►
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
good
afternoon.
I
would
like
to
call
to
order
the
meeting
on
a
senate
committee
on
revenue
and
economic
development
will
the
secretary
please
call
the
roll.
A
Here
so
mark
senator
sivers
ganza
present
as
she
arrives,
I'm
here,
oh
okay,
all
right,
so
senator
stevens
answered
his
present.
Okay.
So
before
we
begin,
I
would
like
to
just
quickly
explain
how
virtual
committees
are
working,
I'm
sure
you're,
very
familiar
we're
60
to
almost
60
days
into
the
session.
There
are
various
ways
that
members
of
the
public
can
participate
and
engage
throughout
the
process.
A
If
you
go
to
nellis,
you
can
register
by
clicking
the
participate
button,
you
will
get
a
email
that
gives
you
a
call
and
number,
and
you
designate
that
you
want
to
call
in
on,
and
support
opposition
and
neutral.
You
can
also
submit
written
testimony
to
the
committee
via
an
email
address
or
fax
number,
which
is
listed
on
the
senate
revenue
agenda.
You
can
share
your
opinion
via
the
legislature's
opinion
application
on
nellis,
and
you
can
also
just
view
the
committee
through
nellis
or
on
the
legislators,
youtube
channel.
A
So
today
everyone
we
have
a
work
session
and
two
bills,
so
I
am
going
to
start
with
the
work
session
first
on
sb
74,
and
then
I
will
move
into
the
bills
that
we
have
sb
10
and
sb
284.
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record
joe
reel
deputy
fiscal
analyst
with
the
fiscal
analysis
division
of
the
legislative
council
bureau.
The
bill
on
the
work
session
today
is
senate
bill
74..
This
bill
revises
provisions
relating
to
the
population
total
used
in
determining
the
distribution
of
certain
taxes.
B
In
the
case
of
a
conflict
between
the
population
totals
certified
by
the
governor
and
the
population
totals
issued
by
the
census
bureau
specifically
senate
bill
4
eliminates
the
requirement
to
use
the
population
totals
issued
by
the
census
bureau
in
the
case
of
a
conflict
with
the
population
totals
certified
by
the
governor
from
the
provisions
of
nrs
360.690,
which
governs
the
local
government
distribution
account
also
known
as
the
consolidated
tax
distribution
and
from
nrs
377.057,
which
governs
the
distribution
of
the
1.75
percent.
Supplemental
city,
county
relief,
tax
bill
of
men's
nrs
377.05.
B
The
workstation
document
summarizes
the
individuals
that
testified
on
the
measure
and
there
are
no
amendments.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
Thank
you
for
that,
and
I
do
want
to
make
mention
for
the
work
session
document
there.
You
know
there
were
local
governments
that
had
a
very
vested
interest
in
sb-74
and
I
will
call
department
of
taxation
a
director
to
the
make
some
comments,
because
there's
a
reason
why
we
did
not
accept
the
amendments.
A
E
E
The
department
has
been
working
with
the
city
of
north
las
vegas
and
has
heard
their
concerns
in
opposition
to
sb-74,
and
we
have
agreed
to
work
with
them,
but
before
I
go
into
the
details
about
what
the
department
will
be
doing
to
work
with
local
governments,
I
would
like
to
share
with
you
here
today
that
the
state
demographer,
jeff,
hart
castle,
will
be
retiring.
In
june.
E
Mr
hart
castle
jeff
has
been
the
state
demographer
since
january
of
january.
2000
working
for
both
the
nevada
system
of
higher
education
and
finishing
out
his
distinguished
career
at
the
department
of
taxation
he's
had
significant
influence
on
the
federal
funds
that
have
come
into
nevada
as
a
result
of
his
hard
work,
and
I
will
share
with
you
in
his
own
words.
It's
all
about
a
good
address
list
and
jeff
worked
to
ensure
that
the
list
for
nevada,
through
two
census
programs
census
count
review
and
the
local
update
of
census
addresses
luca.
E
E
The
economic
impact
would
equal
312
million
dollars
in
federal
funds
flowing
into
nevada,
to
put
account
review
into
perspective
in
2010.
Nevada
was
the
third
highest
number
of
addresses
added
through
that
program.
Just
behind
texas
and
florida
jeff
has
worked
on
many
efforts
throughout
his
career
to
include
a
2005
study
when
it
came
to
closing
a
barrack
out
at
the
hawthorne
army
depot
in
mineral
county,
where
the
through
his
work
showed
that
the
depot
would
have
an
economic
impact
to
monroe
county
and
helped
to
keep
it
open
2012.
E
E
Jeff
has
been
a
member
of
the
federal
state,
cooperative
and
population
estimates
steering
committee
for
15
years
and
chaired
the
committee
itself
for
13
years.
He's
been
a
member
and
a
panel
of
addressing
priority
technical
issues
for
the
next
decade
of
the
american
community
survey
committee
on
national
statistics
in
the
national
academy
of
sciences
he's
been
a
participant
and
presenter
at
workshops.
E
On
rationalizing
rural
area
classifications,
the
committee
on
national
statistics
and
the
national
academies
of
science
he's
been
a
presenter
at
the
2020
census,
data
products,
data
needs
and
privacy
considerations
and
a
committee
on
national
statistics
and
national
academies
of
science.
So
prior
to
that,
for
the
last
20
years
that
jeff
has
worked
as
the
demographer.
He
worked
for
clark
county
as
a
planner
for
clark,
county,
comprehensive
planning
from
november
29
1990
to
january
of
2000.,
and
what
I'd
like
to
share
a
result
of
jeff's
work
in
nevada.
E
He's
been
a
leader
in
work
performed
at
the
state
and
the
federal
level,
and
I
would
like
to
personally
thank
jeff
for
all
of
his
hard
work
and
dedication
to
the
state.
With
that
being
said,
we
are
interviewing
for
a
new
demographer
this
friday,
who
will
be
able
to
work
with
jeff
until
his
retirement.
E
With
the
new
demographer
in
place,
the
department
will
be
finalizing
its
data
governance
structure
in
october
of
2020.
The
department
published
our
strategic
plan
and
our
goal
number
three-
is
to
support
the
department
executives,
state,
local
and
national
decision
makers
by
providing
timely,
relevant
accurate
data
and
analysis
where
our
goal
here
is
to
allow
the
department
to
provide
that
timely,
relevant
and
accurate
data
and
analysis
that
is
utilized
by
the
department,
state
and
local
decision
makers
with
valuable
information
in
guiding
revenue
discussions.
E
E
A
Thank
you,
director,
young.
I
appreciate
you
putting
the
credentials
on
the
record
and
continuing
to
work
with
the
city
of
las
vegas
henderson
and
north
las
vegas
as
the
new
demographer
comes
on
board.
Thank
you.
Any
questions
on
sb
74
the
work
session
document.
A
F
H
D
A
Thank
you
for
the
question
that
is
correct,
but
not
it's
city,
it's
well!
No!
Let's!
Let
me
back
that
statement
up,
so
it
was
the
census.
Didn't
have
city
and
town
town
numbers
director,
young.
D
F
A
I
A
Yes,
so
sb
74
passes
unanimously.
I
will
assign
the
floor
statements
to
I'll
just
do
the
four
statement.
A
F
F
Like
a
lasagna,
you
may
remember
from
last
session's
presentation
all
of
these
layers
in
and
all
of
these
layers,
most
of
them
have
federal
dollars
in
them
and
they
are
capped,
and
so,
if
you
layer
all
of
those
together-
and
you
end
up
with
say,
if
perhaps
you
needed
a
dollar
to
buy
something
at
the
dollar
store.
You
may
remember
this
example
from
last
session.
F
If
you
can
only
layer,
97
cents
of
funding
together,
and
you
can't
get
that
last
three
cents,
then
the
project
doesn't
get
built,
and
so
the
low
income
housing
tax
credit
program
at
the
state
level
was
established
last
session,
with
the
specific
goal
of
getting
that
last
three
cents.
If
you
will
and
the
reason
that
the
program
has
the
potential
to
be
so
powerful
is
with
that
last
three
cents,
then
you
get
the
whole
project
without
that
last
three
cents.
F
F
Could
you
get
construction
workers
on
a
site?
All
of
those
things
were
really
in
play
once
that
there
was
some
clarity
achieved.
The
housing
division
reopened,
the
low
income,
housing
tax
credit
program
and
we
had
our
first
project
award,
and
that
was
september
of
2020.
The
first
three
million
dollars
in
tax
credits
were
reserved,
so
you
are
all
very
familiar
with
how
transferable
tax
credits
work.
F
Under
these
certain
categories,
honestly,
we
envisioned
that
most
of
these
tax
credits
would
be
purchased
by
large
gaming
companies
and
the
logic
behind
that
is
that
large
gaming
companies
have
to
pay
the
most
taxes
in
nevada,
and
so
they
have
enough
of
a
tax
burden
or
a
three
million
dollar
tax
credit
to
make
sense.
There
are
some
other
taxpayers
that
get
close
to
that,
but
there
aren't
very
many
of
them.
So
what
happened?
F
F
What
I
would
say
is
there
were
many
lessons
learned.
So
there
was
the
need
for
some
technical
improvements,
things
like
understanding.
F
A
good
definition
of
a
closing
the
timing
of
when
the
tax
credits
should
be
awarded
based
on
how
the
other
financing
works
in
a
project,
knowing
that,
if
you
were
going
to
work
with
a
fund
with
a
purchaser
like
a
bank
that
they
may
need
to
be
able
to
transfer
some
of
those
tax
credits
to
a
subsidiary
so
same
same
company,
but
just
a
different
unit
within
that
company,
lots
of
learnings,
and
so
basically,
what
this
bill
is
sb284
seeks
to,
based
on
the
experience
of
having
issued
our
first
tax
credits
and
learning
about
that
process,
both
from
the
developer
side,
the
housing
division
side
and
the
companies
that
might
purchase
these
tax
credits
in
the
future
side
that
there
were
some
tweaks
that
need
to
be
made.
F
So
most
of
what
this
bill
does
is
give
you
those
technical
tweaks
so
that
it
can
be
successful
moving
forward
in
the
future.
The
last
thing
that
it
does
is:
it
removes
the
sunset.
So
when
I
conceived
this
last
last
session,
the
idea
was,
let's
do
a
four-year
part
pilot
project.
40
million
dollars
in
tax
credits
were
awarded,
and
then
at
the
end
of
that
four
years
we
would
say
is
this
working?
F
So
we
are
not
asking
for
an
additional
allocation
of
tax
credits.
We
think
that
the
40
million
allocation
will
take
us
through
the
pilot
period,
but
we
are
asking
to
remove
the
sunset
so
that
the
tax
credits
do
stay
on
the
books
so
that,
if
a
future,
I'm
sorry
so
the
tax
credit
law
stays
in
the
nrs,
so
that
if
a
future
legislature
thought
that
this
program
was
successful
and
wanted
to
allocate
more
tax
credits,
the
statutory
mechanism
would
be
there
to
do
so.
So
that's,
basically
what
this
bill
does.
F
F
We
have
michael
holliday
who's,
also
from
the
housing
division
and
really
gets
his
hands
dirty
on
these
projects,
and
we
have
david
paul
who
is
with
nevada
hand,
which
is,
and
they
are
one
of
the
largest
developers
of
subsidized,
affordable
housing
in
the
state
of
nevada
and
so
they're
going
to
take
you
through
any
technical
elements
of
it
and
be
here
to
answer
any
questions
should
you
have
them
chair?
Would
you
like
us
to
walk
through
the
bill.
A
All
right
any
questions
from
members.
J
Thank
you.
So
in
can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
awarding
the
tax
credits
before
the
project
is
completed
and
then
the
clawback
provision
and
why
that's
necessary.
F
Yep,
so
thank
you
senator
keith
for
the
question
before
I
go
there.
I
did
mean
to
also
point
you
to
there's
a
modest
amendment
on
nellis
from
the
nevada
housing
coalition,
and
we
do
have
it's
a
couple
of
words
and
we
are
in
agreement
with
that
amendment.
So
just
in
case
anybody
references
that
amendment,
while
we're
answering
questions
wanted
to
make
sure
that
everybody
was
aware
of
that
clawback
provision,
mr
across
you
want
to
take
that.
B
Sure,
thank
you,
senator
ratty,
steve
across
the
housing
division
administrator
for
the
record,
changing
that
closing
narrative.
If
you
will
basically.
