►
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
very
much,
madam
secretary.
I
want
to
call
this
afternoon's
meeting
of
the
senate
committee
on
legislative
operations
and
elections
to
order.
Madam
secretary,
we
do
have
a
quorum,
please
mark
majority
leader
kanzara
present
when
she
arrives
we're
going
to
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
315.
Thank
you,
assemblyman
o'neil
for
being
here.
B
Thank
you
chair
for
having
me
in
committee
members.
I
appreciate
the
time
today.
I
know
we're
rushed,
so
I'm
going
to
give
you
a
very
short
statement
on
ab
315,
a
bill
relating
to
mental
health
incidents
or
support
for
our
first
responders
for
the
record.
I'm
pk
o'neal
assemblyman
for
assembly
district
40,
which
covers
all
of
carson
city
and
parts
of
southeast
washoe
county.
B
The
proposed
legislation
that
I
have
before
you
today
seeks
to
require
employing
agencies
to
provide
mental
health,
post-traumatic
stress
disorder
or
ptsd,
and
suicide
prevention
information
to
their
employees
and
provide
a
maximum
of
two
hours
with
a
mental
health
expert
upon
retirement
to
learn
or
deal
with
the
symptoms
of
mental
health.
Incidences
such
as
alcoholism,
suicide
and
mainly
post-traumatic
stress
syndrome.
B
I
can
tell
you
personally
that
since
I
became
an
officer
many
years
ago,
law
enforcement
and
firefighters
have
for
years
been
competing
almost
for
the
number
one
spot
in
suicides
across
our
country.
I
see
the
importance
of
that.
I've
had
friends,
unfortunately,
people
that
I've
worked
with
commit
suicide,
and
so
that's
what
brought
me
to
bring
forth
this
this
bill.
B
A
C
Thank
you,
chair
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
steve
gramas,
I'm
the
president
of
the
las
vegas
police,
protective
association,
I'm
also
a
police
officer
with
las
vegas
metropolitan
police
department.
I
represent
approximately
3
500
commissioned
law
enforcement
officers
down
in
southern
nevada.
We
appreciate
assemblyman
o'neil,
bringing
this
bill
forward.
C
Go
ahead,
hello,
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
troyce
cromie
t-r-o-y-c-e
k-r-u-m-m-e.
I
I'm
the
vice
chairman
of
the
las
vegas
police
managers
and
supervisors
association
rising
in
support
of
this
bill.
I'd
like
to
thank
assemblyman
o'neill
for
bringing
this
forward
after
20
years
in
law
enforcement.
I
can
tell
you
that
I
have
personally
seen
and
read
too
many
stories
of
law
enforce
first,
responding
professionals
having
trouble
dealing
with
some
of
the
feelings
that
come
about
in
this
profession
and
deciding
to
take
their
own
life.
C
A
A
A
Thank
you
very
much
broadcasting.
Now
I
would
like
to
go
back
to
the
committee
room
in
carson
city.
Anyone
who's
neutral
on
the
measure
wants
to
be
heard
on
the
record.
I
don't
see
anyone
coming
forward
in
carson
city
broadcasting.
Can
we
go
to
the
phone
lines
for
neutral
testimony
on
assembly
bill
315.
A
B
B
B
So
I
just
would
ask
you
very
strongly
to
please
support
this
and
help
me
on
the
floor
to
get
it
moving
forward
and
with
that
that
would
conclude
my
statements
and
I
would
ask
after
we
can
you
close
testimony.
I
would
like
to
make
a
comment
on
the
upcoming
bill
and
then
leave
I've
got
to
get
to
a
committee
meeting
upstairs.
Please.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Assemble
neil
o'neil.
Thank
you
for
bringing
the
bill.
Thank
you
for
your
service
to
our
state,
both
in
the
legislature
and
as
a
law
enforcement
officer
protecting
our
citizens.
I'd
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
315
members.
Is
there
an
appetite
to
move
this
bill
today?
