►
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
And
call
senate
revenue
to
order.
Mr
secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
A
Here
so
mark
the
senator
ratty
and
senator
kiki
for
absent,
excuse
there
in
other
meetings,
we're
just
going
to
go
ahead
and
get
started,
we're
going
to
open
up
the
hearing
for
ab363
and
welcome
assemblywoman.
C
C
I'm
sure
that
many
of
you
at
this
time
have
been
contacted
either
by
email
letter
or
in
person
or
telephone
calls
from
various
people
regarding
either
their
support
opposition
confusion
regarding
senate
or
assembly
bill
363,
and
I'm
hopeful
that
in
my
presentation,
in
your
review
of
the
actual
bill
language,
you
will
understand
what
the
intent
is
and
where
what
this
bill
seeks
to
do.
So
with
that,
I
will
start
just
some
general
background
for
you
all.
You
know
the
inspiration
from
this
bill.
C
Despite
what
some
of
the
emails
from
my
own
neighbors
from
people
that
are
like
providing
stuff
didn't
come
from
any
industry
player,
I
wasn't
approached
by
a
casino
I
wasn't
approached
by
airbnb.
I
wasn't
approached
by
realtors.
I
wasn't
approached
by
neighborhoods
it
kind
of
initially
it
started
my
discussion.
Just
in
my
own
home.
I
live
in
the
city
of
las
vegas.
I
live
approximately
two
miles
away
from
las
vegas
boulevard.
I
live
in
a
district
that
is
predominantly
not
under
the
control
of
any
homeowners
associations.
C
So
most
of
my
district,
I
think
I've
heard
estimates
between
like
70
and
87
percent
of
my
district
are
not
with
under
an
hoa,
and
so
why
is
that
important?
A
lot
of
neighborhoods
that
are
hoas
have
some
of
those
protections
I
prefer
to
live
in
a
non-hoa.
I
love
my
community.
I
love
my
neighborhood,
I
know
my
neighbors,
I
know
their
dogs,
I
know
their
pets,
my
family
lives
there.
C
It's
me
my
kids,
my
husband,
my
father,
my
father-in-law,
our
dog,
so
it
is
very
much
my
home
and
I
don't
plan
on
leaving
and
I
don't
want
it
to
turn
into
a
mini
hotel
strip
outside
of
the
strip,
and
so
you
know
we've
seen
party
homes
in
in
and
out
and
throughout
assembly
district
10
as
well
as
many
of
you
have
probably
experienced
them
in
your
own
neighborhoods
in
your
own
homes.
C
But
for
me
it
wasn't
so
much
just
about
like
party
homes,
which
I
think
are
problematic.
I
also
had
concerns
about
my
neighborhood
just
being
taken
over
like
I've
seen,
unfortunately
in
other
communities
within
our
state,
where
there
haven't
been
regulations
on
strs,
where
I
would
walk
out
and
my
kids
would
not
have
anyone
to
go
to
school
with
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
play
with
anyone
and
not
because
there
was
a
party
house
across
the
street,
but
there
were
no
long-term
residents,
and
so
just
in
learning
and
talking
with
different
people
and
other
representatives.
C
Obviously
it's
impossible
for
me
to
meet
with
every
single
neighborhood
association
group,
every
single
neighbor.
I
did
rely
on
meeting
with
those
representatives.
We
do
have
a
representative
democracy,
so
I
have
met
with
the
neighboring
like
assembly,
representatives
and
senators,
including
my
own,
senator
about
the
issues
that
we
saw
in
our
own
neighborhoods
and
what
we
could
do
to
curtail
that
what
assembly
bill
363
does
is
one.
It
adds
guard
rails.
It
allows
local
jurisdictions
to
maintain
and
keep
their
ordinances,
they
can
make
ordinances
and
they
can
expressly
allow
for
the
enforcement
of
those
ordinances.
C
Second,
it
also
seeks
to
perfect
protect
nevadans,
especially
from
the
spread
of
unregulated,
illegal,
short-term
rentals.
It
also
protects
our
workers
who
are
employed
and
have
fought
hard
to
make
sure
that
they
have
safe
working
conditions
within
our
tourism
industry
and
also
seeks
to
prevent,
protect
nevadans
from
rising
house
costs
associated
with
unregulated
proliferation
of
short-term
rentals.
The
bill
also
enables
and
allows
local
jurisdictions
to
expressly
impose
fines
based
on
their
ordinances
that
they
have
created.
C
C
This
bill
sets
guard
rails.
These
are
like
the
floor
and
ceilings
of
like
our
like
the
ordinances
that
these
local
jurisdictions
can
do.
In
all
of
these
cases,
the
the
city
ordinances
can
be
more
strict
than
what
they
are.
So,
for
example,
this
sets
a
guard
rail
at
660
feet
as
a
separation
distance
requirement.
C
It
sets
a
minimum
occupancy
of
16
people
in
a
house.
Those
are
the
minimum
and
maximum,
so
no
jurisdiction
can
set
their
their
levels
lower
than
that
660
feet.
So,
for
example,
in
the
city
of
las
vegas
they
have
owner
occupied
and
the
distance
requirement
is
660
feet.
Under
the
provisions
express
provisions
of
ab363,
they
will
be
able
to
maintain
and
keep
those
ordinances
that
they
fought
so
hard
to
like
enact.
C
I
think,
what's
also
important
is
without
this
bill.
Counties
and
cities
do
not
have
the
expressed
authority
to
impose
the
fines
that
are
contained
in
here.
They
have
ordinances.
I
know
that
in
clark
county
they
have
struggled
to
be
able
to
have
that
authority
to
impose
fines
and
be
able
to
impose
those
fines.
C
The
collection
is
something
that
was
obviously
addressed
in
another
bill
that,
unfortunately
it
doesn't
appear
that
it
is,
but
that's
not
included
in
this
bill,
but
this
does
give
them
the
expressed
opportunity
expressed
authority
to
impose
those
fines
and
fees
on
strs,
as
well
as
those
platform
providers
that
are
also
doing
that.
So
it
does
have
that
platform
liability
component
as
well
without
this
bill.
C
You
know
we
these
same
lobbying
groups
that
are
like
seeking
to,
I
think
part
of
the
interest
in
wanting
to
see
ab363
fail
is
because
they
want
to
be
able
to
these
short-term
rental
platforms
and
other
people
that
are
trying
they
want
to
have
like
expressed
authorization
to
exist,
but
they
also
want
to
be
able
to
exist
with
no
limitations
and
no
guard
rails
and
we've
seen
that
happen.
Unfortunately,
in
other
aspects
of
the
state,
this
also
closes
corporate
loopholes.
C
Without
this
bill,
our
local
governments
and
schools
are
also
missing
out.
The
revenue
is
not
something
that's
first
and
foremost
for
me,
but
I
think
it
is
interesting
to
note
that
there
was
an
article
in
the
las
vegas
review
journal
that
talked
about
how
there
was
an
estimated
45
million
dollars
in
lost
room
tax
parity
that
we
were
missing
out
and,
as
many
of
you
know
that
sit
on
this
committee
at
least
a
quarter
of
that
goes
to
our
local
schools.
C
So
we
currently
without
this
bill
have
a
system
where
we
have
millions
of
dollars
annually,
conservatively
that
are
going
unregulated
untaxed
and
that's
directly
being
taken
out
of
the
you
know
our
local
governments,
as
well
as
our
schools,
and
so
that
is
it
without
this
bill.
Short-Term
rental
platforms
currently
do
not
have
to
post
the
licenses
on
their
platforms.
This
also
gives
them
the
ability
to
they
have
to
post
that
like
license.
C
They
have
to
post
that
on
their
platform,
and
if
they
don't
have
that
platform,
and
they
don't
have
it
verified
on
there,
then
there's
accountability
there
for
it
to
be
taken
down
and
for
the
local
jurisdictions
to
be
able
to
pull
those
lists
and
say:
hey.
All
of
these
people
are
operating
unlawfully.
If
they're
posting
like
false
numbers,
they
can
go
after
them
in
other
aspects,
whether
it's
civil
or
criminal,
based
on
their
local
ordinances,
to
show
that
they
are
either
doing
business
without
a
license
or
they're
fraudulently.
C
C
That
is
mostly
some
clarifying
language
that
was
proposed
by
clark
county,
as
well
as
the
city
of
henderson
and
the
city
of
las
vegas,
so
that
amendment
is
one
through
six
that
had
some
like
clarifying
language
that
they
asked
for.
In
order
to
do
it.
I
know
that
clark
county
also
submitted
an
amendment
I
think
it
was
submitted
today.
C
It
starts
with
section
7
if
you're
looking
on
nellis.
I
do
see
that
as
a
friendly
amendment-
and
I
will
tell
you-
there
was
another
amendment
that
was
proposed,
I
believe
by
boulder
city,
and
that
is
not
a
friendly
amendment.
So
I
do
not
see
that
as
a
friendly
amendment,
I
had
jurisdictions
that
do
not
want
to
regulate
their
short-term
rentals.
They
want
to
maintain
their
bans
and
on
the
flip
side,
they've
also
argued
that
they
would
like
to
be
opted
into
the
bill
only
for
enforcement
provisions.
C
But
I
think
if
you
are
going
to
go
down
this
road,
that
you
need
to
be
in
a
position
where
you
are
being
regulated-
and
you
are
also
doing
this-
so
it
does
put
it
on
these
local
jurisdictions
to
start
protecting
our
community,
and
so
with
that
I
will
open
it
up
for
any
questions.
The
committee
might
have
remembers
any.
D
C
So
I
want
to
make
sure
the
intent
is
clear.
I
know
as
a
lawyer.
Obviously
I
don't
draft
the
language
that
is
in
the
bill,
but
I
know
as
a
lawyer
when
people
are
litigating
cases
and
they're
looking
at
that
they
look
at
our
legislative
intent.
They
look
at
these
hearings.
They
look
at
these
minutes
to
determine
what
that
was
what
my
intent,
specifically
with
any
of
the
I'm
going
to
call
it
grandfathering
language
for
lack
of
a
better
term
is
an
example
like
this.
C
C
You
know,
their
unions
in
most
cases,
have
fought
really
hard
for
the
protections
that
their
workers
have,
and
I
think
it's
important
to
protect
that
kind
of
investment
that
brick
and
mortar
kind
of
and
investment
in
our
economy,
with
our
employees
and
in
our
communities,
and
so
there
are
restrictions
now
where
there
can't
be
strs
within
2500
feet.
From
that,
like,
I
guess
casino
I
will
say
like
the
city
of
henderson-
has
like
some
that
were
issued
licenses
during
this
time
period
now
under
their
ordinances
that
are
within
that.
C
So
it's
my
intention
with
this
bill
to
allow
them
to
do
that.
They
had
some
concern
all
the
local
jurisdictions
that
the
language
as
written
would
not
allow
them
to
terminate
someone's
thing
if
they
were
in
violation.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
they
still
have
that
local
authority.
This
was
clarifying
language
that
they
felt
they
needed
to
make
sure
that
they
could
terminate
people
that
were
either
not
operating
under
their
ordinances,
and
they
didn't
have
to
have
like
an
automatic
renewal
for
that.
If
that
makes
sense,.
D
So
so,
thank
you
so
just
be
clear,
so
number
two
on
your
proposed
conceptual
amendment
allows
them
to
be
grandfathered,
even
if
they
aren't
within
the
restrictions
that
are
in
this.
If
they've
already
had
an
authorization,
but
then
it
looks
like
four
essentially
says
that
they
still
have
to
follow
the
rules
or
their
authorization.
D
I
don't
know
if
that
one
said
could
be
terminated,
suspended
or
revoked,
so
there's
still
power
by
the
local
jurisdiction.
If
someone's
not
acting
within
the
rules.
The
current
the
rules
they
agreed
upon
to
get
that
authorization.
C
Rochelle
went
for
the
record
that
is
completely
correct,
so
they
will
be
able
to
stay
within
the
local
ordinances
that
they
have
any
new
additional
ones
they
would
have
to
like
comply
with
this,
but
the
ones
that
were
there.
So
if
you
had
a
house
across
the
street
from
green
valley
ranch
and
you
were
authorized
under
the
city
of
henderson's
ordinance,
you
would
be
able
to
maintain
that
and
renew
it
as
pursuant
to
their
procedure.
C
D
D
And
I
have
some
questions
around
the
660
feet.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
in
a
jurisdiction
work
they
currently
don't
have
authorizations.