B
B
We
can
then
determine
whether
the
issuance
of
the
tax
credits
exceeded
the
need
for
those
credits
at
that
time.
Hopefully
that
answers
your
question.
Senator
keeger.
J
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
acroff.
So
the
I
know
the
what
senator
ganzard
has
indicated
that
really
there
are.
There
are
not
a
whole
lot
of
people
who
do
this
work,
but
they
tend
to
be
pretty
stable
right.
I
mean
there
aren't
a
lot
of
folks
that
are
going
out
of
business
in
the
midst
of
a
project
and
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
claw
back
our
tax
credits
from
them.
F
Yes,
senator
or
chair
neil
through
youtube,
senator
key
keffer.
That's
absolutely
right.
The
the
clawback
provisions
that
we're
accustomed
to
seeing
in
some
of
our
other
tax
credit
programs-
and
I
don't
want
to
call
our
other
tax
credit
programs
speculative,
but
they
do
perhaps
come
with
less
certainty
by
the
time
an
affordable
housing
project
has
reached
the
point
where
it
would
be
being
awarded
a
tax
credit.
F
K
Yes,
absolutely
senator,
thank
you,
david
paul
with
nevada
hand
for
the
record,
the
certainty
of
of
these
these
developments
by
the
time
an
award
is
issued
and-
and
we
reach
financial
closing
is-
is,
I
think,
almost
100
percent.
I
think
steve
across
or
michael
holliday
could
opine
on
how
many
developments
have
not
been
completed
once
you've
reached
that
point,
as
the
senator
alluded
to
that
this
is
a
very
stable
industry,
and
these
these
developments
require
a
number
of
different
financing
items,
including
federal
tax
credits.
K
So
once
you
get
to
that
point,
the
project
is
is
going
to
go
through
as
far
as
as
the
value
of
the
tax
credit,
a
credit
today
is
definitely
worth
much
more
than
a
credit
in
two
or
three
years
from
now,
just
the
present
value
of
of
money
and
the
certainty
of
knowing
that.
Yes,
we
have
a
tax
liability
today
that
that
that
can-
and
we
can
use
this
credit
today,
is
very
helpful.
Something
that
we
ran
into
with
the
first
award
of
tax
credits.
K
Is
that
because
the
credit
can't
can't
be
awarded
or
can't
be
issued
or
taken
by
the
by
the
the
who
we
by
the
entity
that
we
sell
it
to
until
after
the
project
is
completed?
We've
we've
found
that
we
have
to
now
bridge
that
financing.
So
in
the
case
of
the
development
that
that
we're
working
on
that's
three
million
dollars
that
we
have
to
bridge
until
those
credits
are
sold,
which
which
makes
the
projects
much
much
harder
to
complete.
It
also
adds
significant
significantly
to
the
cost.
K
We
are
paying
interest
on
those
funds
and
ultimately
ends
up
costing
costing
the
state
units
in
production
because
of
added
costs
and
potentially
projects.
K
You
know
we
think
it's,
it's
quite
beneficial
to
you
know
to
have
have
these
credits
awarded
before
the
project
is
completed
in
the
case
of
affordable
housing
developers,
while
we're
very
stable
industry
financing
providing
our
own
financing
for
these
credits
until
completion
can
be,
can
be
challenging
and
and
quite
costly,
and
you
will
end
up
with
fewer
companies
that
are
able
to
to
utilize
the
credits
and
develop
projects.
J
F
So,
thank
you
for
the
question
senator
kikefor.
This
is
senator
raddy
for
the
record
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
ask
david
paul!
Well,
yeah
david
doesn't
make
sense
for
you
to
speak
to
your
experience
with
this.
K
Yes,
I
think
so
david
paul
for
the
record.
So
in
our
experience
we
were
selling
to
a
bank
that
had
multiple
affiliates,
that
that
had
tax
liability
and
for
them
to
take
the
three
million
dollars
they
needed
to
spread
it
across
a
number
of
affiliates
for
that
tax
liability
and
we've.
We've
found
that
to
be
the
case
with
a
number
of
financial
institutions,
and
we
expect
that
may
be
the
case
with
with
other
institutions
as
well,
where
they
have
have
different
affiliates
that
have
tax
liability.
J
Okay,
yeah,
I
think
I
maybe
misread
it
originally.
I
thought
it
would
be
the
project
sponsor
transferring
the
credits
to
one
of
its
own
subsidiaries
or
affiliates,
but
that's
not
what
it
says.
It
says.
Basically,
the
person
that
you
transfer
it
to
can
then
transfer
it
to
one
of
those
sister
organizations
that
wants
to
spread
out
the
value
or
the
applicability
of
that
across
multiple
entities.
J
A
Thank
you
any
additional
questions.
Senator
gantz
sieber's
cancer.
B
Thank
you,
senator
michael
holliday
for
the
record
chief
financial
officer
for
the
nevada,
housing
division,
senator
seaver's
cancer.
Basically,
when
we
do
the
underwriting
we
we
do
it
just
like
we
do
with
the
federal
income,
housing,
tax
credits,
the
developer
submits
a
pro
forma.
We
actually
use
a
third
party
financial
advisor
to
help
us
with
the
underwriting
on
that
to
determine
whether
it's
necessary,
and
it
will
tell
you
that,
usually
where
the
pushback
comes
as
to
whether
something
is
necessary
or
not.
B
Is
a
debt
coverage
ratio
and
the
amount
of
funding
that
the
development
needs
to
borrow.
So
when
you,
when
you
calculate
their
debt
coverage
ratio
for
anything
that
they're
going
to
pay
interest
on
typically,
if
there's
plenty
of
money
there
or
plenty
plenty
of
capacity
for
the
project
to
pay
back
debt,
then
they
maybe
don't
need
the
state's
money
or
they
don't
need
layers
of
subsidy
financing
you're,
typically
not
going
to
see
that.
That's
that's!
Why
we're
your
session
ago
asking
for
that,
but
that's
really.
B
The
crux
to
the
issue
is
whether
financially
their
debt
coverage
ratio,
their
profitability,
cash
flow,
going
forward
for
15
or
30
years
is
going
to
be
sufficient
to
support
the
project,
and
then
that
would
justify
the
ask
for
the
tax
credits
and
then
to
mention
the
clawback
provisions,
that's
where,
at
the
end
of
the
project,
when
they
come
in
with
a
certified
cost
report
prepared
by
an
independent
cpa
firm,
we
have
again
another
bite
at
the
apple
to
say
whether
we
actually
put
in
too
many
credits.
B
I
will
tell
you
that,
generally
speaking,
that's
not
the
case.
The
costs
have
gone
way
up
by
the
time
they
finish
construction,
so
hopefully
that
answers
your
question.
A
Thank
you
for
that
members.
Any
other
questions.
A
So
I
had
a
quick
question
on
believe:
it's
page
seven,
it's
I
just
wanted
to
get
an
example
of
this
is
where
your
definition
of
affiliate
is
and
sub
11..
What's
section
one
sub
eleven,
what
would
be
an
example
of
a
person
who
is
indirectly
in
control
that
would
classify
as
an
affiliate.
F
Thank
you,
senator
neal
for
the
chair,
neal
the
question.
So
there
was
a
lot
of
conversation
between
director
across
and
russell
indian
and
our
lcb
tax
team
to
to
get
the
affiliate
language
right,
and
so
I
would
ask
either
director
across
or
our
lcb
team,
to
help
chime
in
on
that.
A
Thank
you
for
that.
I
had
no
idea
that
mr
guindon
was
a
part
of
that.
B
So
this
is
steve
across
the
administrator
of
nevada
housing
division.
Basically,
as
david
explained
previously,
the
affiliate
is
is
going
to
be
a
body
somehow
wrapped
up
in
the
overall
corporate
structure.
I
can't
answer
to
the
direct
or
indirect,
so
that's
the
language
that
was
provided
by
lcb
I'll
defer
to
mr
gindin
on
that.
L
L
I,
in
terms
of
as
senator
ratty
discussed,
we
did
have
meetings
with
the
housing
division
staff
and
then
that
information
was
in
terms
of
what
the
the
concept
was
was
provided
to
the
legal
division,
and
this
is
the
language
then,
that
they
provided
that
felt
met
what
the
housing
division
was
supposed
to
be
doing,
and
this
affiliate
is
comparable
to
the
definition
that
we
use
for
this
term
elsewhere
and
the
statutes
with
regards
to
as
a
statutory
construct
not
being
of
the
real
world.
L
It's
hard
for
me
to
tell
you
what
would
be
an
actual
example
of
directly
or
indirectly,
but
I
didn't
know-
maybe
mr
paul
actually
being
involved
in
this
stuff
and
I'm
not
trying
to
continue
to
pass
the
hot
potato
here,
but
he
he's
in
the
real
world
and
might
have
the
ability
to
provide
a
better
example
of
what
the
term
would
mean
or
be
used
in
actual
application.
For
this
specific
tax
credit
program.
F
Thank
you,
mr
ginden,
and
so
we'll
give
mr
paul
a
shot
and
then,
if
he
can't
do
it,
I'd
like
to
call
on
joe
reel
and
michael
nakamoto,
I'm
just
kidding.
K
K
You
could
have
a
financial
institution
that
is
a
partner
with
another
financial
institution
and
they
have
have
an
entity,
that's
that
they've
created
together
and
they
may
have
an
indirect
control
over
that
new
financial
entity,
so
that
I
think
that
would
be
an
example.
I
don't
want
to
use
any
any
names
of
financial
institutions,
but
you
could
have
you
know
different
different
companies
that
have
created
an
entity
and
they
may
have
direct
or
indirect
control
over
that
that
entity.
F
Thank
you,
and
I
will
just
say
this
for
the
record.
We
were
very
concerned
with
not
wanting
to
set
a
precedent
with
these
tax
credits
that
transferable
tax
credits
could
be
transferred
more
than
once
and
so
working
with
mr
ginnon
and
his
staff,
who
passed
on
that
information
to
our
legal
counsel.
That
really
is
the
intent
of
this
section
is
to
make
sure
that
okay
yeah.
F
It
might
make
sense
that
if
you
have,
you
know
a
home
office
and
some
city
areas,
and
you
don't
have
enough
tax
burden
in
just
the
home
office,
and
you
need
to
pass
that
tax
burden
along
to
your
subsidiaries,
but
you're
all
really
one
unit
that
that
makes
sense.
But
what
we
don't
want
is
for
them
to
become
a
commodity
that
can
be
sold
from
one.
F
You
know
one
business
to
another,
because
then
the
burden
on
staff
of
tracking
that
and
making
sure
that
we
know
where
this
tax
credit
is
going
to
show
up
in
the
future
against
the
state.
But
state's
budget
is
an
issue.
So
really,
probably
the
best
person
to
answer
some
of
the
details
in
the
language
would
be
our
our
legislative
council
bureau
legal
staff,
because
they
really
spent
the
time
on
this
section
to
make
sure
that
that's
the
intent
we
were
trying
to
get
to.
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that
and
I
guess
we'll
follow
up
with
that
with
mr
fernley,
as
you
know,
he's
busy,
because
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
like
what's
the
threshold
of
indirectly
connected,
because
that
could
be
loose
a
loose
affiliation
and
then
they're
receiving
the
credits
but
okay,
any
additional
questions.
F
And
chair
neal,
I
I
think
I'm
understanding
that
somehow
along
the
way,
we
didn't
get
you
the
amendment.
So
would
you
like
me
to
just
walk
through
that
verbally,
it's
relatively
simple
and
we'd:
have
it
on
the
record
yep
great,
so
again,
julia
ready
for
the
record.
So
in
section
one
sub,
six.
F
Or
b,
where
it
starts
upon
completion
of
the
project,
we're
tightening
up
that
definition
to
say
not
less
than
45
days
before
the
project
is
closed,
because
completion
of
a
project
could
be
a
relatively
vague
term
or
lines
down
where
it
reads:
the
division
shall
complete
a
review
of
the
project
comma.
It
is
now
the
division
shall
complete
a
review
of
the
project
and
the
project
sponsor
then
going
a
couple
more
lines
down
where
it
talks
about
the
declaration
of
restrictive
covenants
and
conditions.
F
Instead
of
has
been
there.
The
the
words
are
will
be
you
go
down
to
the
next
sub
section,
one
where
it
says,
determine
the
appropriate
amount
of
transferable
tax
credits
for
the
project,
which
must
be
the
amount
must
be
the
amount
the
division
determines
is
necessary
to
make
the
project
financially
feasible.
