►
From YouTube: 1/12/2021 - Nevada Youth Legislature
Description
This is the sixth and final meeting of the 2019-2021 Term. The agenda is not yet available.
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
Legislator,
bieda
president
youth
legislator,
carver
president
youth
legislator,
chundu
absent
excused
duke
legislator,
craig
she'll
be
late:
youth
legislator,
devoran
present
youth
legislator,
espanol
espinosa
de
los
monteros
president
youth
legislator,
fournier
frozen
youth
legislator.
Goings,
president
youth
lecturer,
oh
vice,
chair,
kincaid,
youth
legislator,
melendez.
A
C
C
Please
remember
to
click
unmute
when
speaking
and
mute
yourself
when
you
are
done
speaking
also,
please
remember
to
identify
yourself
for
the
record
when
speaking.
If
you
have
been
identified
before
you
have
spoken,
there
is
no
need
to
state
your
name
for
the
record.
Please
note
that
this
meeting
is
being
recorded
and
uploaded
to
the
legislative
website
before
we
begin.
C
If
anyone
was
prepared
to
give
public
comment,
please
identify
yourself
now
we
ask
that
public
commenters
keep
your
comments
to
no
more
than
three
minutes
and
try
to
avoid
repeating
any
comments
that
have
been
made
by
a
previous
speaker.
Remember
that
there
will
also
be
another
period
for
a
public
comment
at
the
end
of
the
meeting.
If
you
prefer
to
wait
to
provide
a
testimony
at
that
time,
is
there
anyone
who
is
prepared
to
give
public
comment
at
this
time.
C
A
C
C
C
Before
we
get
into
the
discussion
about
the
bill
draft,
we
need
to
address
item
number
four
on
our
on
our
agenda.
Our
last
meeting
was
held
on
november
19
2020,
copies
of
the
minutes
of
that
meeting
have
been
provided
to
you.
I
will
accept
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes.
Would
anyone
like
to
make
a.
C
C
C
C
C
D
A
C
F
C
A
B
C
C
F
F
I
will
just
quickly
go
through
the
components
of
the
bill,
because
this
may
be
the
first
time
many
youth
legislature,
many
youth
legislators
are
seeing
a
bill
draft
and
I
want
to
make
sure
you
understand.
What's
on
the
page
in
front
of
you
before
we
get
into
the
substance
of
the
bill,
you'll
note
at
the
very
top
of
the
first
page,
there
is
an
indication
that
the
bill
includes
an
unfunded
mandate
not
requested
by
effectively
affected
local
government.
F
F
Ultimately,
this
results
in
the
draft
of
the
bill
being
sent
out
to
the
relevant
state
agencies
and
local
governments
for
them
to
provide
the
legislature
with
actual
fiscal
notes
describing
the
costs.
It
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
there
will
be
a
cost.
This
is
just
the
flag
that
we
use
to
send
it
to
local
governments
and
affected
state
agencies
to
determine
what
the
costs
may
be.
F
The
nevada
constitution
requires
all
bills
to
be
about
a
single
subject,
and
this
first
clause
in
the
title,
an
act
relating
to
the
administration
of
justice
is
the
single
subject
that
encapsulates
all
the
contents
of
the
bill.
The
following
clauses
describe
with
more
particularity
the
various
subjects
inside
the
bill,
which
are
all
part
of
the
single
subject
of
the
administration
of
justice.
F
F
F
F
F
Subsection
two
of
section
one
generally
describes
what
this
training
must
include,
including
information
about
implicit
bias,
information
regarding
cultural
competency
and
related
background
information
that
may
be
useful
to
give
this
training
effect.
Subsection
3
of
section
one
requires
the
attorney
general
to
adopt
regulations
to
carry
out
the
provisions
of
this
section.
So
those
regulations
would
concern
both
the
contents
of
the
training
and
the
timing
and
logistics
of
the
training
being
provided
to
the
various
participants
in
the
criminal
justice
system
and
then
subsection
4
of
section
1
defines
cultural
competency.
F
F
That
does
not
include
this
affidavit
you'll
see
section
three
of
the
bill
relating
to
expenses
of
local
government.
This
is
a
technical
provision
that
allows
the
substantive
provisions
of
the
bill
to
become
effect
to
become
effective.
Despite
the
unfunded
mandate
on
local
government
and
then
section
four
of
the
bill
is
the
effective
date.
F
C
E
Thank
you.
So
I
was
looking
at
one
of
these
sections
within
the
bill
draft.
I
see
that
we're
leaving
up
the
particularities,
the
trainings
to
attorney
generals
and
with
the
knowledge
that
they
get
up
or
the
knowledge
they
get
elected
every
four
years
around.
I'm
curious,
if
you
think
it's
better
to
go
ahead
and
have
trainings
be
decided
by
a
position
that
has
more
longevity
than
from
someone
who's
elected
every
four
years,
especially
since
they're
deciding
certain
aspects
of
these
trainings.
F
F
During
this
meeting,
the
youth
legislature
will
decide
whether
to
proceed
with
the
bill
on
the
current
form
or
whether
to
request
any
changes
to
the
bill
before
introduction.
If
any
changes
are
requested,
it'll
come
back
to
lcb,
we'll
draft
in
those
changes
and
then
that
revised
bill
will
be
the
version
that's
introduced
to
the
legislature.
F
So
youth
legislator,
beta
you're,
correct
the
the
bill
as
currently
drafted,
puts
the
onus
on
the
attorney
general
of
the
state
of
nevada
to
adopt
regulations
governing
the
training
process.
I
believe
the
intent
of
that
was
that,
since
the
attorney
general
is
the
chief
law
enforcement
officer
of
the
state
and
these
provisions
generally
concern
the
criminal
justice
system
that
that
might
be
the
most
appropriate
party,
but
in
the
end
that's
a
policy
decision
for
the
youth
legislature
to
make.
C
B
F
F
That
will
often
cost
the
agency
that's
required
to
adopt
the
regulations
in
excess
of
two
thousand
dollars
and
that's
our
threshold
for
whether
we
flag
a
bill
as
potentially
having
a
fiscal
effect
on
the
state
or
not.
So
since
the
bill
contains
a
regulatory
process,
we
automatically
flag
it
as
potentially
having
an
effect
on
the
state.
