►
From YouTube: 3/3/2021 - 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
All
right
it
being
one
o'clock,
we
will
call
this
committee
meeting
of
the
senate
judiciary
committee
to
order
with
the
esteemed
secretary.
Please
take
the.
A
A
Here,
thank
you
very
much
and
for
the
record
we
do
have
mr
patrick
geinin
with
us
today
from
lcb
staff.
It
looks
like
mr
anthony
anthony
is
busy
drafting
all
the
bills
that
we
wish
to
introduce,
so
he
will
be
available
to
answer
questions
after
the
meeting.
If
any
committee
members
have
them.
Otherwise
we
will
have
to
proceed
without
him
for
now
and
with
that,
I
think
we
are
ready
to
move
to
our
first
item
on
the
agenda,
which
is
sb
137.
D
Thank
you,
chair,
scheible,
again,
heidi
sievers
cancer,
for
the
record,
I'm
here
to
present
senate
bill
137
I'd
like
to
share
my
screen
and
also
we
have
mindy
mckay
on
the
line
from
the
department
of
public
safety,
who
can
also
help
with
questions
and
the
intricacies
of
the
bill.
I'm
going
to
share
my
screen.
D
D
D
National,
instant
criminal
background
check
system,
and
so
basically
we
want
to
make
sure
that
that
information
is
being
transmitted
and
that
it's
accurate
and
the
reason
I
brought
this
bill
is
that
there
was
an
audit
of
the
information
that
was
to
be
transmitted
per
statute.
So
we
have
a
number
of
statutes
that
require
information
to
be
sent
and
when
they
did
the
audit,
only
one
third
of
nevada's
78
courts
at
the
time
were
sending
records,
and
there
were
also
there
was
a
huge
backlog
of
about
900
000
records
that
had
not
been
uploaded.
D
So
they've
been
received
to
the
department
of
public
safety
safety,
but
not
uploaded.
Since
then,
the
backlog
has
been
uploaded,
so
they
are
caught
up.
There
was
staff
that
was
added
on
a
temporary
basis
and
probably
continued
some
of
them
continued
that
helped
with
the
backlog,
but
we've
really
never
addressed
whether
all
the
courts
are
sending
all
the
required
information
in
the
required
statutorily
required
amount
of
time,
and
we
talk
about
you
know
what
is
the
current
law?
What
type
of
information
could
be
sent
or
should
be
sent?
D
It's
the
list
right
here
adjudications
for
mentally
ill,
misdemeanor
conviction,
convictions
of
domestic
violence,
felony
convictions
and
protection
orders.
So
those
of
those
pieces
of
information
should
be
transmitted
promptly
to
the
nevada's
repository,
and
then
it
gets
uploaded
again
to
the
fbi's
database.
D
So
this
bill
is
pretty
short,
so
the
first
part
basically
authorizes
the
central
repository
to
monitor
agencies
of
criminal
justice.
So
they
can,
they
can
actually
monitor
the
courts
and
if
the
information
is
being
sent
and
then
they
needed
authority
to
contact
them.
So
it's
the
authority
to
contact
them
and
to
monitor
the
information
that's
being
sent
and
then,
which
is
section
1-4
and
something
to
be
clear.
Is
this
really
is
about
making
sure
the
information
is
accurate?
It
doesn't
expand
the
information.
D
One
of
the
questions
that's
been
asked
of
me
is
around
what
happens
when
there's
a
change,
for
instance
a
temporary
protection
order,
and
I
can
let
mindy
mckay
answer
that.
But
basically
there
are
systems
in
place.
If
there
needs
to
be
information,
that's
revised,
amended
or
deleted.
There
are
processes
to
be
able
to
update
those
records,
but
I'll.
Let
her
respond
to
that
question
more
thoroughly.
D
If
information
is
not
being
provided
in
a
timely
manner
or
not
all
the
information
is
provided,
they
will
provide
a
report
on
that.
So
I
didn't
want
to
do
an
annual
report,
that's
ongoing,
because
we
get
so
many
reports
unless
we
have
outliers
and
so
in
instances
where
the
statute
is
not
being
met,
then
that
information
would
be
reported.
A
D
I
don't
know
if
you
want
mindy
mckay
to
speak
at
all
or
if
you
want
to
go
on
to
questions
I
don't
know
if
mindy
wants
to
add
any
information.
I
know
you're
on.
E
Good
afternoon
members
of
the
committee
and
chair
I'm
mindy
mckay,
and
I
am
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
get
me
onto
the
camera.
For
you,
we
go
okay,
hi,
so
we're
here
to
answer
any
questions.
