►
Description
This is the sixth meeting of the 2021-2022 Interim. Please see the agenda for details.
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
B
B
B
A
Here,
thank
you,
mr
jamison.
Please
indicate
we
have
a
quorum.
Thank
you.
Before
we
begin,
I
would
like
to
take
a
moment
to
go
over
some
basic
housekeeping
items
first
for
everyone
here
in
attendance,
both
members
and
those
out
in
the
audience.
I
would
like
to
remind
you
to
please
turn
off
all
cell
phones
and
laptops
during
the
meeting
for
those
joining
on
zoom.
A
Please
be
sure
to
mute
your
microphone
when
you
are
not
speaking
to
minimize
background
noise
members
on
zoom,
please
remember
to
keep
your
video
turned
on
during
the
meeting
to
ensure
that
we
have
a
quorum
for
the
individuals
on
zoom.
I
would
like
to
remind
you
that
the
chat
feature
is
only
to
be
used
for
technical
assistance
with
bps.
It
is
not
to
be
used
for
any
communication
between
members
or
by
presenters
unless
requesting
technical
assistance.
A
As
noted
on
the
agenda,
public
comment
will
be
limited
to
three
minutes
per
speaker.
There
will
be
a
public
comment
period
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
and
another
public
comment
period
at
the
end
of
the
meeting.
In
addition
to
testifying
in
person,
members
of
the
public
may
provide
public
comment
in
four
different
ways,
all
of
which
are
listed
on
the
agenda.
A
A
A
A
A
A
Okay,
seeing
none
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
I,
if
you
are
on
zoom,
please
raise
your
hand.
I
I
those
opposed
seeing
none
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
Committee
members.
Okay.
Agenda.
Item
number
four
is
a
presentation
from
the
state
barbers
health
and
sanitation
board.
If
you
recall
at
our
meeting
on
january
26
2022,
we
received
a
presentation
from
the
board
regarding
the
modernization
of
the
board's
operations
and
additional
items
requested
by
the
2019-2020
interim
subcommittee.
A
At
the
conclusion
of
this
presentation,
several
of
our
subcommittee
members
asked
that
the
board
report
back
on
a
few
items.
Those
items
were
one
the
possibility
of
making
the
testing
timeline
shorter.
At
the
january
meeting,
the
board
reported
that
testing
is
held
every
three
to
four
weeks:
two,
whether
the
local
barber
schools
accepted
united
states,
department
of
veteran
affairs,
gi
bill
benefits
and
three
the
possibility
of
increasing
licensure.
By
endorsement,
I
believe
we
have
miss
antoinette
maestas
from
the
state
barbers
board
on
zoom
to
discuss
the
board's
progress.
Miss
molestas
are
you
with
us?
D
Okay,
madam
chair
member
to
the
sunset
committee,
my
name
is
anthonette
my
hostess.
I
am
the
secretary
treasurer
of
the
nevada
state,
barbara's
health
and
sanitation
board,
I'm
here
to
report
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
state,
barbara's
health
and
sanitation
board.
At
the
meeting
held
january
26th,
I
reported
to
the
committee
that
the
board
had
completed
four
to
five
requests
that
the
committee
had
asked
for.
Our
website
was
developed
in
his
working
tool
for
the
board
and
licensees.
D
Modernization
of
practices
is
being
done.
We
are
offering
all
of
our
meetings
in
person
or
teleconference
cooperation.
With
the
cosmetology
board,
we've
been
working
with
the
cosmetology
board
when
problems
arise
or
questions
we
may
have.
Payments
to
moving
online
are
being
done.
We
just
went
through
renewal
of
licensees
and
we
had
a
great
response
to
our
online
services.
D
The
increase
of
frequency
of
testing,
we're
currently
testing
about
every
four
weeks.
The
board
has
worked
on
this
diligently
after
consulting
testing
agencies
because
of
our
low
numbers
of
candidates.
It
would
cost
the
candidates
anywhere
from
three
to
three
hundred
and
fifty
dollars
to
take
an
exam.
Do
testing
companies.
The
candidates
are
now
paying
100
dollars
to
take
the
exam.
This
is
a
big
increase
for
the
candidates,
taking
the
examination.
D
D
I
have
reached
out
to
to
our
neighboring
state,
and
I
found
that
with
new
mexico
they
test
every
day
with
a
third
party
agency.
As
of
may
25th,
I
tried
to
schedule
an
exam
with
them.
The
earliest
I
could
schedule
was
june
14th.
That
was
a
waiting
period
of
20
days,
arizona
tests
six
times
a
year.
They
test
in
january
march
may
july,
september
and
november
california,
they
test
every
day,
but
it's
kind
of
crazy.
The
way
their
system
works.