I'd
accept
a
motion.
E
Yes
chair,
I
move
that
we
I'm
in,
is
it
amended?
Do
you
pass.
A
E
I
just
think
this.
I
just
want
to
get
this
on
the
record
that
I
think
this
is
so
important
and
I'm
we
talked
yesterday
and
I
went
back
up
and
read
the
bill,
and
I
just
think
it's
so
important
that
we
do
this
for
people
that
give
service
and
do
great
things
for
our
communities
and
thank
you
so
much
for
bringing
it
forward.
A
Thank
you
vice
chair,
any
senator
buck.
No,
all
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
any
opposed.
Madam
secretary,
please
mark
note
that
it
passed
three
affirmative
votes
and
excuse.
Senator
sivers,
gansart
and
majority
leader
kanazaro
are
excused
and
I'd
like
to
give
the
floor
statement
to
vice
chair
lang
and
thank
you.
Thank
you,
someone
for
bringing
the
bill
and
appreciate
your
hard
work
on
this
measure.
B
E
A
Thank
you
very
much,
and
now
I
I
I
like
to
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
65
and
before
we
go
to
our
presenters
with
your
with
everyone's
indulgence,
chair,
wallen
and
miss
chase.
I
wonder
if
I
could
allow
assemblyman
o'neill
to
make
some
brief
comments.
As
a
former
member
of
the
ethics
commission,
he
represented
me.
He
wanted
to
make
some
comments
in
support
of
the
bill.
Then
he
has
to
run
over
to
assembly
judiciary.
A
B
Thank
you
chair
and
committee
members.
I
know
this
is
putting
the
cart
in
front
of
the
horse,
but
we
only
have
yes.
Thirty
five
four
hours
left
ab65
you're
going
to
hear
testimony
on
it
coming
up
shortly.
I
served
four
years
on
our
state
ethics
commission.
Unfortunately,
during
that
time
and
prior,
I
was
involved
with
incidences
involving
legislators
on
ethics,
alleged
ethics
violations.
B
There's
an
amendment
to
ab65
separating
out
the
legislature
from
the
authority
of
the
state
ethics
commission,
and
I
just
wanted
to
give
the
support
to
that.
There's
several
things
in
the
bill.
I
could
go
into
detail
in
support
of,
but
that
particularly
because
it
really
we
look
at
separation
of
power
of
the
legislative
branch,
the
judicial
branch
and
the
executive
branch,
and
it
was
difficult.
B
Four
of
the
members
of
the
committee
are
appointed
by
the
legislature
as
four
of
are
appointed
by
the
governor.
So
when
a
legislature
legislature,
who
was
involved
in
an
incident,
would
come
before
it
was
always
an
argument
and
and
confusing
some
of
them
had
relationships.
I
know
I
had
relationships
or
friendships
with
some
of
the
legislators
and
I
had
to
recuse
myself.
Some
others
had
to
recuse
themselves
because
they
were
supported
by
the
legislators
we
have
in
the
past
the
legis.
The
legislature,
I
know,
has
an
ethics
commission.
B
I
just
wanted
to
say
the
amendment
is
exactly
what
we
need
in
that
separation
and
I
do
believe
that
we
as
legislators
can
handle
their
own.
I
think
of
law
enforcement.
The
agency
we
had
internal
affairs
or
they're
also
called
office
of
professional
responsibility.
We'd
handle
our
own
incidents
and
please,
I
think
we
are
grown-ups
adults.
A
Unbiased
opinion
there
I'm
sure,
thank
you,
assemblyman
o'neil.
Thank
you
for
your
service
on
the
ethics
commission
in
the
past
and
appreciate
your
work
on
both
these
bills
and
and
please
I
don't
want
to
keep
you.
I
know
you've
got
run
up
to
assembly
judiciary.
So
thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
being
here.
A
F
F
Ab65
will
help
to
do
that
by
improving
the
protection
of
whistleblowers,
which
is
very
important,
especially
now.