It
would
then
be
sent
out
to
the
relevant
state
agencies
and
they
would
return
to
us
fiscal
notes
for
consideration
by
the
legislature
describing
what
they
believe
the
actual
costs
are.
F
So
at
this
point
the
bill
hasn't
been
provided
to
any
affected
agencies.
Yet
so
we
we
can't
know
what
those
costs
ultimately
might
be.
Similarly,
since
various
local
government
bodies,
the
prosecutor's
offices,
the
public
defender's
offices
are
going
to
be
providing
and
receiving
training
pursuant
to
this
bill,
that
often
has
some
sort
of
a
substantive
cost.
But
again
we
can't
say
with
any
particularity
at
this
point
what
it
might
be,
so
the
bill
would
be
sent
out
to
the
affected
local
governments
to
return
to
as
a
fiscal
note
stating
what
they
believe
it
would
be.
C
E
Time,
thank
you,
youth
legislator,
beta
for
the
record,
so
the
main
goal
of
this
bill,
at
least
in
some
sense,
is
to
go
ahead
and
reduce
the
amount
of
discrimination
we
already
have
in
the
justice
system.
And
so
when
I
was
looking
at
the
bill,
I
noticed
that
we
would
make
available
multiple
implicit
bias,
trainings,
and
so
I
was
curious
if
this
idea
that
I'm
about
to
present
might
help
reduce
the
cost.
If
there
is
one.
E
So
I
was
thinking
that,
if
reports
are
made
possible
or
easier
at
some
point
in
the
process
that
we're
establishing
here
it
might
serve,
they
might
serve
us
well
to
go
ahead
and
make
that
process
easier.
So
we
can
see
if
we
need
a
higher
frequency
of
these
implicit
bias
trainings
in
the
first
place,
because
I
I
assume,
if
we
receive
less
complaints
about
discrimination
in
the
justice
system
as
a
result
of
let's
say
the
first
or
second
implicit,
bias,
training
that
we
may
reduce
the
frequency
in
which
we
establish
these.
F
So
I
I
can
respond
just
briefly.
I
think
that's
a
policy
discussion
that
the
youth
legislature
may
wish
to
have
a
a
concept
like
that.
Adding
in
some
sort
of
reporting
requirement
in
statute
is
certainly
something
that
would
be
within
the
single
subject
of
the
bill.
So
it's
something
the
youth
legislature
could
do.
F
The
one
other
thing
that
I
would
point
out
for
for
the
youth
legislature's
awareness
is
that
that
kind
of
reporting
and
reconsideration
of
timeline
is
something
that
is
often
also
done
through
the
regulatory
process.
So
it's
entirely
possible
that
the
attorney
general,
when
adopting
the
regulations
to
implement
this
section,
could
require
certain
reporting
from
the
various
local
governments
and
state
agencies
and
then
revise
the
timeline
that
this
training
is
required.
As
a
result,
the
bill
doesn't
define
any
particular
timeline
for
the
training.
F
It
just
requires
the
training
to
be
provided
periodically,
so
the
attorney
general
through
the
regulatory
process
would
have
the
ability
to
say
hey
we're
going
to
start
off,
requiring
it
once
every
year
we're
going
to
get
some
reporting
and
then
based
on
the
results
of
that.
Maybe
we
bump
it
down
to
once
every
two
years
once
every
four
years,
and
just
so
the
youth
legislature
is
aware.
F
The
regulation
process
comes
back
before
the
legislature.
Ultimately,
any
state
agency
that
adopts
a
regulation
before
that
regulation
can
become
effective.
It
comes
before
the
legislative
commission,
which
is
the
legislature
during
the
interim
for
approval.
So
there
would
be
further
legislative
review
of
any
of
the
regulations
that
are
adopted
to
implement
this
bill.
C
D
D
Perhaps
in
I
don't
know
the
earlier
part
of
the
bill
or
maybe,
but
I
was
just
thinking
that
periodic
seems
very
vague,
and
I
can
understand
that
for
regulatory
reasons,
but
I
was
wondering
if
like
adding
in
a
provision
that
would
like
specify,
like
maybe
you
know,
you
would
do
training
like
once
a
a
year
for
a
couple
years,
and
then
you
would
stagger
that
out.
If
that
would
be
a
too
much
of
a
too
rigid
of
a
skeleton
to
provide
for
the
attorney
general.
F
And
thank
you,
madam
chair
usher,
kelly
and
legal
counsel.
That
is
certainly
something
that
the
youth
legislature
could
choose
to
do
that.
That's,
ultimately
a
policy
question,
but
from
a
drafting
perspective
we
do
have
language
that
we
would
regularly
regularly
use
for
that
kind
of
concept.
For
example,
we
could
provide
that
the
the
training
must
be
provided
once
every
year
unless
the
attorney
general
by
regulation
allows
for
it
to
be
provided
less
frequently
and
we
could
adjust
that
number
to
be
whatever
the
youth
legislature
believes
is
an
appropriate
starting
point.
F
So
so
we
do
have
the
the
the
capability
to
provide
either
a
set
schedule
of
timing.
If
the
youth
legislature
wishes
to
include
that
or
to
include
a
starting
point
for
timing
and
allow
the
attorney
general
effectively
an
escape
hatch,
to
create
a
different
set
of
timing
or
the
bill
as
presently
drafted
would
just
leave
it
to
the
discretion
of
the
attorney
general
to
establish
the
timing.
C
G
G
F
Madam
chair,
this
is
asher
killian
legal
counsel
for
the
record,
just
to
jump
in.
If
you
look
at
page
four
of
the
bill
section
two,
this
is
the
section
of
the
bill
that
requires
the
filing
of
an
affidavit
that
effectively
inappropriate
discrimination
did
not
happen
before
any
juvenile
proceeding
is
instituted.
F
Required
the
the
race
of
a
juvenile
to
be
redacted
on
any
charging
or
potential
charging
document
presented
to
a
prosecutor's
office
for
a
charging
decision.
Rather
than
that
approach.
The
approach
that
was
taken
after
discussion
with
the
relevant
parties
and
drafting
was
this
alternative
of
requiring
the
filing
of
an
affidavit
that
inappropriate
discrimination
did
not
happen
and
the
relevant
training
was
completed
before
any
juvenile
proceeding
can
be
instituted.