D
D
D
D
In
that
same
time
frame
we
had
107
students
apply
to
examine
and
only
78
of
them
took
the
exam.
I
think
I
had
said
this
in
the
last
meeting
that
once
they
graduate
they're
not
all
in
such
a
hurry
to
to
take
their
exam,
and
this
proves
that
there
were
only
29
that
showed
up
to
take
the
exam
out
of
the
78
that
took
the
exam.
We
had
64
that
passed
the
exam
13
that
failed
out
of
the
13
that
failed.
The
exam
five
were
from
out
of
state
schools.
D
Out
of
the
78
that
were
tested,
there
were
42
students
that
did
not
take
the
exam
as
soon
as
they
graduated
from
school
out
of
the
13
that
failed.
The
examination
one
candidate
graduated
four
days
prior
to
the
test,
one
candidate
graduated
nine
days
prior
to
the
exam
and
the
rest
graduated
from
two
months
to
two
and
a
half
years
prior
to
testing.
D
D
D
I
sent
letters
to
all
the
barber
schools
in
nevada
and
gave
them
the
information
of
who
to
contact
for
the
application,
after
speaking
with
the
individual,
over
that
the
va
benefits
in
our
state.
They,
let
me
know
that
there
had
been
barber
schools
in
the
past
to
reach
out
to
them
and
they
elected
not
to
proceed.
They
explained
to
me
that
it
is
a
financial
risk.
If
a
student
drops
out,
they
explain
that
over
the
last
three
years,
the
regulations
behind
the
va
education
benefit
program
have
been
more
stringent
and
difficult
to
navigate.
D
D
The
board
has
worked
to
achieve
everything
that
was
asked
of
us.
The
board
continues
to
strive
to
make
things
better
and
more
efficient.
In
closing,
I
hope
that
this
has
been
able
to
shed
some
light
on
the
testing
situation
and,
as
always,
feel
free
to
reach
out
to
me.
If
there
are
any
questions
and
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
any
of
the
members
would
have.
E
E
The
the
director
at
the
va-
and
I'm
just
trying
to
understand,
because
the
one
of
the
reasons
that
a
lot
of
people
will
take
va
is
because
they
know
that
the
student
will
be
able
to
the
student
will
be
able
to
complete
the
course
and
once
the
money
has
been
issued
to
the
to
the
school
most
of
the
time,
it's
not
withdrawn.
Unless
there
are
really
really
really
good
reasons.
D
Correct
correct,
I
don't
know
if
I'm
allowed
to
say
who
I
spoke
to
no.
E
D
D
D
E
D
E
E
So
my
question
would
be
this:
some
schools
are
offering
an
outreach
program
so
when
people
are
having
difficulty,
either
financially
or
otherwise,
and
and
with
the
way
that
rent
prices
are
going
up
now,
many
people
are
not
able
to
do
a
lot
of
things,
because
the
every
dime
that
they
make
goes
to
rent
so
you'll
have
any
type
of
an
outreach
program
that
would
for
the
students
who
graduate
and
then
it's
a
little
bit
longer
than
that
is
expected
for
them
to
take
the
test.
E
D
B
Thank
you
chair.
My
question
is
kind
of
outside
the
purview
of
exactly
what
we're
talking
about,
but
I'm
just
curious
on
the
barber
board.
Do
you
also
cover
the
schools?
Are
you
responsible
for
the
schools?
Are
they
under
a
different
agency.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
okay
committee
members.
This
go
brings
us
right
into
our
next
agenda
item.
This
is
our
final
work
session
for
this
sunset
subcommittee,
this
interim
sunset
subcommittee.
As
a
reminder,
this
subcommittee
is
charged
with
reviewing
existing
boards
and
commissions
and
making
recommendations
regarding
their
future.
A
Our
next
order
of
business
is
to
consider
recommendations
for
some
of
the
boards
and
commissions
that
we
reviewed
throughout
our
previous
meetings
for
each
entity.
The
work
session
document
presents
options
or
actions
for
consideration
by
the
members.
It
is
intended
to
assist
the
members
in
determining
whether
to
recommend
that
a
board
or
commission
be
continued,
terminated,
modified
or
consolidated
with
another
entity
as
a
result
of
the
subcommittee's
consideration.
Today,
each
item
may
be
the
subject
of
further
discussion,
refinement
or
action.
The
work
session
document
was
posted
with
the
agenda
on
the
legislature's
website.
A
The
work
session
document
contains
standard
language
that
asks
the
members
to
consider
the
possible
recommendations
in
some
instances.
It
also
includes
suggested
actions.
These
are
presented
for
discussion
purposes
and
do
not
in
any
way
limit
the
range
of
options
available
to
the
members.
With
that,
I
am
going
to
turn
to
our
subcommittee
staff
to
open
the
work
session.