In
fact,
in
the
2020
global
business
ethics
survey
from
the
ethics
and
compliance
initiative,
they
found
the
highest
percentage
ever
for
reporting
misconduct,
but
they're
also
seeing
a
tremendous
increase
in
retaliation,
retaliation
has
tripled
since
2013
and
doubled
since
2017,
and
it
continues
to
get
worse.
We're
also
seeing
a
20-year
high
for
employees
being
pressured
to
bend
the
rules
and
commit
wrongdoing.
F
Ab65
will
also
streamline
some
of
our
processes
allowing
us
to
operate
more
efficiently.
It
also
provides
additional
due
process
for
the
individuals
who
have
had
a
complaint
filed
against
him.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
of
this
bill,
and
now
I
will
have
commission
counsel.
Tracy
chase,
give
you
the
highlights
of
the
bill
and
answer
any
questions
you
may
have.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
A
Thank
you
very
much
chair
walden
and
thank
you
for
your
continued
service
to
our
state.
I
think
it's
probably
I
don't
think
we've
ever
it's
so
rare
someone
with
your
experience
in
state
government
chairing
the
ethics
commission.
Thank
you
very
much
miss
chase
unless
there
any
questions
for
chair,
wallen
or
ms
chase.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you,
tracy
chase,
commission
counsel
for
the
record
good
evening.
I
would
like
to
first
thank
the
committee
and
the
chair
for
your
consideration.
Today.
I
will
be
provide
a
very
abbreviated
presentation
on
assembly
bill
65,
because
I
know
how
busy
you
are
this
evening
and
both
the
chair
and
I
are
available
for
questions.
G
Ap
65
is
an
important
legislation
for
the
commission,
because
it
addresses
a
number
of
procedural
issues
that
the
commission
has
faced
in
the
past
few
years.
Essentially,
the
bill
serves
to
clarify
three
areas
of
the
nevada,
ethics
and
government
law
associated
with
ethics,
complaints,
advisory
opinions,
the
ethical
standards
of
conduct
and
administrative
matters,
starting
with
requests
for
ethics,
complaints
and
advisory
opinions.
The
bill
clarifies
and
enhances
procedure
for
transparency
and
whistleblower
protections
for
certain
requesters
of
ethics
complaint.
G
It
authorizes
the
executive
director
and
the
commission
council
to
provide
immediate
informal
confidential
advice
to
public
officers
or
public
employees
which
may
be
relied
on
by
them
and
which
is
also
subject
to
review
by
the
commission
on
the
ethical
standards
of
conduct.
The
bill
does
make
some
changes
to
the
cooling
off
period
by
limiting
it
to
those
at
the
higher
level
of
management.
G
Ab65
further
confirms
that
a
public
officer
or
public
employee's
duties
relating
to
disclosure
and
abstention
under
the
ethics
law
would
not
extend
to
protect,
would
not
extend
to
revealing
confidential
information
that
is
otherwise
protected
by
law.
Some
administrative
changes
are
set
forth
in
the
bill
as
well.
It
clarifies
that
the
confidentiality
protections
for
both
advisory
opinions
and
the
processes
related
to
ethics
complaint
hearings.
G
One
of
the
amendments
I
want
to
bring
your
attention
to
is
the
amendment
to
section
8
of
the
bill
which
exempts
those
public
officers
and
employees
that
provide
representation
to
subject
of
ethics,
complaints
from
the
witness
cooperation
measures
set
forth
in
the
bill.
The
other
amendment
is
to
section
22
to
remove
the
requirement
that
the
executive
director
be
an
attorney
that
will
not
harm
the
commission
because
they
can
always
have
that
preference
in
hiring.
G
A
A
I
think
the
only
question
I
have
here
it
is
I'm
looking
at
page
53
of
the
first
reprint
section
46
in
terms
of
the
documents
that
would
be
kept
confidential.