C
E
C
G
Am
I
unmuted?
Yes,
you
are
okay,
good,
I'm
having
some
technical,
I'm
on
my
ipad
mini.
If,
if
you
would
like
me
to
explain
the
dialogue,
madam
chairs,
because
I
was
a
participant
in
that
conversation
or
would
you
like
mr
killian
to
give
that
and
then
I
can
kick
in
any
thoughts
I
might
have
as
to
par
my
understanding
of
the
conversation
to
shift
it
to
the
affidavit
from
the
redaction
that.
C
G
G
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
killian
legal
counsel,
and
I
will
I
should
have
done
this
at
the
start,
but
I'll
I'll
give
our
normal
disclaimer.
At
this
point,
your
lcb
staff
are
central
nonpartisan
staff.
We
are
actually
prohibited
by
law
from
supporting
or
opposing
any
policy
position
or
any
provision
of
legislation.
So
just
as
a
preface
as
non-partisan
staff,
it's
it's
not
my
role
to
support
or
oppose
this
bill
or
any
of
the
policies
within
it,
but
just
to
provide
you
with
neutral,
objective
advice
and
drafting
services.
F
There
was
concern
that
the
loss
of
this
information
in
the
police
report
may
make
it
substantially
more
difficult
for
defense
attorneys
to
successfully
challenge
the
identification
of
potential
defendants
which
could
make
it
more
difficult
to
defend
against
juvenile
charges.
If
this
change
was
made.
F
G
Another
piece
that
we
had
not
considered
or
had
not
been
discussed
during
the
hearing
on
the
measure
was
how
substantial
how
this
information
is
very
important
in
both
criminal
and
juvenile
justice
work
that
is
being
done
to
gather
statistics
about
inequities,
or
you
know,
biases
and
other
things
that
such
numbers
may
relate
to
that.
This
information
is
very
important.
G
The
irony
of
this
in
terms
of
equity,
this
information
is
very
important
to
statistically
support
those
arguments.
If
indeed,
the
information
would
demonstrate
inequities,
which
is
what
the
bill
is
attempting
to
address
in
the
juvenile
justice
system.
So
this
information
actually
supports
the
argument
that
more
work
needs
to
be
done,
and
you
need
to
gather
the
data
and
statistics
in
order
to
make
that
case
in
signing
in
affidavit
this
person,
or
these
people
would
be
adding
their
signature
to
an
official
legal
document.
G
Basically
stating
I'm
not
sure
would
be
considered
the
level
under
oath,
but
it
is
an
illegal
affidavit
signing
their
names
in
no
way
have
they
been
affected
by
any
of
the
prejudices
that
are
mentioned
in
the
affidavit
and
no
biases
were
components
of
their
decision
making.
In
taking
this
action
step,
I
would
think
I
don't
know
how
ash
may
have
to
answer
that.
Mr
kelly.
G
I
would
believe:
that's
that's
the
the
weight
and
power
of
that
that
signed
after
david,
and
that
was
a
reason.
It
would
create
a
record
that
this
person
stayed
at
this
for
these
people.
They
would
be
on
record
affirming
that
they
were
not
prejudiced
in
any
way.
So
that
was
an
intention
behind
that
as
well.
F
F
If
an
attorney
were
to
do
that
fraudulently.
If
the
if
an
attorney
were
to
violate
their
duty
of
candor
to
the
tribunal
by
willfully,
submitting
a
false
statement
by
affidavit,
not
only
would
that
be
a
massive
breach
of
professional
ethics,
it
would
also
subject
the
attorney
to
potential
disbarment
and
other
liabilities.
So,
since
all
of
the
participants
who
would
be
filing
this
affidavit
or
attorneys,
that
that
creates
a
significant
measure
of
accountability
for
those
people
involved
in
this
process.
C
D
Time
my
the
only
question
that
I
was
originally
going
to
have
was
just
pursuant
to
the
ability
to
actually
regulate
subsection
b
of
of
the
section
one
of
section
two,
but
considering
the
declarations
about
how
much
people
would
be
accountable
to
that.
I
don't
believe
that
my
original
idea
was
that
would
there
need
to
be
a
way
to
regulate
that
section?
Subsection
b
would
actually
have
a
mechanism
for
accountability
further
than
just
necessarily
just
the
the
respectability
in
the
department
and
the
like
that
you
mentioned
before.
G
F
F
So
if
the
affidavit
was
filed
falsely
if,
if
the
training
hadn't
actually
been
completed,
or
if
discrimination
was
part
of
the
basis
for
the
filing
of
the
document,
either
the
defense
attorney
at
trial
or
on
subsequent
appeal
could
raise
that
failure
to
satisfy
a
condition
precedent
to
filing
the
action
to
attack
the
validity
of
the
action
of
itself
and
potentially
overturn
the
action
itself.
It
would
create
a
new
basis
to
challenge
such
a
proceeding.
If
this
conditioned
precedent,
we're
not
satisfied.
D
Thank
you,
honorable,
chair
youth
legislator,
outward
for
the
record.
Sorry,
I
haven't
been
saying
that
the
the
second
thing
that
I
was
that
was
on
my
mind
that
came
up
after
that,
and
I
would
hate
to
say,
play
devil's
advocate,
but
I'm
more
just,
and
can
I
just
want
to
learn,
understand
more
about
the
process?
D
My
question
is:
how
easy
would
it
be
in
most
situations
to
be
able
to
prove
that
there
was
inappropriate
discrimination
based
upon
the
wording
in
our
bill
and
that
in
that
regard,
and
just
after
you
know
the
process,
how
easy
would
it
be
able
to
prove
that
and
how
many
attorneys
might
therefore,
how
easy
would
it
even
be
for
an
attorney
for
that
matter,
even
working
with
an
officer
to
be
able
to
prove
themselves
that
they
can
prove
that
that
affidavit
is
true?
I
just
want
to
understand
more
about
the
process
if
possible,.
F
F
C
B
B
F
The
attorney
general's
office
could,
through
the
regulatory
process,
choose
to
create
these
materials,
provide
this
training
itself.
It
could
also
adopt
bioreference
materials
produced
by
some
other
body.
Effectively
is
currently
drafted.