There
really
are
no
rules
of
engagement,
so
no
one
is
really
legal
because
they
there's
not
a
process
for
them
to
follow.
How
do
you
envision
operators
who
are
within
660
feet
of
each
other?
How
does
one
person
take
priority,
or
is
there
a
lottery
system
or
how
do
you?
How
do
you
process
homes
that
are
being
used
for
this
purpose,
but
have
not
had
any
authorization.
C
Rochelle
win
for
the
record.
I
want
to
make
it
very
clear:
clark:
county
has
banned
them,
so
they
do
have
an
ordinance
in
place
that
bans
them.
So
all
of
the
strs
that
are
operating
and,
like
I
said
I've
heard
anywhere
from
today
alone,
I
heard
it
was
between
8,
000
and
18
000
of
these
that
are
illegally
operating.
I
can
tell
you
if
you
have
the
app
on
your
phone
for
any
one
of
these
platform
providers.
You
can
go
on
today
and
you
can
see
hundreds
of
them
that
are
operating
unlawfully.
C
So
we
are
talking
about
unlawful,
like
operations,
it's
not
like
up
in
washoe
county
here
where
they
are
authorized
to
exist
without
these
kind
of
requirements,
and
so
that
that's
part
of
the
reason
they
were
not
included
in
this
bill
and
that's
why
there's
that
population
cap,
so
this
is
to
prevent
that
kind
of
proliferation
with
unregulation,
where
there
you
have
a
neighborhood
like
my
own,
where
it
would
be
house
after
house,
after
house
after
house
that
were
like
you
know,
short-term
rentals.
C
So
I
will
tell
you
that
precedent
exists
in
state
statutes
for
imposing
minimum
land
use
requirements.
I've
heard
a
lot
of
people
talk
about
how
land
use
is
a
local
issue.
It
should
be
left
to
local
governments
and,
I
would
say
under
for
most
circumstances.
That
is
the
case.
You'll
see.
This
is
mostly
authorizing
language
to
allow
them
to
do
it.
It
does
have
certain
guard
rails
and
there's
precedent
in
the
law
for
these
type
of
guard
rails,
particularly
with
respect
to
tourism
related
like
issues
impacting
residentially,
zoned
properties.
C
So,
like
we
have
gaming
enterprise
districts,
the
nevada
state
legislature
in
state
statute,
not
in
local
ordinances,
have
set
minimum
standards
for
the
establishment
or
expansion
of
gaming
enterprise
districts
like
a
hotel
casino,
especially
for
those
located
outside
of
the
las
vegas
resort
corridor
like
casinos,
impacting
residential
neighborhoods
and
there's
population
caps
there
for
places
above
700
000.
There
are
2500
foot
notice
requirements
for
petitions
to
create
these
gaming
enterprise
districts
districts.
They
have
to
be
500
feet
from
developed
residential
districts,
1500
feet
from
school
or
churches.
C
They
can't
be
adversely,
so
we
have
other
land
use
things.
We
do.
This
with
cannabis
that
is
determined
on
a
state.
There
was
a
bill
that
passed
just
this
session
with
regards
to
cannabis,
lounges
those
are
set
in
like
state
statutes,
so
these
are
other
land
use
issues
where
we
do
have
a
situation
where
people
have
to
choose
like,
I
guess,
winners
and
losers
for
lack
of
a
better
term.
C
We
have
them
for
rural
neighborhood
preservation,
neighborhoods.
We
have
them
with
sb
150
this
year
with
senator.
I
think
it
was
senator
harris's,
tiny
homes
bill
in
that
sec.
You
know
in
just
this
session
we
adopted
that
requiring
local
governments
to
adopt
standards
in
the
land
use
codes
for
tiny
homes.
So
there
isn't
like
an
unprecedented
amount
of
doing
this.
Just
like
this
right
now,
all
of
those
strs
are
operating
unlawfully.
C
This
gives
them
a
pathway
forward.
It
causes
clark
county
in
particular
to
set
up
ordinances,
to
allow
them
to
put
in
applications
and
apply.
For
these
type
of
you
know
things
and,
to
a
certain
extent
it
could
be
a
first-come
first-term.
It
could
be
like
they're
picking
the
more
qualified
candidates
that
meet
all
their
qualifications
and
standards
they
may
choose
to
have
owner
occupied.
They
may
choose
to
have
stricter
standards
where,
instead
of
660
feet
away
they're
a
thousand,
they
may
choose
to
choose
percentages
by
neighborhood.
C
There
are
lots
of
different
options
when
you
look
at
like
places
like
san
diego,
they
have
these
kind
of
ordinances
that
are
set
by
like
the
area
of
town,
and
so
there
are
lots
of
options
that
the
county
will
have
in
order
to
enact
like
these
statutes.
With
these,
like
guard
rails
in
place,
I
don't
know
if
that's
a
long
and
wounded.
D
E
So
will
this
give
if
those
if
there
are
individuals
that
currently
I
mean
they're,
not
regulated
so
that,
but
they
are
existing
illegally,
but
if
they
want
to
come
into
compliance
with
that,
give
them
enough
time
to
do
that.
C
Well,
just
to
make
it
very
clear,
they're
all
operating
illegally,
this
is
gives
an
effective
date
for
clark
county.
I
mean,
let's
just
say
who
it
is
clark
county
has
to
come
up
with
an
ordinance
by
july,
1st
2022,
and
then
they
can
start
the
implementation
process
of
how
they
will
accept
applications,
how
they
will
approve
them,
what
their
guidelines
are
going
to
be
with
these
guard
rails
in
place.
E
F
E
A
Thank
you
for
that.
So
I
have
a
couple
questions
so
on
in
regards
to
the
the
grandfathering
in
what
happens
if
the
llc
transfers
out
of
ownership
and
a
new
person
comes
in,
as
are
they
as
a
new
owner
grandfathered
in.
C
That
would
be
left
up
to
the
local
jurisdictions
to
determine
how
they
would
like
conduct
their
renewal
process,
how
they
would
be
able
to
do
that
again.
This
gives
very
minimal
guard
rails
in
place.
One
of
the
protections
that
I
put
in
there
was,
for
example,
only
one
entity
can
own
like
up
to
five.
C
A
And
then
I
had
another
question
on
section:
seven
and
I
know
there's
an
amendment,
but
my
my
questions
were
around
the
fine
structure,
so
it
allowed
four
fines
and
it
gave
a
range.
A
So
it
was
between
that
one
thousand
or
not
more
than
ten
thousand,
and
then
it
triggered
the
a
a
b
and
c
where
they're
going
to
take
into
account
without
limitation,
the
severity
of
the
violation
and
so
the
severity
of
the
violation
and
whether
or
not
the
person
who
committed
the
violation
acted
in
good
faith.
A
A
So
I
really
wanted
to
understand.
Like
you
know,
I
I
heard
you
on
guardrails,
but
what
constitutes
a
three
thousand
eight
thousand,
because
you
know
it
uses,
although
it's
permissive
it
pretty
much
is
to
me
I
see
it
as
a
catch-all,
but.
C
Thank
you,
rochelle
went
for
the
record.
These
are
suggestions
that
came
from
the
local
municipalities
and
clark
county
on
concerns
that
they
had
in
being
able
to
impose
like
appropriate
fines.
C
For
example,
if
you
have
a
property
that
is
renting
out
a
room
for
a
hundred
dollars
a
month
or
a
hundred
dollars
like
twenty
dollars
a
day,
and
they
are
doing
so
in
violation
of
the
ordinance
they're
operating
unlawfully,
they
don't
want
to.
They
want
to
be
able
to
have
the
flexibility
to
have
a
fine,
that's
commensurate
with
like
what
the
infraction
is
and
what
that
is
on
the
flip
side.
They
are
very
limited
right
now,
in
a
set,
like
I
think,
of
senator
john
darrell
loop.
C
If
you
go
online,
you
will
see
them
they're,
not
even
they're,
on
their
own
platform
and
most
of
those
homes
are
renting
out
for
five
to
ten
thousand
dollars
a
night,
and
they
have
like
illegal
septic
tanks
that
are
being
installed.
They
have
banks
of
bathrooms
that
are
in
there
and
they
are
having
all
day
day
parties
and
beach
parties
right
in
the
middle
of
a
residential
neighborhood,
where
there
are
potentially
hundreds
of
people
and
they've
led
to
violent
acts,
the
increase
in
the
civil
penalty
and
giving
that
authorization
kind
of
allows.
C
You
know
talking
with
you
know
our
casino
workers
on
how
the
people
that
are
maintaining
and
working
on
those
properties
don't
have
like
proper
safety
protocol.
A
lot
of
them
were
running
rampant
during
lake
covid,
because
our
you
know,
tourism
industry
was
like
slowed
down
or
shut
down
for
a
period
of
time,
and
people
were
using
these
as
other
opportunities
to
have
like
these
day
clubs,
and
so
this
gives
that
flexibility
there.
A
Thank
you
for
that
and
then
in
section
nine
they
have
the
pay,
the
annual
fees.
So
this
is
in
section
nine
step,
five
a
and
this
was
paying
the
annual
fee.
But
then
the
last
sentence
says
that
the
board
of
the
county
commission
may
increase
the
annual
fee
of
an
amendment
by
in
an
amendment
to
the
ordinance,
and
so
what
I
was
trying
to
figure
out
was
what's
driving.
A
You
know
what
is
the
criteria
for
the
fee
increase
and
because
I
know,
there's
guard
rails,
but
sometimes
when
we
allow
the
county
or
just
any
local
government.
The
question
is
sometimes
trying
to
put
some
criteria
in
the
law
so
that
it's
not
oppressive
and
that
the
fee
is
not
to
the
point
where
it
is
prohibited
right,
and
so
so
I
want
to
talk
about
that.
A
little
bit.
C
Thank
you,
rochelle
nguyen
for
the
record,
putting
that
in
there
initially
what
my
intent
was
was
putting
that
in
there
was
a
lot
of
the
local
jurisdictions
complained
that
they
didn't
have
the
resources.
C
If
you
and
I'm
sure,
if
the
I
know,
there's
many
representatives
from
local
municipalities
as
well
as
clark
county,
they
can
tell
you
that
they
are
only
responding,
they're,
only
reactive
to
complaints
and
they
get
them
on
a
daily
basis.
But
this
was
this.
You
know
it's
my
hope
that
they
would
learn
from
some
of
the
other
jurisdictions
that
have
done
this,
that,
if
you
make
that
fee,
overly
burdensome
that
it's
just
going
to
continue
to
drive
that
market
underground
and
people
will
find
new
creative
ways
to
operate
unlawfully.
A
Okay
and
then
my
next
question
was
on
10.5,
so
this
is
the
section
where
it
says
may
impose
additional
requirements.
So
I
was
wondering
what
the
conversation
was
because,
what's
contemplated
in
in
the
county
commissioners
imposing
additional
requirements
upon
an
accommodation
facilitator,
I
mean
there's
a
series
of
requirements
that
come
before
it.
C
Rochelle
win
for
the
record
section
10.5
is
that
I
don't
know
if
it's
a
good
language
to
use.
C
Excuse
me
it's
that
grandfathering
language,
so
this
allows
in
section
10.5
and
I
think
the
corresponding
is
20
20.5,
maybe
or
in
the
other
in
the
city
section.
What
that
section
is
is
to
allow
them
to
have
more
strict
requirements
than
is
allowed
in
the
current
statute.
So
if
you'll
see
this,
they
can
be
more
restrictive
than
the
provisions
of
1.5
to
11..
C
The
additional
restrictions
for
an
accommodations
facilitator
if
they
want
to
add
additional,
like
requirements
for
reporting
if
they
want
to
work
in
good
faith
with
the
local
governments,
to
be
able
to
get
that
information
and
put
that
in
there.
They
will
have
that
authority
to
be
able
to
make
sure
that
the
platforms
are
also
held
liable,
for
example,
if
they
are
continually
posting
people
that
don't
have
verification,
don't
have
a
license
on
there,
they
would
be
able
to.
You
know
you
know
address
that
with
the
platform
facilitator.
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
So
I
want
to
go
to
section
11
on
the
collection
of
the
actual
tax,
so
in
section
11
it
allows
the
well.
This
is
where
it
says
the
county,
commissioner,
shall
require
an
accommodations
facilitator
who
brokers
coordinates
or
makes
available,
or
otherwise
arranges
for
the
rental
of
the
residential.
So
I
want
to
really
get
an
understanding
around
when
we
talk
about
the
collection
of
the
tax
and
who
then
is
responsible
for
the
collection
and
then
remittance.