Mr
malgareho,
let's
begin
and
I'm
going
to
make
a
request
that
we
go
through
items
one
and
two
together.
It
is
my
understanding,
after
running
this
by
legal,
that
we
can
take.
One
motion
for
work
session.
A
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record.
I
am
cesaro
guerrero
committee
policy
analyst
and
nonpartisan
as
nonpartisan
staff.
I
can
either
advocate
for
nor
against
a
measure
that
comes
before
this
subcommittee,
I
will
provide
a
short
overview
of
the
work
session
document,
starting
with
items
number
one
and
two,
as
the
chair
stated.
F
The
first
and
second
entity
on
the
work
session
is
the
nevada
transportation
authority
and
the
taxi
cab
authority.
The
nta
regulates
certain
motor
carriers,
operators
of
tow
cars
brokers
of
regulated
carriers,
transportation
network
companies,
autonomous
vehicle
net
network
companies
and
the
storage
of
household
goods
and
effects.
The
nta
also
regulates
taxi
cabs
outside
of
clark
county,
while
the
taxi
cab
authority
regulates
the
operations
of
taxicabs
within
clark
county.
F
The
sunset
subcommittee
previously
reviewed
the
nta
and
ta
during
the
2015-2016
interim
and
recommended
terminating
and
consolidating
the
functions
of
the
nta
with
the
ta
in
a
new
executive
department.
On
november,
2nd
2016
sunset
subcommittee
presented
its
report
and
recommendations
to
the
legislative
commission
subcommittee's
recommendation
to
consolidate
the
nta
and
the
ta
was
considered
and
omitted
from
the
note
motion
to
direct
the
legal
division
lcb
to
prepare
bill
draft
request
on
behalf
of
the
sunset
subcommittee
subcommittee,
once
again
reviewed
the
nta
and
the
ta.
F
This
interim
at
its
meeting
on
may
18
2022
director,
reynolds
of
the
department
of
business
and
industry,
testified
that
there
is
a
need
to
modernize
both
the
nta
and
the
ta
and
the
laws
that
govern
them.
He
recommended
a
legislative
study
to
review
the
transportation
laws
administered
by
the
nta
and
the
ta.
F
The
question
before
the
subcommittee
is:
does
the
subcommittee
wish
to
recommend
continuation
or
determination
of
the
nevada
transportation
authority
and
the
tax
cap
authority
if
the
subcommittee
recommends
termination?
Is
there
a
recommendation
for
consolidation
or
a
recommendation
to
have
the
authority's
duties
transferred
to
another
entity?
If
the
subcommittee
wishes
to
recommend
continuing
the
nta
and
ta,
does
the
subcommittee
recommend
any
changes
to
these
authorities
and
medev
chair
director
reynolds
miss
gibbons,
chair
of
the
nta
mr
research
sheriff?
A
Thank
you,
mr
michael
rajo,
and
thank
you,
mr
armstrong,
for
being
here
as
well
committee.
If
you
recall,
during
our
last
meeting,
we
were
given
insight
into
the
need
for
modernization
of
the
chapters
that
govern
the
nta
and
the
ta
after
discussions
with
director
reynolds.
It
is
my
recommendation
to
request
an
interim
study
and
that
the
study
be
conducted
through
a
legislative
committee
such
as
the
joint
interim
standing
committee
on
growth
and
infrastructure.
A
So
my
again,
my
consider
at
this
time
I
would
like
for
us
to
consider
a
motion
to
draft
a
concurrent
resolution
to
direct
the
joint
interim
standing
committee
on
growth
and
infrastructure,
to
conduct
a
study
to
review
the
laws
administered
by
the
nta
and
the
taxi
cab
authority
during
the
2023-2024
interim.
I
do
want
to
open
it
up
to
discussion
before
we
take
a
motion
to
see
if
anyone
has
any
questions
for
either
mr
armstrong
who's
here
with
us
in
las
vegas
or
for
any
of
the
members
who
are
joining
us
via
zoom.
A
E
Maybe
not
so
much
the
question
as
it
is
well,
maybe
it
is
if
the
consolidation
were
to
occur,
what
would
be
the
benefits
and
what
would
be
the
liabilities.
G
The
question
is:
who
exactly
are
you
directing
the
question
to?
Are
you
directing
it
to
the
nta
or
the
ta
or
I'll
start
I'll
start
with
the
ta?
In
terms
of
what
we're
talking
about
at
this
particular
point,
we
have
laws
that
we
still
need
to
revise
review,
we're
in
the
process
of
doing
that.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
we're
going
to
have
an
unofficial
work
session
on
june
15th
in
order
to
continue
our
process
of
trying
to
review
the
regulations,
as
well
as
the
laws
that
affect
the
ta
in
terms
of
the
situation.