After
all,
other
sources
of
funding
are
allocated
and
paid
toward
the
final
cost
of
the
project
we
strike
are
striking.
F
One
may
not
cut
it,
they
may
need
to
do
it
to
one
or
two
or
three.
So
we'll
get
that
to
you
in
writing,
and
my
sincere
apologies
for
not
having
that
for
you
for
this
hearing,
but
we'll
make
sure
to
make
ourselves
available
to
answer
any
questions
on
those
minor
minor
tweaks.
None
of
them
are
substantive
to
the
content
or
to
the
purpose
of
the
bill.
A
Okay-
and
we
did
find
the
amendment
and
I
think
staff
is
trying
to
get
it
uploaded
into
the
record.
Do
you
have
any
questions
on
the
amendments,
or
is
everyone
good.
J
Thank
you.
It's
probably
more
of
a
question
for
russell,
so
I
think
mr
ginden
sorry
so
we
I
know
the
the
bill
doesn't
actually
change
the
total
amount
of
the
credits
that
are
eligible
right.
It's
still
up
to
40
million
dollars,
but
it
spreads
it
out
sort
of
indefinitely
right,
so
the
from
an
accounting
basis.
L
Thank
you
for
the
record
russell
gained
principal
deputy
fiscal
house
with
the
fiscal
analysis.
Division
you're
correct
that,
rather
than
there
now
being
a
specific
cutoff
date
that
it
allows
the
10
million
to
be
out
there
until
housing
can
use
it
up
on
projects
and
so
for
us,
as
the
staff
that
participates
in
preparing
forecasts
for
the
tax
credits
that
are
presented
to
the
technical
advisory
committee
to
the
economic
forum
in
the
economic
forum.
L
We
really
don't
see
it
changing
anything
because,
like
some
of
the
other
tax
credit
programs,
we
know
what
the
statutory
maximum
that
may
be
awarded
for
a
fiscal
year
is,
and
then
we
can
evaluate
that
what
that
is
in
relation
to
what
we
start
to
learn
as
the
tax
credit
program
goes
forward.
L
But
what
we
just
do
is
like
we
interact
with
the
agencies
that
are
responsible
for
implementing
and
administering
these
tax
credit
programs
to
have
them
provide
us
information
on
what's
been
approved.
When
do
we
think
those
tax
credits
are
going
to
be
awarded
if
they
haven't
been?
If
they
have
been
awarded,
then
we're
talking
to
the
department
of
taxation
and
gaming
control
board,
depending
on
where
they,
what
revenue
they
were
pledged
against,
to
see
when
they
will
be
taken
in
and
so
that's
to
keep
track
of.
L
Specifically,
if
you
look
at
the
economic
forum's
forecast,
we
have
three
million
dollars
worth
of
tax
credits
on
the
sheets
for
this
program
for
fy
2022
and
then
the
10
million
dollars
for
fy
2023,
based
on
conversations
that
the
fiscal
analysis
division
had
with
the
housing
division
back
in
november
to
precede
the
forecast.
L
So
with
all
that,
then
senator
we
really
don't
see
it
affecting
how
we
would
look
at
forecasting
or
tracking
this
program.
The
only
difference
would
be,
as
you
pointed
out,
could
the
tax
credits
then
be
out
there
longer
than
they
would
be
under
the
bill?
Yes,
possibly,
but
they
could
still
all
be
used
up
in
the
time
frame
and
only
time
will
tell
as
the
housing
division
works
to
this
program
and
we
get
pre-pandemic
type
of
economic
events.
Thank.
J
L
No,
we
will
certainly,
as
your
staff,
probably
here
in
about
less
than
a
month,
be-
and
I
guess
this
could
be
an
advance
notice
for
mr
acrobat,
mr
holliday,
that
we
will
be
circling
back
around
with
them
to
ask
them
that
if
any
information
is
changed
here
in
april
of
2021
compared
to
what
they
were
telling
us
in
november
2020
as
to
the
expectation
for
tax
credits
that
will
be
awarded
and
be,
and
it's
not
just
being
awarded
but
right,
the
expectation
is
that
they
can
be
taken.
A
C
C
M
N
Original
bill
for
these
tax
credits
last
session,
these
continue
to
be
good,
sound
policy.
We
believe
that,
given
time
to
prove
out.
M
C
I
Thank
you
chairman
here,
chair
neil
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
benjamin
channel.
That's
the
h,
a
l
inor,
I'm
the
policy
director
for
faith
in
action
nevada.
We
are
here
in
support
of
sb
284.
First,
we
would
like
to
thank
senator
raddi
for
her
continuing
work
for
the
end
on
the
nevada,
affordable,
housing.
Tax
credit
nevada
is
in
severe
need
of
additional,
affordable
housing
units
according
to
the
national
low-income
housing
coalition.
I
Sb
284
will
look
to
make
sure
that
we
are
able
to
keep
the
nevada,
affordable,
housing
tax
credit
in
the
long
term
to
make
sure
if
it's
something
that
works
and
we
feel
like
it,
will
work
and
we'll
bring
in
more
units
into
the
state
that
we
can
make
sure
we
can
continue
on
this
work
for
future
generations.
Thank
you.
So.
C
C
O
To
put
it
another
way,
any
household
of
four,
with
one
wager
making
less
than
12
dollars
and
30
cents.
An
hour
falls
into
this
category,
and
this
is
about
21
of
nevada
households.
So
it's
not
an
insignificant
number
of
people
who
are
affected
has
already
been
stated.
The
current
shortage
of
affordable
housing
units
in
nevada
is
over
80
000..
O
This
means
people,
families
with
children
are
struggling
to
obtain
housing
that
they
can
afford,
and
right
now,
when
many
lower
wage
earners
are
experiencing
extreme
financial
impact
as
a
pandemic.
Where
are
those
people
going
to
go?
Where
are
they
going
to
find
new
housing
if
they
have
to
that
they
can
afford,
and
we
know
that
without
stable
housing
and
affordable
housing,
families
can't
magic
other
critical
needs,
such
as
food
security
and
access
to
health
care
and
other
important
services.
O
So
this
is
a
very
critical
issue
for
the
state
of
nevada,
as
we
talked
about
sb
448
passed
in
2019,
and
we
very
much
applaud
senator
ratty
for
her
work
on
that
bill
and
her
a
strong
support
for
this
bill
and
her
passion
for
housing
issues
in
general,
nevada
for
the
common
good,
strongly
supported
senate
bill
448
in
2019,
and
we
equally
support
senate
bill
284
in
this
session.
We
urge
you
to
pass
this
legislation.
C
C
I
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
eric
novak
e-r-I-c-n-o-v-a-k,
I'm
president
of
praxis
consulting
group
which
provides
development,
finance
assistance
to
affordable
housing
developers
in
nevada,
I'm
also
the
treasurer
of
the
nevada
housing
coalition.
We
strongly
support
the
proposed
changes
to
the
law
related
to
the
transferable
state
tax
credit
for
affordable
housing.
Sp
284
removes
the
sunset
provision
in
the
law,
allowing
for
more
time
to
to
use
the
credit
given
the
pandemic
and
its
effects
on
gaming
revenue.
I
Since
the
credit
was
created
in
the
last
legislative
session,
the
pressing
need
for
affordable
housing
in
nevada
has
only
grown
based
on
the
national,
low-income
housing
coalition
2021
gap
report,
which
was
released
two
weeks
ago.
Nevada
again
has
the
least
housing
per
capita
in
the
country
available
to
both
very
low
income
and
extremely
low
income
households
by
a
wide
margin.
For
us,
the
real
magic
of
the
transferable
state
tax
credit
is
that
it
will
provide
the
but
for
gaap
financing
to
allow
taxes
and
bond
affordable
housing
projects
to
proceed.
I
Based
on
the
success
of
the
nevada,
housing
division
pilot
gap
program.
We
know
that
a
relatively
small
amount
of
public
subsidy
can
leverage
a
large
amount
of
private
funds
in
order
to
produce
new,
affordable
housing
in
the
state.
The
nhd
pilot
program
has
resulted
in
the
creation
of
over
2500
affordable
units
in
the
last
four
years.
I
I
C
J
Good
afternoon,
chair
neal
and
committee
members,
matt
walker,
on
behalf
of
the
southern
nevada
home
builders,
just
calling
in
to
also
express
our
support
for
senate
bill
284.
I
think
that
the
design
of
as
closely
matching
federal,
low-income
housing,
tax
credit
programs
as
possible
makes
it
predictable
and
and
most
easily
employable
to
really
move
the
needle
and
get
the
maximum
impact
of
this
tax
credit,
and
I
just
want
to
express
our
thanks
to
senator
rowdy
for
all
of
her
hard
work
on
this
measure
to
tackle
a
really
important
problem
in
our
communities.
J
C
C
P
For
the
record,
I'm
dawn
christensen
d,
a
w
n
c
c-h-r-I-s-t-e-n-s-e-n,
vice
president
of
communications
and
corporate
responsibility
for
the
nevada
resort
association
good
afternoon,
chair
neal
and
committee
members.
We
thank
senator
rowdy
for
bringing
this
bill
forward
and
appreciate
her
leadership
and
work
in
this
area.
Affordable
housing
is
an
important
issue
for
the
resort
industry
and
our
workforce.
P
C
P
P
Thank
you
to
chair
neil
and
committee
members
for
the
opportunity
to
comment
and
support
and
thank
you
senator
ratty,
for
bringing
this
bill
and
all
your
hard
work
on
this
issue.
Our
our
bank
members
are
engaged
they're
committed
to
efforts
to
increase
financial
literacy
among
nevadans,
starting
with
school-age
students
and
following
throughout
all
stages
of
their
financial
life,
so
having
affordable
housing
options
is
really
one
of
the
most
important
building
blocks
not
being
able
to
find
housing
that
meets
that
30
percent
of
budget
recommendation
or
it
it
just
starts
negative
chain
reaction.
P
So
the
ability
to
secure,
affordable
housing
means
a
solid
foundation.
It
means
individuals
and
households
can
build
their
spending
plans
and
have
a
real
road
map
that
can
be
followed,
allow
them
to
meet
their
financial
needs,
but
not
just
their
needs.
It
allows
people
to
also
plan
and
achieve
their
wants
and
access
and
achieve
their
financial
dreams.
So,
thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
support
fb284.
C
D
D
D
We
agree
with
all
the
comments
you've
heard
regarding
our
affordable
housing
crisis
and
would
just
like
to
emphasize
additionally
that
affordable
housing
is
economic
development
in
nevada,
our
own
children
struggle
to
stay
or
return
home
to
raise
their
families
and
pursue
their
careers
due
to
a
lack
of
affordable
housing,
hard-working
nevadans
face
housing
and
security
that
impacts
their
ability
to
maintain
steady
employment
or
consider
advancing
workforce
skills,
and
our
communities
are
hampered
in
attracting
new
businesses.
When
those
firms
see
the
challenge
in
accessing,
affordable
housing
for
their
workers.
D
C
C
Queue,
thank
you
chair.
It
appears
there
are
no
callers
wishing
to
use
the
board.
Sorry
testify
in
support
of
sb284
at
this
time.
A
Okay,
so
we
will
move
to
opposition
and
for
sb
284.
C
C
Q
Marcos,
lopez,
m-a-r-c-o-s,
l-o-p-e-z,
america's
for
prosperity,
nevada,
americans,
with
prosperity
strives
to
train
the
economy
that
works
for
all
by
empowering
people
to
earn
success
and
realize
their
potential.
Q
But
what
we're
kind
of
seeing
in
this
debate
is
no
one's
really
talking
about
the
root
cause
of
the
problem,
which
is
housing
costs
and
what
is
driving
this?
We
know
it's
zoning
and
land
use
regulations
and
we
need
to
do
everything
we
can
to
address
that.
The
white
house
council
of
economic
advisors
explained
this
last
year
when
they
said
that
we
find
the
key
driver
of
housing.
Unaffordability
problem
is
the
over-regulation
of
housing
markets
by
state
and
local
governments,
which
limits
supply
by
driving
up
home
prices.
Q
The
national
bureau
of
economic
research
also
has
found
the
same
thing
in
multiple
papers
and
there's
strong
evidence
that
removal
of
these
restrictive
and
exclusionary
zoning
regulations
is
actually
what
will
help
our
housing
crisis
and
help
encourage
more
construction
and
more
building,
and
this
is
where
we
encourage
that
we
actually
focus
our
attention
and
later
on,
we'll
be
talking
about
property
taxes,
and
when
we
talk
about
tax
reform,
some
of
the
things
we
need
to
eliminate
are
tax
credit,
because
that
is
what
negatively
impacts
what
we
collect
in
revenue
overall.