I've
got
staff
with
me
as
well
in
regard
so
what
senator
scans
are
in
regard
to?
What
specifically
did
you
want
me
to
speak
about
right
at
this
moment.
D
So
I
had
a
question
about
that
was
posed
to
me
about
information
making
sure
it's
accurate.
So
if
there's
a
change,
so
our
temporary
protection
order,
those
sound
like
they
automatically
have
a
timeline
on
them
and
they
get
deleted,
but
criminal
records.
If
there
needs
to
be
an
amendment
or
a
change
to
make
sure
that
the
information
is
accurate.
E
Very
good,
thank
you
very
much
so
mindy
mckay
for
the
record.
There
are
multiple
mechanisms
for
removing
records
of
information
subject
to
monitoring
from
the
division's
various
systems.
For
example,
protection
orders
are
entered
into
the
repository
with
an
expiration
date,
so
those
will
automatically,
through
the
system
mechanism,
be
removed
from
view.
If
there,
if
it
was
to
be
queried,
it
would
not
show
up
after
the
expiration
date.
The
system
is
programmed
to
automatically
remove
the
protection
order
from
an
active
status
to
an
inactive
status
upon
expiration.
E
If
the
court
orders
the
dissolution
of
a
protection
order,
there
is
functionality
within
the
protection
order
program
that
allows
a
user
to
dissolve
the
order
for
the
uniform
crime
reports.
We
have
back
end
validations
to
check
for
incorrect
or
invalid
information.
So
again,
that's
built
into
the
system.
The
system
is
programmed
to
not
accept
the
data.
If
the
validations
are
not
met,
the
mental
health
adjudications
must
go
through
the
court
process
and
a
subsequent
court
order
must
be
issued
to
remove
the
mental
health
record
from
the
nix
indices.
E
A
All
right,
thank
you.
If
the
secretary,
please
note
that
vice
chair
cannizzaro
is
here
and
I
will
open
it
up
for
questions,
I
encourage
members
to
utilize.
The
raise
hand
function,
and
I
see
that
senator
pickard
has
already
done
so.
So
you
may
ask
the
first
questions.
Knitter.
F
Thank
you,
church
scheible
and
thank
you
senator
receivers
gavin
for
bringing
the
bill.
I
I
think
it's
a
a
good
bill.
We
talked
about
this
last
session
and
I
think
all
of
your
co-sponsors
should
be
duly
commended
for
joining
you.
I'm
kidding,
of
course,
but
I
had
one
person
actually
approach
me
on
this
and
they
raised
a
question
and
they
thought
I
would
have
the
answer,
but
I
don't,
and
that
is
who
does
the
report
go
to?
F
D
For
the
record,
heidi
sievers
cancer,
thank
you
for
the
question,
and
so
their
department
of
public
safety
is
going
to
post
it
on
their
website.
So
it's
around
transparency
and
again
we
as
a
body
and
lots
of
different
agencies
received
so
many
reports.
We
wanted
to
make
sure
we
had
a
transparent
process
and
we
posted
it,
but
we
didn't
and
we
only
wanted
to
create
that
process
if
there
were
outliers,
if
there
were
courts
that
were
not
providing
the
information
in
the
timely
manner,
as
required
by
statute.
F
G
Thank
you,
chair
and
my
question.
I
think
for
director,
mckay
senator
seaver's
gangster
stated
that
the
compliance
rate
in
her
estimation
among
the
courts
is
only
about
30
33
or
about
a
third.
I
just
wonder:
why
do
you
do
you
know
why
compliance
rate
is
that
low
and
have
you
seen?
Have
you
seen
any
improvement
in
years
or
I
just
wondered
if
you
could
expound
on
that?
Thank.
H
G
All
right,
thank
you,
that's
good,
to
hear.
Thank
you.
D
D
Cancer,
it's
a
heidi
sievers
concert
for
the
record,
and
so
you
know
in
hearing
that
the
question
may
be
well
why?
Why
do
we
have
this
bill?
So
there's
there's
a
couple:
components
really
is:
is
all
the
information
being
transmitted
and
is
it
being
transmitted
in
a
timely
manner?
And
so
those
are
the
two
pieces
and
we
want
to
make
sure
the
information
is
accurate,
that's
uploaded,
and
so
the
information,
a
third
of
the
courts
or
I
was
just
stated
24.
There
was
an
audit
so
that
wasn't.
D
That
was
from
an
audit
that
was
in
2012
when
we
realized
that
the
courts
weren't
reporting
consistently
and
then,
when
the
information
was
being
transmitted,
it
wasn't
always
being
uploaded.