The
attorney
general's
office
has
the
maximum
possib
possible
discretion
in
that
area.
C
B
F
Officers,
thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
killian
legal
counsel.
Sorry
just
gotta
pop
up
asking
me
whether
I
wanted
to
unmute
myself,
and
I
thought
I
already
had
so.
Hopefully
my
identification
was
clear.
So
the
the
way
that
section
two
is
written,
the
responsibility
to
file
the
affidavit
falls
upon
the
person
who
files
with
the
court
the
petition
to
initiate
the
juvenile
proceeding
to
my
knowledge-
and
you
know
a
subject
matter
expert-
may
be
able
to
provide
better
advice
in
this
regard,
but,
to
my
knowledge,
the
person
filing
with
the
court.
C
G
G
If
you
look
at
the
bill,
there
was
a
question
about
who
will
determine
the
specifics
in
the
training.
What
kind
of
latitude
in
designing
the
curriculum
itself
the
attorney
general
might
have?
If
you
look
at
the
youth
legislators,
I
will
ask
you
to
look
again.
It's
in
section
one
number,
two,
the
language
reads:
the
training
required
by
subsection.
One
must
include
here's
the
important
language
in
this
without
limitation
instruction
that
so
what
follows
are
the
specifics
that
you,
as
a
youth
legislature,
so
take
a
look
at
that
language?
G
That
is
what
you
certain
time,
certainly
as
a
youth
legend,
if
those
are
the
pieces,
you
want
to
be
taught
for
sure
these
are
certain
pieces
that
have
to
be
taught
components
address.
That's
in
the
statute,
if
indeed
it
passes,
that
will
be
a
requirement
in
that
sentence.
Above
that
says,
without
limitation,
that
gives
the
attorney
general
discretion
to
add
more
to
it
at
the
discretion
of
the
a.g
or
different
ages,
as
we
heard
earlier
over
a
period
of
time.
G
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
former
senator
wiener,
that's
correct
the,
including
without
limitation.
Language,
makes
this
not
an
exhaustive
list
effectively
the
paragraphs
a
b
and
c
that
follow
are
established
as
minimum
requirements,
but
the
attorney
general,
as
the
officer
made
responsible
for
implementing
this
section,
is
given
the
power
to
add
additional
requirements.
Above
and
beyond
those
minimums.
C
Thank
you,
mr
kielian.
I
have
a
question
regarding
the
affidavit
for
mr
killeen.
If
that's
okay,
I
was
just
wondering
I
understand
that
the
affidavit
will
hold
the
legal
team
accountable,
but
is
there
a
portion
of
the
bill
that
states
that,
if
they
do
not
sign
the
affidavit
that
they
cannot
continue
with,
like
the
justice
system
process
like
that
states
that
it's
mandatory
for
the
affidavit
to
be
signed
in
order
in
order
for
them
to
continue
within
the
justice
system?.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
killian
legal
counsel,
so
the
the
effectively
the
question
you're
asking
is
whether
the
requirement
file,
an
affidavit,
has
any
teeth
and
the
teeth
are
in
subsection,
two
of
section
two,
so
subsection
one
establishes
the
requirement.
Subsection
2
is
the
provision
that
prohibits
a
court
from
accepting
a
petition
to
commence
a
juvenile
proceeding
unless
the
affidavit
has
been
filed
so
section
1
creates
the
requirement
and
section
2
prohibits
the
person
from
even
making
it
into
the
court
system.
Unless
the
affidavit
has
been
properly
filed.
C
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
killian
legal
counsel,
so
there
are
two
different
answers
to
that
question.
The
first
is
in
order
for
the
affidavit
to
comply
with
the
statutory
requirement.
It
would
have
to
contain
at
least
the
the
substance
in
statute,
so
they
would
have
to
sort
of
certify
the
statements
in
paragraph
a
and
paragraph
b
of
subsection
one
there
theoretically
would
be
some
freedom
for
the
various
offices
to
create
create
their
own
versions
of
the
affidavit,
and
then
this
leads
to
the
second
answer,
which
is
just
practically.
D
Thank
you,
honorable
chair.
This
is
youth
legislator
outward
for
the
record.
My
consideration
was
for
subsection
four
for
section
one
does
all
of
the
considerations
of
the
understanding.
Everything
from
you
know
the
culturals
economic
statuses,
race,
religion
does
all
of
that
work
in
with
subsection
b
subsection
two.
Does
that
work,
the
definition
of
cultural
competency
that
we're
providing
does
all
of
the
statuses
and
considerations
there
also
work
with
the
consideration
after
the
provides
information
regarding
cultural
competency,
including
without
limitation
sensitivity?
D
To
would
would
that
need
to
be
added
some
of
that
into
section
b,
because
another
consideration
might
be.
I
think,
important
after
that
sensitivity
to
be
religion,
particularly
with
the
muslim
minorities
in
the
country
that
have
often
been
discriminated
against
because
of
events
overseas
and
on
the
homeland.
G
Land
chair,
senator
weiner,
if
I
may
respond.
Actually
there
is
a
reference
to
religion
in
sub
four
that
is
included
in
the
list.
Mr
kelly,
there
could
be
in
the
affidavit
whatever
language
and
as
required
in
nrs,
chapter
blah,
blah
blah
blah
and
then
all
that
language
would
be
included,
rather
than
being
all
of
it
put
into
the
affidavit.
G
Could
it
not
be
referenced
to
a
law
and
a
chapter
and
a
section
of
law
that
would
be
all
included
plus
if
it
were
ever
amended,
you've
got
to
constantly
amend
the
affidavits,
so
is
that
a
possible
way
that
sometimes
affidavits,
as
required
under
nrs
blah
blah
whatever
it
would
be?
And
then
that
section
is
already
in
statute
and
that
would
be
referenced
in
the
affidavit
without
listing
reciting,
the
entire
section
of
law.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
kelly
and
legal
counsel.
To
respond
to
former
senator
weiner's
question.
That's
generally
how
affidavits
are
crafted.
It
would
probably
contain
just
the
language
of
section
two
subsection
one
paragraphs,
a
and
b,
so
just
those
two
short
statements
and
then
likely
a
reference
back
to
the
sections
of
nrs
to
avoid
duplicating
the
language
because
the
courts
I
mean
much
like
anyone
else,
don't
like
to
have
voluminous
unnecessary
language,
so
that
the
affidavit
would
probably
be
relatively
brief
and
and
then
to
to
refer
back
to
youth
legislator.