C
Rochelle
win
for
the
record.
I
see
I
might
have
to
phone
a
friend
I
see
mr
gindin
and
mr
nakamoto
on
the
zoom,
and
so
I
know
that
they
were.
This
is
more
in
your
wheelhouse
than
mine,
senator
neil,
and
so
this
was
language
that
came
from
actually
a
bill
in
2017
brought
by
assemblywoman
irene
bustamante
was
having
the
facilitators
collect
the
revenue.
They
are
already
doing
that
in
some
jurisdictions,
and
so
this
would
just
put
them
in
line
with
some
of
the
same
provisions
that,
like
our
hotels,
do
it.
C
A
Mr
ginnon,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
deal
with
this,
but
I
can
go
past
it
because
I
really
want
to
get
to
some
other.
I
guess
substantive
stuff
right.
I
mean,
let's,
let's
just
get
into
the
drama
right
all
right,
so
so
there's
been
a
lot
of
complaints
that
number
one
we
shouldn't
have
this
bill,
and
so
why
is
it
exactly
that
the
clark
county
commission
didn't
just
bring
this
bill
themselves.
C
C
We
can
sit
here
for
another
two
years
and
not
do
anything
at
all.
Bury
our
heads
in
the
sand
about
what
is
happening
in
clark
county,
wait
for
them
to
protect
the
community
from
a
housing
crisis
that
is
already
exacerbated
right
now
by
the
existence
of
illegal
strs
or
we
can
as
a
state
say
it
is
our
policy
we
want
to
protect
our
communities.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
how
for
affordable
housing
stock
available
and
that
they
are
not
just
run
over
by
str's.
C
A
I
will
ask
so
also
my
next
question.
You
know,
there's
a
series
of
economic
arguments
that
are
being
made,
that
this
bill
is
creating
a
kind
of
anti-competitive.
A
It
is
an
attempt
to
take
away
streams,
streams
of
income
from
investors
or
families
who
are
currently
operating
strs
and
that
this
bill
is
restrictive.
A
So
you
know
when
we
think
about
the
economic
arguments
that
are
being
made
where
individuals
are
now
making
money,
although
I'll
bet
they
might
have
been
making
it
illegally
in
the
unincorporated
parts
of
the
county,
they
they
still
have
engaged
in
an
actual
act
of
profit
and
leasing
out
their
houses,
and
so
the
argument
has
been
made
that
if
this
660
came
in
that,
if
they
were
already
in
play,
even
though
illegal
that
this
then
would
eliminate,
potentially
their
house
or
someone
else's
house
who
is
now
a
part
of,
I
guess,
a
market
stream.
C
Rochelle
win
for
the
record.
I
would
probably
give
the
same
argument
that
I
I
mean
these
are
individuals
that
are
operating
unlawfully
senate
bill.
Our
assembly
bill
363
will
give
them
a
pathway
to
become
lawful
within
those
restrictions.
Are
there
individuals
that
have
been
operating
unlawfully
that
are
reliant
on
this
income?
I'm
sure
that
they
are
but
they've
also
been
doing
so
unlawfully
for
years
now,
knowing
so
and
if
they
didn't
know,
so
they
should
probably
know
so
because
then
we
don't
know
what
kind
of
safety
protections
they
have
in
place
for
the
people.
C
We
don't
know
how
the
workers
that
have
come
to
either
maintain
their
properties
clean,
their
properties
handymen,
whether
or
not
they
are
operating
unlawfully
or
lawfully.
What
kind
of
safety
precautions
are
within
the
homes?
What
kind
of
protections
that
we
have
for
those
people
that
are
either
coming
here
to
visit
our
state
and
staying
in
those
unlawful
illegal,
like
short-term
rentals
or
if
they
are
so,
I
would
argue
that
if
they
are
not
able
to
and
they
have
to
sell
those
homes,
first
of
all,
homes
are
a
high
premium
in
clark
county.
C
So
they
would
be
making
a
profit
off
of
the
selling
of
their
home,
and
that
would
only
add
to
the
housing
market
that
is
like
lacking
right
now
and
that
would
lead
to
potential
affordable
housing
for
people
that
actually
want
to
live
and
purchase
those
homes.
Additionally,
there's
nothing
stopping
from
people
from
converting
from
short-term
rentals
to
long-term
rentals
and
again,
that's
another
housing,
affordability
issue
that
just
opens
up
that
market.
C
I
think
those
are
all
policy
goals
that
I
would
support
again.
I
think
that
there
is
a
possibility.
I
know
like,
for
example,
in
the
city
of
henderson.
They
had
like
an
amnesty
like
type
kind
of
registration
like
come
into
compliance,
and
they
might
be
able
to
answer
questions
on
how
that
procedure
went
and
whether
or
not
clark
county
felt
like
they
needed
some
authorizing
language
to
allow
them
to
grandfather
people
in
and
then
that
could
be
fought
on
a
local
level.
C
But
as
it
stands,
I
you
know
my
my
intent
is
to
protect
that
housing
market.
You
know,
on
the
flip
side,
you
have
people
that
have
been
wanting
to
perhaps
invest
in
like
short-term
rental
properties,
and
they
know
when
in
talking
to
their
realtor,
can
I
operate
this
as
a
short-term
rental
and
the
realtor
says
no.
This
is
in
clark
county.
This
is
unlawful
and
they
are
just
waiting
for
clark
county
to
be
able
to
find
a
pathway
for
them
to
invest
in
these
short-term
rental
properties.
C
And
so
I
would
hate
to
see
a
situation
where
the
people
that
are
law
abiding
trying
to
do
the
right
thing
and
abiding
by
the
current
ordinances
are
at
a
disadvantage,
because
people
just
chose
to
operate
unlawfully.
A
And
thank
you
for
that.
So
I
just
have
one
final
question,
because
the
the
final
issue
that
came
to
the
table
or
came
to
my
attention
was
there
are
some
cities
that
do
don't
want
to
be
included
in
this.
They
don't
want
to
be
number
one.
They
feel
like
the
county
is
in
a
position
to
either
dictate
to
them
or
we
are
when
they
already
have
something
in
play,
and
so
there's
been
a
discussion
about
removing
them.
A
C
Like
I
said,
any
ordinances
that
were
put
into
place
like
the
city
of
las
vegas
and
the
city
of
henderson.
They
will
be
able
to
keep
those,
and,
in
fact
they
have
assurances
in
this
law
that
if
a
new
city
council
comes
in
and
they
decide
that
they
have
been,
you
know,
influenced
by
you-
know
short-term
rental
companies
or
other
investors
that
want
to
turn
their
neighborhoods
into
short-term
rentals.
They
at
least
have
guard
rails
in
place
where
they
can't
go
any
lower
than
what's
set
in
state
statute.
C
You
know,
like
I
said
I
had
some
of
those
jurisdictions.
That
said
they
didn't
want
to
put
in
ordinances
into
place
because
they
didn't
think
it
was
an
issue.
But
on
the
flip
side,
they
wanted
to
be
opted
in
for
the
enforcement
mechanism,
and
so
I
said
why
would
you
need
enforcement
if
it
wasn't
a
problem,
and
so
they
they
kind
of
want
both
of
those
things.
So
I
think
that
they
should
have
to
put
ordinances
in
place
that
address
both
of
the
problems
and
problematic
things.
C
C
We
can
enact
criminal
laws,
but
it's
up
to
law
enforcement
agencies,
it's
up
to
prosecutors
in
those
local
jurisdictions
to
determine
how
and
what
they're
going
to
investigate
and
what
they're
going
to
refer
for
prosecution.
This
just
gives
enabling
language
that
says
come
up
with
an
ordinance
and
then
impose
that
ordinance.
Here
are
the
tools
that
you
can
enforce.
That
ordinance.
Should
you
choose
to
put
those
resources
there?
I've
had
a
lot
of
people
say
that
you
know
this
puts
too
much
of
a
burden
on
the
cities
to
enforce
things.
C
Well,
they're,
not
if
they're
not
enforcing
them
now,
and
they
choose
not
to
enforce
them
even
given
these
additional
tools
to
enforce
them,
you
know
as
a
state
legislature.
We
can't
do
that.
That's
something
that
they
need
to
take
care
of
on
a
local
level,
but
this
gives
them
some
guidance,
so
I
think
they
should
be
under
those
protections.
I
think
the
people
in
boulder
city
and
mesquite
should
also
be
protected
from
the
proliferation
of
like
short-term
rentals
that
come
in
and
deplete
housing,
affordability.
D
C
This
the
660
feet,
if
you'll
see
there
were
multiple
different
numbers,
obviously,
with
a
great
deal
of
stakeholders
in
play,
you
know
there
there's,
obviously
a
part
of
the
negotiation
dealing
with
other
legislators
having
to
you
know,
even
move
it
through
the
first
house,
the
house
that
it
originated
in
the
assembly.
There
were
different
interests
from
different
groups:
the
660
feet.
It's
my
understanding,
that's
like
a
code
for
most
like
land
use
code,
it's
like
a
city
block
for
lack
of
a
better
term,
and
so
that's
where
that
was.
C
C
It
was
just
something
that
we
had
looked
at,
especially
at
the
proximity
of
some
of
the
there's,
a
lot
of
surrounding,
like
like
apartment
complexes,
condo
developments
around
the
las
vegas
strip,
and
so
this
kind
of
encompassed
some
of
those
like
things
for
protections
for
housing,
affordability
on
and
near
the
strip
for
strip
workers.
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that
so
assemblywoman.
When
we
will
go
ahead
and
I'm
done
with
questions
at
least
to
you.
So
we
can
go
ahead
and
go
to
support
all
right,
so
we
will
open
up
for
support
for
av363.
E
Good
evening
committee,
my
name
is
jim
sullivan
and
I'm
representing
the
culinary
union.
The
culinary
union
got
into
this
fight
for
due
to
the
affordable
housing
and
party
house
issues,
and
we
put
a
letter
on
the
site
that
outlines
those
concerns.
But
I
would
like
to
take
my
time
here
today
to
talk
about
platform
accountability,
because
I
think
it's
probably
the
most
important
part
of
the
law.
So
platform
accountability
is
the
most
effective
and
efficient
regulatory
model.
American
cities
have
adopted
to
ensure
compliance
with
short-term
rental
ordinances.
E
It
makes
it
unlawful
for
airbnb,
verbo,
homeaway
or
other
third-party
services
to
collect
booking
fees
or
commissions
for
facilitating
rentals
of
housing
units
that
are
not
legally
authorized
for
use.
As
strs
cities
include
platform,
accountability,
accountability,
provisions
in
their
ordinance
for
two
principal
reasons:
first,
without
them
staffs
charged
with
enforcing
str
regulations,
are
left
to
pursue
scoff
laws,
one
by
one
in
jurisdictions,
with
thousands
of
operators
or
even
in
small
towns
with
small
budgets
that
can
prove
a
nearly
impossible
task.
The
model
requires
a
database.
E
The
platforms
can
readily
access
to
determine
the
legal
status
of
all
listings
and
fines
sufficient
to
incentivize
compliance.
Second
apps
and
such
provisions
platforms
have
repeatedly
demonstrated
they
will
rent
anything
regardless
of
governing
law.
Legal
legal
is
of
no
concern.
They
will
rent
units
without
property
earnest
permission
and
even
in
the
face
of
owners,
explicit
objections.
E
Indeed,
they
offer
no
assurances
that
the
units
they
rent
are
habitable
or
that
they
even
exist.
San
francisco,
legalized,
short-term
rentals
in
2014..
Its
ordinance,
however,
regulated
only
operators,
not
platforms
by
the
end
of
2015
fewer
than
a
thousand
comply
with
licensing
and
registration
requirements,
yet
airbnb
alone
carried
nearly
10
000
str
listings
in
the
city.
In
2016
platform,
accountability
provisions
were
adopted,
making
it
a
misdemeanor
punishable
by
fines
or
imprisonment
for
collecting
booking
fees
on
illegal
strs,
airbnb
and
homeaway
sued.
E
The
court
ruled
in
favor
of
the
city,
noting
that
the
city
is
regulating
commerce,
booking
fees,
not
speech,
and
it
is
well
within
its
rights
and
authority
to
do
so.
Santa
monica
adopted
san
francisco's
model
shortly
after
that
ruling
airbnb
and
homeaway
sued
and
lost,
appealed
and
lost
and
requested
the
appellate
court
to
consider
the
case
in
bach
and
lost
again.