So
this
information
is
critically
important.
We
want
to
make
sure
it's
accurate,
and
so
that's
why
I
brought
the
bill.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
I
also
have
a
couple
of
questions.
The
first
one
goes
to
subsection
two,
which
gives
the
central
repository
authority
to
adopt
policies
and
procedures
to
carry
out
the
provisions
of
the
bill,
and
I'm
wondering
on
what
the
process
is
for
the
central
repository
to
create
those
policies.
If
we,
if
there
already,
is
a
process
in
place
or
if
that's
kind
of
an
administrative
task
who
would
be
doing
that
for
the
central
repository
or
if
it's
been
contemplated
already,
what
that
would
look
like
that
process
of
creating
policies
and
procedures.
C
Erika
suzuyamas
for
the
record,
those
would
be
that
would
be
an
administrative
action
that
we
take.
We
already
have
some
policies
established
in
regards
to
some
internal
policies
in
regards
to
monitoring
that
we
currently
conduct
in
multiple
program
areas,
with
the
record
different
record
types
that
are
outlined
in
this
bill.
D
For
the
record,
heidi's
senator
heidi
sievers
cancer,
the
department
of
public
safety,
so
the
central
repository
is
responsible
for
uploading.
The
information
and
I
can
have
them
weigh
in,
but
I
believe
they
send
it
also
to
the
the
fbi
and
they
they
transmit
it
there
or
they
may
be.
Actually
you
know
what
I'll
let
them
answer
because
they
may
upload
on
behalf
of
the
fbi
too,.
C
C
C
Erica
suzuyamas
for
the
record,
our
initial
backlog
of
over
900
000
was
completed.
I
believe
I
want
to
say
2018.
So
it's
been
a
few
years
since
we've
completed
the
entry
of
the
900
000,
and
I
did
want
to
point
out
that
we
had
never
previously
received
those
disposition
records
from
the.
So
when
we
received
them,
we
we
took
on
a
pretty
large
effort
to
hire
multiple
temporary
staff
and
and
permanent
staff
to
address
the
backlog
it
took
us
approximately.
C
I
think
three
and
a
half
to
four
years
to
address
that
that
initial
backlog
today
we're
current
so
with
current
dispositions
coming
in
from
the
courts.
It
takes
us
about
three
weeks
on
average
to
get
the
current
dispositions
entered
at
both
the
state
and
fbi.
D
Thank
you,
chair,
scheibal,
and,
and
just
to
add
to
that
again
the
two
components
so
part
of
what
we
want
to
make
sure
is.
The
courts
are
transmitting
information,
but
are
they
transmitting
all
the
information
and
then
are
they
transmitting
it
within
the
time
frame?
That's
required
per
statute,
and
so
the
record
from
12
was
that
they
weren't
transmitting
it.
D
Not
all
of
them
were
transmitting
it,
and
then
they
were
transmitting
only
part
of
it
and
we've
really
we've
not
gone
back
to
do
another
audit,
because
some
of
the
choices
that
you
can
make
when
you
do
a
bill
like
this
is
you
can
say
where
you're
going
to
audit
them
or
you're
going
to
do
this.
This
annual
review,
but
in
talking
to
the
department
of
public
safety
and
where
they
think
they
are
right
now
and
where
the
courts
are.
D
We
thought
if
we
just
gave
them
the
authority
to
to
request
and
make
sure
that
they're
getting
information
and
then
report
if
they're
not
getting
information
in
an
entirely
matter.
That
would
be
best
again
to
create
a
check,
but
not
to
be
heavy
great
heavy-handed
bureaucracy
over
the
top
of
this.
This
is
really
about
creating
this
check
as
appropriate,
based
on
the
information
that
we've
had
in
the
past,
where
there
was
a
big
gap
in
communication,
and
we
just
don't
want
that
to
happen
again,.
A
I
I
I
J
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
jennifer
noble,
j
j-e-n-n-I-f-e-r-n-o-b-l-e,
and
I
am
testifying
pursuant
to
committee
rules
and
opposition
to
the
bill.
This
afternoon
I
represent
the
nevada
district
attorney's
association,
this
session,
along
with
jon
jones.
I
first
want
to
begin
by
thanking
ms
mckay
and
mrs
yamas
for
talking
to
us
about
our
concerns.
J
We
have
determined
that
we
would
like
a
tie
back
or
a
reference
in
the
bill
language
to
nrs
179.070,
which
defines
what
a
criminal
history
is
and
what
it
is
not.