Thank
you.
C
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
Anyone
who
is
signed
in
in
neutral
for
sv-284.
C
R
Hi,
I
actually
I
do
not
wish
to
be
disclosed,
but
I
I
was
actually
calling
in
on
a
different
matter,
but
I
it's
regarding
the
same
issue,
which
are
property
taxes.
The
other
matter
is
talk
about
lifting
the
cap.
This
matter
is
talking
about
transferring
credits
to
a
bank.
R
You
know
we're
trying
to
keep
our
homes
here
in
southern
nevada,
I'm
from
las
vegas
and
back.
I
have.
I
have
a
rental
home
in
senator
neil's
district,
and
you
know
we're
looking
at
this
very
carefully,
because
you
know
as
a
single
property
owner
of
a
rental
property.
R
We
have
a
very
small
margin,
and
so
anyway,
regarding
this
issue,
there
is,
I
don't
know
why
we're
handing
it
over
to
a
bank
rather
than
looking
to
like
the
last
gentleman
said,
grow
the
economy
and
stimulate
things
because
tax
credits
and
the
poor
they
don't
have
to
be
poor.
R
R
So
I
would
ask
everybody
to
think
about
that
when
they
vote
on
these
things,
because
there
is
a
real
cost
to
a
tax
credit
that
means
you're,
taking
it
from
someone
else,
and-
and
you
know
it's
it's
just
it's
beyond
me-
what
I'm
hearing.
I
just
can't
believe
what
I'm
hearing
here
this
is.
R
This
is
why
people
get
upset.
You
know.
I
know
you
guys
want
to
do
the
right
thing,
but
this
is
not
the
right
thing
to
take
from
somebody
else
and
give
it
to
a
bank.
So
somebody
can
have
assisted
house
housing
credits,
so
they
can,
they
can
live
somewhere
and
there's
no
there's
no
exit
to
that.
That's
that's
not
fair
to
them
either.
So
I
would
consider
ask
everybody
really
consider
this
issue
as
a
whole
big
picture
overview
that
I'm
speaking
of
thank
you
for
your.
R
C
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
again
senator
julia
ratty
for
the
record,
so
I
just
want
to
first
thank
the
committee
and
each
of
its
members
for
the
time
and
energy
you
put
into
this
bill
today
as
well.
I
want
to
thank
the
nevada
housing
coalition.
F
The
housing
division,
nevada
hand
who's
been
here
today
to
help
and
has
helped
along
the
way
and
many
others
who
have
put
their
time
and
energy
towards
making
sure
that
we're
getting
this
to
a
program
that
works.
I
did
just
want
to
briefly
talk
about
the
need.
F
I
think
it's
probably
important
to
end
there
in
a
basic
economic
curve,
we're
going
to
have
always
a
portion
of
our
society
that
isn't
going
to
be
able
to
compete
on
a
supply
and
demand
market-based
economy
and
for
many
of
these
low-income
housing,
tax
credits
and
the
projects
that
are
built
for
them.
They're
serving
folks
who
are
as
an
example,
a
senior
citizen
who
has
worked
their
entire
life.
F
We've
seen
increases
in
property
values
upwards
of
20
in
one
year
in
washoe
county,
and
we
all
know
that
a
social
security
check
does
not
go
up
that
rapidly
and
so
for
that
senior
citizen
for
that
person,
with
a
disability,
who's
on
a
fixed
income
or
that
family,
who
is
in
a
community
college
or
workforce
development
program
and
is
working
their
way
towards
higher
earning
power.
But
for
now
cannot
afford
rent
and
these
projects
are
the
safety
net
to
make
sure
that
people
are
housed,
and
I
want
to
emphasize
the
need.
F
Nevada
is
very,
very
very
far
behind
so
for
every
100,
low-income
individuals,
like
the
individuals
that
I
just
described,
we
only
have
40
units
for
every
ex
extremely
low-income
individual.
We
only
have
18
for
every
100
that
we
need
so
18
for
extreme
extremely
low
income,
40
percent
for
low
income.
A
H
Good
afternoon
hi
good
afternoon,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
thank
you
so
much
for
hearing
this
build
today.
Sb10
my
name
is
dagny
stapleton.
I
am
the
executive
director
of
naco,
the
nevada
association
of
counties,
and
I
have
a
presentation
for
you
all
and
I'll
go
to
that
now.
H
Okay,
so
again,
I
want
to
thank
the
chair
for
being
willing
to
hear
this
bill
with
me.
Today
are
lyon
county
comptroller,
josh,
foley
and
clark
county
cfo,
jessica,
coleman,
jessica
and
josh
are
here
to
help
me
with
any
technical
questions
that
I'm
not
able
to
answer.
Sb10
makes
a
very
small
change
to
nevada's
property
tax
calculation
for
all
nevada's
counties.
Property
taxes
are
either
the
primary
or
secondary
source
of
revenue,
making
them
critical
to
the
services
that
counties
provide
tool.
Nevadans
property
taxes
are
also
an
important
source
of
revenue
for
nevada's
schools.
H
Existing
law
provides
for
a
partial
abatement
of
property
taxes
through
an
annual
cap
on
increases
of
property
tax
bills,
as
most
taxpayers
understand
it.
Those
annual
caps
on
how
much
property
tax
bills
can
increase
are
three
percent
for
residential
properties
and
eight
percent
for
commercial
sb
10
fixes
a
piece
of
the
formula
that
was
added
at
the
11th
hour
prior
to
the
creation
of
the
caps
in
2005,
and
that
we
believe,
has
had
unintended
consequences
in
limited
instances.
H
The
three
percent
and
eight
percent
caps
actually
drop
below
three
percent
and
can
go
as
low
as
zero
and
fy
17.
For
example,
a
year
when
the
economy
was
strong
and
property
values
grew
in
some
counties.
Taxpayers
had
the
property
taxes
they
paid
capped
at
0.2,
so
almost
at
zero.
This
significantly
reduced
overall
tax
collections
in
that
year
and
lowered
the
property
tax
base
in
future
years.
H
Without
the
fix
provided
in
sb
10,
this
scenario
will
likely
occur
again.
In
fact,
it
will
occur
in
some
counties
to
a
smaller
extent
next
year.
Sb10
would
make
one
simple
change
and
that
is
removing
the
ability
of
the
standard,
three
percent
and
eight
percent
property
tax
caps
to
fall
below
three
percent.
Importantly,
this
change
will
affect
very
few
property
tax
payers
next
year
and
in
many
years
it
may
have
no
impact
in
that
year.
H
The
mechanism
in
the
property
tax
formula
that
allows
the
tax
caps
to
move
between
zero
percent
and
three
and
eight
percent
is
commonly
referred
to
as
the
secondary
cap.
It
was
added
as
the
caps
were
being
passed
in
2005
and
it
it
considers
it
includes
in
that
formula
two
times:
the
consumer
price
index
dpi
and
the
10-year
average
of
the
growth
of
assessed
valuations
of
property
in
each
county.
H
Since
fyo6,
the
caps
have
dropped
under
three
percent
for
select
counties
in
only
four
years,
with
the
majority
of
instances
coming
in
fiscal
year,
17
and
18..
At
that
time,
the
tax
cap
calculation
was
heavily
influenced
by
the
large
real
estate
value
declines
years
before
that
during
the
housing
crisis.
H
The
table
here
illustrates
how
the
caps
are
calculated
using
the
secondary
cap.
This
is
from
2017..
You
can
see
it's
this
largely
unknown.
Calculations
that
allows
property
tax
growth
to
occasionally
be
capped
below
three
percent
and
not
down
even
to
zero.
The
column
that
is
important
to
look
at
here
is
the
one
for
this
to
the
right.
The
general
cap,
2017
is
the
year
when
the
lowest
caps
occurred.
Since
the
formula
went
into
place,
as
you
can
see,
nine
of
nevada's
17
counties
had
tax
caps
below
three
percent.
H
Six
of
those
at
point,
two
percent.
The
secondary
cap,
creates
an
issue
of
predictability
and
stability.
The
projected
caps
for
the
next
fiscal
year
are
announced
by
the
department
of
taxation
around
march
of
each
year
as
counties
are
building
their
budgets
for
the
next
fiscal
year.
What
can
and
has
happened
is
that
county
revenue
can
be
suddenly
reduced
as
a
result
of
those
caps.
Dropping
sp
10
would
ensure
that
the
annual
cap
on
increases
to
property
taxes
cannot
fall
below
3
percent.
H
Sp
10
simply
ensures
that
where
property
values
are
rising,
property
tax
collections
are
not
artificially
limited
by
a
mathematical
formula
such
that
a
property
owner
that
experienced
a
10
percent
increase
in
property
value
and
may
have
may
have
a
comparable
increase
in
what
they
owe
in
taxes
would
not
be
capped
at
3
percent,
but
instead
it
capital
even
lower
at
one
percent
point
two
percent
or
even
zero
percent.
So
it
would
prevent
that.
H
H
H
Hope
everybody
can
see
that
if
you
take
a
look
at
this
you'll
see
that
there
are
only
a
few
years
that
the
caps
drop
below
three
percent
those
years
are
highlighted
in
orange
and
that
this
has
not
occurred
in
all
counties.
H
H
So
again,
you
can
see
that
it's
only
in
those
outlier
years
that
more
property
tax
revenue
may
be
realized
over
the
past
over
the
past
16
years.
Since
this
formula
was
put
in
place,
the
caps
have
dropped
below
three
percent.
Only
these
handful
of
times,
however
2017,
was
especially
impactful,
which
we'll
talk
about
in
a
moment
and
that's
what
part
of
what
we're
trying
to
prevent
happening
again
in
this
bill.
H
H
I
just
I
want
to
note
also
that
we've
learned
that
the
final
caps
for
fiscal
year
22
were
just
released
and
it's
actually
four
counties,
not
five
that
are
under
three
percent
white
pine
county
comes
off
this
list,
so
just
wanted
to
note
that
discrepancy
these
numbers
were
built
off
the
projected
preliminary
cap
numbers
that
we
had
received
last
month.
H
H
I
also
want
to
note
that
it
was
the
recession
years
that
really
pulled
the
caps
down
because
of
the
decreased
and
assessed
values,
because
the
secondary
formula
is
based
on
a
10-year
average.
H
However,
the
way
that
the
formula
works-
the
cap
bottoming
out
did
not
happen
during
the
recession
did
not
happen
during
those
years,
but
years
later,
during
the
continuing
recovery,
when
local
governments
were
trying
to
recoup
revenues
lost
during
the
recession
and
meet
the
demand
for
growing
services
anecdotally.
This
is
a
really
important
example
of
why
sb10
is
needed.
H
I
briefly
want
to
talk
about
what
I
know.
Each
of
the
members
of
this
committee
are
very
familiar
with,
and
that
is
the
effect
of
the
tax
caps
overall
and
the
amendments
that
have
been
created
by
those
caps.
The
issue
that
sb
10
is
trying
to
address,
of
course
compounds
this,
but
it
is
important
to
note
the
overall
effect
of
caps
in
nevada
and
also
that
sp
10
does
not
propose
to
remove
these
caps.
H
So
what
this
slide
shows
in
the
first
table
are
actual
local
property
tax
revenues
in
green
and
in
gray,
the
abated
amounts
created
by
the
caps
the
amount
the
taxpayers
were
not
asked
to
pay
the
table
to
the
right
shows
those
abatements
over
time.
During
the
great
recession,
housing
prices
dropped
dramatically.
It
did
assess
values
in
interim
property
tax
revenue
and,
as
the
economy
began
to
recover.
However,
property
tax
revenue
did
not
because
of
the
caps
on
how
much
property
tax
bills
could
increase
and
the
new
base
value
to
which
they
have
dropped.
H
Some
local
governments
have
still
not
recovered
to
pre-recession
revenue
or
staffing
levels,
so
I
want
to
note
here
the
abatements
in
fy
17,
including
the
effects
again
of
the
secondary
cap
formula,
were
about
700
million.
Roughly
40
percent
of
those
debated
tax
payments
would
have
otherwise
been
distributed
to
school
districts
throughout
the
state.
This
year
the
state
of
nevada
will
abate
more
than
1
billion
in
property
taxes,
while
total
collections
are
roughly
on
par
with
what
they
were
a
decade
ago.