The
company's
legal
challenges
in
boston
were
similarly
fruitless.
E
Platform.
Accountability
is
now
firmly
in
place
and
effective
in
those
three
cities,
as
well
as
los
angeles,
washington,
dc
hawaii,
denver,
portland
san,
diego
and
toronto,
with
their
legal
arguments
meritless,
the
platforms
have
resorted
to
claiming
that
government
shouldn't
be
outside
regulation
enforcement
to
private
companies,
but
that's
disingenuous.
E
The
model
is
designed
to
ensure
the
platforms
have
some
skin
in
the
regulatory
game,
just
like
other
businesses
in
other
industries.
We
expect
clerks,
for
example,
to
check
ids
before
selling
young
people
alcohol.
We
trust
that
uber
verifies
that
each
of
his
drivers
has
a
valid
license
and
registered
vehicle
before
adding
them
to
its
platform
platform.
Accountability
simply
requires
companies
to
ensure
that
their
offerings
are
legal,
that
the
revenue
isn't
derived
from
aiding
and
abetting
illegal
activity.
E
Thank
you
and
thank
you
for
letting
me
comment.
G
Thank
you,
chair
neal
good
evening.
My
name
is
benjamin
chalinor
policy
director
for
faith
in
action,
nevada
and
we're
here
in
support
of
ab363.
We
like
to
thank
you,
someone
gwen
for
bringing
this
bill.
Ab363
will
protect
nevadans
against
the
spread
of
unregulated
str's,
unregulated
and
not
unlawful.
G
It
would
also
be
protecting
important,
much-needed
housing
for
nevadans,
with
this
bill,
we'll
also
be
seeing
revenue
that
our
local
governments
and
schools
are
currently
missing
out
due
due
to
str's
being
unregulated.
Lastly,
one
one
thing
I
do
want
to
mention
is:
we
will
be
modernizing
our
laws,
not
unlike
what
we've
done
with
uber
in
the
past
and
to
the
session
with
sb
389
and
then,
lastly,
again
in
the
interest
of
time,
I'm
also
in
faith
in
action.
Nevada
is
part
of
a
revenue
coalition.
G
H
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
anna
magnus
and
I'm
the
executive
director
of
battleborn
progress.
We
are
here
today
in
support
of
ab363
to
ensure
short-term
rentals
are
subject
to
taxes
on
transient
lodging
and
to
require
facilitators
like
airbnb
and
vrbo,
to
pay
their
fair
share
of
taxes.
H
A
room
tax
on
the
short-term
rentals
can
generate
over
45
million
for
the
state.
Despite
what
you
may
hear,
this
regulation
has
been
effective
in
other
states
and
has
not
driven
the
industry
out
of
the
state
for
for
far
too
long,
facilitators
have
taken
advantage
of
this
loophole
and
have
invaded
or
evaded
paying.
The
taxes
that
nevadans
deserve.
H
Ab-363
would
also
help
curb
the
rise
in
costs
of
housing
through
this
regulation
and
would
protect
nevada
workers
who
have
fought
hard
for
safe
working
conditions,
prioritizing
nevadans
and
their
homes
over
corporations.
We
need
more
revenue
in
this
state.
This
bill
will
do
just
that.
We
thank
assemblywoman
wynn
for
creating
a
fair
and
common
sense
solution
to
regulate
short-term
rentals
and
strengthening
our
state's
econom
economic
portfolio.
D
G
E
I
I
first
wanted
to
thank
assemblywoman
wen
for
all
of
her
efforts.
It's
and
time,
and
probably
blood,
sweat
and
tears
that
have
gone
into
this
bill
and
also
the
many
other
stakeholders
who've
worked
diligently
on
this
legislation.
I
Just
like
our
resorts
do
the
provisions
set
forth
in
ab
363
are
aimed
at
protecting
tourists
and
residents
alike
by
requiring
that
str's
obtain
a
local
jurisdiction
permit
and
state
business
license
to
operate,
and
that
that
information
is
clearly
listed
on
any
advertisement
for
the
short-term
rental
as
well
as
displayed
in
the
unit
itself.
Additionally,
the
bill
requires
that
str's
are
subject
to
health
and
safety
oversight
from
the
local
health
authority
and
includes
restrictions
such
as
occupancy
limits
and
minimum
night
stays
to
prevent
party
houses
that
are
disruptive
to
neighborhoods
and
communities.
I
The
bill
also
includes
important
distance
separation
requirements
to
ensure
that
short-term
rentals
aren't
saturating
neighborhoods,
essentially
becoming
commercial
enterprises
or
distributed
hotels
in
residential
areas.
Board
gaming,
along
with
our
industry
partners,
are
highly
regulated
by
multiple
agencies:
the
gaming
control
board,
osha,
southern
nevada,
health,
district,
business
licensing
and
many
others.
We
take
great
pride
in
welcoming
visitors
to
one
of
the
premier
tourist
destinations
in
the
world
and
believe
that
ab363
is
necessary
to
ensure
that
nevada
remains
the
gold
standard
for
hospitality
and
tourism.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
your
time.
A
J
Thank
you
for
the
record.
My
name
is
virginia
valentine,
I'm
with
the
nevada
resort
association
good
evening,
madam
chairwoman,
neil
and
committee
members,
it's
an
honor
to
be
here
in
support
of
ab363.
We
really
appreciate
the
opportunity
and
I
will
be
brief.
I
know
you've
had
an
extremely
long
day.
We
want
to
thank
assemblywoman
nguyen
for
her
tireless
work
to
bring
forth
this
bill
and
to
recognize
her
co-sponsors,
assemblyman
tom
roberts
for
his
work.
Also,
and
finally,
we
want
to
acknowledge
many
stakeholders
with
very
diverse
perspectives
who
participate
in
this
process.
J
Ab363
is
a
comprehensive
piece
of
legislation,
reflects
input
of
many
stakeholder
groups.
The
legislation
in
front
of
you
is
a
product
of
her
hard
work,
bringing
people
together
and
while
the
the
bill
and
the
amendments
won't
make
everyone
happy,
I
have
to
tell
you
we
started
off.
I'm
really
feeling
like
a
band
was
the
answer,
and
we've
come
around
to
seeing
that
there
is
a
space
for
short-term
rentals,
and
that
really
regulation
is,
is
the
best
solution,
solution
and
the
best
path.
J
So
I
think
this
is
a
good
compromise
between
those
who
would
have
no
regulations
and
those
who
would
want
a
total
prohibition.
So
the
result
of
this
work
does
a
couple
of
things:
it
protects
consumers
with
some
very
modest
safety
requirements.
It
preserves
residential,
neighborhoods
and
affordable
housing
by
limiting
the
numbers,
and
it
addresses
fact
that
they
are
currently
illegal
in
clark
county
and
it
addresses
millions
of
dollars
in
lost
tax
revenue
to
state
and
local
governments.
J
It's
estimated
that
they're
about
eight
thousand,
I
heard
tonight,
eight
thousand
to
eighteen
thousand
short-term
rentals
that
are
operating
illegally
in
clark,
county
they've
overwhelmed
and
changed
the
character
of
neighborhoods,
and
as
it
stands
today,
these
operators
offer
places
to
visit
that
are
not
regulated.
They
don't
ensure
public
health
and
safety
and
they
do
not
pay
room
taxes.
So
8363
will
establish
some
minimum
requirements
and
create
a
level
playing
field
in
clark
county
by
regulating
and
taxing
these
commercial
operations.
J
J
Resorts
are
strictly
regulated
inspected
by
multiple
agencies,
including
the
gaming
control
board,
osha
local
health
districts,
fire
and
building
departments
and
city
and
county
business
licensing,
and
during
the
2020
special
session,
we
supported
even
stricter
regulations
for
public
accommodation
facilities
for
the
well-being
of
employees
and
guests.
Due
to
the
pandemic,
this
bill
will
add
some
requirements
of
very
modest
common
sense
safety
requirements
like
emergency
contact,
information,
fire
extinguishers,
carbon
monoxide
detectors,
smoke,
alarms
and
occupancy
limits.
Those
will
protect
guests
and
will
protect
las
vegas
reputation
as
a
safe
and
welcoming
destination.
J
Amy
was
legalized
six
years
ago
to
generate
tax
revenue,
foster
economic
development,
protect
consumers
and
attract
tourists.
Today
that
act
has
allowed
the
resort
gaming
industry
to
leave
the
state
by
providing
some
433
000
jobs,
state
and
local
tax
revenue
and
billions
of
dollars
in
capital,
investment
and
dust
in
the
destination
marketing
that
attracts
visitors
to
clark
county.
J
We
know
that
affordable
housing
continues
to
be
a
top
issues
for
our
employees
and
team
members.
We
heard
earlier
from
jim
sullivan
with
the
culinary
union,
while
he
focused
mostly
on
platform
integrity.
I
think
he
would
agree
that
ab363
is
important
to
culinary
members
and
resort
employees
who
live
or
want
to
live
in
neighborhoods
close
to
where
they
work.
These
neighborhoods
also
tend
to
be
popular
for
short-term
rentals,
given
their
proximity
to
tourism
districts,
and
this,
of
course,
impacts.
Affordable
housing.
J
We
believe
the
half-mile
distance
separation
from
non-restricted
resort
hotels
is
a
reasonable
condition
to
ensure
hospitality.
Employees
have
access
to
affordable
housing,
close
to
work,
allowing
short-term
rentals
and
resort
hotels
to
co-exist,
and
I
would
like
to
point
out
with
respect
to
the
200
2500
foot
separation.
Since
that's
come
up,
the
nrs
requires
a
petition
for
a
gaming
enterprise
district
to
prove
that
would
not
adversely
affect
residences
within
a
2500
foot
fee
of
the
gaming
enterprise
district.
J
It
also
requires
a
2500
notice
from
that
requirement,
but
the
gaming
enterprise
district
must
only
be
500
feet
from
residential,
hence
the
larger
distance
separations.
To
ensure
that
str's
do
not
continue
to
cluster
around
resort
hotels,
another
critical
piece
of
this
legislation
is
capturing
revenue
to
the
benefit
of
residents.
J
I'm
not
going
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
in
that
because
I
know
you've
all
had
a
long
day,
and
I
believe
that,
as
assemblywoman
rachelle
mentioned
really
the
taxation
aspects,
this
might
be
the
only
time
you
hear
this
this
entire
session-
that's
probably
not
the
biggest
part
of
the
spill.
I
think
the
really
important
part
is
the
regulation.
I
should
add,
though,
that
those
room
tax
revenues
about
90
percent
of
the
room
tax
collected
mistake
comes
from
clark
county
about
23
of
that
goes
to
the
state
education
fund.
J
Another
12
percent
went
to
capital
projects
in
clark.
County
local
jurisdictions
also
receive
about
50
million
dollars
for
local
projects
and
services
like
public
safety
and
parks,
and
about
45
million
dollars
in
room
tax,
went
to
transportation
projects
in
clark
county
and
then,
of
course,
292
million
went
to
promoting
the
destination
by
funding
the
nevada
commission
on
tourism
and
the
las
vegas
visitor
and
convention
authority.
These
funds
also
create
jobs
for
tourism
infrastructure
projects
like
the
las
vegas
convention
center
expansion
and
the
las
vegas
stadium.
J
So
I
hope
these
numbers
demonstrate
the
importance
of
these
taxes
to
nevadans
by
taxing
and
regulating
str's
nevadans
will
benefit
from
the
additional
revenue
that
isn't
being
collected
today,
and
it
seems
only
fair
that
short-term
rentals
should
pay
their
share,
given
the
many
benefits
they
receive
from
the
destination.
Marketing
and
special
events
supported
by
lbcba
and,
of
course,
lbcba
is
100
funded.
Excuse
me
by
room
tax
for
those
who
would
like
to
see
a
total
prohibition
or
no
regulation
may
not
be
satisfied,
but
we
believe
this
bill
will
protect.
J
Workforce
housing
provide
tax
equities
for
places
of
public
accommodation
as
a
start
on
some
modest
regulatory
and
enforcement
requirements.
Without
this
bill,
str's
will
continue
to
operate
illegally,
encroach
on
workforce
housing,
pay,
no
taxes
and,
most
importantly,
continue
to
proliferate
and
operate
illegally.
Our
thanks
again
to
assemblywoman
win
for
her
leadership.
Thank
you,
chair
neal,
vice
chair,
ready
and
committee
members
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
in
support
of
this
bill
today.