E
Thank
you
because
the
thing
that
comes
to
mind
immediately
is
if
there
is
consolidation
and
we're
talking
about
improving,
and
I
think
part
of
the
discussion
last
time
dealt
with
some
technology
that
is
in
play
now
and
that
will
be
coming
into
play
and
making
sure
that
that
that
whatever
we
talk
about,
takes
in
consideration
five
ten
years
down
the
road,
we
may
not
know
everything
about
it.
E
But
some
of
the
things
that
we
do
know
is
that
there
will
be
different
modes
of
transportation
introduced
and
there
will
be
different
ways
that
people
will
be
be
transported
if
you
will
so
to
try
to
try
to
make
sure
that
that
is
taking
consideration.
So
I
wanted
to
know-
and
maybe
that's
one
of
the
questions
that
the
study
could
answer,
look
at
the
pros
and
the
cons
of
it.
E
Yeah
the
the
thing,
the
biggest
thing
that
the
biggest
concern
that
I
would
have
and
and
as
you
said,
you
have
an
unofficial
meeting,
but
that's
still
going
to
because.
G
An
unofficial
work
session
for
us
because
we
don't
have
anything
ready
to
be
presented
to
the
board
for
or
to
the
legislature
in
terms
of
bdr
relatives
that
we're
talking
at
this
particular
point
with
the
industry
about
what
we
need
to
do.
In
order,
like
you
say,
to
modernize
and
do
the
things
that
we
do,
that
we're
established
required
to
do.
E
If
I
may
just
make
a
suggestion,
if
you
haven't
considered
look
at
the
role
of
autonomous
vehicles,.
G
A
Thank
you
vice
chair,
and
I
would
like
the
public
and
the
committee
members
to
know
that
there
is
exhibits
on
the
website
of
examples
of
nrs
and
nac
that
were
provided
to
us
of
things.
That
could
be
modernized.
So
if
anyone
wants
to
take
a
look
at
those,
but
again
the
committee
members,
I'm
doing
last
call
for
discussion
or
questions.
A
Senator
lang
raise
your
hand.
If
you
have
any
questions
okay.
Well
then
I
again
I
would
take.
I
would
be
looking
for
a
motion
to
draft
a
concurrent
resolution
to
direct
the
joint
interim
standing
committee
on
growth
and
infrastructure,
to
conduct
a
study
to
review
the
laws
administered
by
the
nta
and
taxi
cab
authority
during
the
2023
2024
interim.
A
B
A
A
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record
cesar
mcgregor
community
policy.
Analyst.
The
next
entity
is
the
merit
award
board
the
board
and
the
merit
award
program
were
established
by
the
legislator
in
1967
the
board
reviews
proposals
from
state
employees
that
would
reduce
or
eliminate
standing
state
expenditures
or
improve
the
operations
of
state
government.
The
board
evaluates
the
merits
of
these
suggestions
subcommittee,
previously
reviewed
the
board
on
march
15
2016
and
recommended
its
continuation
with
various
statutory
provisions
being
changed.
These
recommendations
were
adopted
through
senate
bill
72
in
the
2017
session.
F
The
board
was
reviewed
this
interim
by
the
sunset
subcommittee
at
its
meeting
on
february
16
2022.
At
that
time,
representatives
of
the
board
stated
that
the
board
was
not
funded
for
the
2123
biennium
and
in
the
sunset
subcommittee
review
form.
The
division
of
human
resource
management
reported
that
without
the
budgetary
authority
to
fund
awards,
the
hrm
suggests
that
it
is
advisable
to
align
the
statute
with
budget
realities.
F
The
question
before
the
subcommittee
is:
does
the
subcommittee
wish
to
recommend
continuation
or
determination
of
the
board
if
a
subcommittee
recommends
determination?
Is
there
a
recommendation
for
consolidation
with
another
entity
or
a
recommendation
to
have
the
board's
duties
transferred
to
another
entity?
If
the
subcommittee
wishes
to
recommend
continuing
the
commission,
sorry,
the
board
does
subcommittee
want
to
recommend
any
changes
to
the
board
on
chair
hardage.
We
have
director
freed
from
the
department
administration
in
carson
city
and
administrator
richard
richardson
and
deputy
administrator
gone
from
dhrm
on
zoom
to
address
any
questions
about
this
board.
A
Thank
you
so
much,
mr
malgarejo
and
thank
you
committee
members.
I
know
it's
been
a
while,
since
we
we've
reviewed
the
merit
award
board,
so
just
some
information
I'd
like
to
provide
to
the
committee
members
nrs285.070
authorizes
the
board
to
award
a
state
employee
up
to
five
thousand
dollars
and
anything
above
five
thousand
dollars
must
be
approved
by
interim
finance
committee.
