
attractive
and
practical
for
builders
and
developers
to
become
to
be
and
become
landlords.
We
are
very
concerned
that
these
type
of
policies
will
depress
the
construction
market
for
multi-family
homes
and
rental
properties,
exacerbating
the
already
high
home
prices
by
limiting
the
supply
of
a
bit
available
units.
We
urge
the
committee
to
reject
sb
218
and
allow
the
multi-family
construction
industry
to
thrive.
J
C
Thank
you,
church
ribault,
the
committee
and
senator
ready,
susie
vasquez
for
the
record.
I
am
the
executive
director
of
the
nevada
state
apartment
association
and
we
represent
67
of
all
multifamily
housing
in
the
state
of
nevada,
since
the
pandemic
has
been
mentioned,
landlords
continue
to
be
asked
to
bear
the
burden
of
this
crisis.
Sb
218
and
the
amendment
presented
today
will
only
make
the
bleeding
worse
for
landlords
and
in
turn,
tenants.
C
First,
application
fees
allow
us
to
recover
costs.
We
incur
to
obtain
screening
information.
Fraud
is
very
prevalent
and
the
thorough
screening
takes
time
and
also
protects
not
only
the
landlord
but
those
who
may
be
a
victim
of
fraud
as
well.
It
would
make
more
sense
to
codify
only
one
application
is
allowed
per
unit
until
the
unit
is
rented,
which
falls
in
line
with
best
practices
of
our
industry.
C
Second,
I
want
to
note
the
length
of
our
lease
directly
correlates
with
the
language
requirements
of
existing
statute,
which
provides
the
tenant
with
a
written
record
of
protections
afforded
to
them,
as
well
as
provides
a
clear
record
of
what
fees
are
due
on
a
monthly
basis.
Terms
of
elise
are
not
allowed
to
be
charged
or
changed
on
a
whim.
Next,
the
amendment
imposes
a
24-hour
turnaround
time,
which,
for
a
landlord
to
present
an
itemized
list
of
deficiencies
after
an
inspection,
this
timeline
is
overly
burdensome.
C
C
However,
as
more
and
more
restrictions
which
mimic
that
of
surrounding
states
are
imposed
on
my
members,
the
likelihood
of
that
standard
practice
coming
to
nevada
increases,
sb
218
will
drive
many
of
our
good
landlords
to
leave
the
market,
reducing
the
overall
supply
of
rentals,
as
well
as
further
discouraging
those
that
provide
affordable
housing
to
remain
in
the
program,
further
driving
up
housing
costs
for
the
tenant
that
this
bill
purportedly
is
supposed
to
protect.
Thank
you.
J
N
N
This
bill
has
numerous
provisions
which
would
make
it
more
difficult
to
be
involved
in
the
rental
of
property
in
the
state
of
nevada.
Unfortunately,
this
will
cause
shrinkage
in
the
rental
market,
as
well
as
increased
market
rate
rents
across
the
board.
As
we
attempt
to
rebuild
our
economy
after
the
pandemic,
we
must
consider
the
availability
and
affordability
of
market
rate
housing
as
necessary
for
economic
growth.
We
urge
you
to
vote
against
sb
218
and
keep
nevada
housing
affordable
and
available.
Thank
you.
J
C
C
I
wanted
to
just
stand
and
let
you
guys
know
that
I
have
a
ton
of
my
investors
that
are
leaving
las
vegas,
so
I
managed
in
las
vegas
north
las,
vegas
and
henderson,
and
they
are
bailing
out
I'm
not
against
having
stronger
rules.
I
think
landlords
should
be
held
accountable,
but
when
you
tie
our
hands
so
tight
that
that
we
can't
follow
the
rules,
that's
when
things
get
broken,
we
have
to
count
on
vendors
and
we
have
to
work
on
vendors
schedules
to
be
able
to
come
out
and
give
us
a
bid.
C
21
days
is
my
biggest
concern
for
what
you
are
all
are
working
on
right
now
we
have
to
get
vendors
out.
A
lot
of
our
owners
want
more
than
one
bid.
That
means
we
have
to
get
multiple
vendors
out
tennis
ideas
as
well
as
are
different
than
landlords
as
to
how
property
should
be
left.