If
the
commission
decides
to
keep
the
identity
the
requester
confidential,
how
would
that
be
a
change
from
current
law
in
terms
of
those
documents,
those
records.
A
H
H
In
addition,
the
statute
governing
the
legislative
council
bureau
allows
the
officers
of
the
legislative
council
bureau,
including
general
counsel,
to
make
recommendations
to
the
legislature
when
the
piece
of
legislation
affects
the
operations
of
the
lcb,
and
in
this
case
the
amendment
that
was
adopted
by
the
assembly
dealing
with
the
nevada
legislative
ethics
law
has
an
impact
on
the
legislative
council
bureau.
So
I
am
authorized
under
law
to
answer
questions
on
any
impacts
that
they
may
have
on
the
lcb.
H
Just
so
it's
clear
the
proposed,
I'm
sorry.
The
amendment
adopted
by
the
assembly
amendment
777
included
all
of
the
components
that
miss
chase
mentioned,
in
particular
the
two
amendments
requested
by
the
ethics
commission.
They
were
included
in
those
sections,
as
miss
chase
mentioned.
In
addition,
sections
55
through
112
were
added
by
amendment
777
in
the
assembly
and
that's
what
I'm
going
to
focus
on,
provide
an
objective
legal
analysis
and
overview
of
the
legal
effects
of
that
part
of
the
bill
as
it
stands
now,
starting
with
section
56.
H
Before
I
move
into
some
of
the
details
of
the
sections,
it's
important
to
have
some
background
on
the
role
of
each
house
of
the
legislature.
With
regard
to
ethics
and
discipline
of
its
members
under
article
4,
section
6
of
the
nevada
constitution,
each
house
has
exclusive
and
plenary
constitutional
powers
to
adopt
the
rules
of
its
proceedings
and
discipline.
Its
measure
members
and
with
the
concurrence
of
two-thirds
of
its
members,
expel
a
legislator
from
their
appropriate
house.
H
In
addition,
there
are
non-core
legislative
functions
where
the
houses
and
the
commission
on
ethics
share
concurrent
jurisdiction
over
those
ethical
matters.
In
those
cases,
if
there's
an
ethical
violation,
a
legislator
or
a
legislator
officer
employee
could
be
subject
to
discipline
by
the
house
of
the
legislature
and
by
the
commission
on
ethics.
H
Some
examples
of
non-core
legislative
functions
that
are
subject
to
the
ethics
laws
are
the
prohibition
on
a
legislator
using
governmental
time,
property
equipment
or
services
for
a
personal
purpose,
there's
prohibitions
on
legislators
and
other
employees
entering
into
contracts
with
state
and
local
government,
and
there's
prohibition
on
legislators
and
other
employees
receiving
honorarium,
which
is
a
fee
for
a
speech
or
appearance.
Those
are
non-core
legislative
functions
in
which
there's
concurrent
jurisdiction
with
the
houses
and
the
ethics
commission.
H
So,
with
that
in
mind,
the
goal
then,
of
course,
is
to
ensure
that
the
existing
ethical
standards
that
are
in
nrs
chapter
281a,
which
is
what
is
ministered
by
the
efforts
commission,
continue
to
apply
to
the
legislative
branch
of
government.
What
that
means
is
that
you'll
see
obviously
a
lot
of
new
language
in
section
in
sections
55
through
112..
However,
a
good
portion
of
that
is
copying.
The
existing
provisions
from
chapter
21,
a
281a
of
nrs
and
moving
them
into
this
new
chapter
in
title
17
governing
the
state
legislative
department.
H
So
that's
the
overarching
goal
of
the
legislative
ethics
law
is
to
ensure
the
highest
standards
of
ethical
behavior
are
practiced
in
the
legislature.
Sections
through
77
established
definitions
for
the
legislative
ethics
law.
Again,
a
lot
of
these
definitions
are
taken
verbatim
from
chapter
281a
of
nrs
and
now
will
be
applied
in
this
chapter
governing
the
legislative
department.