A
But,
as
I
sat
back
and
I
thought
about
the
awards
that
families
received,
and
especially
any
program
that
rewards
our
state,
employees
who
continuously
sacrifice
for
our
state
is
something
that
we
should
protect.
Our
state
employees
are
working
in
these
divisions
and
these
departments
day
in
and
day
out
and
are
best
equipped
to
be
able
to
identify
things
that
could
make
their
offices
run
more
efficiently
and
they're
the
ones
who
receive
the
merit
award.
A
E
Not
trying
to
dominate,
but
so
I'm
sure
I
would
agree-
and
I
would
just
like
to
add
this-
for
the
record-
you're
absolutely
correct.
Our
state
employees
go
above
and
beyond,
and
there
were
several
years
that
they
were
asked
to
take
furlough,
which
is
indeed
a
drop
in
pay,
and
there
were
two
or
three
sessions.
I
know
that
the
legislature
reduced
our
pay,
so
it
could
go
back
to
to
them
and
I
just
want
to
make.
E
I
just
want
to
say
to
to
the
state
employees
you
all
are
doing
a
yeoman's
job,
and
sometimes
we
hear
people
say
things
that
government's
too
big
and
it
costs
too
much
and
most
of
the
times.
People
that
say
that
are
the
same
ones
complain,
but
they
can't
get
a
real
live
person
on
the
phone.
B
Thank
you
chair.
I
just
wanted
to
echo
your
comments
and
now
the
comments
of
the
vice
chair,
our
state
workers,
do
so
much
for
us
all
the
time,
and
I
just
really
feel
that
this
needs
to
continue
and
I'm
100
in
favor
of
it.
A
Okay,
then
again,
I
would
repeat
my
motion.
We've
just
restated
for
the
record,
but
it's
my
recommendation
and
I'd
be
looking
for
a
motion
for
continuation
of
the
merit
award
board
with
a
request
to
fund
the
admin
account
with
three
thousand
dollars
biannually
and
to
amend
chapter
285
to
allow
for
general
fund
usage
and
create
an
award
account
funded
with
twenty
five
thousand
dollars
of
general
funds
that
shall
be
reverted
to
the
general
fund
if
they
are
unused
during
the
biennium.
A
A
Okay,
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye,
aye.
Okay,
I
have
an
eye
from
senator
pickard
who
raised
his
hand
as
well
opposed
motion,
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you
and
thank
you
to
our
state
employees
as
well.
Thank
you.
Okay.
Next
item
on
the
agenda
is
item
number
four:
the
advisory
council
on
science,
technology,
engineering
and
mathematics.
Mr
malgadejo.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record
of
cesar
mel
guerrero
community
policy.
Analyst,
the
advisory
council
on
science,
technology
engineering
and
mathematics
is
next
in
the
work
session
document.
The
advisory
council
on
stem
currently
resides
under
the
office
of
science,
innovation
and
technology,
better
known
as
osit
within
the
office
of
the
governor.
The
mission
of
the
council
was
to
increase
student
interest
and
achievement
in
the
fields
of
stem
leading
students
to
rewarding
careers
in
the
new
nevada
economy.
F
Council
is
charged
with
developing
a
statewide
strategic
plan
for
stem
identifying
and
awarding
recognition
to
students
in
schools
throughout
nevada
that
excel
in
stem
conducting
surveys
and
research
and
applying
for
grants.
The
council
was
reviewed
for
the
first
time
by
the
sunset
subcommittee
on
march
30th
2022
during
the
review.
The
representatives
of
the
council
discussed
several
challenges
with
the
council
that
the
council
has
had
over
the
years.
F
In
addition,
after
march
after
the
march
30
meeting
elsa
notified
subcommittee
staff
that
it
would
recommend
terminating
the
council,
the
question
before
the
subcommittee
is:
does
the
subcommittee
wish
to
recommend
continuation
or
determination
of
the
council
if
the
committee
recommends
termination?
Is
there
a
recommendation
for
consolidation
with
another
entity
or
recommendation
to
have
the
council's
duties
transferred
to
another
entity?
If
subcommittee
wishes
to
recommend
continuing
the
council
does
subcommittee
want
to
recommend
any
changes
to
the
council
chair
haragi,
we
have
tracy
howard.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
mangarejo,
and
again
committee
members.
Thank
you
again
because
I
know
it
has
been
a
while,
since
we
reviewed
the
advisory
council
after
just
many
discussions,
we've
reached
out
to
the
nevada
department
of
education,
again,
we've
reached
out
to
oset
and
what
we
learned
during
our
committee
hearing
when
we
reviewed
the
advisory
council
is
that
one
of
the
things
that
came
out
during
covid
was
the
the
birth
of
the
new
division
department.
That
kind
of
took
under
took
over
a
lot
of
these
functions.