H
So
briefly,
I
want
to
use
this
slide
to
illustrate
what
I've
referenced
as
the
compounding
effect
of
the
secondary
cap
based
on
the
fy
17
tax
cap
of
0.2
percent.
In
years,
where
property
taxes
would
have
grown
and
are
capped
at
a
very
low
level.
Due
to
the
formula
the
amount
upon
which
the
cap
is
applied,
that
next
year
remains
at
that
same
level
and
any
growth
in
that
next
year
again
begins
at
a
lower
point.
H
So,
for
example,
in
2016,
the
dark
green
line
shows
that
if
a
300
000
home
would
have
paid
3
000
in
property
taxes
and
a
3
cap
was
applied,
you
can
see
that
the
projected
growth
you
can
see
that
productive
growth
in
revenue
over
the
next
10
years.
Look
then
to
the
olive
colored
line,
which
reflects
the
effect
of
the
secondary
cap,
dropping
to
essentially
zero
in
2017
and
the
compounding
impact
of
that
over
the
following
years.
H
Because
of
that
almost
zero
percent
cap,
the
tax
bill
is
again
at
approximately
three
thousand
dollars
in
2017.
It
was
not
allowed
to
grow
at
all.
If
we
then
assume
it
has
occurred
so
far
that
the
cap
is
back
at
three
percent
in
the
following
years,
the
collections
are
still
lower
in
every
subsequent
year
due
to
what
happened
in
2017.
H
H
Oh
and
I
just
realized-
I
was
on
the
wrong
slide.
This
slide
shows
a
similar
effect.
I
hope
that
all
made
sense
to
everyone.
This
slide
shows
a
similar
effect
on
an
example
of
commercial
property
and
how
essentially
rebasing
the
amount
of
the
tax
paid
in
the
year
when
the
cap
went
to
zero
compounds
and
affects
future
years
as
well.
H
If,
in
fact,
those
caps
dropped
below
three
percent
in
years
when
property,
if,
in
fact
those
caps
dropped
below
three
percent
in
years
when
property
tax
revenue
would
have
increased,
because
we
aren't
very
good
at
predicting
the
caps,
we
don't
know
what
those
numbers
will
be
the
numbers
of
the
caps.
However,
we
have
an
example
and
one
projection
that
we
hope
will
help
the
committee
to
think
about
this.
H
The
first
example
shows
the
impact
on
the
left
of
the
slide.
If
sb
10
had
been
in
place
in
2017,
69
million
dollars
in
additional
revenue
was
abated
in
that
year
due
to
the
cap
going
below
three
percent
in
those
nine
counties.
This
is
the
year
that
we
really
do
not
want
repeated,
where
property
tax
bills
are
capped
at
nearly
zero,
then
to
the
right
on
this
slide
as
sb
10
is
written,
it
would
actually
go
into
effect
in
fy
23.
H
However,
if
it
was
in
effect
for
this
next
fiscal
year,
fy
22,
then,
if
the
projected
five
counties
that
have
a
cap
below
three
percent
were
instead
kept
at
three
percent,
the
effect
would
be
minimal,
an
actually
almost
negligible
amount
compared
to
the
more
than
seven
billion
dollars
in
statewide
property
tax
collections.
H
The
impact
of
taxpayers
in
fy22,
if
sb
10
were
in
place,
would
actually
be
just
a
little
over
one
hundred
thousand
dollars
spread
over
five
counties,
and
I
would
add
that,
though,
due
to
the
caps
dropping
below
three
percent
of
those
counties
which
they
will
do,
that
that
compounding
issue
illustrated
in
the
previous
slides
will
also
occur,
and
property
tax
will
be
property.
Tax
bills
will
be
a
little
lower
as
well,
and
this
is
true
even
if,
in
future
years,
those
caps
are
back
up
to
three
percent.
H
We
would
stress
the
point
that,
if
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
years,
where
average
assessed
property
values
decline,
that
it's
likely
that
the
cap
will
not
be
pulled
down
below
three
percent
and
it's
possible
that
sb10
would
may
have
no
impact
in
future
years.
On
the
other
hand,
however,
it's
the
fear
of
another
recession
that
in
part
drives
the
need
for
this
bill.
If
assessed,
values
do
drop.
There
is
the
potential
that
those
caps
could
go
back
down
to
zero
destabilizing
local
governments
and
return
those
critical
services
that
they
provide.
A
Sb10,
okay,
so
no
questions
on
sb10,
it's
like
groundhog
day.
Okay,
so
we
will
open
up
for
support
for
sb10.
C
M
Good
afternoon,
for
the
record,
my
name
is
michael
mears
m-e-a-r-s
good
afternoon,
chair
neal
members
of
the
committee.
I
am
the
county
assessor
in
eureka
county
and
today,
I'm
representing
eureka
county
I'd
like
to
be
clear
that
I'm
not
representing
my
colleagues
of
the
nevada,
assessors
association.
M
M
So
sb10.
All
we're
looking
to
do
here
is
set
a
floor
on
on
the
caps
at
that
three
percent
residential
level
and
keeping
in
mind
that
the
caps
are
on
the
actual
property
taxes
and
not
on
the
actual
assessed
value
of
the
property
for
counties
like
eureka,
county
and
persian
county
this
year,
who
are
looking
at
a
2.4
percent
overall
cap.
If
sb
10
was
in
place
this
year,
it
would
have
an
impact
on
our
counties
in
eureka
county.
M
M
We
believe
that
three
percent
floor
does
provide
some
stability
for
state
and
local
government
revenue
projections
going
forward,
and
it
does
not
dramatically
impact
our
our
property
taxpayers,
because
the
majority
of
them
are
still
going
to
experience
the
three
percent
benefit
of
the
residential
owner-occupied
cap.
We
urge
your
support.
Thank.
C
M
M
The
league
is
in
support
of
sb10
and
we
appreciate
the
work
of
nevada,
the
nevada
association
of
counties
to
bring
this
bill
forward,
and
we
appreciate
the
distinguished
members
of
the
senate
committee
on
revenue
and
economic
development
for
hearing
it.
This
bill
is
a
thoughtful
and
needed
adjustment
to
existing
property
tax
law,
nevada's
property
tax
laws
do
not
provide
a
consistent,
stable
or
predictable
source
of
revenue
for
nevada's
counties,
municipalities,
school
districts
and
special
districts,
and
the
proposed
bill
would
alleviate
an
aspect
of
these
dynamics.
M
However,
it
should
not
be
seen
as
a
comprehensive
solution
to
the
multifaceted
defects
in
nevada's
property
tax
policies.
That
said,
this
is
needed
legislation,
as
stated
by
executive
director
stapleton.
This
bill
does
not
increase
the
tax
rate,
nor
does
it
remove
the
tax
caps
that
protect
taxpayers
from
shocking
increases.
C
C
C
C
C
J
E
r
rose
r,
o
s
e,
with
strategies
360.
we're
representing
churchill,
county
churchill
county
supports
senate
bill
10..
As
noted.
The
changes
contained
in
the
bill
do
not
increase
the
tax
rate,
nor
do
they
remove
the
standard
three
percent
and
eight
percent
caps
that
protect
taxpayers
from
property
tax
increases
above
those
percentages.
J
C
D
We
also
support
this
as
a
means
to
provide
more
stability
in
funding
for
our
children's
schools.
As
this
legislation
is,
in
reality,
a
tweak
to
previous
legislation
that
has
created
immense
hardships
for
public
entities
supporting
the
needs
of
nevadans.
We
ask
that
you
pass
it
swiftly
and
begin
the
larger
and
more
pressing
task
of
finding
meaningful
solutions
towards
stable
and
sufficient
funding
for
our
children's
public
education.
D
D
C
G
Hello
and
thank
you
committee
chairwoman,
neil
and
committee
members,
my
name
is
hava
ahmed
h-a-w-a-h-a-h-m-a-d
and
I
am
here
representing
the
clark
county
education
association.
The
clark
county
education
association
is
the
official
bargaining
partner
for
the
clark
county
school
district
and
represents
more
than
eighteen
thousand
licensed
professionals
in
clark
county
school
district.
We
are
the
largest
independent
teachers
union
in
the
country
and
in
the
state
of
nevada,
and
we
engage
in
bipartisan
bipartisan
advocacy
for
advancing
public
education
in
nevada.
G
Most
importantly,
we
know
that
the
k-20
education
delivery
system
is
key
to
economic
development
and
diversification
and
workforce
development
in
nevada.
Ccea
is
testifying
in
support
of
senate
bill
10.
when
we
have
an
economy
dependent
on
regressives
on
a
regressive
sales
tax
to
fund
our
schools
and
services
and
counties
where
our
median
home
price
is
over
400
thousand
dollars.
We
must
ask
we
must
ask
why
we
are
the
only
state
with
a
depreciating
property
tax
with
this
type
of
abatement.
G
This
bill
provides
a
great
first
step
to
reassess
our
out-of-date
property
tax
calculations,
though
we
must
note
that
this
is
only
a
beginning
point.
Realistically,
we
have
an
opportunity
to
re-evaluate
our
tax
structure
to
take
the
burden
off
of
what
is
argued
to
be
our
work
class
and
place
burden
on
individuals
who
can
afford
it.
Homes
are
not
bought
without
taxes
in
mind
and
though
we
are
in
a
housing
crisis
for
affordable
housing.
G
We
cannot
ignore
that
we
have
an
influx
of
home
buyers
who
are
expecting
better
services
in
schools
than
we
can
offer
them
every
legislative
session.
We
debate
how
to
stretch
a
dollar
versus
being
realistic
and
assessing
the
fact
that,
as
taxpayers,
we
do
not
pay
nearly
as
much
as
we
should.
We
are
not
in
a
position
to
continue
that
the
course
that
we
are
on
unless
we
want
to
continue
the
risk
to
risk
the
well-being
and
education
of
our
students,
though
this
increase,
does
not
directly
impact
our
schools.
G
G
However,
we
must
have
this
conversation
and
know
that
if
we
choose
not
to
reform
our
tax
structure,
that
we
will
have
to
compromise
our
services
and
futures
of
our
students,
ccea
is
in
support
of
this
bill.
But
we
know
that
together
we
can
come
up
with
a
better
fix
than
focusing
purely
on
abatements.
We
can
come
up
with
a
tool
that
will
not
negatively
impact
individuals
currently
in
their
homes
that
will
capitalize
on
the
influx
of
new
nevadan
residents
in
support
of
all
of
our
services
and
schools.
G
C
N
Thank
you,
chair
nail
members
of
the
committee
warren
hardy.
N
Last
name
hardy
h-a-r-d-y,
calling
in
today
in
support
of
sb10
on
behalf
of
the
urban
consortium,
which
is
made
up
of
the
cities
of
las
vegas
henderson
reno
and
sparks
I'd
like
to
associate
myself
with
the
comments
of
league
of
city's
director
wesley
harper.
I
think
he
stated
perfectly
our
position
on
this
bill.
N
We
believe
that
sb
10
is
an
incremental
but
very
important
step
in
the
process
of
making
the
corrections
that
are
required
in
our
our
tax
cap
system,
and
particularly,
we
endorse
the
recommendation
of
the
league
that
we
conduct
a
comprehensive
study
of
nevada's
revenue
system.
I
don't
think
that's
been
done
since
the
early
80s
or
the
mid
80s,
at
least,
and
I
think
it's
time,
madam
chair,
that
we
we
take
that
task
on
again
and-
and
this
should
be
central
to
that-
that
study
and
that
that
discussion.
N
C
N
C
M
Good
afternoon,
chair
neal
vice
chair,
ready
for
the
record.
This
is
jared
luke
j-a-r-e-d-l-u-k-e,
director
of
government
affairs
for
the
city
of
north
las
vegas.
In
interest
of
time
chair,
I
will
just
echo
many
of
the
comments
already
made
in
support
and
add
that
senate
bill.
10
will
add
some
stability
for
municipalities
to
be
able
to
predict
appropriate
forecasts
and
thus
ensuring
the
stability
and
the
ability
to
provide.
C
O
L-I-N-D-S-A-Y-A-N-D-E-R-S-O-N
on
behalf
of
the
washoe
county
school
district
as
school
districts
are
the
primary
beneficiaries
of
property
tax
washer
county
school
district
is
in
full
support
of
senate
bill
10..
This
is
a
common
sense
approach
to
ensure
a
more
stable
source
of
revenue
for
school
districts.
It's
even
more
important
as
we
move
to
a
pupil-centered
funding
plan
that
no
longer
guarantees
revenues
to
districts.
