►
From YouTube: 4/13/2021 - 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
C
D
A
A
Those
of
you
who
are
watching
from
afar,
I'm
not
sure
what
you
can
see
right
now,
because
this
is
all
new
to
all
of
us,
but
I
do
want
to
let
the
committee
know
that
most
of
your
las
reached
out
to
me
personally
to
remind
you
that
you
are
now
on
camera.
So
if
you
can't
fix
your
face,
the
whole
audience
will
see
it.
However,
you
will
still
have
your
mask
on
so
that
should
help
alleviate
some
of
the
problems
that
apparently
you
all
normally
have
with
that.
A
We
will
go
back
to
our
method
of
speaking
from
before
in
the
olden
times
before
we
were
all
on
zoom.
You
have
a
microphone
button
in
front
of
you.
You
have
to
press
that
before
you
speak,
even
though
we
can
hear
you
in
the
room.
It
is
more
important
than
ever
that
you're
speaking
whatever
you're
saying,
is
picked
up
by
the
microphone
so
that
it's
on
the
audio
recording
and
so
that
everybody
else
who's
watching
from
afar
can
hear
it
you
can.
A
When
we
go
to
questions
you
can
get
my
attention
by
raising
your
hand,
shooting
me
a
message
something
like
that
and
for
those
of
you
who
are
actually
everybody
in
the
room
and
those
watching
at
home,
we
are
still
doing
a
hybrid
version
of
things.
So
in
case
you
did
not
see
the
committee
room
when
we
first
started.
All
of
the
senators
are
here
present
in
person
just
like
before.
When
you
watched
us
on
the
internet,
which
I
know
you
all
did
religiously.
A
If
that
is
a
witness
or
a
presenter,
there
is
a
separate
camera
that
will
focus
on
them
and
that
witness
or
that
presenter
may
also
be
on
zoom,
in
which
case
as
you're
watching
from
home,
the
the
live
feed
will
switch
to
the
zoom
or
the
video
of
that
person,
and
the
only
thing
that
I
ask
of
everybody
here,
oh
and
when
we
do
testimony,
we
will
continue
with
our
newfangled
testimony
with
the
help
of
our
broadcast
services
to
being
people's
voices
in
from
above,
via
the
telephone
to
testify
and
support,
opposition
and
neutral.
A
That
system
will
not
be
changing.
At
least
for
now.
We
do
have
a
very,
very
small
room
capacity
limit.
It's
about
nine
people
in
this
room
and,
as
you
can
see,
we
constitute
nine
just
with
senators
and
staff.
So
I'm
not
sure
when
we'll
be
able
to
welcome
all
of
you
into
the
audience.
A
But
I
am
certainly
glad
that
we
can
all
be
here
in
person,
at
least
on
the
diocese,
to
to
ask
questions
and
get
more
information,
and
that
also
means
that
those
of
you
who
are
here
in
the
room
will
need
to
silence
your
cell
phones,
please
in
case
you
got
out
of
the
habit
same
thing
with
your
computers.
A
Senators
no
longer
need
to
log
in
to
zoom
on
their
computers
as
long
as
they're
here,
but
you're
always
welcome
to
utilize,
your
computer
for
taking
notes
and
reading
documents
and
bills,
and
things
like
that.
Just
make
sure
that
your
speakers
are
off.
Otherwise,
we
will
all
be
able
to
hear
all
of
your
notifications.
A
I
think
that
about
covers
it
for
now.
The
only
other
thing
that
I
ask
is
everybody's
patience
as
we
work
through
the
new
new
system,
I'm
sure
we
will
get
the
hang
of
it
and
with
that,
I
think
we
are
ready
to
move
on
to
our
very
first
hybrid
bill
presentation,
which
is
ab24.
A
We
have
presenters
here
with
us
via
video,
and
I
will
now
open
the
hearing
on
ab24.
Please
proceed
whenever
you're
ready,
oh
and
you
still
to
say
your
name
for
the
record,
whether
you're
presenting
or
answering
a
question.
Thank
you.
C
So,
thank
you.
I
I'm
elizabeth
neighbors
e-l-I-z-a-b-e-t-h.
C
C
I
am
here
to
briefly
go
over
that
bill.
It
clarifies
and
expands
the
definition
of
a
forensic
facility
in
nevada,
revised
statute
175.539.
C
The
bill
is
designed
to
update
current
forensic
facilities
identified
in
the
division
of
public
and
behavioral
health
to
include
stein
forensic
facility
opened
in
2015
prior
to
that
we
only
had
in
the
state
lakes
crossing
center
that
was
identified
as
a
forensic
facility,
so
this
update
is
much
needed
as
we
are.
Expanding.
A
E
Thank
you
very
much
chair
and
thank
you,
dr
neighbors,
for
presenting
the
bill.