H
What
it
provides
is
that
each
of
those
commissions
will
have
jurisdiction
to
investigate
and
take
appropriate
actions
regarding
an
alleged
violation
of
the
legislative
ethical
standards
by
a
legislative
officer
employee
on
any
ethics
complaint.
That's
filed
within
two
years
after
the
alleged
violation
or
reasonable
discovery
of
the
alleged
violation
that
two-year
statute
of
limitations
matches
the
existing
statute
of
limitations
in
the
ethics
law
in
chapter
281a
of
nrs.
H
In
addition,
section
78
and
82
make
clear
that
the
statutory
ethical
standards
in
this
new
chapter
will
supplement
the
existing
ethical
standards
in
the
rules
adopted
by
each
house
and
the
joint
rules
adopted
by
both
houses,
and
there
are
ethical
standards
currently
in
standing
rule,
23
assembly,
standing
rule
23
and
the
joint
standing
rules
which
create
the
legislative
code
of
ethical
standards.
So
this
is
going
to
be
statutory,
ethical
standards
that
supplement
existing,
rule-based
ethical
standards
and
the
statutes
bribe.
H
H
The
assembly
commission
will
have
jurisdiction
over
all
legislative
officers,
employees
of
the
assembly,
and
then
the
joint
commission
will
have
jurisdiction
over
all
other
legislative
officers,
employees,
which
generally
means
the
officers
and
employees
of
the
legislative
council
bureau.
The
reason
for
that
is
obviously
the
lcb
is
a
non-partisan
legal
agency,
and
so
we
serve
both
houses
of
the
legislature.
H
So
a
joint
commission
warned
of
members
of
the
senate
and
members
of
the
assembly
would
be
the
ones
that
hear
ethics,
complaints
against
an
officer
employee
of
the
lcb
and
therefore
both
houses
would
be
contributing
to
that
ethical
review.
Sections
91
and
1
102
established
the
membership
of
each
of
those
commissions.
The
provisions
for
alternate
members,
the
provisions
for
vacancies
payment
of
members,
all
these
standard,
statutory
provisions
that
go
along
with
creating
legislative
bodies
like
this.
H
H
The
senate
commission,
the
assembly
commissioner,
or
the
joint
commission
and
there's
a
procedure
for
each
of
those
commissions
to
conduct
adjudicatory
hearings
if
necessary,
and
also
there's
remedies
and
penalties
involved
from
issuing
letters
of
caution
and
instruction
to
admonishment
and
reprimand
and
censure
the
imposition
of
civil
penalties
and
the
referral
of
the
matter
to
each
respective
house.
For
if
it's
a
legislator
and
they're
subject
to
the
jurisdiction
of
their
house.
H
And
finally,
the
last
section
section
112
makes
it
clear-
and
this
is
also
provision-
that's
in
the
ethics
law
in
281-
a
that
these
provisions
do
not
abrogate
or
decrease
the
effect
of
any
provisions
of
nrs
which
define
crimes
or
prescribe
punishments
with
respect
to
the
conduct
of
legislative
officers
and
employees.
So,
obviously,
a
legislative
officer
employee,
who
commits
an
ethical
violation
subject
to
the
jurisdiction
of
these
three
ethics
commissions,
subject
to
potential
jurisdiction
of
the
house
and
also
subject
to
the
potential
jurisdiction
of
criminal
prosecution.
A
E
Thank
you
so
much
chair,
ornshaw
and
sorry,
I'm
a
little
new
to
this.
But
what
if
the
complaint
is
against
the
was
filed
against
the
speaker
or
the
majority
leader
or
both.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
for
the
record
kevin
powers,
general
counsel,
lcb,
legal,
the
speaker
or
the
majority
leader
are
members
of
the
legislature
and
they
are
subject
to
the
same
disciplinary
power
as
any
other
member
of
the
legislature.