F
Atwood's
original
question,
the
the
language
in
subsection
four
of
section,
one
is
a
definition
of
the
term
cultural
competency.
So
everything
listed
in
that
subsection
is
included
when
we
use
the
term
cultural
competency.
And
if
you
then
look
back
to
subsection
two
paragraph
b,
the
training
is
required
to
provide
information
regarding
cultural
competency,
so
that
would
include
everything
in
subsection
four,
including
among
other
things,
different
religions,
etc,
and
then
the
language
following
that
the
including
without
limitation,
sensitivity
to
the
needs
of
children,
etc.
F
Those
are
additional
items
that
may
or
may
not
be
inclu
already
included
within
the
definition
of
cultural
competency,
but
that
are
being
highlighted
by
the
youth
legislature
in
law,
as
particular
areas
of
emphasis
again
that,
including
without
limitation
construction,
that
just
establishes
a
minimum.
It
makes
it
a
makes
it
not
an
exhaustive
list.
C
E
I
believe
it
might
be
a
good
idea
to
go
ahead
and
add
to
the
build
draft
that
the
attorney
general
might
have
to
consult
the
rest
of
the
attorney
general
leadership,
which
could
include
or
not
be
limited
to
the
solicitor
general,
the
general
counsel
and
whoever
else
we
deem
as
appropriate
within
that
leadership
team.
But
this
is
just
a
suggestion.
F
F
We
do
that
to
put
the
obligation
to
act
on
on
the
chief
of
the
relevant
office,
but
that
in
no
way
precludes
them
from
consulting
with
their
staff,
to
develop
the
best
possible
recommendation-
and
I
mean
quite
frankly
frequently
they
do
so.
We
certainly
couldn't
like
and
qui.
We
could
include
language
requiring
the
attorney
general
to
consult
with
any
other
entities,
be
it
solicitor,
general
general
counsel
within
their
own
staff
or
the
council
for
prosecuting
attorneys
or
any
other
external
body.
G
Madam
sheriff
center,
where,
if
I
just
may
add
to
mr
killing
before,
are
you
flustered
in
as
beethoven
said
they
may
be,
making
it
optional
or
making
the
suggestion
mr
killian
had
referenced
that
we
could
require
there's
also
in
between,
and
this
is
maybe
making
it's
an
in
between.
As
I
say
that
would
be
if
in
statute
language,
that
might
be
that
encouraging
nudge,
a
recommendation
but
not
a
requirement,
there
could
be
permissive
language.
G
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
in
response
to
sorry,
asher,
killian,
legal
counsel,
in
response
to
former
senator
weiner
that
that's
another
kind
of
construction
we
could
use,
we
could
break
down
subsection
three
effectively
into
two
components.
One
would
be
authorizing
the
attorney
general
to
consult
with
other
relevant
parties
before
making
any
decisions
for
the
implementation
of
the
section
and
then
requiring
the
attorney
general
to
adopt
regulations
implementing
the
section.
That's
a
that's
another
kind
of
construction,
that's
used
in
nrs
and
just
a
as
your
legal
staff.
F
What
I
would
would
ask
is,
if
you
want
to
go
down
that
road,
it
would
be
helpful
for
us
to
know
what
other
parties
you
want
for
them
to
consult.
If
there
are
particular
parties
you're
wanting
to
name
and
if
not,
we
could,
we
could
draft
it
just
as
a
general
statement
that
the
attorney
general
may
consult
with
any
other
appropriate
parties
to
determine
the
appropriate
method
for
implementing
the
provisions
of
this
section.
C
Thank
you
senator
weiner,
and
thank
you,
mr
kielian
youth,
legislator.
Bieta.
You
may
give
your
follow-up
at
this
time
really
quickly.
I
would
just
like
to
encourage
any
other
youth
legislators.
If
you
have
any
comments
or
questions,
please
put
your
name
in
the
chat
below
feel
free
to
do
so,
youth,
legislative
reader.
You
may
give
your
comment
at
this
time.
E
Youth
legislator
bieta
for
the
record
at
the
moment.
I
do
think
that
permissive
language
would
be
a
good
idea
to
include
in
this
bill.
I
do
like
the
idea
of
an
optional
avenue
for
the
attorney
a
general
to
take
to
go
ahead
and
discuss
with
the
rest
of
his
leadership,
as
for
other
leadership
that
the
attorney
general
may
consult,
although
I
can't
name
any
specific
departments
or
positions
right
now.
E
I
think
generally
someone
who
oversees
this
process
in
particular
closely
and
by
this
process,
I'm
referring
to
the
results
we
see
with
the
affidavits,
for
example.
That
might
be
a
good
idea,
although
I'm
not
entirely
sure
at
the
moment,
and
secondly,
I
did
just
also
want
to
provide
some
clarification,
because
I
thought
that
the
urgency
to
act
is
a
good
idea
like
I
was
fine
with
the
idea
of
having
the
attorney
general
do
it.
I
was
just
concerned
about
the
time
frame
we
see.
E
Attorney
generals
occupy
their
office,
which
is
every
four
years.
I
just
thought
that
the
policies
we
go
ahead
and
see
implemented
with
trainings
might
be
more
consistent
and
then
might
save
us
some
money
if
it
costs
money
if
they
went
ahead
and
consulted
their
team
just
so,
we
can
make
sure
that
the
differences
between
your
or
differences
between
people
who
are
in
the
position
of
attorney
general,
aren't
that
massive.
So
that's
it's
not
really
a
question.
I
just
wanted
to
provide
some
of
what
I
was
thinking.
Thank
you.
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
G
What
you're
voting
on
right
now
is
doesn't
include
any
changes
at
all.
It's
what
you
were
sent,
so
I'm
not
cheerleading
either
way.
I
just
want
the
members
to
know
that
you
there
have
been
no
amendments
that
have
been
offered
for
the
measure,
because
if
there
were,
then
you
would
be
voting
on
the
amendment
and
then
the
measure
and
asher
can
help
with
the
legality
there.