My
question
on
assembly
bill
24
you'd
mentioned
a
possible
expansion
beyond
lakes
crossing
and
the
stein
facility.
Do
you
envision
senate
bill?
I
mean
assembly
bill
24
in
the
future
to
allow
placement
of
incompetent
persons
at
private,
contracted
facilities
or
perhaps
out
of
state,
or
do
you
believe
that
this
language
change
would
still
limit
the
placement
of
those
incompetent
persons
to
a
state-run
facility
such
as
lakes,
crossing
stein
or,
if
there's
a
future
state-run
facility
constructed.
C
At
the
present
time,
we
don't
have
any
anticipation
that
there
would
be
that
these
facilities
would
be
privately
contracted.
C
Oh,
I'm
sorry
elizabeth's
neighbors
for
the
record,
and
nor
do
we
anticipate
placing
anyone
out
of
state
that
would
be
very
difficult
to
take
them
out
of
the
judicial
venue
that
they're
in
I
don't
know
that
it
excludes.
C
F
You
know
church
I
will
and
thank
you
miss
neighbors
for
your
presentation.
F
I
just
I
I
had
the
same
question
as
senator
earnshaw
and
but
as
a
follow-up
to
that,
I'm
wondering
when
we
talk
about
the
term
forensic
typically
in
the
law,
we're
talking
about
a
rearward-looking
legal,
interpretive
type
of
definition,
and
I
I
want
to
be
sure
that
we're
talking
about
a
therapeutic
approach,
a
facility
that
is
still
looking
at
rehabilitation
as
its
core
mission
since
we're
doing
we're
dealing
with
juveniles
and
then
as
a
follow-up
to
that,
I'm
wondering
if
this
definition,
where
we
talk
about
designated
by
the
division,
is
there
some
precedence
to
suggest
that
this
would
not
authorize
a
private
facility
and
I'm
just
hearkening
back
to
prior
sessions.
C
Track
elizabeth
neighbors
for
the
record
in
response
to
the
first
part
of
your
question
about
is
this:
a
therapeutic
facility
absolutely
are
two
forensic
hospitals
both
licensed
as
psychiatric
hospitals,
and
we
and
adam
should
qualify
that
these
are
adult
facilities,
not
juvenile
facilities.
C
C
C
And
at
the
moment
it
is
not
anticipated
that
we
would
do
that.
There
is
no
plan
that
we
have
in
place
and
we
have
not
really
looked
into
that
as
a
alternative
to
our
current
model
for
delivering
these.
A
Services
all
right
are
there
any
other
questions
from
members
of
the
committee.
I
don't
see
any
questions,
so
we
will
now
move
to
testimony
in
support
of.
D
D
A
All
right,
dr
neighbors,
do
you
have
any
closing
comments
on.
C
C
A
A
G
Nevada
law
allows
only
a
tribunal
to
redirect
child's
court
payments
to
another
state's
sdu
ab27
seeks
to
mirror
language
found
in
ufsa
to
allow
a
support
enforcement
agency
or
a
tribunal
of
the
state.
The
ability
to
comply
with
this
federal
requirement,
including
the
support
enforcement
agency
and
existing
statute,
provides
for
an
administrative
process
to
carry
out
this
requirement,
thus
reducing
the
need
for
state-funded
court
proceedings
and
getting
support
to
the
families
faster
and
more
efficient.
F
Thank
you,
charles
scheible,
and
thank
you
miss
kaplan.
I
appreciated
the
brief
presentation
I
just
I
I
questioned
this.
I
spent
about
25
percent
of
my
practice
or
so
in
the
uf
support,
so
I'm
pretty
familiar
with
what
you're
talking
about,
but
this
language
seems
to
grant
the
the
office
the
ability
to
issue
an
order
which
is
currently
reserved
for
the
u.s
judicial
officer
who's
appointed.
F
Much
like
we
would
say
a
deposition
or
a
subpoena,
although
we're
talking
about
someone's
their
their
rights
to
their
income
and
we're
invading
their
their
income,
whether
that
be
through
a
garnishment
order,
or
at
least
a
support
order
from
this
state.
Can
you
explain
how
that
doesn't
run
afoul
of
the
separation
of
powers.
H
H
Kim
smalley
for
the
record
k-I-m-s-m-a-l-l-e-y.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Senator
pickard.
This
bill
covers
existing
orders,
not
the
establishment
of
orders.
We
are
requesting
that
when
a
nevada
order
is
established
and
the
sdu
named
in
the
nevada
order
that
we
are
able
to
have
an
administrative
process
to
pass
those
payments
on
the
request
of
another
state
under
uw
with
that
is
not
an
establishment
of
order.
H
Just
the
payment
redirect
portion
named
in
an
existing
order.