So
if
a
complaint
was
filed
against
the
majority
leader
of
the
speaker,
it
would
be
submitted
to
the
legislative
council
who
would
review
the
matter
with
the
chair
of
the
appropriate
commission,
either
the
senate,
commission
or
assembly
commission.
If
her
chance,
the
speaker
or
the
majority
leader,
was
the
chair
of
that
commission.
H
And
if
the
respective
commission
determined
that
an
adjudicatory
hearing
was
necessary,
then
the
judicator
hearing
against
the
speaker,
a
majority,
would
leader
would
occur
and
if
they
were
found
to
have
committed
a
violation,
they'd
be
subject
to
punishment
by
the
respective
senate,
commission
or
ethics,
commission
or
assembly
ethics
commission,
and
in
addition,
they
would
be
subject
to
potential
punishment
by
their
house.
No
member
of
the
legislature
is
excluded
from
punishment
by
their
own
house
or
under
this
bill
by
a
senate,
commission
or
an
assembly
commission.
H
E
Thank
you,
chair
orange
cell.
So,
basically
you,
if
you
control
the
majority,
then
the
people
in
that
body
will
be
able
to
decide
whether
it's
ethical
or
not.
H
So
the
process
that
set
forth
in
section
55
to
112
of
this
legislation
is
not
unusual.
In
fact,
it's
what
the
framers
of
the
nevada
constitution
contemplated
by
giving
each
house
exclusive
power
over
the
discipline
of
its
members,
the
framers
determined
that
each
house
should
conduct
its
proceedings
to
ensure
that
they're
ethical
and
that
each
member
is
invested
with
the
power
to
determine
for
themselves
whether
a
other
another
member's
conduct
violates
ethical
standards.
H
So
if
the
majority
leader
or
the
speaker
or
any
other
member
of
the
legislature
or
to
commit
an
ethical
violation
right
now,
without
this
legislation,
they'd
be
subject
to
punishment
by
their
house.
This
legislation
also
gives
the
additional
punishment
from
the
senate,
commission,
the
assembly,
commission
and
the
joint
commission
created
by
this
legislation.
H
A
One
question
I
have,
and
maybe
I'm
missing
it
in
the
bill-
is
you
know
an
existing
the
existing
ethics
statutes.
A
I
believe
that
someone
who's
a
perhaps
a
government,
employee
or
a
member
of
a
board
can
ask
for
an
opinion
from
their
counsel
and
then,
if
at
a
later
date,
the
ethics
commission
disagreed
with
that
that
attorney's
opinion
they
they
no
safe.
Harbor
is
the
right
word,
but
they
they
they're,
allowed
to
show
the
ethics
commission
that
they
they
did
seek
advice
to
their
counsel.
A
D
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
for
the
record
kevin
powers,
general
counsel,
lcb
legal.
There
is
a
provision
in
the
ethics
law
that
provides
a
sort
of
safe
harbor
if
before
the
act
occurs,
the
public
officer,
employee,
gets
legal
advice
from
the
council
for
the
public
employer
they
work
for,
and
if
that
advice
is
consistent
with
the
published
opinions
of
the
commission,
then,
if
they're
found
to
have
committed
a
violation
that
determination
that
they
sought
an
opinion
and
followed,
it
will
reduce
the
violation
from
a
willful
violation
to
a
non-willful
violation.
H
There's
proposal
in
this
legislation
that
would
change
that
slightly
for
the
ethics
commission.
That
being
said,
there's
no
similar
provision
that
was
included
in
sections
55
to
112,
which
is
the
legislative
ethics
law.
The
reason
for
that
is
right
now
under
statute,
the
members
of
the
legislature
can
receive
the
advice
of
lcb
legal,
and
we
can
now
provide
that
advice
already
on
matters
of
ethics
and
other
matters
of
law.
H
It
will
be
up
to
the
senate,
commission
and
the
assembly
commission
and
joint
commission
to
determine
what
way
to
give
lcb
legals
advice
when
they
provide
that
advice
to
the
particular
legislator.