We
believe
it
would
help
move
toward
ensuring
that
districts
are
still
able
to
meet
the
needs
of
our
students,
especially
during
times
of
economic
hardship.
O
C
C
C
I
I
One
thing
that
I
do
want
to
mention
is
that
we,
we
must
take
a
look
at
our
long-term
revenue
stream
and
sources
to
make
sure
that
we
are
providing
a
more
reliable
revenue
source
for
our
education
for
our
health
services,
our
mental
health
services
and
our
other
social
services
that
the
state,
the
local
and
state
and
local
governments
provide.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your.
C
C
C
C
C
N
N
One
of
the
things
that
I
find
interesting
is
that
you
talked
about
the
fact
of
having
a
stable
and
predictable
revenue,
streamline
well
property
taxes
have
a
tendency
to
go
down
in
the
middle
of
a
recession
and
at
the
time
that
that's
happening.
A
lot
of
these
people
who
are
homeowners,
do
not
have
a
stable
and
or
predictable
income,
so
they're
facing
a
lot
of
the
same
problems
as
an
individual
level
and
re
doing
away
with
this
reduction
below
three
percent
doesn't
necessarily
help
their
cause.
N
In
addition,
you
also
talked
about
the
fact
that
a
lot
of
entities
are
still
playing
catch-up
as
a
result
of
the
times
that
it
did
drop
below
three
percent.
Well,
you
know
those
folks
who
are
paying
these
taxes.
Some
of
them
are
also
still
trying
to
play
catch-up
and
in
a
recession
it
becomes
unpredictable
and
makes
it
even
sometimes
more
difficult
for
folks
to
catch
up.
N
For
example,
right
now,
they've
been
doing
a
moratorium
on
rents
and
on
mortgages,
because
people
in
the
pandemic
have
been
having
problems
with
employment
and
paying
their
bills.
Well,
that's
eventually
going
to
end,
and
some
of
these
folks
are
going
to
have
to
play
catch-up
and
it's
going
to
be
difficult
for
them
to
do
so.
Anything
that
has
the
potential
for
increasing
their
taxes
is
going
to
complicate
their
situation
and
especially
those
who
are
in
the
middle
and
lower
end
of
the
income
spectrum.
N
So
I
ask
that
you
vote
against
sb10
in
order
to
protect
those
folks
who
have
unstable
and
unpredictable
incomes,
and
I
understand
the
penalty
there,
the
pain
rather
that
it
causes
the
government
entities
in
trying
to
have
a
stable,
predictable
income,
but
you
know
they're
they're,
not
doing
anything
different
than
the
average
taxpayer
out
on
the
street
has
to
deal
with.
Thank
you
for
your.
N
C
C
C
N
T-H-O-M-A-S-G-H-I-D-O-S-S-I
and
first
of
all,
I
would
like
to
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today
and
I,
like
the
other
caller,
had
noted.
I
find
it
very
interesting
that
a
hundred
percent
of
the
callers
in
support
of
the
bill
are
government
entities
and
or
use
the
funds
rather
than
contribute
toward
the
funds.
I,
on
the
other
hand,
I'm
a
retired
senior
citizen
farmer.
If
that
makes
any
difference
or
not-
I
don't
know,
but,
as
I
read
bill
number
sb10,
the
wording
of
which
is
a
little
confusing.
N
So
I've
done
some
research
on
it
and
currently
we
have
a
tax
cap
of
three
percent
on
increases
on
taxes
on
our
residents,
and
this
was
placed
in
in
law
in
order
to
protect
us
from
runaway
property
tax
increases
and
prior
to
that,
we
were
getting
a
roughly
a
double
tax
on
our
home
every
five
years.
N
But
if
this
senate
bill
goes
in,
that
goes
away,
and
what
happens
is
that
the
government
or
the
people
that
get
the
tax
money
would
be
just
guaranteed
of
a
three
percent
increase
every
year,
whether
it's
justified
or
not,
the
tax
cap
is
a
good
thing
for
homeowners
in
nevada,
and
it
gives
us
a
little
peace
of
mind
and
with
the
elimination
of
the
formula
for
calculating
the
increase.
N
It's
not
a
good
thing
for
nevada's,
and
I
think
it's
just
plain
wrong.
As
a
senior
citizen,
we
worry
that
the
constant
increases
in
property
taxes,
along
with
other
fees
such
as
sewer
water,
etc,
will
eventually
force
us
to
sell
our
house
in
order
to
pay
the
taxes,
and
why
would
that
be?
Okay?
Wouldn't
it
be
better
to
work
with
some
protections
for
us
senior
citizens
that
would
limit
these
increases
and
do
something
to
help
us
rather
than
hurt
us
as
individuals.
N
C
N
N
This
will
be
especially
trying
for
lower
income
abandons,
who
can
barely
make
ends
meet
it'll
also
be
tough
on
senior
citizens
on
a
fixed
income,
and
small
businesses
could
continue
to
go
under
with
the
extra
burden
of
higher
property
taxes
that
there
are
unable
to
pay
now.
The
same
goes
for
homeowners,
who
are
struggling
to
pay
their
mortgages.
During
these
distressed
times,
more
taxes
could
force
them
out
of
their
homes.
N
N
N
S
S
The
citizens
of
nevada
elect
our
representatives,
because
we
believe
that
when
bills
come
up
for
a
vote,
they
will
use
logic
and
common
sense,
as
well
as
the
best
interests
of
our
state
and
its
residents
when
they
decide
how
to
vote
on
these
bills.
I
would
hope
that
you
will
do
the
same
thing
with
sb10.
S
S
The
state
budget
is
actually
in
better
shape
than
is
being
described.
Despite
the
pandemic,
the
governor
is
proposing
spending
9.2
billion
for
the
next
two
years
of
budgets
for
perspective
in
2019
before
the
coronavirus
pandemic,
the
legislator
approved
8.88
billion
in
spending,
so
we're
spending
more
in
this
budget
than
before
the
pandemic
and
nevada
is
also
allocated.
S
S
S
C
P
Hello
for
the
record,
my
name
is
juaniqua
mccloud,
that's
la,
and
I
qua
last
name
mccloud
mcc
loud
and
calling,
because
I
am
in
opposition
of
sc
10.
I
think
that
everyone
else
should
be
as
well
as
a
potential
or
future
home
buyer.
I
do
not
see
how
this
would
benefit
me
with
being
that
this
current
market
that
we
already
have
due
to
the
pandemic
has
already
gone
down,
and
it's
going
to
continue
to
go
down.
P
P
C
C
T
I
am
in
opposition
of
sb10
and
I
just
got
to
tell
you
right
now
I
mean
you,
you
look
at
the
country
and
you
wonder
why
so
many
veterans
come
to
nevada
with
almost
300
000
in
population
here
making
over
10
percent.
They
come
for
low
property
taxes,
they
come
for
less
regulation
and
they
like
their
peace.
They
like
living
in
the
world.
They
love
living
in
clark
county
too,
but
this
is
going
to
drive
them
away.
T
This
is
going
to
drive
investments
away,
businesses
away,
it's
going
to
drive
people
who
are
coming
from
other
states
speaking
these
benefits
that
we
have
this
at
least
common
sense
property
tax
that
we
have
away
when
you're
hiking
it
up
in
the
worst
time
possible.
As
everyone
said,
I
just
you
know,
ditto
what
they
said
were
struggling
with
covet
now's,
not
the
time,
and
I
mean
instead
of
helping
spur
economic
growth,
you're
just
burdening
us
with
more
taxes
and
and
more
regulation.
T
You're
hurting
the
nevadans,
as
I
said,
the
ones
that
are
voting
you
in
here
there's
an
insatiable
appetite
right
now
for
overspending,
increasing
taxes
when
it
should
be
the
opposite
when
it
should
be
well,
let's
cut
wasteful
spending,
let's
ease
the
burden
on
the
end
user,
which
is
nevadans.
C
C
Q
Q
Last
year
with
the
pandemic,
they
end
up
pulling
another
11.2
million
dollars
from
their
reserve
funds.
More
importantly,
they
also
included
in
there
that,
should
there
not
be
a
room
tax
that
covers
that
cost.
It
is
the
taxpayers
across
the
entire
county
that
covers
that
cost
through
listing
as
a
general
obligation.
C
O
Good
afternoon
this
is
janine
hansen,
the
state
chairman
of
the
independent
american
party,
j
j-a-n-I-n-e-h-a-n-s-e-n.
We
oppose
sb
10,
which
will
increase
property
taxes.
Sb10
puts
homeowners
property
tax
cap
at
three
percent
and
commercial
and
rental
property
at
eight
because
of
the
emergency,
some
people
have
already
lost
their
homes
and
businesses.
According
to
the
institute
for
policy
innovation
in
the
united
states,
the
total
u.s
tax
burden,
including
federal
state
and
local
taxes
and
hidden
taxes,
is
equal
to
56
of
annual
personal
consumption
spending.
O
In
other
words,
taxes
consume
56
percent
of
all
the
average
person
spends.
This
includes
19
in
state
taxes
and
13
in
local
taxes.
56
percent
is
more
than
a
person
spends
on
housing,
food,
health
care,
transportation,
education
and
recreation
combined.
How
can
we
possibly
take
care
of
ourselves
and
our
family
when
government
takes
56
percent
of
our
income?
Businesses
don't
pay
taxes,
they
pass
them
on
to
consumers
in
the
price
of
goods
and
services.
O
Just
as
will
happen
in
sb
10
businesses
will
pass
the
increased
property
taxes
on
to
consumers
and
renters
business
taxes
will
become
part
of
the
hidden
taxes
we
don't
see.
In
the
united
states
there
are
670
657
billion
dollars
in
additional
hidden
taxes
or
2
462
in
hidden
taxes
per
person,
for
instance,
for
a
cheap
loaf
of
bread
that
costs
a
dollar
14
taxes
account
for
35
cents
of
the
cost,
and
for
a
can
of
soda
at
50
cents.
18
cents
go
toward
taxes.
There
are
many
hidden
taxes.
O
My
brother
had
a
roofing
company
in
sparks.
He
would
tell
people
if
the
risk
cost
ten
thousand
dollars,
that
half
of
that
five
thousand
was
in
taxes,
fees
and
regulations.
If
we
could
see
all
the
hidden
taxes
plus
the
others
we
pay,
we
would
understand
that
we
are
not
free,
but
we
are
tax
slaves
to
the
government.
The
state
of
nevada
received
454.5
billion
in
covet
relief.
Money
use
that
money
instead
of
raising
taxes.
Nevada
was
one
of
the
hardest
hit
states
suffering
up
to
30
unemployment.
O
Why
are
you
raising
taxes
when
people
have
lost
their
jobs,
their
homes
and
their
businesses?
How
can
nevadans
ever
catch
up?
We
hear
of
a
giant
sucking
sound,
that
is
the
government
taking
ever
more
money
out
of
our
pockets.
Consider
helping
us
afford
our
housing
by
not
increasing
the
property
taxes,
and
one
way
you
can
cut
spending
and
significantly
improve
the
quality
of
education
is
by
instituting
choice
in
education
which,
because
of
the
unions,
the
teachers
union.
You
have
refused
to
do
so.
Thank
you
and
vote
against.
A
A
C
D
My
name
is
britney
sheehan
s,
h
e,
h,
a
n,
and
I
appreciate
a
lot
of
the
comments
I
just
heard
in
this
committee.
We
just
heard
a
bill
about
selling
tax
credit
credits
to
support
low
income
housing
and
those
tax
credits
were
going
to
be
sold
to
banks.
And
now
the
agenda
item
is
to
increase
the
cap
on
property
taxes.
D
So
nevada's
economy,
as
you
know,
is
still
reeling
from
the
economic
impacts
of
the
pandemic
and
for
me
to
hear
the
school
districts
and
teachers
union
call
and
support,
claiming
that
the
school's
role
in
providing
for
students
basic
needs
is
critical,
comes
off
a
little
tone
deaf,
since
the
schools
have
done
less
for
our
students
in
the
past
year
than
any
other
time
of
our
lives.
Ccsd
itself
has
a
multi-billion
dollar
budget
and
the
state
did
get
4.5
billion
dollars
recently
and
covid
relief.
So
I
don't
think
that
this
is
appropriate,
especially
at
this
time.