We
think
that
that
tieback
will
assist
in
resolving
any
issues
we
have
in
the
future
and
we're
looking
forward
to
continuing
to
working
with
ms
mckay
susie,
yanus
and
senator
gansert
in
making
sure
this
bill
is
in
a
place
where
we
can
get
to
support.
Thank
you.
C
Fair
scheible:
this
is
erica
souza
yamas,
with
the
criminal
history
repository.
We
have
some
testimony
in
neutral.
If
that's
okay,
please
go
ahead.
Okay!
Thank
you.
C
A
good
afternoon
again,
I'm
erika
suzuyamas
records
bureau
chief
of
the
department
of
public
safety
records,
communications
and
compliance
division
which
houses
the
central
repository
for
nevada
records
of
criminal
history.
I'm
here
today
to
testify
in
neutral
for
senate
bill
137.
C
Furthermore,
senate
bill
137
requires
an
agency
of
criminal
justice
to
provide
information
to
the
central
repository
upon
request
in
the
manner
and
within
the
time
prescribed
by
the
by
any
policies
and
procedures.
Additionally,
the
central
repository
must
prepare
an
annual
report
on
or
before
march
31st
of
each
year
for
the
preceding
calendar
year.
If
the
monitoring
was
completed
to
indicate
if
the
agencies
of
criminal
justice
are
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
regarding
submitting
or
transmitting
information
and
records
set
forth
in
the
statutes
that
I
just
briefly
covered.
C
Staff
within
the
central
repository
are
already
performing
the
monitoring
functions
in
most
areas
and
will
continue
to
work
cooperatively
with
our
criminal
justice
partners,
which,
which
will
include
cooperation
when
we
develop
the
policies
and
procedures.
C
The
brady
point
of
contact
firearms
program
tracks
all
of
the
mental
health
submissions
that
it
receives
pursuant
to
nrs's
159.0593
174035,
175,
533,
175,
539,
178,
425
and
433
a
310
staff
currently
tracks.
When
the
order
was
signed
by
the
issuing
judge
each
month,
staff
in
the
program
send
out
letters
to
each
of
the
courts,
notifying
them
of
the
no
I'm
sorry
notifying
them
of
the
orders
that
were
received.
C
If
senate
bill
137
is
enacted
as
introduced,
we
would
continue
to
send
the
current
notifications
out
to
the
courts,
but
we
would
also
include
a
caveat
for
the
orders
that
were
not
received
within
the
statutory
time
frames.
The
only
added
workload
to
the
brady
point
of
contact
firearms
program
would
be
the
creation
of
the
annual
report,
placing
and
placing
it
on
the
division's
public-facing
website.
C
The
criminal
records
unit
currently
tracks
all
of
the
court
dispositions
sent
to
the
central
repository
pursuant
to
nrs
179a
075,
subsection
3..
This
is
manually
done
at
this
time,
but
it
has
proven
effective
over
the
past
six
to
seven
years
to
ensure
that
courts
continue
to
report
the
dispositions.
C
C
This
has
resulted
in
a
100
reporting
rate
of
the
courts,
submitting
their
dispositions
to
the
repository
over
time.
It
should
be
noted
that
while
we
can
see
that
100
of
the
courts
within
the
state
are
reporting
dispositions,
we
do
not
have
the
ability
to
monitor
whether
they
are
sending
all
of
the
dispositions
to
the
repository.
C
This
program
area
does
not
have
a
formal
monitoring
program
like
the
brady
point
of
contact
and
criminal
records
units
have,
however,
they
informally
monitor
the
criminal
fingerprint
cues
and
if
they
notice,
a
large
contributor
is
not
coming
through.
They
investigate
and
assist
in
troubleshooting
works
needed.
C
A
I
am
so
sorry
to
interrupt
you,
but
in
fairness,
we
do
have
a
two-minute
rule
in
this
committee,
and
testimony
is
limited
to
two
minutes
per
person
and
we
definitely
appreciate
you
weighing
in.
I
also
noticed
that
we
do
have
your
testimony
uploaded
in
nellis
already.
A
I
will
advise
all
of
the
members
of
the
committee
that
I
expect
you
to
read
it
in
full
and
absorb
it
understand
what
the
department
of
public
safety
and
the
records
department,
the
rutgers
communications
compliance
division
has
to
contribute
about
this
bill,
and
we
do
appreciate
you
being
here
answering
questions
and
providing
your
testimony.
But
at
this
point
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
wrap
up
the
testimony.
C
I
just
wanted
so
I'll.