J
K
K
L
L
Private
property
rights
should
be
protected
with
the
new
rental
platforms.
We
know
that
short-term
rentals
are
more
prevalent
than
ever
in
our
neighborhoods.
There
needs
to
be
a
balance
of
the
full-time
resident's
quality
of
life
in
his
or
her
neighborhood,
with
the
ability
to
rent
a
property
as
a
short-term
rental.
Ab363
creates
a
fair
balance.
We
appreciate
the
inclusion
of
a
population
cap,
so
the
bill
applies
only
to
clark
county.
L
The
realtors,
with
many
others,
have
put
a
lot
of
time
and
effort
into
working
with
washoe
county
on
recently
passing
their
ordinance
to
address
short-term
rentals,
and
it
needs
time
to
see
how
that
implementation
goes.
Eventually.
Realtors
would
like
to
see
a
plan
that
addresses
short-term
rentals.
Statewide
nevada
realtors
will
continue
to
stay
at
the
table
and
work
with
assemblywoman
win
on
finding
a
solution
that
works
for
every
local
jurisdiction.
K
F
We
represent
state
employees
who
have
endured
furloughs
and
in
fact
there
are
going
through
furloughs,
both
this
month
and
in
june,
even
though
our
numbers
look
better
we're
still
seeing
state
employees
taking
pay
cuts
through
these
months
further
they're
facing
healthcare
cuts
that
are
in
the
range
of
value
of
about
30
million
dollars
a
year.
All
of
that
could
have
been
avoided.
Had
legislation
like
this
been
in
place
to
capture
revenue
from
what
are
currently
illegal
black
market
rentals
that
don't
participate
in
our
shared
revenue
system.
F
If
we
want
to
stabilize
our
revenue
and
make
sure
that
we
have
some
kind
of
net
for
the
services
that
the
state
provides.
We
think
this
is
an
excellent
first
step
towards
making
our
revenue
stream
more
diverse
and
making
sure
that
we're
not
leaking
out
lost
opportunities.
So
we
respectfully
ask
that
you
support
ab363.
K
F
Of
red
rock
resorts
in
support
of
ab363
and
the
policy
goes
behind
the
legislation
which
we
believe
will
establish
a
proper
and
consistent
regulatory
framework
for
southern
nevada's,
short-term
rental
industry.
This
legislation
enables
short-term
rentals
to
lawfully
do
business
in
southern
nevada,
with
appropriate
minimum
standards
to
protect
nevada's,
neighborhoods
and
businesses.
F
No
longer
is
the
short-term
rental
industry,
strictly
represented
by
the
individual
homeowner,
who
seeks
to
lease
their
home
for
a
weekend
or
extended
time
period
while
they
are
out
of
town
in
order
to
earn
extra
income.
Today,
many
short-term
rentals
are
owned
by
corporations
or
investors
who
purchase
mostly
entry-level
homes
and
with
multiple
homes
for
short-term
lease.
They
operate
like
a
hotelier
but
are
not
held
to
the
same
standards
as
the
resort,
hotel
industry
and
certainly
do
not
create
the
same
level
of
jobs
as
our
largest
industry
in
the
state.
F
A
Okay,
so
we
will
move
to
opposition,
we'll
move
to
opposition
in
the
room
and
then,
if
there's
any
on
zoom
and
then
to
the
phone
line,
so
opposition
to
ab363
fill
in
both
chairs.
Please.
E
Yes,
my
name
is
ed
ewling,
ueh
ling,
and
I
congratulate
this
panel
of
this,
this
group
of
senators
for
asking
very
good
questions
and
I
don't
think
you've
gotten
a
single
answer
to
what
to
what's
been
to
what
you're
asking
and
find
that
very
curious.
Also.
I
would
like
to
point
out
a
procedural
item
here,
we're
being
held
to
two
minutes
of
commentary.
E
E
Yet
the
culinary
union
spoke
for
three
and
a
half
minutes,
and
I
I
would
just
like
to
notice
those
things
now
in
answer
to
your
excellent
question,
chair
chairwoman,
neil,
why
doesn't
the
county
create
do
this
by
themselves,
because
the
the
county,
the
county
commission,
is
bought
off
by
the
the
resort
association?
E
That's
the
resorts,
that's
why
they
don't
create
this,
and-
and
so
that's
that's
the
real
answer
to
that.
To
that
question
I
would.
I
would
like
to
first
state
three
three
things.
Two
one
of
which
you
already
know
two
of
which
you
may
not
know
number
one
when
when
there
are
prohibitions,
black
markets
exist,
that's
what
we
have
a
bla.
This
is
a
black
market
that
is
occurring,
the
eighteen
thousand
or
eight
thousand
or
whatever.
The
number
is.
E
The
second
thing
is
that
the
las
vegas,
the
tourism
industry
of
las
vegas,
is
in
very
bad
shape.
Everyone
thinks,
oh,
it's
fabulous.
You
know
we're
the
number
one
tourist
destination,
but
in
fact
it's
not
and
I'll
go
into
I'll,
come
back
and
and
go
into
details
about
that.
The
third.
The
third
thing
that
you
may
not
know
is
the
resort
association.
E
The
hotels
themselves
are
creating
this
problem
on
purpose
and
then
they're
coming
and
pointing
out
all
these
all
these
issues
that
is
caused
by
the
by
the
pro
by
the
ban
that
that
they've,
that
they've
caused
in
the
county
and
pointing
out
all
the
defects,
it's
them.
That
is
creating
the
problem.
Okay,
let's
go
back
one
one
by
one
as
far
as
as
as
the
black
market.
This
is.
This
is
similar
to
the
what
existed
in
the
in
the
uber.
E
E
This
is
the
same
very
similar
situation
here.
Regardless
of
of
what
happens,
people
are
going
to
probably
the
second
oldest
profession
in
the
world
is
hosting
visitors
in
your
home.
People
have
done
that,
since
the
beginning
of
humanity
and
and
the
the
that
system
existed
before
hotels
even
existed.
E
The
second
item
that
the
industry
in
las
vegas
is
really
suffering.
We
have
today
virtually
the
same
number
of
tourists
or
in
the
highest
year.
We
have
virtually
in
the
highest
level
of
tourism.
In
this.
In
clark,
county
is
only
is
less
than
10
percent
higher
than
2007..
E
In
2007
we
had
39
million
tourists
the
highest
we've
ever
had
since
then
is
42
million
tourists,
not
even
10.
If
we
had
merely
kept
pace
with
global
tourism
throughout
the
world,
that's
increasing
at
six
percent
per
year
and
our
city
spends
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars
and
is
not
growing
at
all.
We're
at
the
same
state
and
and
the
reason
that
we're
not
growing
is
because
the
resort
association,
the
resorts
themselves
are
stifling
the
industry.
E
We
do
not
want
new
year's
eve
every
weekend
in
this
city
he's
saying
we
only
want
rich
visitors
who
are
willing
to
pay
500
000
a
room,
that's
what
he's
really
saying
and
if,
if,
if
we,
if,
if
we
could
have
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
rooms
to
to
we
today,
we
should
have
90
million
tourists
in
las
vegas.
E
We
only
have
42
million
tourists,
we're
missing
all
that
business
and
the
only
way
we
can
really
reach
that
is
through
the
through
the
home,
through
people
sharing
their
homes
and
and
if
we
could
get
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
people
to
share
their
homes
that
would
produce
tremendous
income
these
they
they
act
as
if
they
don't
the
the
the
short-term
rentals,
don't
want
to
pay
the
taxes
they
want
to
pay
the
taxes
they
want
to
become
legalized.
E
They
want
to
contribute
to
the
economy,
they
want
to
make
money
for
their
for
their
households
and
and
the
current
industry
is
foreign.
A
So
I
thank
you
so
we're
now,
because
I
wanted
to
give
you
equal
time
we're
at
six
minutes
30
seconds
so
you're
four
seconds
off
from
the
resorts,
and
so
I
wanted
to
equalize
try
to
equalize
you
out,
so
you
didn't
say
how
dare
she
give
the
resorts
over
a
regular
citizen
now
I
just
gave
you
equal
time.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
G
G
G
This
imposes
a
substantial
and
unwelcome
burden
on
boulder
city
and
mesquite,
which
are
not
staffed
or
otherwise
resourced.
To
comply
with
this
mandate.
Additionally,
it
imposes
it
imposes
an
unwelcome
burden
on
henderson
and
las
vegas.
Both
cities
have
already
enacted
ordinances
to
regulate
this
commerce
activity
within
their
jurisdictions.
G
A
I
think
I
need
to
reiterate
what
the
time
is
so
because
I
gave
extra
time
I
equaled
it
out
for
mr
ewling,
but
miss
valentine
was
a
part
of
miss
assemblywoman
wins
original
presentation
right,
and
so
I
did
let
her
go
and
then
so
I'll
go
to
the
three
minute
since
I've
already
erased.
My
two
so
I'll
give
you
one
minute
and
then
I
wanted
to
give
mr
ewling
because
he
called
me
out
so
I
equalized
him.
So
I
didn't
want
anybody
to
feel
that
they
are
less
than
the
resort
association.
G
G
Both
cities
adopted
ordinances
and
then
modified
those
ordinances
to
improve
their
calibration.
Both
cities
were
able
to
diagnose
the
unintended
consequences
of
their
initial
order
ordinances
and
were
then
able
to
adjust
them
quickly
in
comparison
to
the
two-year
intervals
between
legislative
sessions.
G
G
We
hope
that
the
committee
views
this
bill
with
a
keen
scrutiny
and
respects
the
purview
of
local
governments
to
properly
govern
according
to
the
direct
and
unique
needs
of
our
residents.
Again,
thank
you
very
much
phantom
chair
for
your
attention
and
for
your
indulgence
and
for
allowing
my
statement
of
opposition.
M
We
represent
the
host
community,
which
is
a
little
odd
because
that's
who
this
bill
most
adversely
affects
yet
we
haven't
really
had
a
seat
at
the
table.
Have
we?
This
is
very
personal.
For
me,
I've
had
a
property
two
properties.
For
three
years
now
I
invested
in
scr
properties
because
I
needed
to
take
care
of
my
parents.
M
M
M
M
M
M
What
was
sickening
for
me
was
I
had
in
my
means.
You
know
how
hard
it
is
to
save
and
to
invest
and
buy
two
properties
on
a
post
office
salary.
I
did
it
and
I
was
proud
of
myself
and
now
I
wasn't
able
to
do
it
and
we're
hearing
as
an
association.
These
stories
every
single
day,
especially
from
those,
are
doing
home,
share
senior
citizens
empty
nesters.
They
just
want
to
rent
out
their
property
to
make
ends
meet.
They
just
went
out.
They
want
to
run
out
of
room.
M
M
They
don't
want
to
be
told
what
to
do
and
they
don't
expect
the
government
to
come
in
and
didn't
do
it,
and
I
feel
that
senator
that
assemblywoman
win
is
using
her
position
as
an
assemblywoman,
a
state
assemblywoman
to
now
impose
these
extra
rules
and
regulations,
and
I
don't
feel
that's
right.
However,
I
do
appreciate
she
did
mention
that
I
can
sell
my
properties
now
and
probably
make
a
profit.
She
is
right.
I
am
getting
multiple
offers
every
single
week
from
californians
that
want
to
pay
cash
for
my
house.
A
K
K
F
F
This
amendment
is
anti-competitive.
It
erodes
the
public
trust
in
short-term
rental
policy.
The
amended
provisions
picks
winners
and
losers
at
the
expense
of
residents
who
share
their
home
additionally
outside
of
the
gaming
buffer.
Short-Term
rental
hosts
are
capped
at
10
of
multi-family
units,
whereas
a
percentage
cap
would
not
apply
to
a
non-restricted
gaming
property
hosting
is
a
lifeline
for
many
residents,
and
tourism
is
an
industry
big
enough
for
all
to
succeed.
F
Nevada
deserves
a
level
playing
field
for
the
benefit
of
all
stakeholders,
not
just
a
select
few.
The
growth
of
short-term
rentals
over
the
past
10
years
coincided
with
the
largest
ever
boom
in
hotel
occupancy.
So
clearly,
the
industries
can
successfully
coexist
without
these
arbitrary
restrictions.
F
We
are
coming
off
the
heels
of
a
once
in
a
century
pandemic
that
has
devastated
travel
and
tourism.
A
divide
and
conquer
approach
that
pitch
different
tourists
and
travel
industry
groups
against
each
other
is
self-defeating.