My
brokerage
specifically
states
how
we
want
the
property
left,
what
our
cleaning
guidelines
are.
C
They
are
signed
at
the
beginning
of
the
lease
we
send
a
copy
of
that
out
to
them
as
soon
as
we
get
a
30
day
notice
and
we're
very
fair
and
very
open,
I'm
kind
of
shocked
to
hear
about
all
of
these
landlords
out
there
that
are
not
following
these
rules,
although
I
should
I
should
know
about
it.
I
get
a
ton
of
comments
that
are
unhappy
from
previous,
but
if
you
force
all
of
us
landlords
and
their
property
managers
to
go
to
court
for
an
eviction,
it's
going
to
tie
our
time
and
increase.
C
I
mean
a
lot
of
money
for
our
landlords.
It's
not
just
a
matter
of
scheduling
a
court
date.
They
get
moved,
they
get
cancelled.
It's
just
the
summer.
Eviction
is
the
best
way
to
go,
and
I'm
trying
desperately
to
keep
landlords
here
in
las
vegas,
the
city
that
I
know
and
love
for
our
tenants
that
are
out
there.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
J
J
C
Good
afternoon
sheriff
scheible
and
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
theresa,
mckee
t-e-r-e-s-a-m-c-k-e-e
and
I'm
ceo
of
the
nevada
realtors,
I'm
speaking
today
on
behalf
of
more
than
eighteen
thousand
members
of
nevada
realtors.
We
opposed
nearly
every
section
of
the
bill
and
we
thank
senator
raddy
for
speaking
with
us
about
this
bill
and
allowing
us
to
get
some
of
our
concerns.
On
the
record.
We
oppose
section
six
charging
a
fee
for
a
rental
application
is
necessary
to
cover
out-of-pocket
expenses
for
tenant
screening.
C
If
the
landlord
is
not
able
to
charge
those
fees
to
prospective
tenants,
it
will
be
added
to
the
cost
of
the
rent.
We
oppose
section
seven
in
reality.
Only
after
a
full
and
thorough
evaluation
of
the
property
can
a
final
assessment
be
made
as
to
whether
or
not
the
tenant
damages
exist
that
will
be
charged
to
the
tenant
deposit.
If
pair
repairs
are
not
completed
in
a
workmanlike
manner,
landlord
will
have
to
re-repair
have
those
re-repaired
by
a
professional
and
the
landlord
should
not
be
required
to
accept
attendance.
C
Less
than
professional
repair
topic
we
oppose
section
4
a
late
fee
amount
should
compensate
the
landlord
for
the
inconvenience
and
risk
of
not
receiving
rent
on
time
and
should
motivate
the
tenant
to
pay
rent
on
time.
Contractually
agreed
upon
provision
should
not
be
further
limited
or
amended.
We
oppose
section
13
prohibiting
a
landlord
from
charging
a
cleaning
deposit
that
exceeds
15
of
the
periodic
rent.
Not
all
properties
are
equal
and
not
all
tenants
are
equal
15
of
the
randomly
chosen
level
of
recovery.
That
is
not
realistic
or
fair
to
property
owners.
C
Further.
In
section
13,
we
oppose
requiring
the
return
of
the
remainder
of
the
security
deposit
within
21
days.
After
the
end
of
dependency,
it
would
create
a
huge
burden
on
the
landlord,
the
courts,
the
working
class,
handymen,
journeyman
and
contractors
in
many
markets,
it's
simply
impossible
to
retain
professional
services
and
have
the
work
completed
within
that
time
and
remember
until
that
property
is
repaired.
The
landlord
is
also
suffering
the
loss
of
the
rental
income
on
that
unit.
It
is
in
their
interest
as
well
to
get
that
those
repairs
done
quickly.
C
J
N
Chair
scheible
and
members
of
the
committee
good
afternoon,
my
name
is
terry
moore,
that's
t-e-r-r-y-m-o-o-r-e,
I'm
an
attorney
that
practices
in
landlord-tenant
law
here
in
nevada,
and
I
primarily
represent
landlords
and
property
managers
who
manage
and
own
approximately
25,
000
apartments
and
single-family
homes
throughout
the
state
as
a
practicing
landlord
tenant
attorney,
I'm
on
a
daily
basis,
I'm
in
the
trenches,
as
senator
carr
pickard
mentioned,
and
on
a
daily
basis.