Just
add
that
we're
here
to
answer
any
additional
questions
that
you
guys
may
have
the
division
is
able
to
absorb
the
additional
tasks
with
the
resources
we
already
have.
So
we're
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
If
any
any
of
the
legislators
would
like
an
overview
of
any
of
our
programs,
we're
always
available.
A
All
right,
thank
you
so
much
first,
let
me
go
back
to
broadcast
and
see
if
there
is
anybody
on
the
phone
line
who
wants
to
provide
neutral
testimony
to
sb-137.
I
I
A
All
right,
thank
you
so
much.
That
concludes
testimony
on
this
bill.
Normally,
we
would
close
the
hearing
at
this
point,
but
we
have
a
little
bit
of
time
and
there
is
a
senator
who
has
another
question.
So
I'm
going
to
let
senator
orrinshaw
ask
that
question
right
now.
G
Thank
you
very
much
chair
and
the
last
witness
I
just
spurred
a
question
in
my
head.
The
central
repository,
I
think
the
witness
mentioned
collects
of
you,
know
fingerprint
data.
Besides,
that
is
there
any
other
biometric
markers
data
that
the
central
repository
keeps
track
of.
C
A
Go
ahead,
senator
secrets
cancer.
D
Thank
thank
you,
chair
schreibel.
I
I
was
thinking
that
you
were
going
to
be
closing
the
hearing,
so
I'm
more
than
happy
to
work
with
the
da's
office
during
the
the
laps
that
we
had
here
this
little
interim,
we
were
able
to
find
an
email
from
them
from
yesterday.
So
I
think
there's
been
a
communication
issue
and
so
I'll
be
working
with
the
da's.
If
we
need
to
tighten
up
the
language
a
little
bit.
Thank
you.
A
Fantastic,
thank
you
and
I
believe
that
concludes
all
the
comments
and
testimony
on
this
bill.
Always
you
can
follow
up
offline
with
any
of
the
presenters,
the
such
product
experts
or
with
me,
and
with
that
I
will
now
close
the
hearing
on
sb
137.
Thank
you
again,
senator
stevens
cancer
for
joining
us
in
judiciary
today,
and
I
will
open
the
hearing
on
sb
148.
A
We
have
senator
harris
here
to
present
that
bill
well,
she's
also
here
because
she's
on
the
committee,
but
next
I
would
like
you
to
present
the
bill.
Please
senator
harris.
H
Thank
you
for
providing
me
the
opportunity
to
present
senate
bill
148
today,
a
bill
which
seeks
to
codify
and
statute
the
reporting
of
hate
crimes
in
nevada
and
to
ensure
that
the
data
gathered
in
relation
to
those
crimes
is
reported
to
the
federal
bureau
of
investigation
for
inclusion
in
its
annual
report
and
made
publicly
available
before
we
get
started.
I
should
point
out
that
I
am
proposing
an
amendment
to
the
bill.
H
H
Okay
looks
like
they
do
fantastic.
So
before
going
over
the
specifics
of
sb
148,
I
would
like
to
explain
briefly
why
I
believe
it's
important
for
us
to
pass
this
bill.
The
most
recent
data
available
from
the
fbi
shows
that
in
2019
hate
crimes
across
the
united
states
rose
to
their
highest
level
in
over
a
decade,
and
while
black
people
continue
to
experience
vastly
more
hate
motivated
crime
than
any
other
sector
of
the
population,
bias-motivated
crimes
went
up
across
the
board.
H
Hispanic
and
jewish
populations
saw
the
highest
year,
year-over-year
increases,
but
asian-americans
and
transgender
people
also
saw
increases
in
the
number
of
attacks
they
experienced
in
nevada.
We
saw
an
overall
increase
between
2018
and
2019
of
nearly
79
percent,
with
an
increase
related
to
race,
race,
ethnicity
or
ancestry
of
nearly
130
percent.
H
Perhaps
equally
alarming
is
the
fact
that,
according
to
the
fbi,
out
of
more
than
fifteen
thousand
law
enforcement
agencies
that
voluntarily
take
part
in
reporting
in
2019,
only
2172
agencies
reported
a
hate
crime
at
all.
That
means.
86
percent
of
agencies
did
not
report
a
single
hate
crime,
and
this
includes
law
enforcement
in
71
cities
with
populations.
Over
a
hundred
thousand
clearly,
there
is
a
national
problem
with
data
collection
and
reporting,
while
I'm
happy
to
note
that
we
in
nevada
are
already
compiling
and
tracking
this
kind
of
information.