We
must
all
come
together
as
an
industry
and
recognize
that
this
is
a
critical
time
to
boost
economic
recovery.
I
have
submitted
a
letter
further
outlining
our
concerns
for
your
review.
We
look
forward
to
working
with
state
and
local
leaders
to
ensure
airbnb
and
our
community
are
partners
to
nevada's
future.
Thank
you
for
the
consideration
of
our
comments.
Thank.
K
K
F
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
I
appreciate
your
efforts
to
moderate
and
legislate
such
a
controversial
topic
with.
That
being
said,
I
strongly
oppose
this
bill
due
to
its
punitive
and
burdensome
regulation
that
will
make
it
harder
for
small
business
owners
like
myself
to
earn
an
income
as
assembly.
In
the
win
stated.
Many
residents
operate
their
short-term
rentals
as
their
sole
livelihood.
Like
myself.
F
Truly,
we
appreciate
the
assembly
woman's
heart
efforts
and
I
want
to
make
that
very
clear.
Madam
assemblywoman,
we
really
do
appreciate
your
hard
efforts,
but
we
ask
that
you
negotiate
further
with
the
interested
parties
like
myself
to
ensure
fairness,
I'm
african-american
and
I'm
also
a
homeowner.
Those
two
things
usually
don't
go
together.
F
F
Again,
I
appreciate
the
efforts
of
this
community
and
most
specifically
assembly
women
win,
but
I
ask
that
the
committee
and
those
that
may
be
interested
in
creating
equity
in
this
community
and
put
action
to
work
that
they
that
I
ask.
Why
not
focus
on
getting
this
right
the
first
time
and
create
fairness
for
african-americans
and
other
minorities
and
disadvantaged
homeowners
like
myself,
it's
been
everything
to
create
to
get
a
share
of
this
american
dream
and
ensure
that
they
are
no
longer
disenfranchised
residents.
K
L
When
I
spoke
at
the
assembly
revenue
committee,
I
share
my
personal
story
as
to
how
income
from
my
licensed
str's
has
allowed
me
to
stop
working
so
that
I
can
continue
to
be
the
sole
provider
for
my
mom
who's
losing
her
battle
with
stage
four
cancer.
I'm
not
going
to
actually
talk
about
that
tonight.
L
Instead,
what
I
want
to
do
is
actually
ask
some
tough
questions,
rhetorical,
obviously,
because
no
one's
going
to
answer
me
at
this
point,
but
I
just
want
you
all
to
kind
of
hear
some
questions
that
I
have
in
response
to
some
of
the
things
that
have
been
made.
Claims
and
things
have
been
said
tonight,
a
simply
woman.
When
you
claim
this
bill
as
guard
rails
and
you're
right,
you
have
added
guardrails
on
the
side
of
the
resort
in
local
jurisdictions,
but
when
it
comes
to
us
str
operators,
these
are
not
guard
rails.
L
These
are
spike
strips
intended
to
stop
sdrs
altogether.
There's
a
claim
that
illegal
operators
can
go
to
long-term
routes.
Do
you
actually
know
how
much
long-term
rental
money
has
gone
uncollected
since
the
pandemic
and
is
still
going
uncollected
due
to
eviction
moratorium,
but
yet
you
give
that
as
an
option
for
us.
There's
also
been
a
lot
of
focus
tonight
on
illegal
rentals
and
how
this
bill
only
impacts.
Those
str
operators,
but
I
am
a
legal
license
operator
and
this
bill
will
impact
me
as
well.
I
want
to
actually
address
the
senator.
L
I
think
it
might
have
been
the
chairwoman
that
mentioned
or
asked
the
question
about
anti-competition.
Is
there
an
anti-competition
issue
here,
and
I
urge
you
to
actually
probe
this
point
further,
because
there
is
an
anti-competition
here.
This
is
anti-competition
at
its
finest.
Let's
take
just
the
two
night
minimum
you
can't
classify
and
tax
sdrs
the
same
as
these
hotels
and
resorts,
but
then
tell
these
sdrs
that
hey
you
can
only
rent
for
one
night,
but
this
hotel
this
hilton
over
here
or
this
resorts
world
they
can
rent
for
one
night.
L
But
you
you
can't
that's
anti-competition.
You
are
impacting
our
ability
to
compete,
so
I
do
urge
you
to
probe
that
better
further,
the
unions
in
the
resorts
claim
they
are
pro
ab363
because
they
want
to
protect
their
workers.
A
point
I
find
very
interesting
because
when,
when
during
the
pandemic,
where
were
they
for
these
workers,
I'll
tell
you
where
they
were,
they
were
laying
them
off
and
hanging
them
out
in
the
cold.
You
can
fact-check
this
by
reviewing
our
state
unemployment
data.
L
Look
how
many
people
are
still
laid
off
from
these
resorts
when
these
workers
were
laid
off.
It
was
us
sgr
operators
who
were
there
for
them,
offering
jobs
and
helping
them
stay
off
our
state
unemployment.
I
personally
know
this
to
be
true,
because
I
hired
a
maintenance
man
and
two
housekeepers
laid
off
from
three
different
strip:
hotels
and
still
haven't
been
offered
their
jobs
back.
So
let's
call
this
beta
spade
here.
The
2500
distance
separation
has
nothing
to
do
with
protection
of
the
workers,
but
rather
to
protect
the
pockets
of
these
big
corporations.
K
K
F
F
F
F
Everybody
complains
that
these
sdrs
aren't
paying
lodging
taxes,
yet
they
refuse
to
allow
them
to
get
legalized,
claiming
that
they
don't
deserve
to
get
legal
because
they
have
been
operating
illegally.
So,
if
that's
the
case,
then,
what's
the
whole
point
of
ap
363
is
not
to
allow
illegal
sdrs
to
come
into
compliance.
F
This
is
why
we
think
this
bill
is
not
a
path
to
legalization.
It's
the
bill
to
wipe
out
two-thirds
of
their
current
sdr
owners
and
in
the
process,
take
away
an
important
source
of
revenue
for
these
nevadan
families,
and
also
the
pride
of
state
and
local
municipalities
from
any
lodging
taxes.
These
homes
would
collect.
F
So,
yes,
we
oppose
this
bill
as
written,
because
we
want
true
path
to
legalization
for
all.
Fdr
owners
currently
operating
without
a
license,
not
a
bill
that
gives
monopoly
to
resort
hotels
with
the
2500
foot
distance
restriction,
and
you
think
this
alone
doesn't
make
us
wonder
who
this
bill
protects
and
who
it
really
harm.
F
The
assembled
woman
also
said
that
whoever
loses
their
short-term
rental
revenue
should
just
kill
their
home.
Maybe
she
should
sell
her
home
and
move
to
nhoa,
see
how
disrespectful
and
out
of
touch
that
type
of
statement
is
she's
completely
out
of
touch
with
the
different
life
situations
that
fdr
owners
face.
You
can't
tell
a
senior
citizen
on
a
fixed
income,
sharing
a
room
to
just
tell
her
how
she's,
relying
on
it
because
she's
not
making
enough
money.
Where
is
she
gonna
go?
We
are
pushing
the
masses,
the
masses
for
this.
F
A
Thanks
next.
K
H
Now
I
support
reasonable
regulations,
ensure
code
enforcement,
but
ab
366
is
not
the
bill
that
would
support
this
industry.
Experts
immediately
recognize
this
bill's
main
intent,
and
we
know
that
states
allowing
accommodations
facilitators
to
control
transient
lodging
taxes
have
regretted
it
do
the
math,
and
you
will
see
that
nevada
will
lose
tax
revenue
under
this
program.
H
H
H
It'll,
create
many
layers
of
problems,
lawsuits,
chaos
and
contention
as
many
as
the
colorful
amendments
within
this
draft
bill,
as
it's
been
amended
and
amended
and
amended
now,
the
state
standards
are
unreasonable
and
please
let
local
governments
enact
standards
that
are
appropriate
for
their
unique
communities.
That's
something
that's
been
working
and
that
will
work.
Please
set
aside
the
misconceptions
and
emotions
the
deal
making
and
the
politics
and
do
what
is
best
for
nevadans
your
constituents
by
voting
no
on
ab363.
K
K
K
J
Our
objections
to
av
363
are
founded
in
the
basics
of
good
governance
over
land
use
matters
which
have
been
dismissed
during
previous
testimony
in
favor
of
an
unsubstantiated
argument
that
this
bill
provides
for
parity
and
at
the
center
of
it
taxes.
However,
official
studies
and
hard
data
are
conspicuously
absent.
During
testimony.
It
was
also
stated
that
ab363
would
protect
employees
of
the
resort
industry
provide
for
the
resources
that
would
further
enforcement
and
regulation
and
improve
the
prospects
for
more
affordable
housing.
J
I
find
it
interesting
that,
in
today's
testimony
her
concern
and
desire
to
protect
our
neighborhood
was
something
that
no
one
in
our
neighborhood
knew
was
a
problem
she
had
intended
to
solve
if
re-elected.
I
would
also
encourage
members
of
this
body
to
watch
previous
testimony
from
the
assembly
revenue
committee.
J
There
are
reasons
the
bar
is
high
for
such
legislation
and
the
lack
of
substantive
evidence
makes
it
passage
dangerous
and
sets
a
very
bad
precedent.
We
respectfully
request
you
both
to
spill
down
in
your
committee
and
force
everyone
back
to
the
table
where
the
state's
appropriate
role
in
this
process
may
be
fully
vetted.
I
agree.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time.
K
L
L
I'm
here
in
opposition
to
assembly,
bill
363.,
the
city
of
boulder
city
is
most
concerned
with
section
20,
sub-section
4,
which
prohibits
local
governments
from
enacting
or
enforcing
a
complete
prohibition
on
the
rental
of
short-term
rentals.
The
city
is
also
extremely
concerned
about
the
short
time
frame
in
which
this
bill
is
required
to
be
implemented.
L
L
The
city
does
not
currently
allow
for
short-term
rentals,
and
this
bill
would
essentially
take
away
the
right
for
boulder
city
citizens
to
determine
how
and
whether
transit,
rentals
and
single-family
homes
should
be
permitted.
In
addition
for
other
jurisdictions,
the
bill
has
a
self-regulating
mechanism.
L
If
the
short-term
rental
is
located
in
an
hoa,
the
hoa
governing
documents
must
allow
the
those
transit
lodging
in
the
community.
Unlike
many
communities
in
southern
nevada.
Boulder
city
has
very
few
hoas
and
there
are
fears
that
short-term
rental
owners
unable
to
obtain
permits
in
neighboring
jurisdictions
will,
due
to
the
hoa
restrictions,
will
seek
refuge
by
buying
properties
in
boulder
city,
we're
a
small
tight-knit
community,
primary,
primarily
residential.
L
We
have
less
than
16
000
people,
and
while
we
have
some
tourism,
we're
mostly
made
up
of
residents-
and
we
have
absolutely
no
gaming.
Older
city
residents
through
their
representatives
on
council,
should
have
the
right
to
determine
how
to
regulate
short-term
rentals
or
decide
whether
they
should
be
allowed
at
all
of
all.
L
Other
rural
jurisdictions
are
exempt
from
this
bill,
with
the
exception
of
boulder
city
and
mesquite,
and
we
would
simply
appreciate
the
same
treatment
as
the
other
rural
communities
or,
at
the
very
least,
staggered
timeline
for
implementation
for
the
smaller
communities,
with
smaller
staff
that
will
have
to
make
certain
cuts
and
concessions
in
order
to
hire
staff
to
implement
this
bill.
So
with
that,
I
think
you
and
good
evening
committee
members
have
a
good
night.
K
K
L
Good
evening,
I'm
richard
lazaro
senior
manager
for
government
and
corporate
affairs
at
expedia.
Oh
sorry,
l-a-z-a-r-o
here
in
opposition
to
ab363
for
25
years,
expedia
brands
like
expedia.com,
hotels.com
and
vervo
have
powered
travel
throughout
the
state
of
nevada.
L
Regulations
that
meet
each
community's
needs
and
know
firsthand
how
intensely
local
these
issues
are,
in
fact,
the
san
diego
ordinance
that
assembly
member
win
reference,
which
includes,
by
the
way
the
platform
accountability
measures
that
have
also
been
discussed,
was
built
from
an
agreement
between
expedia
group
and
the
local
hospitality
union.
United
local
30.
L
writing
and
enacting
six
local
ordinances
through
a
single
state
bill
is
just
the
wrong
approach.