G
F
That
one
and
thank
you,
madam
chair
I'll,
chime
in
just
quickly
to
follow
senator
weiner's
discussion
there,
so
so,
ordinarily.
The
way
that
this
would
happen
during
a
legislative
meeting
during
session
is
a
motion
would
be
made
to
either
approve
the
item
as
is
or
a
motion
would
be
made
to
improve,
to
approve
the
item
with
certain
amendments.
F
I'm
just
going
to
suggest
as
your
staff
for
efficiency's
sake
and
for
the
sake
of
ease
of
discussion,
rather
than
necessarily
following
that
model.
It
might
be
better
for
the
youth
legislature
to
discuss
in
concept
any
of
the
amendments
that
the
youth
legislature
may
want
to
make
separately
and
vote
on
those
amendments
separately
and
then,
once
we
know
which
amendments
to
include
the
youth
legislature
could
then
accept
a
final
motion
on
approving
the
bdr.
With
those
amendments.
C
F
C
E
C
C
E
Youth
legislator
beat
up
for
the
record,
although
I
mostly
agree
with
what
youth
legislator
melendez
is
saying.
I
do
believe
it's
a
really
good
safety
measure
to
go
ahead
and
include
that
permissive
language
that
at
least
gives
them
the
legal
suggestion
that
they
should
consult
with
their
team
if
they
think
it's
something,
that's
a
good
idea.
I
don't
know,
I
won't
say
anything
further.
Actually,
I
still
do
believe
it's
a
good
idea
to
include
that
permissive
language.
G
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
in
response
to
former
senator
maynard,
I
I
believe
that
would
probably
be
the
most
efficient
process.
My
understanding
from
the
discussion
so
far
has
been
that
there
there
have
generally
been
two
potential
amendments
discussed.
One
is
this
concept
of
adding
in
called
consultation.
C
F
E
You
legislator,
beta
at
the
moment
I
sent
that
no,
because
that
was
my
motion,
but
I
could
also
add
something
else.
This
has
to
do
with
the
timing
of
the
trainings
that
that
people
that
people
who
are
in
the
justice
system
would
be
taking.
Oh
goodness,
let
me
just
remember
what
I
was
wanting
to
say
for
a
moment.
I'm
sorry
I
seem
to
have
forgotten,
but
if
I
remember
I'll
go
ahead
and
put
it
back
up,
thank
you.
C
B
Madam
chair,
this
is
youth
legislator
carver
for
the
record.
Correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
mr
killian,
but
what
you're
saying
is
is
that
we
have
two
issues
that
we
want
to
address
with
the
wording
of
our
bill
and
we
should
do
those
separately.
We
should
vote
on
those
separately,
not
as
one
cumulative
wording
change
right.
F
B
B
C
D
I
believe
that
recent
data
has
shown
that,
for
instance,
for
jewish
individuals,
there's
been
a
massive
increase
of
anti-semitic
hate
crimes
across
the
nation,
also
in
it,
and
then
for
that
matter,
hate
crimes
against
muslims
has
been
high
for
decades.
At
this
point,
so
I
would
just
say
that
perhaps
a
good
amendment
might
be
in
an
effort
by
this
organization
to
highlight
the
concerns.
Many
religious
minorities
across
the
state
of
nevada
would
be
to
add
religious
minorities
in
the
highlighting
thereof
to
paragraph
b
sub
section
2.
C
D
Honorable
chair,
that
is
correct,
that
it
is
under
section
four,
but
my
consideration
was
that,
if,
if
what
we
were
talking
about
before
of
paragraph
b,
subsection
two
is
an
attempt
to
highlight
particular
concerns.
Then
that
was
just
my
suggestion
for
the
amendment
to
highlight,
therefore,
as
well,
not
to
the
detriment
of
any
of
the
other
considerations
in
subsection
four,
but
just
to
particularly
give
a
highlight
to
religious
minorities
in
the
state
of
nevada.
C
E
We
have
here
today
say
that
we're
uncertain
about
any
costs
arising,
but
I
think
if
any
costs
would
arise
from
the
specific
amendment
to
the
bill
draft,
we
we
probably
should
know
that
before
we
go
ahead
and
vote
on
the
on
that
amendment,
especially
considering
we
now
introduced
this
idea
that
we
would
do
a
little
bit
more
reporting
than
was
previously
done
or
that
we
would
pay
attention
a
little
bit
more
to
it.
So
I'm
just
unsure.
F
It
may
change
in
degree,
but
it
won't
change
in
its
yes
or
no
state
so
that
that's
not
necessarily
a
concern
that
the
body
needs
to
worry
about
at
this
time
is
whether
you'd
be
taking
the
fiscal
note
off
the
bill.
At
this
point,
my
suggestion
would
be
it's
probably
easiest
and
you
can
vote
on
them
in
any
order.
F
C
C
Receive
the
process,
I
just
have
a
quick
question
for
the
legal
team.
What
would
be
the
downside
of
having
the
safety
measure
of
I'm
saying
that
adding
permissive
language
and
saying
that
the
attorney
general
could
have
other
leadership
that
oversees
the
process
if
he
would
like
or
like
saying
that
they
made
consults
with
other
parties
instead
of
forcing
them.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
killian
legal
counsel.
I
I
don't
foresee
any
negative
consequences
of
adding
that
kind
of
language.
It's
likely
something.
That's
a
pre-existing
implicit
power
of
the
attorney
general
as
the
head
of
the
attorney
general's
office
to
consult
with
any
relevant
staff,
but
explicitly
acknowledging
that
in
statute.
I
don't
think
that
creates
any
negative
effects.
It
would
simply
be
a
recognition
of
what
is
probably
an
existing
right
in
a
method
that
would
call
to
the
attention
of
the
reader
the
existence
of
of
that
implicit
power.
C
G
It
madam
chair,
if
I
made
this
center
just
for
clarity
for
the
record,
is:
are
you
asking
for
a
motion
to
include
a
permissive
language
for
the
attorney
general
to
include
other
parties
in
the
drafting
of
of
anything
that
might
be
required
under
this
statute?
Or
something
like
that?
You
want
to
make
it
kind
of
clear
and
then
maybe
ask
for
a
motion
for
it,
so
that
that
person,
youth
legislator,
making
the
motion
knows
what
it
is,
that
they're
making
a
motion
for
the
body
to
process.