H
All
law
enforcement
agencies
are
not
statutorily
required
to
do
so.
Nor
is
the
central
repository
for
nevada
records
of
criminal
history
statutorily
required
to
provide
this
information
to
the
fbi
or
to
the
public.
This
is
something
that
the
legislature
should
address:
tracking
and
reporting.
This
kind
of
data
is
vital
if
we
are
to
have
any
success
in
stopping
these
crimes.
H
For
these
reasons,
senate
bill
148,
as
amended,
addresses
data
gathering
and
reporting
in
two
ways.
First,
it
ensures
that
nevada
law
enforcement
agencies
report
hate
crimes
to
the
central
repository
each
month.
The
repository
will
in
turn,
report
this
information
to
the
fbi.
Second,
it
requires
a
central
repository
to
make
this
information
publicly
available
section.
One
of
the
amendment
sets
out
the
requirements
for
reporting
by
law
enforcement
entities
and
follows
already
established
guidelines
for
what
will
be
included
in
the
monthly
reports
section.
H
Thank
you,
chair,
scheible
and
committee
for
hearing
sb
148
today.
I
hope
you'll
agree
with
me
that
codifying
in
statute,
the
requirements
for
data
collection
and
reporting
on
hate
crimes
is
vitally
important.
If
we
are
understand
and
shed
further
light
on
this
issue
in
a
consistent
and
meaningful
way,
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
may
have,
and
I
also
have
miss
mckay
and
the
center
repository
pulling
double
duty
today
and
they
are
available
to
answer
any
questions
as
well.
That
may
be
a
bit
more
technical.
A
F
Thank
you,
sir
schreibel.
Just
a
couple
of
questions
that
are
probably
more
technical
than
anything
else.
As
noted
nrs
179,
a
175
already
requires
this
information,
but
I
don't
see
at
least
there
any
specifications
any
guidance
on
to
how
we
make
those.
You
know
what
constitutes
the
manifestation
of
evidence
of
prejudice.
F
You
know,
what's
the
standard,
that's
going
to
be
used,
and
then
the
second
question,
if
I
may,
is
just
what
are
the
problems
currently
experienced,
and
why
would
we
go
from
to
a
monthly
report?
In
other
words,
what
will
that
other
than
you
know
quadrupling
the
amount
of
effort
that
the
law
enforcement
agencies
have
to
go
to?
How
does
that
rapid
fire
or
relatively
rapid
information?
What
does
that
do
differently
than
what
we
currently
do.
H
And
senator
pickard
to
you,
through
chair,
scheible
I'll,
go
ahead
and
take
your
second
question
first,
so
right
now
there
is
no
it's
not
that
they
are
currently
reporting
quarterly
and
I'm
changing
it
to
monthly.
The
way
the
bill
was
initially
drafted
was
going
to
require
a
quarterly
report.
It
is
my
understanding.
They
are
already
reporting
these
types
of
crimes,
monthly,
that
that
is
the
current
practice,
and
so
there
is
no
intention
to
create
any
additional
work
on
law
enforcement
agencies.
F
H
And
if
I
could,
I
would
like
to
bump
that
to
miss
mckay.
If
dps
is
still
there
and
available,
she
may
have
a
bit
more
insight
on
on
that.
E
Thank
you
hi
for
the
record.
Mindy
mckay
public
safety.
Senator
hammond
in
regard
to
the
standard
used
to
constitute
prejudice.
Is
that
what
I'm
understanding
your
question
to
be.
F
Yes,
where
do
we
find
the
standard
used
to
establish
what
constitutes
evidence?
I'm
trying
to
look
at
the
language
evidence
manifesting
evidence
of.
E
A
I
will
follow
up
with
our
legal
department
and
I
will
have
an
answer
for
the
committee
before
we
have
a
work
session
on
this.
If
we
do.
K
Thank
you,
chair
of
the
categories
that
that
are
listed,
the
one
that
seems
to
be
conspicuously
absent
is
sex.
For
example,
if
a
man
hates
a
woman
and
and
as
we
know,
rape
is
considered
a
violent
act
more
than
any
kind
of
a
sexual
act.
K
H
Senator
hansen
to
you
through
chair
scheible,
you
know,
that's
that's
a
great
question
and
I'm
not
looking
to
change
the
kind
of
current
standard
practice
around
hate
crime
reporting
here.
But
it's
it's
definitely
something
I'd
be
more
than
willing
to
to
have
a
conversation
with
you
about,
and
I
think
that
would
have
to
be
a
separate
bill.