C
J
J
Nevada's
tax
system
is
antiquated,
it
is
cumbersome,
it
hurts
nevadans,
but
that
being
said,
a
study
has
been
done
regarding
nevada's
revenue
stream
and
in
fact
several
members
of
this
very
committee
sat
through
a
presentation
in
2017
over
two
days
where
the
nevada's
tax
system
was
was
brought
out
and
from
that
joint
subcommittee
meeting
sjr14
in
2017
came
out
and
naop
was
the
only
association
that
was
in
support
of
sjr14.
J
In
fact,
a
member,
a
senator
who
is
no
longer
a
member
of
this
body,
openly
questioned
whether
I
even
represented
nap
when
I
opened
when
I
publicly
supported
sjr14,
but
sjr14
was
supported
by
nav
on
the
condition
that
future
comprehensive
discussions
were
going
to
happen
in
the
interim
regarding
a
full
reform
of
nevada's
property
tax
system
and
despite
maps
efforts
to
assemble
stakeholders
in
the
interim,
no
one
would
speak
with
us,
not
local
government,
not
trade
associations
once
the
legislature
was
over
in
2017.
J
No
one
wanted
to
talk
to
us
about
a
real
property
tax
reform,
so
in
2019,
when
sjr14
came
back
nap
just
didn't
support,
it
didn't
oppose
it,
but
didn't
support
it.
Now.
Sdr-14
is
back
this
session
as
sjr-8
and
we'll
see
what
happens
with
that.
But
I
think
it's
also
important
to
note
that
in
2017,
eb-43
was
presented
in
that
intent.
That
bill
attempted
to
place
a
floor
on
property
tax
cap
as
the
property
tax
caps
as
well
and
maps
similarly
opposed
ab43,
because
such
was
a
partial
fix
and
didn't
reform.
J
The
system
ab43
is
very
similar
to
sb10
it's
just
a
floor.
It
doesn't
cure
any
revenue
deficiency.
It
doesn't
raise
taxes
as
as
we've
heard
today.
That's
not
what
sb
10
does
and
that's
not
what
sp
43
did.
It
doesn't
raise
taxes,
but
it's
important
to
note
that
we
are
facing
a
revenue
deficiency
in
local
government.
We,
our
agencies,
are
facing
a
revenue
deficiency
and
nevadans
are
being
hurt.
This
session
proposed
proponents
of
two
bills,
av
3,
31
and
8b.
334
are
saying:
additional
fees
are
necessary
because
nevada's
property
tax
system
is
broken.
J
We
agree,
the
property
tax
system
in
nevada
is
broken,
it
doesn't
work,
it's
not
modern
and
we
can
say
that
without
even
knowing
for
sure
whether
the
revenue
is
necessary.
J
You
know
for
six
years.
Nevada
nevada
has
completely
failed
to
address
the
root
cause
of
these
issues
and
has
instead
chosen
partial
fixes,
starts
gimmicks,
band-aids
and
the
governments
and
the
agencies
continue
to
say,
they're
broke.
Obviously
what
we're
doing
isn't
working
nevada
nevadans
deserve
a
full
discussion
on
this
issue.
J
C
N
C
G
G
L-Y-N-N-C-H-A-P-M-A-N
the
phrase
I've
been
hearing
for
quite
some
time
now
is
affordable
housing.
If
we
are
truly
concerned
about
affordable
housing,
then
we
should
be
very
wary
of
any
increase
in
property
taxes.
You
know
three
percent
a
year
adds
up
in
just
a
few
years
who
needs
affordable
housing.
Well:
disabled
people,
retired
people,
single
parents,
young
families,
just
starting
out
and
lower
income
people
higher
property
taxes
hurt
all
of
them
whether
they
are
renting
or
they
own.
A
home.
G
G
Families
could
lose
their
homes
as
property
taxes
continue
to
climb,
and
this
would
include
owners
of
homes
as
well
as
renters,
because
we
all
know
that
owners
of
rental
property
pass
on
the
increases
of
property
taxes
to
their
renters
retired
people
work
hard,
all
their
lives
and
their
largest
investment
is
their
home,
so
many
people
are
taxed
out
of
their
homes
during
the
last
part
of
their
lives
due
to
consistent
increases
in
property
taxes.
I
know
that
for
a
fact,
because
I've
been
talking
to
a
lot
of
them.
G
Does
this
sound
like
something
that
we
should
be
participating
in
and
just
a
side
note?
Taxpayers
are
not
asked
to
pay
the
taxes,
we
are
told
what
to
pay
and
if
we
don't
pay,
the
government
comes
and
they
take
our
homes
and
our
land
with
all
the
economic
problems
we've
had
in
the
last
year,
people
losing
their
jobs
and
their
homes
and
their
businesses.
This
is
not
the
time
to
raise
any
taxes
on
the
people.
Please
oppose
sb10.
C
J
J-I-M-D-E-G-R-A-F-F-E-N-R-E-I-D,
I
am
the
republican
national
committee,
man
from
nevada,
nevada
republicans
are
in
solid
opposition
to
sb-10
our
state
party
platform
states
that
residents
of
the
state
of
nevada
are
not
under
tax
and
state
government
is
not
overfunded.
Our
budget
crisis
is
the
result
of
years
of
overspending
and
mismanagement.
J
The
current
covet
19
shutdown
by
emergency
order
has
only
exacerbated
the
budget
crisis.
Despite
attempts
to
obscure
that
this
is
a
tax
increase.
With
all
the
talk
of
stability.
Raising
an
abatement
floor
from
zero
to
three
percent
is
an
actual
tax
increase,
no
matter
how
you
slice
it
in
2020,
nevada's
government
elected
to
take
extreme
steps
to
address
the
pandemic,
resulting
in
severe
economic
damage
to
nevadans.
Today,
more
than
a
year
after
covert,
first
appeared
in
nevada,
many
many
businesses
and
individuals
have
not
yet
recovered.
J
In
december,
the
economic
forum,
projective
revenues
will
be
reduced
by
400
million
over
the
coming
biennium
governor
sysolak's
proposed
budget
contained
no
new
taxes
and
a
reduction
in
spending
of
187
million.
These
shortfalls
sound
very
serious,
particularly
in
light
of
the
fact
that
nevada
had
to
drain
its
rainy
day
fund
to
cover
these
expected
reductions.
But
now
we
know
the
nevada
governments
are
receiving
a
4.1
billion
payoff
from
the
federal
government
in
the
1.9
trillion
relief
act
just
passed
by
congress.
State
government
alone
will
receive
a
2.95
billion
out
of
that
money.
J
County
governments
will
get
an
additional
597
million
directly.
That
is
enough
money
to
replenish
the
rainy
day
fund,
twice
over
and
to
fund
budget
shortfalls
and
replace
any
school
budget
reductions
for
many
years,
government
caused
our
current
economic
pain
and,
even
though
nevada
is
being
indemnified
many
times
over,
using
our
federal
tax
dollars
for
our
government's
mistakes,
the
government
is
now
coming
to
the
very
people
they
harmed
with
their
economic
policies
to
ask
for
more
money,
but
it
doesn't
need
to
fix
their
problem.
That
is
unconscionable,
and
I
urge
a
no
vote
on
sb10.
Thank.
C
C
C
D
C
P
Hello,
my
name
is
gina
saint
wars,
t-I-n-a-s-t
space
o-r-e-s,
and
I
strongly
oppose
sb10
on
the
basis
of
the
fact
that
over
this
past
year,
with
tobit,
the
cost
of
living
in
nevada
have
gone
up
tremendously,
and
I've
actually
seen
food
in
my
budget
double
in
costs,
and
now
you
guys
are
proposing
a
tax
increase
during
an
economic
crisis
which
makes
no
sense
to
me.
But
on
top
of
that,
in
the
last
few
weeks,
gasoline
has
gone
up
45
cents,
a
gallon.
P
I
don't
know
how
I'm
supposed
to
afford
to
live
here,
and
I
should
remind
you
guys,
as
well
as
everything
that's
been
going
on.
There
are
companies
like
tesla
and,
let's
see
here,
we've
got
oracle
and
hewlett
packard
companies
that
made
silicon
valley,
silicon
valley,
they're,
leaving
the
state
of
california
because
of
taxes
and
the
cost
of
living
becoming
too
high,
and
that
really
concerns
me
that
you
talk
about
this
being
something
as
a
stability
when
in
fact
it's
actually
going
to
be
a
huge
burden.
P
And
just
six
weeks
ago
there
was
a
survey
done
by
uc
berkeley
institute
of
government
studies
that
cited
half
of
california.
Voters
are
seriously
considering
moving
out
of
california
and
the
number
one
reason
was
their
taxes
were
too
high.
Why
does
nevada
want
to
make
a
california
2.0
is
beyond
me
between
this
legislation?
The
legislation
to
increase
registration
possible
tax
on
flexible
groceries
at
a
time
of
global
crisis,
with
the
economics
going
just
crazy,
I
mean
it
hit
my
home
in
almost
the
shape
of
almost
400
a
month
in
expenses
and
I'm
staying
home.
P
It's
because
everything
is
far
more
expensive
than
it
was
just
a
year
ago
or
even
six
months
ago,
especially
now
with
keystone
pipeline
shutdown
and
gas.
Going
up,
we
don't
know
how
much
more
is
going
to
be
passed
down
to
us
as
the
consumer
retailers
all
these
places
that
you
think
that
is
going
to
be
paying
the
most
on
these
taxes
are
going
to
pass
it
down
to
us,
and
I
urge
you
to
vote
against
this,
especially
in
our
time
of
need,
and
thank
you
for
your.
C
C
N
Good
afternoon,
chair
in
the
committee,
my
name
is
michael
molini,
that's
m-o-e-I-n-I,
I'm
a
homeowner,
a
veteran
and
a
proud
resident
of
nevada
for
the
past
28
years
with
the
pandemic.
I've
recently
taken
on
a
third
job
in
order
to
to
make
ends
meet
in
order
to
keep
a
roof.
Above
my
family's
heads
in
order
to
to
put
my
little
girl
through
school,
and
I'm
wondering
at
what
point
will
I
need
to
take
on
a
fourth
I
I
know
that
I'm
not
the
only
person
in
this
state
that's
had
to
take
on
extra
work.
N
That's
had
to
buckle
down
and
and
try
to
find
a
way
to
make
ends
meet
cutting
costs,
cutting
expenses
cutting
fun
out
of
our
lives.
N
I
I
don't
understand
how
this
is
an
issue,
knowing
that
that
has
been
one
of
the
most
hardest
hit
states
with
this
pandemic.
How
anyone
would
want
us
to
take
on
this
additional
burden?
It's
easy
to
sit
here
and
say:
well,
it's
not
going
to
make
that
much
of
a
difference.
Well,
if
it's
not
going
to
make
a
difference,
why?
Why
would
there?
Why
would
we
even
have
these
talks?
Why
would
there
be
a
vote?
N
How
many
people
need
to
be
hurt
by
this
before
we
realize
that
it's
regulations
and
policies
such
as
this?
That's:
what's
pushing
people
towards
needing
affordable
housing?
That's
what's
pushing
people
towards
needing
all
this
help
from
the
government.
The
government
is
creating
the
restrictions,
that's
keeping
people
from
being
able
to
live
a
fulfilled
life
where
they
can
afford
to
take
care
of
themselves
and
their
families.
N
C
Q
Marcos
lopez,
m-a-r-c-o-s,
l-o-p-z,
americans
for
prosperity,
nevada.
I
mean
I
just
kind
of
want
to
reiterate
a
lot
of
what
everybody
said,
so
I
don't
want
to
beat
that
horse
too
many
times,
but
I
do
want
to
talk
about
spending.
However,
in
2019
there
weren't,
so
many
calls
about
revenue
when
we
passed
collective
bargaining
agreements
that
are
expected
to
increase
our
spending
by
over
a
billion
dollars
by
the
end
of
this
year
whenever
those
labor
negotiations
are
done.
C
R
Thank
you
very
much
I'd
like
to
ask
that
you
oppose
sb10,
I'm
calling
on
behalf
of
interstate
homeowners,
landlords
and
renters
homeowners.
They
usually
buy
a
home
because
they
know
it's
going
to
be
a
fixed
cost.
But
when
you
have
something
like
this,
where
a
downturn
happens,
that
can
you
know
where
the
rates
won't
go
down,
that
that's
an
issue
so
when
they,
when
they
do
come
to
a
hard
time,
they're
gonna
have
to
be
paying
more,
for
you
know
their
taxes,
landlords.
R
R
But
you
know
they:
they
have
that
property
to
be
a
performing
asset
and
unfortunately,
that'll
fall
on
the
renters
in
the
renters.