I
do
note
that
we
are
grateful
for
the
sponsor's
collaborative
approach
to
the
work.
While
we
oppose
this
bill,
we
are
ready
to
work
with
the
sponsor
and
with
each
of
you
and
the
local
communities
you
represent
to
help
address
community
needs
to
local
ordinances.
K
F
Thank
you,
chair
neil
members
of
the
committee
for
this
opportunity
to
testify,
in
opposition
to
ab-363
a
bill
that
has
a
stated
intent
to
legalize
short-term
rentals
that
result
in
anti-competitive,
protectionary
regulatory
capture
that
lends
itself
to
a
de
facto
ban
at
the
expense
of
over
two-thirds
of
operators
in
the
unincorporated,
las
vegas
county
and
clark
county.
Maybe
363
in
its
current
form,
is
the
government
dictating
who
you
can
have
in
your
home
and
for
how
long
you
can
have
someone
in
your
home
to
protect
corporations
over
average
nevadans.
F
We
respectfully
ask
the
sponsor
to
remove
the
deaths
and
separation
requirements
and
the
minimum
night
requirements.
Short-Term
renting
has
offered
nevada
residents
an
opportunity
to
make
some
extra
money
for
themselves
and
their
families.
It's
been
an
important
source
of
income
for
many
nevadans
of
all
walks
of
life
who
want
to
share
and
contribute
in
our
stairs
in
our
state's
robust
tourism
and
gig
economy.
We
strongly
believe
that
str's
must
be
treated
in
the
same
manner
as
long-term
renting.
The
activities
of
the
current
short-term
rental
are
the
same
as
the
activities
that
occur
in
long-term
rentals.
F
These
are
not
hotels,
they
do
not
have
concierge
services,
they
do
not
have
restaurants,
they
don't
have
entertainment,
they
don't
have
physical
security
and
they
don't
have
the
memories
on
sites.
The
activities
that
occur
within
these
short-term
rentals
are
no
different
than
the
activities
that
occur
in
long-term
rentals.
F
Afc
nevada
has
engaged
in
this
issue
since
fall
of
2018
engaging
with
multiple
municipalities
and
counties,
and
we
will
continue
to
do
so,
as
many
of
you
know,
as
short-term
rentals
have
been
a
top
priority
for
us
this
session
and
we've
gone
around
talking
about
our
intents,
who
want
to
find
a
solution
on
this
that
legalizes,
short-term
renting.
However,
we
we
agree
that
in
ab360
periods,
current
junction
is
not
the
way
to
achieve
this.
F
We
strongly
believe
that
even
the
status
quo
right
now
is
more
preferable
than
this
overburden
some
protectionist
cooperative
regulatory
framework
that's
being
proposed.
This
is
not
an
easy
issue,
but
because
precisely
it
is
a
complex
issue
is
why
we
need
to
go
back
to
the
table
and
work
over
the
next
two
years
to
find
common
ground
to
be
able
to
fix
this
issue
for
all
parties,
not
just
for
the
corporations
and
not
just
for
the
hotel
industry.
On
behalf
of
our
over
96
000
activists,
we
urge
you
to
oppose
ab363.
K
K
K
A
F
F
In
addition,
with
fifteen
thousand
properties,
you
can
expect
five
thousand
or
more
to
apply
the
minute.
The
processing
system
opens
up.
That
will
undoubtedly
overload
the
online
registration
system
such
that
applicants
will
get
frozen
out.
Just
like
what
happened
in
the
dealer.
Unemployment
system,
during
covert
with
the
distance
separation
requirement,
overlap
and
numerous
properties
in
the
same
community,
applying
at
the
same
time
who
will
decide
which
property
gets
a
registration
and
which
one
gets
excluded.
F
K
K
K
F
My
name
is
johnny
desmond
d-e-s-m-a-n,
I'm
an
opposed
to
a
bill,
a
363.
senator
woman
win.
You
know
she
stated
that
she
doesn't
believe
bands
work.
She
said
that
many
times.
However,
what
exactly
would
this
bill
be
doing
to
thousands
of
operators
who
don't
fall
with
an
undefeated
ridiculous
restriction?
They
would
you'd
be
banning
them
you're,
taking
the
rights
away
from
thousands
of
property
owners
to
do
what
they
with
with
their
own
property.
F
It's
it's
unrealistic.
It's
unfair,
you're,
gonna
strip,
the
home
to
so
many
people,
just
because
you're,
protecting
the
big
corporate
casinos
and
it's
very
clear
who
you
guys
have
best
interest
in,
and
I
just
wish
that
you
guys
could
take
a
step
back
and
look
and
see
like
how
many
thousands
of
property
owners
that
are
going
to
be
devastated
when
this
bill
passes.
That's
all
I
have
to
say
thank
you.
K
H
My
name
is
cindy
lohmann
c-I-n-d-y-l-o-w-m-a-m.
I
strongly
oppose
ab363
as
written.
I
fully
agree
that
short-term
rentals
should
be
legal
in
nevada.
However,
this
bill
is
written
as
ridiculous.
The
majority
of
short-term
rental
owners
are
owned
by
individuals
for
them
to
support
themselves
and
their
families.
Yes,
there
are
investors
that
have
multiple
ones,
but
that
is
not
the
norm
and
you
cannot
stop
investors
from
buying
homes
to
use
as
rentals
and
blame
them
for
the
housing
shortage.
I'm
a
realtor
housing
insurance
has
nothing
to
do
with
short-term
rentals.
H
It
is
because,
during
the
crash
of
2008,
no
new
houses
were
being
built
during
that
time
and
several
years
after
someone
needs
to
do
their
due
diligence
before
they
blame
short-term
rentals
for
any
housing
problem,
and
I
can
guarantee
you
that
the
average
casino
worker
cannot
afford
my
house
for
many
of
the
short-term
rentals
out
there.
It
is
not
affecting
affordable
housing,
as
people
are
trying
to
blame
those
deciding
on
these
those
deciding.
H
This
really
needs
to
take
time
to
learn
about
short-term
rentals
and
true
decisions
and
have
true
discussions
with
the
stakeholders,
such
as
me,
and
not
listen
to
the
propaganda
about
just
the
bad
strs
and
bad
operators.
Many
people
who
will
be
affected
by
this
bill
have
not
had
a
stay
in
this
bill.
I
opened
my
legal,
short-term
rental
in
2019
when
henderson
made
them
legal.
I
am
a
single
mom
and
I
support
my
family
off
the
income
from
what
was
once
our
family
home.
H
We
gave
up
a
large
home,
a
swimming
pool
and
a
great
location
in
order
to
create
this
income
and
now
live
in
a
small
rental
I
put
in
over
150
000
into
my
sdr
to
make
it
beautiful
luxurious
homes
for
people
to
stand
while
they're
visiting
las
vegas
and
it's
very
safe
and
very
clean,
probably
a
lot
cleaner
than
some
of
these
people
that
are
claiming
we
have
dumps
and
for
the
record
I
pay
taxes
on
my
short-term
rental.
I
paid
state
of
henderson
2500
last
month
so
saying
that
we
are
not
paying.
H
Taxes
is
wrong.
I
pay
them
every
month
and
so
do
many
short
term
rental
owners.
I
have
created
multiple
jobs
from
people
that
might
not
otherwise
have
work
and
they
do
work
in
a
safe
environment.
So
don't
try
saying
our
houses
aren't
safe.
That's
a
baloney
these
guests
in
my
home
patronize,
not
only
the
strip
fremont
street,
but
they
also
spend
money
in
my
local
area
at
restaurants,
bars
stores,
local
casinos,
like
green
valley,
ranch
to
m
south
point.
Why
should
all
the
money
only
go
to
large
casinos?
Let's
help
support
local
businesses
too.
H
It
makes
no
sense
that
the
rules
are
different.
All
over
our
valley.
We
should
have
all
the
same
rules
and
they
need
to
be
fair
and
use
common
sense.
You
need
to
have
fdr
division
like
we
have
a
real
estate
division
that
govern
all
the
short
term.
Rentals
in
southern
nevada
str's
keep
getting
compared
to
hotels,
yet
we
have.
We
have
way
more
restrictions
than
they
do.
This
is
insane
you
can't
have
your
cake
and
eat
it
too.
H
I
strongly
urge
you
to
kill
this
bill
as
it
is
in
britain
and
have
a
committee
working
together
with
ftr
owners,
local
businesses
and
the
big
corporations
to
make
this
bill
one
that
everyone
is
satisfied
with.
I'm
not
a
politician
and
honestly,
I
hate
politics
and
I've
never
been
involved
until
my
likelihood
might
be
destroyed,
I'm
just
a
voting
tax,
paying
normal
person
who
believes
in
honesty
and
common
sense,
which
I
am
not
saying
with
what
is
going
on
with
this
bill.
H
A
B
Good
afternoon
or
well,
we
are
well
past
afternoon
good
evening,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record
justin
harrison
representing
clark
county
here
today
in
neutral
on
ab363,
I'd
first
like
to
thank
assemblywoman
wynn.
I
know
she
had
to
run
to
the
floor,
but
would
like
to
thank
her
for
working
with
us
to
include
many
of
our
proposed
amendments
to
the
language
before
you
today.
B
I
will
also
point
out
the
enforcement
language
and
platform
accountability
measures
that
have
been
added
to
the
bill
that
will
greatly
increase
the
ability
of
the
county
to
adopt
an
ordinance
and
enforce
those
provisions,
and
I
would
point
you
specifically
to
a
number
of
sections,
but
section
8.4,
that
requires
platforms
to
verify
the
licensure
of
these
residential
units
prior
to
allowing
for
booking.
This
is
something
that
we've
researched
and
have
seen
in
other
jurisdictions,
including
san
francisco,
denver
miami-dade
county.
B
A
vital
requirement
in
order
to
really
putting
together
a
successful
ordinance
at
the
local
government
level.
B
It's
been
mentioned
numerous
times
in
testimony
the
number
of
illegally
operating
short-term,
rentals
in
clark,
county
and
specifically
unincorporated
clark
county
that
number
in
the
thousands,
but
it's
really
unknown
at
this
point,
as
there
is
no
no
platform
accountability
and
there
is
no
licensure
of
these
these
properties
at
this
time,
but
we
feel
that
the
measures
that
have
been
added
to
the
bill,
these
provisions
will
allow
the
county
to
do
so.
Moving
forward
I'll
also
just
address
quickly.
B
As
I'm
sure
the
committee
has
a
number
of
questions,
I'm
sure
you
all
have
seen
the
fiscal
note.
That's
been
posted
to
nellis,
it's
a
3.8
million
dollar
fiscal
note
over
the
biennium
and
3.5
million
over
future
biennia.
B
This
is
a
cost
that
we
tried
to
anticipate
based
on
honestly,
a
guesstimate
of
the
number
of
illegally
operating
short-term
rentals
and
potentially,
how
many
short-term
rentals
could
be
could
be
registered
in
the
future
and
unincorporated
clark
county
with
that.
Madam
chair
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
from
the
committee.
I
know
I've
met
with
a
few
of
you
individually
but
happy
to
answer
those
questions
on
the
record.
L
L
We
have
a
couple
of
differences
that
we
would
need
to
change
our
ordinance
on
in
the
bill
that
non-conforming
language
would
be
the
2500
foot,
distance
separation
for
unrestricted
gaming
licensees
and
also
the
percentage
of
condominiums
that
would
be
allowed.
We
currently
allow
25
percent
of
a
condominium
tower
to
be
used
for
short-term
rentals,
and
the
bill
would
lower
that
to
10
percent.
L
A
A
L
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
Senator
ratty.
L
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
chair
in
that
data.
Can
you
differentiate
between
single
owners,
your
hate
to
use
this
term,
because
we've
used
it
so
often
in
the
tenant
spells
but
mom
and
pop
owner
versus
corporate
ownership,
like
one
owner
owning
multiple
units
looks
like
I'm
going
to
phone
a
friend
and
mike
you
want
to
jump,
come
to
the
table.
M
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
mike
cathcart,
representing
the
city
of
henderson
yeah.
We
do
differentiate
between
the
large
properties
we
collect
those
by
address
by
name
of
the
business,
and
then
we
also
contract
with
a
software
provider
that
collects
the
transient
lodging
taxes
from
the
individual
owners
who
are
registered
with
with
us
by
address.
So
we
know
each
one
of
those
as
well.