K
K
So
if
I'm
a
victim
and
you're
a
victim
of
the
same
basic
thing
being
shot
for
whatever
reason,
I
don't
see
why
you
should
be
considered
an
enhanced
victim
category
than
I
would
so
just
I
just
want
to
get
that
on
the
record,
because
the
whole
hate
crime
thing
along
with
hate
speech,
and
all
that
I
I
think
it's
a
super
slippery
slope.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
But
I
do
want
to
point
the
committee
to
nrs
207.185,
which
is
the
current
hate
crime
statute,
and
that
defines
the
categories
or
classes
of
people
who
are
protected
and
for
whom
a
hate
crime
enhancement
would
apply
if
there
is
other
evidence
that
the
crime
was
motivated
by
hatred
or
bias,
and
this
my
reading
is
of
this
bill
is
that
it
is
consistent
with
those
definitions
set
forth
already
in
the
nrs,
which
was
established
by
this
legislative
body
and
senator
harris.
Did
you
want
to
respond
as
well.
H
Yes,
so
to
you
senator
hansen
through
you,
chair
scheible,
you
know
senator
hansen.
I
think
the
first
situation
you
described
in
which
someone
shoots
you
for
a
politically
motivated
reason
could,
under
certain
circumstances,
be
considered
terrorism.
We
have
something
that
that
kind
of
covers
politically
motivated
violence,
and
I
you
know
we're
we're
good
friends,
but
I
just
have
to
disagree
that
when
someone
shoots
you
simply
be
because
of
an
immutable
characteristic.
K
All
right
well,
thank
you,
chair,
and
thank
you
for
that
answer.
I
would
say
that
an
immutable
characteristic
would
also
be
one's
physical
sex,
so
I
would
think
that
that
would
be
a
category,
even
though,
as
the
chair
pointed
out,
our
current
statute
doesn't
cover
that
that
would
seem
to
me
to
be
a
category
that
we
should
certainly
include,
especially
in
this
day
and
age,
when
we
talk
about
sex
as
a
category
and
equal
rights
amendments
everything
else,
but
for
some
reason
in
the
hate
crimes
statutes,
we
failed
to
do
that.
B
H
To
use
senator
settlemeier
through
through
chair
scheible,
you
know,
by
making
this
information
publicly
available,
the
attorney
general
has
the
ability
to
receive
the
information
from
the
central
repository
and
I'll
I'll.
Let
you
know
the
reason
why
I
one
of
the
reasons
why
I
took
that
out
is
because
you
know.
I
know
that
the
central
repository
is
already
collecting
this
information
and
it
is
not
my
intention
to
actually
add
any
additional
work
for
anyone
here.
H
The
current
practice
is
just
submitted
to
the
central
repository
central
repository
is
submitting
it
to
the
fbi,
and
the
information
is
still
available
to
the
attorney
general
if
he
or
she
feels
that
they
need
to
access
it
for
any
reason,.
B
F
And
thank
you
man,
I'm
sure
I'm
just
I
didn't
catch
the
citation
to
the
statute
that
you
raised
and
I
just
wanted
to
go
back
to
that.
Can
you
repeat
that
please.
G
Thank
you
chair
and
not
really
a
question
just
a
comment.
I
want
to
thank
senator
harris
for
bringing
the
bill.
I
think
the
increase
in
hate
crimes
in
the
the
last
several
years
has
been
very
disturbing
and
I
think
more
information
more
transparency
is
to
everyone's
benefit.
So
I
just
want
to
thank
you
for
bringing
the
bill.
A
Thank
you
for
that
anybody
else
not
seeing
any.
We
will
move
now
to
testimony
and
support
of
sb
148.
I
I
L
A-N-D-R-E-W-A-D-E,
I
am
here
at
state
director
representing
service
data
quality
in
full
support
of
sb
148,
and
I
just
want
to
clarify
about
the
sex
being
missing
and
the
category.
L
I
would
say
that
gender
identity
would
satisfy
sex
not
being
mentioned
as
females
and
males
their
gender
identity
is
under
there.
So
if
there
is
a
concern
about
sex
being
removed,
you
might
want
to
consider
just
using
gender
identity,
but
nonetheless
in
school
support
for
sd-148,
because
to
the
previous
speaker,
the
increase
in
hate
crimes
is
concerning,
and
we
need
to
have
better
data
to
be
able
to
address
that
issue.
Thank
you
all
very
much.
I
I
G
Will
fregman
w-I-l-l-p
like
peter
r-e-g-m-a-n,
representing
battle,
born
progress,
we're
testifying
here
in
full
support
of
sb
148,
and
thanks
senator
harris
for
bringing
this
forth
hate
crimes
at
this
time,
especially
to
certain
communities
such
as
the
asian
american
community
are
at
an
all-time
high.