Will
then
pay
more
like
I
have
a
property
and
it
has
a
renter
in
there
and
it's
below
market
value.
So
if
I,
if
I
get
hit
with
a
tax,
I
have
no
choice
but
to
pass
that
on
to
the
person
living
there,
and
I
don't
want
to
do
that.
But
I
have
to
say
look.
R
R
You
know
when
we
talk
about
those
graphs
where
they
go
down
and
up
and
down
and
up
they're
preparing
to
pay
for
everything
they
want
to
pay
100
of
everything,
all
the
wish
lists
and
everything.
What
what
they
need
to
do
is
be
like
us,
the
responsible,
homeowners
and
citizens
of
the
state
and
prepare
for
the
worst
case
scenario.
If
you
have
extra,
that's
great,
maybe
have
a
great
rainy
day
fund
but
then
rebate
everybody
at
the
end
of
the
at
the
end
of
the
year
for
the
property
taxes
that
haven't
been
used.
R
That
should
be
the
goal,
is
how
can
we
save
everybody
money?
Not,
how
can
we
extract
every
little
drop
of
blood
from
everybody
so
that
we
can
we
can
get
the
maximum
amount?
I
I
also
these
people
that
are
speaking
for
the
municipalities.
How
many
consultants
were
on
the
line?
How
many
people
were
paid
tax
dollars
to
speak
for
the
municipality?
How
come
they
couldn't
speak
for
themselves?
They
had
to
hire
somebody
else
on
the
other
side.
You
know
that
I
find
is
a
little
ironic.
R
R
You
know
we
voted
on
this
years
ago
on
the
ballot
and
then
it
was
put
into
law
after
signature
gathering
and
everything
that
we
were
going
to
have
caps
on
taxes.
Somehow
that
got
subverted-
and
we
have
this
three
and
eight
percent
that
we're
talking
about
now.
We
need
to
go
backwards.
We
need
to
go
backwards
and
make
it
be
what
we
had
before,
not
progress
into
something
that
is
just
never
ending
grabbing
of
other
people's
money.
That's
why
everybody's
always
asking
for
a
15
minimum
wage?
Well,
that's
why
we?
R
You
know
people
want
people
want
that,
because
costs
keep
going
up
and
the
businesses
will
never
pay
it.
That's
why
they're
in
business?
You
know
if
we're
and
the
schools
want
funding.
I
understand
that.
But
how
come
a
private
school
like
here
in
the
las
vegas
area,
they
charge
five
thousand
dollars
a
year,
but
the
public
schools
charge
15..
R
R
Well
we're
not
going
to
look
at
the
details
because
they're
kind
of
messy
and
let's
just
look
at
how
we
can
how
we
can
get
more
money,
because
in
the
end
that
doesn't
that
doesn't
serve
anybody
and
you
know,
another
thing
is
for
the
private
sector
laid
off
the
public
sector
kept
their
employees
on.
I
know
employees
at
the
dmv
that
were
kept
on
even
though
they
weren't
working
the
window.
They
were
kept
on
a
lot
of
employees.
R
You
know
the
state
government
offices,
where
the
doors
were
closed.
We
could
not
go
into
those
offices,
yet
they
were,
they
were
working
and
or
they
were
working
from
home
or
they
were
just
laid
off
and
they,
like,
I
said
the
dmv
was
getting
paid.
So
you
know
there's
a
lot
of
issues
here.
Nobody
ever
wants
to
discuss
these
things,
but
we
need
to
discuss
these
things
first
before
we
start
asking
it
for
everybody
to
pony
up
and
pay
for
more,
and
that
includes
what
I
previously
said.
R
I
want
to
make
sure
sd,
2
8
4,
for
tax
credits.
That
was,
I
came
in
on
the
neutral
line,
but
that
was
obviously
a
opposition,
but
please
keep
this
in
mind
guys.
I
think
we
can
all
work
together
and
get
something
done,
but
the
way
this
way
we
keep
wanting
to
grab
from
somebody
else,
that's
stealing
and
that's
wrong.
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
you
listening.
A
So
if
you
guys
have-
because
I
really
really
really
we
have
to
get
to,
I
would
like
for
you
to
condense
your
comments
to
you
know
keeping
it
under
a
minute
so
that
we
can
move
forward.
Senator
ratty
I'm
going
to
let
her
she
has
to
jump
off
our
vice
chair
to
go
to
her
next
committee
chair.
I
have
another
committee
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
so
the
two
folks
who
raised
their
hand
in
opposition-
if,
if
your
comments
have
already
been
stated,
please
ditto
is
perfectly
fine.
If
you
just
want
to
simply
say
I
am
in
opposition
to
sb-10.
A
C
T
Ronald
najaro
state
director
for
americans
for
prosperity.
I
sit
here
and
testify
in
opposition
to
this
bill,
currently
being
proposed
sb10
for
all
the
reasons
that
we've
heard
from
my
colleagues
and
a
lot
of
the
members
in
the
community,
we
just
simply
are
facing
an
unprecedented
health
and
economic
crisis.
T
We
have
sacrificed
enough
over
the
last
year
and,
as
we
pick
up
pieces
from
the
economic
harm
done
in
response
to
contained
covenant,
19
now
is
simply
not
the
time
to
burden
us
with
additional
taxes,
especially
when
our
governments
continue
to
waste
tax
dollars
inefficiently
by
overpaying
upwards
of
40
percent,
more
for
public
works
with
which
was
what
marcos
referred
to
earlier
on
prevailing
wages.
T
It's
unconscionable
to
send
the
message
that
a
possible
eight
percent
tax
increase
year
over
year
is
acceptable,
especially
given
that
eight
percent
unemployment
rate
is
double
where
we
stood
at
this
time
last
year.
Moreover,
and
and
in
the
last
point,
we
need
to
stop
proposing
tax
hikes
and
engage
in
meaningful
tax
reform
that
overhauls
the
entire
system,
while
at
the
same
time
cutting
wasteful
spending.
T
This
means
a
tax
reform
package
that
makes
nevada's
code
simpler
by
eliminating
complexities,
to
promote
compliance
and
increase
revenues
more
efficient
by
removing
market
distortion
and
distorting
impediments
more
equitable,
by
eliminating
tax
loopholes
and
tax
credits
that
favor
one
group
over
others,
such
as
the
film
tax
credit
and
predictable,
to
inspire
economic
growth
investment
and
improve
our
competitiveness
with
other
states.
There's
already
broad
consensus
and
academic
studies
that
promote
solid,
sustainable
economic
growth.
A
Thank
you
final
and
last
caller.
C
Q
A
Thank
you
for
your
brevity,
so
that
was
the
final
caller
correct.
A
Okay,
thank
you
senator
raddy.
I
believe
you
need
to
do
neutral
still.
I
do
so
you,
okay,
so
bps
has
anyone
called
logged
in
for
neutral
testimony
on
sb10.
I
C
Q
Q
It
will
accelerate
the
upcoming
real
estate
collapse
that
we're
about
to
have
because
we're
in
a
real
estate
bubble,
and
this
will
be
a
double
whammy
in
our
economy
and
the
fact
is,
you
guys
are
going
to
think
you're
going
to
continue
to
get
help
from
the
federal
government
and
the
federal
reserve.
Well,
bond
yields
and
the
rising
debt
tell
us
a
different
story.
You
know
what
let
the
thing
backfire.
Q
You
look
at
these
six
figure
salaries.
These
are
red
flags,
and
I
am
tired
of
hearing
about
this
fact
that
nevada
is
becoming
more
progressive.
We
don't
have
progressive
taxation,
state
and
local
taxes.
Wealthier
people
pay
a
lower
rate,
and
the
fact
is
that
one
of
the
reasons
for
this
is
because
we
have
a
government,
that's
overwhelmingly
controlled
and
pumped
by
casinos,
real
estate
and
other
different
types
of
interests,
not
to
mention
the
culinary
union
is
part
of
this
political
machine.
Q
Q
Why
don't
you
guys
at
least
do
us
a
favor
and
lower
our
sales
taxes?
So
you
know
don't
make
us
like
a
one-sided
deal
for
us,
and
the
fact
is.
This
also
proves
that
our
government
isn't
much
different
than
it
was
in
2015.
Despite
we
have
different
party
composition,
we
had
a
republican
control
and
they
gave
us
a
commerce
fact.
This
is
why
I'm
telling
a
lot
of
people
party
power
doesn't
really
mean
anything.
What
matters
is
who
they
represent,
and
the
fact
is,
our
tax
structure
is
regressive.
Q
It's
aimed
at
the
lower
income
ladder
and
it's
covering
the
rich
crony
establishment
and
the
campaign
contribution
explains
everything.
So
I
urge
you
all
to
perhaps
maybe
let
it
happen
it
will
backfire.
We
will
rise
up.
Although
the
problem
is,
people
didn't
have
the
balls
to
fight
against
the
stadium,
but
maybe
we
can
get
another
second
chance,
and
hopefully
this
will
burst
the
real
estate
bubble
and
this
is
going
to
be
a
very
interesting
ride.
Thank
you.
So
much.
A
Hey
bps
is
anyone
else
in
neutral.
A
Great
once
again,
a
spirited
discussion
around
property
taxes,
senator
ratty.
F
Thank
you.
I
used
to
want
to
ask
the
sponsor
a
couple
questions
just
to
make
sure
that,
because
obviously
there
was
a
lot
of
testimony
on
both
sides
and
support
and
opposition.
That
said
things
about
the
bill,
and
I
think
that
there
are
some
things
that
were
said
that
aren't
actually
in
the
bill.
F
H
Thank
you
so
much
senator
ratty
through
chernio
for
you.
No,
this
bill
does
not
remove
the
caps
property.
Taxes
are
still
capped
and
would
be
if
this
bill
were
passed.
Three
percent
for
residential
eight
percent
for
commercial.
In
addition,
this
bill
does
not
remove
the
secondary
formula
that
allows
the
commercial
cap
to
drop
below
eight
percent.
All
this
bill
does
is
ensure
that
those
caps
cannot
go
below
three
percent.
This
bill
also
does
not
raise
the
tax
rate
at
all
or
make
any
other
changes
to
nevada's
property
tax
system.
H
F
H
No,
it
is
not.
The
caps
only
apply
when,
when
your
property
tax
bill
would
increase,
the
caps
only
apply.
In
that
instance,
there
are
years
when
your
property
taxes
could
decrease
based
on
the
formula.
The
caps
only
imply
apply
if
your
bill
increased
and
sb
10.
Would
that
only
apply
to
those
caps
in
those
years,
so
that
the
cap
could
not
go
to
zero
and.
F
Lots
of
testimony
about
the
bloated
state
budget
does
the
majority
of
property
taxes
go
to
the
state?
Do
any
property
taxes
go
to
the
state.
F
So
this
we're
talking
about
nothing
that
we're
doing
here.
That's
really
going
to
benefit
the
state
budget,
a
tiny
little
sliver
on
capital
projects,
but
most
of
this
is
schools
and
local
governments.
And
finally,
is
there
anything
in
this
bill
that
changes,
how
we
assess
the
valuation
of
somebody's
house
so
how
we
determine
the
value.
H
Dagny
stapleton
again
for
the
record.
I
apologize
if
I
didn't
say
that
no,
there
is
nothing
in
this
bill,
senator
rowdy.
That
would
change
the
way
that
we
assess
property
or
value
property.
It
would
not
change
the
depreciation.
It
would
not
change
how
property
is
assessed.
It
would
not
change
that
formula.
It
would
only
make
a
very
small
change,
very
minimal
change
to
the
cap.
How
the
caps
on
how
much
your
bills
can
increase
are
calculated.
F
A
H
No
thank
you.
I
appreciate
dagny
stapleton
for
the
record.
I
appreciate
chair
neil
you
and
the
members
of
the
committee
for
allowing
us
to
present
this
bill.
I
would
just
have
wanted
to
reiterate
what
senator
raddy
asked
me
for
clarification
in
terms
of
what
this
bill
does
and
does
not
do
and
again.
We
appreciate
the
time
today
and
the
opportunity.
Okay.
C
C
C
Thank
you
chair.
It
appears
there
are
no
callers
wishing
to
give
public
testimony
at
this.
Oh
excuse.
C
C
C
A
Okay,
all
right,
so
we
will
go
ahead
and
close
public
comment,
and
this
is
this:
we
will
adjourn
senate
revenue.
Everybody
have
a
good
afternoon.