M
A
So
before
no,
I
just
I
have
one
more
question
so
in
regards
to
like
in
the
bill
and
there's
a
section
in
the
bill
that
talks
about
the
it's,
the
rental
units
in
the
apartments
and
whether
or
not
the
bill
and
there's
a
question
of
whether
or
not
the
bill
will
allow
the
owner
of
the
units
in
the
apartment
complex
to
rent
them
out
to
for
transient
lodging.
Do
you
guys
currently
have
something
in
play
around
apartments?
What
do
you
guys?
What
are
you
doing
around
apartments
right
now.
M
D
Thank
you
before
you
go
away,
so
you
mentioned
that
you
have
a
cap
of
25
percent
of
this
bill.
Contemplates
10..
Do
you
know
what
you're
running,
because
are
you
pushing
up
against
the
25?
Are
there
a
lot
of
instances
where
that's
a
problem,
or
or
typically,
what
are
you
seeing
as
far
as
percentages.
M
M
It
is
the
lake
las
vegas
area,
where
there
are
some
condominium
towers,
and
we
do
have
quite
a
few
short-term
rentals
in
that
area.
D
M
A
A
With
that,
so
why
hasn't
there
been
a
conversation
more
so
around
a
percentage
cap
versus
a
distance
feet.
A
Because
what
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
is,
like
people
have
been
debating
the
660
the
distance
requirements
in
this
bill,
the
2500
feet
the
660..
A
So
if,
if
you
are
currently
using
percentage,
a
percentage
for
condominiums,
which
would
be
the
same,
if,
if
we
were
talking
about
like
apartments
or
other
entities,
why
haven't
we
just
changed
our
method
of
calculation?
I
guess
around
how
the
sdrs
are
being
applied
or
their
usage
like.
M
M
Mike
cathcart
representing
city
of
henderson,
I
really
believe
that,
within
the
the
planning
environment,
the
distance
separation
is
what
stops
the
clustering
within
neighborhoods.
That
was
our
discussion
at
our
council
meetings,
and
that
was
the
the
information
that
our
council
weighed.
When
they
they
looked
at
the
1000
feet.
They
also
did
look
at
the
660.
M
A
Thanks
for
that,
all
right,
so
I'm
thank
you.
So
I'm
going
to
ask
clark
county
questions,
so
so
I
I
feel
a
lot
of
ways
about
this
build
number
one,
because
I
feel
like
we
got
this
bill
because
clark
county
didn't
want
to
act.
So
can
you
tell
me
why
exactly
clark
county
didn't
want
to
take
this
on
at
the
local
level
and
deal
with
this
with
their
own
elected
officials?.
B
For
the
record
justin
harrison
with
clark
county
senator,
I
will
answer
what
I
I
think
were
two
questions
there.
I'll
start
with
the.
Why
clark
county
didn't
take
this
up
to
the
local
level.
B
That
is
the
reason
why
that
has
not
been
taken
up
by
by
by
clark
county
in
the
unincorporated
areas.
So
what
I
think
was
your
your
first
question
about
the
bill
and
and
it
being
directly
about
clark
county.
I
think-
and
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
others,
but
my
understanding
is
that
also
having
a
standard
throughout
southern
nevada
is
something
that
has
been
an
idea
from
from
numerous
stakeholders
to
set
some
minimums
so
that
jurisdictions
that
do
currently
have
an
ordinance
do
not
grant
variances
at
the
rate
that
they
currently
have
been.
A
A
B
For
the
record
justin
harrison
with
clark
county
center-
I
I
I
wouldn't
say
that's
not
an
option,
that's
not
direction
that
we
have
heard
specifically.
I
think
the
bill
gives
the
broad
authority
to
allow
the
county
to
do
that.
Should
they
choose
to
do
so,
but
I
would,
as
you
know,
just
state
that
those
operators
are
operating
illegally.
It's
been
mentioned
a
few
times
and
it
may
be
good
to
clarify
that
there
is
a
ban
or
not
an
ordinance
in
clark
county.
B
A
A
B
Clark
county
had
a
large
stakeholder
group,
including
many
of
the
folks
in
this
room,
getting
together
regularly
to
discuss
the
possibility
of
regulating
short-term
rentals
in
unincorporated
clark
county,
unfortunately
or
unfortunately,
those
those
conversations
halted
fairly
abruptly
when
the
pandemic
hit
and-
and
there
was
an
immediate
shutdown
as
the
the
focus
really
really
shifted
to
the
pandemic.
B
So
I
know
that
those
those
conversations
can
continue
to
happen.
Stakeholders
can
be
brought
together
and
that's
potentially
a
topic
of
conversation
of
how
to
bring
folks
that
are
currently
operating
illegally
into
the
fold.
I
think
that's,
the
the
really
a
large
goal
of
the
bill
is
to
create
a
legal
track
and
and
incentivize
a
means
to
bring
folks
into
the
legal
legal
realm,
bring
them
out
of
the
shadows.
Thus,
the
the
the
different
types
of
enforcement
mechanisms
that
have
been
placed
in
the
bill.
A
All
right,
so
that's
interesting,
so
you're
willing
to
have
a
conversation
about
the
grace
period.
The
bill
passes,
but
not
have
the
conversation
about
actually
creating
the
enforcement
mechanism
and
taking
the
state
out
of
the
game
I'll
leave
that
there
I'm
not
expecting
an
answer,
it's
rhetorical,
all
right
so
moving
on,
I
will
take
you
out
of
the
hot
seat:
it's
not
really
hot
seat.
I
don't
really
drill
you.
I
want
it
to,
but
it's
late.
A
Thank
you,
mr
harrison.
I
appreciate.
A
A
K
K
K
F
Wiz
rizzard,
director
of
grassroots
operation,
with
american
for
prosperity
w-I-z-r-o-u-z-a-r-d.
How
do
you
spell
that?
First
of
all,
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
chair.
You've
been
doing
great
in
giving
people
ample
time
to
speak.
I
like
the
way
you
balanced
it,
and
I
appreciate
it
and
I
wish
more
and
more
would
embrace
that.
Secondly,
I
will
say
I
was
probably
one
of
the
many
that
were
calling
in
trying
to
get
in
on
opposition
of
ab363,
and
there
were
some
technical
difficulties
there.
F
So
I
urge
to
definitely
look
to
the
line
for
others
like
myself.
Nonetheless,
I'm
calling
urging
you
to
or
the
committee
to
vote
no
on
ab363
and
for
myself
I
play
football
unlv
and
graduating
with
bachelor
and
seeing
some
of
my
friends
literally
graduate
with
degrees.
They
were
not
able
to
access
economic
opportunity
and
some
resulted
to
street
activities
that
led
to
criminal
convictions.
F
The
problem
there
was
two
of
them
was
actually
doing
uber
until
uber
came
in
and
actually
was
banned
by
the
taxi
authority,
and
I
see
a
similar
situation
here
happening
where
one
industry
a
corporation,
was
using
government
to
protect
their
own
interests,
didn't
matter
who
they
harmed.
Fortunately,
we
fought
hard
and
got
over
legalized
and
individuals
started
accessing
economic
opportunity.
It
wasn't
about
distance
separation,
it
wasn't
about
percentages,
it
was
about.
Every
individual
has
a
right
to
pursue
their
economic
opportunities
that
they
see
fit
for
their
life
in
pursuing
their
happiness.
F
F
What
really
did
it
for
me
was
when
she
told
me
that,
basically,
the
2500
foot
distance
was
to
protect
the
investment
that
casinos
have
made
in
the
community,
and
I
told
her
that
this
is
wrong,
that
the
community
members
who
are
actually
engaging
with
short-term
renting,
are
people
on
fixed
income.
More
importantly,
it's
people
who
work
in
these
industries
there's
a
bartender
that
called
me
literally
six
months
ago
and
was,
like
you
know,
heartbroken,
that
she
was
hit
with
a
seven
thousand
dollar
fine
from
clark
county
and
when
she
lost
her
job
during
them
pandemic.
F
What
didn't
even
know
short-term
renting
was
illegal.
She
simply
opened
up
her
room
to
give
it
to
someone
on
a
short-term
basis
and
was
was
hit
with
seven
thousand
dollar
fine.
She
was
just
a
pause
that
she
was
turned
into
a
criminal
and
didn't
even
know
it
when
we
reached
out
to
clark
county
and
trying
to
find
sensible
solutions
and
helping
individuals
like
her
to
remedy
these
situations,
they
literally
silenced
and
didn't
show
interest
at
all
and
you're.
Absolutely
correct.
F
Clark
county
didn't
want
to
bring
this
bill
forward
because
of
exactly
what
clark
county
stands
for
and
it's
the
ban.
The
ability
for
individuals
to
to
access
economic
opportunity
and
a
big
interest
of
that
is
the
casinos
when
we
saw
that
the
casinos
were
stepping
in
and
putting
these
different
separations.
We
reached
out
to
the
casinos
to
work
things
out.
As
ed
ewling
pointed
out.
These
are
people
who
are
coming
to
visit
our
city,
our
our
state
that
normally
was
not
vegas
was
not
affordable
or
nevada
wasn't
affordable,
and
these
avenues
filled
with
gaps.
F
F
But,
as
you
pointed
out
chairwoman,
this
is
not
about
opportunity
or
equal
opportunity.
This
is
clearly
as
this
bill
has
been
written,
to
pick,
winners
and
losers
and
in
this
bill,
nevadans
property
owners,
those
small
businesses
and
individuals
who
work
and
need
that
second
income
they're
the
one
that
being
put
in
the
losing
line,
and
I
urge
you
to
vote
no
to
secure
those
opportunities
for
future
generations
to
come.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
A
K
K
H
H
I
know
it
is
late
and
I've
heard
so
many
points
being
made
already
as
I've
been
on
the
phone.
So
I
don't
want
to
go
over
things
that
have
already
been
said
too
much,
but
I
want
to
speak
from
the
heart
and
I
want
to
speak
from
the
streets
of
las
vegas.
H
So,
during
this
year
of
people
needing
to
come
to
las
vegas,
not
even
for
vacation,
but
maybe
for
some
family
related
thing
or
businesses
that
need
to
come
for
work
or
whatever
to
have
to
stay
on
the
strip
where
maybe
their
safety
wasn't
wasn't
a
concern
for
them.
This
is
one
reason
why
the
demand
for
short-term
rentals
is
here
in
las
vegas
and
when
we
talk
about
limiting
2500
feet
away
from
the
hotels,
why
do
you
think
tourists
want
to
stay
near
the
strip,
but
maybe
not
on
the
strips?
H
So
they
have
more
money
to
spend.
We
don't
offer
restaurants,
we
don't
offer
shows
we
don't
offer
gambling,
so
the
money
they're
saving
in
doing
a
short-term
rental,
they're
spending
it
at
the
hotels
and
on
the
strip.
So
it
seems
like
clark.
County
is
kind
of
shooting
themselves
from
the
foot,
because
all
these
years
and
years
over
10
15
longer
years
of
people
doing
short-term
rental
anyway
and
they're
not
collecting
these
taxes.
H
If
they're
going
to
not
offer
this
grace
period,
if
they're
going
to
have
these
such
strict
rules,
they're
not
going
to
bring
in
the
taxes
that
they
could
be
bringing
in
because
they've
been
stalling,
we've
been
they've
been
trying
to
work
with
them.
They've
been
asking
them
to
create
some
kind
of
ordinance
so
that
people
could
operate
legally.
H
Okay
and
that's
kind
of
all,
I
wanted
to
say
for
tonight
being
that
it's
late,
but
I
I
highly
respect
everyone
that's
spoken,
and
I
think
you
know
from
the
heart
and
the
emotions
and
for
the
people
and
the
residents
here
in
las
vegas.
We're
hearing
that
you
know
which
concern
are
you?
Is
it
the
you
know,
resident's
concern
or
the
tourist
concern,
because
when
you
talk
about
the
safety
of
the
home
and
it
needs
to
you
know,
fire
extinguisher
smoke,
alarm
caller
caller.
A
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
number
one.
Listen
thanks
for
your
testimony,
but
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
close
this
out.
I'm
going
to
put
this
in
opposition
not
neutral,
and
I
believe
you
are
our
last
caller,
and
so
I'm
going
to
our
so
can
thanks
for
calling
in,
though
bps
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
close
out
the
callers
we
have
to
get
to
floor,
so
our
presenter
is
not
here.
I
think
she
had
signed,
mr
sullivan.
A
A
K
K
A
A
A
L
A
K
J
F
J
A
Bill.
Thank
you.
Okay.
Thank
you
all
right,
bps
is
there
anybody
else
on
the
line
for
public
comment.