The
community
and
the
many
others
that
are
victims
of
hate
crimes
and
the
state
as
a
whole
will
benefit
from
the
expanded
reporting
on
hate
crimes
that
this
legislation
proposes.
G
I
J
A
I
see
that
we
have
ms
suzayamas
back
with
us
from
dps.
Why
don't
you
go
ahead
first
and
then
we'll
check
the
phone
lines,
but
if
mr
kyle,
if
you
could
just
prompt
anybody
who's
on
the
phone
to
go
ahead
and
queue
up.
I
C
All
right,
good
afternoon
again
for
the
record,
I'm
erica
suzuki
yamas
record
records
bureau
chief
with
the
department
of
public
safety
records,
communications
and
compliance
division
here
to
testify
neutral
on
senate
bill
148,
and
I
promise
this
one
will
be
much
shorter
than
the
last
one:
the
records
communications
and
compliance
division,
houses,
the
uniform
crime
reporting
program
responsible
for
receiving
and
reporting
crime
statistics
statewide
and
up
to
the
fbi,
which
includes
crimes
against
prejudice.
Statistics
pursuant
to
nrs
179.
C
A
175
division
also
houses
the
central
repository
for
nevada
records
of
criminal
history,
which
contains
statewide
records
of
criminal
history
submitted
by
agencies
of
criminal
justice
pursuant
to
multiple
subsections
within
nrs
chapter
179a,
to
include
arrest,
prosecution
and
sentencing
information
section.
One
of
this
bill
requires
each
state
or
local
law
enforcement
agency
in
this
state
to
submit
records
of
crimes
against
prejudice
to
the
central
repository.
C
Additionally,
it
requires
that
all
submitted
records
are
provided
to
the
fbi
and
to
issue
a
detailed
annual
report
regarding
crimes
against
prejudice
to
include
data
specific
to
prosecution
and
any
sentence
imposed.
The
division's
uniform
crime
reporting
program
recently
implemented
a
website
portal
that
allows
members
of
the
public
to
search
for
any
data
relating
to
crime
for
which
the
division
collects
to
include
crimes
against
prejudice.
C
The
division
already
forwards
this
information
to
the
fbi
in
accordance
with
28
usc
subsection
534
and
is
accessible
by
the
public
through
the
fbi's
public
website.
This
bill
will
also
require
the
central
repository
to
publish
a
separate
report
containing
the
crimes
against
prejudice
data
regarding
prosecution
and
any
sentence
imposed.
It
maintains
in
the
criminal
history
records
system.
The
division
is
able
to
meet
these
requirements
with
minimal
impact,
utilizing
existing
resources.
C
We
appreciate
senator
harris
supporting
us
this
cooperative
opportunity
and
are
happy
to
continue
to
assist
wherever
we
can.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
we're
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
I
I
L
L
We
did
sign
in
in
support
of
sb
148
in
its
original
version,
with
the
amendment
and
monthly
reporting
puts
me
in
a
position
where
I
don't
know.
If
all
of
my
members
could
meet
that,
currently
they
should
be
able
to
under
the
new
neighbors
system
once
that's
rolled
out
in
a
year
or
so.
So
the
amendment
moves
us
to
a
position
of
neutral
and
and
possibly
opposition
if
we
can't
meet
that
so
just
want
to
get
that
on
the
record.
So
thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
All
right,
thank
you
so
much
and
mr
spratley,
I'm
sure
that
senator
harris
would
be
happy
to
work
with
you
on
those
concerns
and
she's
nodding.
Her
head.
I
also
see
a
virtual
hand
raised
and
we
do
have
a
little
bit
of
time.
So
I
will
return
to
you
senator
picker.
Do
you
have
a
question
or
a
comment.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
really
do
appreciate
that
I
think
third
bite
at
the
apple
here.
I
was
just
wondering
if
miss
suziamis
can
tell
me
how
often
these
reports
are
currently
coming
in,
since
that
was
an
open
question
from
before.
A
H
You
mind
if
I
just
I
want
to
quickly
just
thank
the
entire
department
of
public
safety
for
their
assistance
and
cooperation
on
not
only
this
bill,
but
a
few
of
the
others
I'm
working
on
and
their
help
has
been
invaluable.
So
I
really
appreciate
it.
A
A
All
right
thanks
so
much
then
that
concludes
our
meeting.
We
will
be
adjourned
until
tomorrow
at.