F
Question
yeah,
and
not
I
mean
I'm,
I'm
not
sure,
I'm
clear,
because
under
section
one
sub
five,
it
states
the
support
enforcement
agency
of
the
state
shall
and
we're
adding
the
the
word
issue
or
request
a
tribunal
of
the
state
to
issue
a
child
support
order
and
an
income
withholding
order
that
redirects
payment
of
the
current
support
and
arrears
and
on
and
so
we're
asking
in
this
legislation
to
add
language.
F
That
would
allow
the
support
enforcement
agency
to
issue
the
order
or
request
the
tribunal,
which
in
most
cases
is
the
u.s
support
to
issue
that
order.
And
then
in
section
two
sub,
two
we're
adding
the
words.
A
support
agency
or
tribunal
of
the
state
shall
direct
and
issue
the
an
order
under
sub
b.
And
so
I'm
concerned
that
this
language
is
actually
allowing
the
agency,
the
executive
agency,
not
the
judicial
officer,
to
issue
an
order
for
that
income.
Withholding
order,
and
I
think
that
that
may
run
afoul.
F
Maybe
this
should
be
a
question
for
legal
to
maybe
clarify
in
my
mind
I
just
to
me
this
seems
inappropriate.
A
And
we
do
have
mr
anthony
here
from
legal
if
you
are
willing
and
able
to
take
that
question.
I
Sure
this
is
nick
anthony
from
the
legal
division.
Thank
you,
chair,
scheible.
Yes,
when
we
were
drafting
this
bill,
we
did
research
ufsa
and
this
bill
as
written,
exactly
tracks
the
option
in
uso
which
allows
the
agency
to
issue
that
redirection
from
child
support.
So
it's
as
the
agency
testified.
It's
not
issuing
a
new
order,
but
it's
actually
just
the
redirection
of
where
that
child
support
would
go.
F
All
right,
I
appreciate
that
and
maybe-
and
we
can
do
this
offline-
if
you
can
just
direct
me
to
the
citation
in
ufc
that
would
help
me.
I
mean
this
is
something
we
encounter
as
a
procedural
matter,
and
so
this
is
a
day.
I'm
learning
something
new
about
it.
So
thank
you
very
much,
mr
anthony.
D
D
Call
her
with
the
last
three
digits
six
four
eight,
please
slowly
state
and
spell
your
name
for
the
record.
You
will
have
two
minutes
to
speak
and
may
begin.
Thank
you,
chair
scheible
members
of
the
senate,
judiciary
committee.
My
name
is
jon
jones
here
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
district
attorneys
association
and
the
clark
county
district
attorney's
office
spelling.
My
name
is
j,
o
h,
n
j,
o
n
e
s
and
as
various
da's
offices,
around
nevada
do
handle
child
support
enforcement.
D
D
A
All
right,
thank
you.
So
much
do
the
presenters
want
to
make
any
closing
comments
on
ab27.
G
A
D
A
J
J
If
anybody
wants
one,
I
got
50
of
them
in
my
office,
senator
pickard
is
being
rebellious
and
wearing
one
also,
but
you
know
for
those
that
are
worried
when
you
see
me
in
the
hall,
if
I
don't
have
my
mask
on
there's
this
little
button
and
I've
passed
the
window
of
time
so
anyway,
since
we're
thinking
about
being
pioneers,
I'm
hoping
we'd
be
able
to
do
that,
and
even
the
testimony
tales
poor,
ladies,
that
were
testifying
they're
they're
muffled
enough
that
I
was
missing
some
of
this
stuff,
so
I'm
just
kind
of
hoping
that
we're
going
to
keep
being
a
little
more
pioneer
spirited
and
and
get
rid
of
these
since
we're
all
vaccinated,
so
just
want
to
throw
that
out
there.
A
Julie
noted,
I
think
that
one
is
above
my
pay
grade,
but
I
will
keep
it
in
mind
and
with
that
before
we
conclude,
I
also
wanted
to.
Did
you,
okay?
I
also
wanted
to
let
everybody
know
that
the
process
remains
essentially
the
same
for
registering
to
participate
online.
When
you
go
to
the
meeting
website
and
click
on
the
participate
button
and
you
fill
in
your
information,
we
will
be
starting
to
update
that
with
the
ability
to
come
in
person
when
we
get
there,
but
for
now.
A
I
would
just
like
to
congratulate
and
thank
my
committee
for
a
fantastic
first
in-person
meeting
and
please
be
on
the
lookout
for
our
next
scheduled
meeting.
We
have
a
house
deadline
coming
up
which
will
cause
our
floor
sessions
to
be
rescheduled
which
will
cause
our
committees
to
be
rescheduled,
but
we
will
try,
as
always
to
be
in
good
communication
with
all
of
you
about
the
next
meeting
of
the
senate
judiciary
committee
and
until
then
we
are
adjourned.