C
G
Each
one
of
these
yes,
madam
chair,
you
are
going
to
vote
because
we
need
to
move
on.
We
have
a
training
and
we
have
others
participating.
I
don't
want
to
cut
you
short,
but
I
want
you
to
be
cognizant
of
the
time
as
well.
Balancing
both
you
could
say
to
the
body
to
your
colleagues.
I
will
entertain
a
motion
to
do
and
then
something
very
specific
or
you
can
say,
do
any
of
the
members
of
any
any
youth
legislators
have
an
any
an
amendment
to
offer
to
the
bill.
G
You
can
do
it
and
then
let
that
youth
legislator
frame
the
language
and
then
once
that
proposal
has
been
offered
in
through
a
motion.
I
will
now
entertain
a
second.
Then
a
legislator
would
second
it
then
discussion
and
then
we
take
the
vote,
the
roll
call
vote
and
then
you'll
do
it
for
the
next
amendment
and
you'll
do
it
for
the
next
amendment
and,
however,
that
falls
out
either
way
through
the
vote,
then
you
will
take
a
vote
on
the
nyl
bill
as
amended,
and
you
have
already
approved
the
amendments.
C
G
Do
any
youth
legislators
at
this
time
have
an
amendment
I
mean
not
official
language.
Would
any
youth
legislators
at
this
time
like
to
propose
an
amendment
to
the
nyo
bdr
14549,
and
then
you
recognize
a
youth
legislator
who
will
propose
the
language
of
the
amendment
that
he
or
she
would
like
to
see
voted
on?
G
C
C
C
C
B
C
D
E
A
A
C
G
C
C
G
C
My
apologies,
the
amendment
that
we
will
be
considering
is
the
adding
and
timing
for
the
training.
So
would
any
youth
legislator
like
to
motion
the
amendment
to
require
the
training
be
completed
once
every
two
years,
unless
the
attorney,
unless
the
attorney
general
provides
by
regulation
for
a
different
timing,.
C
G
Madam
chair
you've
just
framed
the
language
of
the
amendment
that
is
being
proposed.
Therefore,
you
would
ask
for
if
any
youth
legislators
would
make
a
motion
to
approve
this
amendment
to
the
to
the
nyo
bill,
and
you
wait
to
see
if
anyone
says
yes
and
if
they
do,
then
you
ask:
is
there
a
second?
They
say?
Yes,
is
there
any
additional
discussion
and
then
you'll
take
the
vote
after
that.
G
Well,
let's
be
respectful
that
we
do
have
a
training.
We
have
people
waiting,
but
we
want
this.
This
is
your
bill,
so
we've
got
to
balance
it.
We
have
had
some
discussion
already,
but
we
we
need
to
balance
that
we
can't
use
our
whole
time
on
this
out
of
respect
for
those
who
are
waiting
to
participate,
including
the
senate
majority
leader,
and
so
anything
that
that
needs
to
be
vetted
that
has
not
been
discussed
certainly
should
be
brought
forward
that
any
youth
legislator.
C
Okay,
so
at
this
time,
are
there
any
youth
legislators
who
like
to
motion
who
like
to
give
a
motion
to
move
forward
with
the
amendment
to
require
the
training
to
be
completed
once
every
two
years,
unless
the
attorney
general
provides
by
regulation
for
different
timing
and
youth
legislator
melendez,
I
saw
your
name
in
the
chat.
Would
you
like
to
motion?
B
G
C
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
killian
legal
counsel.
My
understanding
is
that
this
would
not
be
requiring
all
training
to
happen
at
the
same
point
in
the
two-year
cycle
that
the
requirement
would
just
be
for
the
relevant
personnel
to
complete
the
training
at
least
once
every
two
years.
So
it
would
be
a
staggered
rolling
period
in
which
they'd
have
to
complete
the
training.
G
B
C
D
A
B
A
C
F
C
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair
youth,
legislator,
carver
for
the
record,
isn't
religious
minority
protections
already
in
the
wording
of
the
bill
just
in
a
different
place,
but
is
already
in
the
bill,
and
if
we
were
to
add
religious
protections
into
section
2,
we
would
also
have
to
add
all
of
like
the
veterans
protections,
and
I
can't
remember
quite
off
the
top
of
my
head.
What
the
other
ones
were.
We
would
also
have
to
put
those
ones
into
section
two,
just
from
a
an
ethical
standpoint,
but
it's
already
in
the
bill.
B
F
But
the
the
language
in
paragraph
b
calls
out
particular
people
that
are
included
within
that
definition
as
a
point
of
emphasis,
so
specifically
children,
lgbt
persons,
racial
and
ethnic
minorities
and
women,
and
so
this
amendment
would
just
be
adding
a
fifth
category.
That's
specifically
called
out
alongside
children,
lgbt
persons,
racial
and
ethnic
minorities
and
women,
and
that
fifth
category,
that's
specifically
called
out.
So
as
a
specific
point
of
emphasis,
would
be
religious
minorities.
D
Thank
you,
honorable,
chair
youth
legislator,
out
for
the
record
just
for
a
just
for
a
clarification.
What
we
do
have
in
section
four
is
that
it
mentions
all
religions.
My
suggestion
is
for
religious
minorities
as
as
astrid
killian
specified,
and
I
and
thank
you,
youth
legislator,
carver.
That
was
the
thought
that
also
came
into
my
mind,
would
be
the
ethical
concern.
C
B
C
A
D
B
C
E
G
C
C
C
D
I
would
for
the
record
this
just
came
to
my
mind
as
I
was
reading
section
four,
should
it
be
amended
that
just
the
addition
of
sexes-
because
I
for
my
knowledge
and
a
lot
of
because
we
do
have
genders,
but
I
mean
I
wouldn't
note
specifically
if
the
nrs
has
say,
defines
it
like
sex
and
gender
differently
or
not
in
the
1964
civil
rights
act,
for
instance,
it
mentions
sex,
so
I
just
mean
in
the
sense
of
upon
precedent.
Would
we
also
want
to
add
sexes
into
section
4
under
cultural
competency.
C
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
is
youth
legislator
carver
for
the
record.
The
difference
between
sex
and
gender
in
terms
of
legislation
is
a
gray
area.
Adding
gender
usually
covers
everything.