However,
we
expect
that,
because
the
legislature
generally
follows
the
advice
of
lcb
legal,
that
the
each
of
the
respective
commissions
would
afford
deference
to
lcb
legal's
interpretation
of
the
statutory
ethical
standards
and
the
standards
in
the
rules
of
each
house,
and
that's
how
it
we
generally
proceed
now.
H
So
we
didn't
believe
there
was
a
necessary
element
to
statutorily
codify,
which
is
a
pro
which
a
process
exists
already
for
lcb
legal,
to
provide
that
legal
advice
and
for
the
legislative
branch
to
give
deference
to
that
legal
advice.
A
F
Miss
mr
mr
chair,
david
hall,
is
not
presenting
from
the
ethics
commission,
so.
A
E
Thank
you
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
david
dazzlich,
director
of
government
affairs
for
the
vegas
chamber.
It's
been
a
long-standing
legislative
priority
of
the
chamber
to
support
legislation
that
promotes
good
governance
through
ethical
ethical
procedures,
we'd
like
to
thank
the
ethics
commission
for
all
their
good
work
on
this.
We
believe
that
this
bill
does
promote
transparency
and
accountability,
and
we
are
in
support.
Thank
you.
A
A
Thank
you
we'll
come
back
to
the
committee
room
here
in
carson
city,
we'll
go
to
opposition
anyone
who
is
opposed
to
assembly
bill
65
and
wants
to
testify
on
the
record.
I'm
not
seeing
anyone
come
forward
here
in
the
committee
room
broadcasting.
Can
we
go
to
the
phone
lines?
Opposition
on
assembly,
bill,
65.
A
Thank
you
very
much
broadcasting
we'll
come
back
to
the
committee
room,
one
more
time
neutral
anyone
who's
neutral
on
the
measure
and
wants
to
speak
on
the
record
here
in
the
committee
room.
Don't
see
anyone
here
in
the
committee
room
broadcasting.
Can
we
go
to
the
phone
lines
neutral
on
assembly
bill
65.
A
F
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
and
I
think
this
is
a
very
good
bill
and
I
hope
it
gets
passed
and
goes
through.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
your
support
in
all
these
years
as
well.
Mr
chair.
A
Well,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
your
hard
work
on
this
measure.
Thank
you,
miss
chase.
Thank
you,
mr
bowers,
with
that
we'll
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
65
and
I
am
missing
two
of
my
members
right
now,
so
I
believe
we'll
go
to
we'll
go
to
public
comment
and
then
we'll
take
a
recess
and
we
will
hopefully
meet
either
later
in
the
committee
room
or
maybe
down
on
the
floor,
brought
any
public
comment
here
in
the
committee
room.
Anyone
who
wishes
to
make
public
comment
broadcasting
even
go
to
the
phone
line
someone's
come.
A
Okay,
thank
you
with
that.
We
are
going
to
be
at
ease
for
just
a
moment.
A
Members
will
come
back
to
order.
Thank
you
for
all
sticking
around.
We
just
heard
assembly
bill
65
and
given
our
impending
adjournment
of
session
tomorrow
night,
I
wonder
if
there'd
be
an
appetite
to
move
this
right
now
I
have
a
do
pass
motion
from
vice
churling.
Is
there
a
second.
F
A
I
have
a
second
from
senator
buck,
any
discussion
on
the
motion
and
no
discussion,
all
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
aye
any
opposed.
Madam
secretary,
please
note
that
it
part
it
passed
with
three
in
the
affirmative
and
majority
leader
cannazaro
senator
sievers
cancer
are
excused
with
that.
We
will
once
again
be
in
a
recess
and
we
probably
don't
have
any
weather
work
to
do,
but
if
we
do
it'll
be
real
short
and
on
the
floor
most
likely.
Thank
you
members
for
being
so
flexible.
Thank
you.