A
It
was
while
the
blue
ribbon
commission,
and
we
sunset
at
a
similar
program
during
our
last
committee
meeting,
because
again,
the
blue
ribbon
commission
kind
of
assumed
the
roles
and
responsibilities
that
were
being
provided
by
that
program
and
also
by
the
advisory
council,
which
is
right
now
in
ineffective,
since
its
functions
are
being
performed
by
another
entity.
So
it
would
be
my
recommendation
to
terminate
the
advisory
council
and
to
have
the
blue
ribbon.
Commission
continue
with
the
functions
of
the
advisory
council.
A
A
I
have
a
second
by
vice
chair
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
I
I
okay
opposed
motion
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you.
Committee
members.
Item
number
five
on
the
work
session
is
the
advisory
committee
to
the
juvenile
justice
oversight
commission
before
I
turn
it
over
to
mr
mangadejo.
Thank
you,
mr
margaret.
I
do
want
to
make
a
couple
comments
regarding
the
advisory
committee
to
the
juvenile
justice
oversight
and
the
next
agenda
item
on
work
session,
which
is
number
six,
the
juvenile
justice
oversight.
Commission.
A
We
reviewed
both
of
these
entities
we
kind
of
had
an
overview
during
the
advisory
committee
hearing,
and
then
we
had
the
juvenile
justice
oversight.
Commission
come
back
so
that
we
could
work
session
them
as
well.
I
want
to
point
out
to
the
committee
that
there
are
discussions
between
the
supreme
court
and
the
governor's
office
to
consolidate
some
programs
that
exist
in
duplication,
so
we
currently
have
the
juvenile
justice
oversight.
A
With
that
comes
my
recommendation
for
item
number,
five,
which
would
be
to
terminate
the
advisory
committee
and
because
of
because
the
bdr
has
not
been
put
in
place,
it
was
going
to
be
my
recommendation
to
continue
the
oversight
commission
because
federally
we
need
it
to
receive
funds
until
the
bdr
goes
through
in
2023
that
consolidates
the
two.
So
I
wanted
to
take
a
moment
to
give
you
guys
some
insight
before
we
jumped
into
the
advisory
committee
work
session
document.
So
with
that,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
mr
malaga.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record,
says
our
melrose
community
policy
analyst.
I
really
don't
have
much
more
input
to
provide
madam
chair.
However,
I
did
want
to
ask
if
you
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
take
both
of
these
motions
to
together.
That
might
be
a
possibility
and
then
also
just
to
notify
you.
F
We
do
have
several
individuals
in
carson
city,
we
have
administrator
pitlock
from
an
administrator
anderson
from
the
division
of
child
and
family
services,
and
I
believe
we
have
one
more
individual
on
zoom
that
is
available
to
provide
to
answer
any
questions.
A
A
B
A
Thank
you,
okay
committee
members.
That
was
a
I
guess.
My
insight
worked,
but
after
my
discussions
with
the
governor's
office
and
again
the
supreme
court,
this
was
something
that
they
were
already
working
on
was
the
consolidation,
so
that
there
is
no
duplication.
A
So
it
would
be
my
recommendation
then,
and
I
would
be
looking
for
a
motion
to
terminate
the
advisory
committee
to
the
juvenile
justice
oversight
commission
and
because
we
need
to
continue
the
juvenile
justice
oversight
commission
in
order
to
receive
federal
funding
until
the
consolidation
occurs.
It
would
be
my
recommendation
to
continue
the
juvenile
justice
oversight
commission
again.
If
anyone
has
any
questions
regarding
the
discussions
that
are
going
on
to
consolidate
with
the
supreme
court
program,
we
do
have
administrators
here
to
answer
committee
members.
A
A
F
Thank
you
chair.
The
council
is
assigned
to
review
parental
involvement
and
family
engagement
policies,
school
district
annual
reports
and
effective
and
effective
practices.
It
is
also
charged
with
identifying
methods
to
improve
outreach
and
communication
with
parents.
The
council
is
required
to
report
annually
to
the
legislature
on
its
activities
and
any
recommendations
for
legislation.
F
The
council
consists
of
11
members
and
9,
who
are
appointed
by
the
superintendent
of
superintendent
of
instruction
and
2,
who
are
appointed
by
who
are
legislators
appointed
by
senate
majority
leader
and
speaker
of
the
assembly
sunset
subcommittee
previously
reviewed
the
council
during
the
2015-2016
interim,
the
subcommittee
recommended
continuation
of
the
council,
which
statutory
revisions,
including
revising
the
name
of
the
council,
modifying
the
council's
annual
reporting
requirements.
F
The
question
before
the
subcommittee
is
the
committee
wish
to
recommend
continuation
or
determination
of
the
council
if
the
subcommittee
recommends
termination,
is
there
a
recommendation
for
consolidation
with
another
entity
or
a
recommendation
to
have
the
council's
duties
transferred
to
another
entity?