I
deal
with
many,
if
not
all,
of
the
aspects
of
nrs
chapter
118,
a
that
section,
sb
218
seeks
to
modify.
N
These
are
not
modest
changes
to
nevada
law,
as
senator
raddy
suggested.
These
are
realistically
speaking,
many
of
sb
218's
proposed
revisions
will
cause
havoc
when
they're
actually
applied
to
real
world
landlord
situations.
Most
of
the
proposed
revisions
actually
appear
to
be
solutions
that
are
looking
for
problems.
N
That
is
why
my
clients
and
I
oppose
nearly
every
aspect
of
sb
218-
nobody's
opposed
to
transparency.
Transparency
is
good,
but
this
bill
goes
far
beyond
that
section.
13
of
the
amendment
shortening
the
time
frame
from
30
days
to
21
days
for
the
landlord
to
provide
the
tenants
security
deposit
accounting
is
not
only
reasonable.
It's
unrealistic
in
many
instances,
damage
to
a
unit
needs
to
be
repaired
by
an
outside
vendor
and
that
can
take
weeks
to
even
get
scheduled,
let
alone
completed.
N
Under
no
set
of
circumstances
is
such
a
draconian
penalty
fair
or
warranted
under
nevada
law.
If
a
if
a
dispute
arises
over
a
security
deposit,
much
like
the
one
senator
ratty
indicated
her
former
neighbors
had
there's
a
remedy
already
in
place.
They
file
a
motion
in
front
of
the
justice
court
and
it's
resolved
and
the
judge
is
allowed
to
weigh
the
evidence,
hear
the
testimony
and
make
a
fair
ruling.
N
N
F
N
F
J
F
B
B
Thank
you
vice
chair
orange
shaw.
I
very
much
again
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
in
front
of
the
senate
committee
on
the
judiciary,
long
hearing.
I
know
that
this
is
a
contentious
issue.
I
will
say
that
it's
been
a
long
hard
year.
I
know
we're
just
a
a
year
past
the
kickoff
of
the
pandemic
and-
and
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
that
there
has
been
more
than
enough
pain
to
go
around
and
that
that
pain
has
hit
penance
and
that
that
pain
has
hit
landlords.
B
B
It's
not
as
significant
as
losing
the
roof
over
your
head,
and
so
I
think
we
have
to
figure
out
a
balanced
approach
to
making
sure
tenants
have
a
remedy
when
landlords
are
taking
advantage
of
the
situation.
Frankly,
and
so
I
think
again
that
these
are
reasonable
and
modest
protections
for
tenants.
They
are
modest
compared
to
protections
that
you
see
in
most
states
across
the
nation.
B
I
don't
believe
that
this
legislation
significantly
raises
the
cost
of
housing
in
the
state
of
nevada.
That
was
the
testimony
to
sb
151
last
session,
and
we
did
not
see
a
crumbling
of
the
rental
infrastructure
because
of
the
modest
protections
that
were
put
in
last
session,
and
I
don't
believe
we
will
this
session.
I
do
believe
some
tenants
or
some
landlords
are
going
to
get
out
of
the
business,
but
I
don't
think
it's
because
of
these
tenant
protections.
I
think
market
forces
have
a
lot
to
do
with
it.
B
Their
property
values
are
up
significantly
and
I
do
think
some
folks
are
fatigued
based
on
the
pandemic
and
some
of
the
things
that
happen
because
of
the
pandemic.
But
I
don't
think
it's
because
of
modest
protections
that
we
put
in
place
to
equalize
the
balance
between
tenants
and
landlords.
So
I
think,
there's
still
some
work
to
do
on
this
bill.
I'm
open
to
doing
it
and
I
very
much
appreciate
your
time
in
hearing
this
bill,
your
questions
and
I
seek
to
make
sure
that
your
questions
get
answered
thanks.
So
much.
F
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
presentation.
Thank
you
for
all
your
hard
work.
Senator
ratty,
we'll
now
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
218
and
the
last
item
on
the
agenda
is
public
comment
broadcasting.
If
there's
anyone
on
the
line
who
wishes
to
make
public
comment,
that
is
two
minutes
per
speaker.