Sex
can
oftentimes
be
discriminatory
because
the
textbook
definition
relies
off
of
biological
genitalia,
which
can
be
a
discriminatory
factor,
but
gender
should
be
safe.
I
would
say
that
adding
sexes
is
a
bit
redundant.
C
D
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
asher,
killian
legal
counsel.
As
a
drafting
convention.
It's
our
understanding
that
gender
would
be
the
broader
term
that
would
include
all
possibilities
for
gender
and
sex,
gender
and
sex
expression,
so
this
as
drafted,
would
be
including
the
the
broadest
number
of
people
within
this
definition.
C
C
D
C
Being
that
the
motion
has
carried
unanimously,
the
bill
drafts
will
be
revised
to
the
three
amendments
that
we
have
voted
on.
Hearing
that
there
are
no
other
motions.
I
will
ask
mr
kielian
and
miss
miranda
kick
to.
Please
submit
these
changes
to
the
lcb
legal
divisions
to
be
incorporated
into
the
bill
draft.
C
Although
the
student
member
cannot
vote
the
student
attends
meetings
of
the
state
board
of
education
and
has
the
opportunity
to
participate
in
and
ask
questions
at
these
meetings
at
its
meetings,
the
state
board
of
education
makes
various
decisions
about
education
policy
in
nevada.
It
selects
test
text
books,
creates
the
standards
for
the
state
testing
programs,
determines
courses
of
study
and
makes
other
rules
related
to
education.
C
The
law
requires
this
student
member
to
be
to
be
nominated
by
the
nevada
association
of
student
councils
in
consultation
with
the
nevada
youth
legislature.
The
selection
of
the
student
member
of
the
state
board
won't
occur
until
march.
So
at
this
point
we
do
not
yet
have
any
information
on
the
students
to
be
considered
for
the
nomination.
C
Additionally,
since
this
is
our
last
meeting,
we
will
not
meet
again
before
the
selection
of
the
nominee.
Therefore,
it
was
suggested
that
we
appoint
a
member
to
attend
the
nasc
meeting
and
consult
with
the
nasc
on
our
behalf,
either
in
person
or
remotely,
as
we
did
last
year,
the
nasc
board
meeting
will
probably
be
on
march,
6th
and
or
7th
2021
again,
our
representative,
our
representative,
may
attend
the
meeting
in
person
or
be
via
video
conference.
C
B
G
Meeting
at
this
time,
but
just
for
clarity-
you
have
a
youth
legislator,
carter,
who's
volunteered
to
do
it
a
second
time,
so
you
would
say:
are
there
any
others
who
are
interested
and
would
like
to
be
considered
if
it's
only
bless?
Sarah
carver?
Thank
you
so
much
for
volunteering
again.
If
there
are
others
who
are
interested,
then
you
would
take
a
vote
of
the
youth
legislature
between
the
two
and
the
one
who
would
get
the
top
vote
would
be.
The
representative.
C
C
Okay,
it
it
appears
that
youth
legislator,
carver,
is
the
only
one
that
volunteers.
So
thank
you,
youth,
legislator,
carver.
Since
youth
legislator,
carver
will
be
consulting
with
the
nasc
on
our
behalf.
We
should
provide
some
guidance
on
the
qualities
we
consider
most
important
in
selecting
a
nominee.
C
C
B
Hello
so
last
year
I
applied
for
the
position
of
student
member
to
the
board
of
education,
and
I
was
selected
as
a
second
runner-up,
so
I
guess
kind
of
the
second
candidate.
So
I
kind
of
do
have
a
little
bit
of
experience
with
this,
but
I
would
say
that
it's
really
important
for
the
candidate
to
show
an
understanding
of
policy
and
to
show
an
understanding
of
you
know
the
legislative
business
that
goes
on
in
nasc
and
in
the
state
board
of
education
and
just
in
the
department
of
education
in
general.
B
I
know
that
a
lot
of
candidates
who
do
apply
for
this
position
really
put
emphasis
on
the
fact
that
it's
an
nasc
position
and
they
really
focus
on
the
fact
that
it's
a
student
council
position
and
most
of
the
time
student
council
members
are
really
focused
on
certain
aspects
like
enthusiasm
and
things
like
that,
which
is
great.
But
it's
really
important
for
this
specific
member
student
member
to
the
board
of
education
to
have
that
understanding
of
policy
so
to
youth
legislator
carver.
B
C
B
Youth
legislator,
wang
for
the
record.
I
also
agree
that
a
background
in
policy
is
needed
to
specifically
education
because
of
the
nature
of
the
position,
but
I
also
think
that
enthusiasm
and
past
work
in
student
council
is
also
very
important
because,
in
my
opinion
that
shows
dedication,
and
so
I
think
those
things
should
also
be
considered.
C
E
Legislator,
peter
for
the
record
I
feel
like
a
candidate,
should
have
previous
exposure
to
not
only
their
own
public
school,
but
also
other
public
schools
that
are
separate
to
just
attending.
Like
certain
student
council
conferences,
I'm
not
too
versed
on
what
they
attend,
but
I
feel
like
a
separate
desire
to
go
ahead
and
expose
themselves
to
other
people
who
may
live
in
different
parts
of
nevada
and
themselves
and
other
parts
of
the
valley.
C
B
Proceed.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
he's.
Legislator
cover
for
the
record,
so
I've
been
taking
a
few
notes
and
from
the
three
speakers
I
understand
or
sorry,
four
yes,
four
I
can't
count
is
that
the
general
understanding
and
the
general
consensus
we've
come
to
is
that
we
want
the
member
to
have
an
understanding
of
policy
and
an
understanding
of
the
legislative
business,
but
to
also
be
enthusiastic,
has
a
background
in
this
sort
of
work
and
just
from
the
candidates.
Last
year
we
had
nine
candidates.
B
C
C
C
Since
we
have
no
other
items
to
discuss,
we
will
move
forward
to
the
next
period
of
public
comment
at
this
time.
I
will
now
open
the
next
period
of
public
comment.
The
same
rules
mentioned
during
the
first
period
of
public
comment
apply.
Please
try
to
avoid
repeating
the
same
comments
that
have
been
previously
made,
and
I
ask
you
to
please
limit
your
testimony
to
three
minutes.