If
the
stock
committee
wishes
to
recommend
continuing
the
council,
does
the
subcommittee
want
to
recommend
any
changes
to
the
council?
A
Thank
you
so
much.
Mr
malaga
hello
committee
members.
We
reviewed
this
council
at
our
last
committee
meeting
if
you
recall,
and
there
had
been
discussions
about
the
difficulties
in
filling
some
of
the
seats
after
discussions
with
the
nevada
department
of
education.
Again,
this
is
a
council
that
is
really
important
and
I
had
made
the
recommendation.
A
It
would
be
my
recommendation
and
I
would
be
seeking
a
motion
to
recommend
continuation
of
the
advisory
council
for
family
engagement,
with
an
amendment
to
nrs
385-610,
to
require
the
council
to
within
60
days
before
the
beginning
of
the
term
of
any
member
appointed
to
the
council
or
within
30
days.
After
such
a
position
becomes
vacant,
they
must
submit
notification
of
a
vacancy
to
the
appointing
authority,
either
the
superintendent
of
public
instruction
or
legislative
leadership.
C
C
You
didn't
mention
that
in
your
motion,
which
I
think
is
probably
a
good
thing,
because
I
thought
that
the
discussion
was
that
this
is
a
really
critically
important
activity
and
I
think
that
the
connection
with
the
legislature
having
legislative
members
actually
participate
and-
and
maybe
that's
a
challenge
for
leadership
to
find
a
member
that
is
willing
to
do
so.
C
But
I
agree
with
your
comment
that
this
is
a
critically
important
feature,
because
parental
involvement
is
one
of
the
contributing
factors
to
many
of
the
problems
that
we
see
in
education
today
so
or
the
lack
of
that
engagement.
C
A
Thank
you
senator
pickard,
and
yes,
that
was
intentionally
left
out.
I
think
legislature,
participation
and
oversight
is
always
critically
important.
Again,
we
can
make
recommendations
to
amend
the
statutes,
and
so
I
think
it's
always
important
that
we
participate
and
are
part
of
the
conversation
as
well.
So
yes,
I
will
take
that
as
a
motion.
Then
we
have
a
motion.
A
E
Thank
you.
I
certainly
agree
with
senator
peter
with
your
analysis
that
parental
involvement
is
quite
important.
The
one
thing-
and
I
don't
know
I
don't
want
to
amend
the
motion
or
anything
of
that
nation,
but
the
one
thing
I
want
to
put
on
record
is
that
we've
got
to
make
sure
that
any
discussion
about
parental
involvement
must
include
workforce,
workforce
development
as
well
as
employer
input,
because
we
are
in
a
down
here
anyway.
E
It's
a
24,
7
town
and
so
somebody's
at
the
blackjack
table
at
two
o'clock
in
the
morning,
and
those
somebodies
often
have
children
and
somebody's
at
the
blackjack
table
at
nine
o'clock
at
night
and
those
somebodies
probably
have
children,
and
I'm
saying
that
to
say
that
often
what
we
do
when
we
talk
about
parental
engagement
or
family
engagement,
it's
convenient
for
nine
to
five
but
inconvenient
for
those
who
work
either
swing
or
or
mid.
E
So
whatever
the
committee
does,
I
think
there
should
be
some
consideration
to
the
fact
that
they
probably
have
parents
that
work
for
a
living,
not
a
hobby,
and
we
have
to
make
sure
that
we're
accommodating
them,
if
not
accommodating
them.
Indeed,
than
accommodating
in
spirit
so
that
they
don't
get
castigated
because
they're
not
attending
a
school
function
or
they're
not
attending
a
meeting
and
the
reason
they're
not
attending
it
is
because
they're
working,
so
we
have
to
decide
what
we
want
to
do.
E
We
want
parents
to
work
to
provide
a
living
for
their
families,
or
are
we
going
to
castigate
them
and
push
them
out
on
social
services?
That's
those
are
my
comments
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
consider
that
and
keep
that
in
mind,
and
and
and
remember
that,
just
because
a
parent
is
not
involved
doesn't
mean
that
they
don't
care
many
times.
It
means
that
they
are
not
a
family
of
means
and
they've
got
to
work
to
make
sure
that
their
family
is
existing.
So
thank
you.
Vice
chair.
B
Yes,
can
you
remind
me,
with
the
nevada
department
of
education
actually
recommended
terminating
the
network
because
they're
already,
they
already
feel
they're
doing
that
with
their
blue
ribbon.
Commission.
A
I
believe
you're
on
the
the
next
agenda
item
assembly,
woman,
casama,
we're
on
number
seven,
the
advisory
council-
and
I
believe
you
might
be
talking
about
the
competency-based
education.
B
A
Sorry,
yes,
no
worries.
Okay
again,
I
have
the
motion
from
senator
pickard
and
I
have
a
second
from
vice
chair.
We
took
discussion
so
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye,
aye
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you
committee.
Now
we
will
move
on
to
number
eight,
which
is
the
competency-based
education
network.
Mr
margaret.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record
cesar
montgomery
committee
policy.
Analyst
next
is
the
composite
competency
based
education
network
network
was
established
in
2017
alongside
a
competency-based
education
pilot
program.
The
pilot
program
allows
schools
to
explore
the
use
of
competency-based
education
in
classrooms.
F
F
At
that
time,
representatives
of
the
of
the
nevada
department
of
education
recommended
terminating
the
network
since
the
superintendent's
blue
ribbon
commission
for
globally
prepared
nevada
and
the
relevant
nde
programs
are
currently
carrying
out
the
charge
of
the
network.
F
The
question
before
the
subcommittee
is
does
subcommittee
wish
to
recommend
continuation
or
termination
of
the
network
if
subcommittee
recommends
termination,
is
there
a
recommendation
for
consolidation
with
another
entity
or
a
recommendation
to
have
the
network's
duties
transferred
to
another
entity?
If
the
recommendation,
if
the
subcommittee
wishes
to
recommend
continuation
of
the
network,
does
the
subcommittee
want
to
recommend
any
changes
to
the
network
and
sharehargy?
I
believe
director
brian
camp
from
the
office
of
standards
and
instructional
support
from
nde
is
available
in
carson
city
to
discuss
the
network.
A
We've
reviewed
the
competency-based
education
or
get
our
last
committee
meeting
and
if
you
remember,
and
they've
talked
a
little
bit
about
that,
this
was
put
into
statute
and
the
network
was
created
just
for
the
purposes
of
creating
this
pilot
program
and
the
network
has
fulfilled
its
legislative
requirements
and
duties
and
they
will
be
put
and
created
the
pilot
program
and
they
will
be
producing
their
final
report
soon,
and
so
it
was
the
request
that
they
be
terminated,
but
the
functions
that
were
created
out
of
the
pilot
program
will
would
continue
under
the
oversight
of
the
blue
ribbon
commission.
A
I
we
do
have
director
brant
camp
here,
so
I'm
going
to
turn
to
assemblywoman
kasama.
I
know
you
had
a
question,
so
I
think
this
would
be
the
perfect
time
to
answer
well.
A
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
talked
to
a
couple
of
individuals
that
have
participated
and
maybe
tangentially
I
couldn't.
I
didn't
really
get
into
the
details
of
their
participation,
but
I
wanted
to
better
understand
what
the
network,
what
terminating
the
network,
would
look
like
what
it
would
do
to
the
broader
competency-based
education
effort.
My
understanding
from
those
conversations
is
that
the
blue
ribbon
commission
is
focusing
on
things
much
broader
than
competency-based
education,
that
this
would
become
a
a
small
subset
of
their
broader
mission,
and
so
I'm,
I'm
really
concerned.
C
Having
been
a
vocational
teacher
when
I
was
teaching,
and
my
entire
curriculum
was
based
on
competencies
that
had
to
be
achieved
in
order
to
progress
you
know,
and
when
we
were
talking
about
competency-based
education
in
the
2017
legislature,
I
think
that
across
the
different
bills
that
covered
it,
there
was
a
recognition
that
competency-based
education
could
work
in
a
lot
of
different
contexts,
and
so,
anyway,
the
result
of
the
conversations
were
just
that
you
know
we
haven't
really
done
much
with
this
network.
C
We've
established
the
pilot
programs,
which
some
weren't
really
undertaken
with
the
kind
of
zeal
that
I
think
we
anticipated,
and
so,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
the
pilot
programs
in
in
some
of
the
districts
were
successful
and
others
were
kind
of
underwhelming
I
so
I
I
didn't
get
the
sense
anyway,
and
certainly
after
the
presentation
we
got
in
the
last
hearing,
I
didn't
really
get
the
sense
that,
while
you
know
the
leadership
took
it
seriously,
it
just
didn't
seem
to
get
much
of
the
attention
that
maybe
it
should
have-
and
you
know,
competency-based
education
isn't-
is
more
than
what
it
used
to
be.
C
When
I
was
teaching
the
the
idea
really
comes
down
to.
What
can
we
do
to
allow
students
to
progress
at
their
pace
instead
of
pigeonholing
them
in
with
the
group
and
then
limiting
their
participation
because
they
either
get
bored
or
or
they
could
have
done
more?
Ultimately,
so
I'm
not
really
comfortable
with
the
idea
of
terminating
the
program
per
se.
C
What
I
think
we
personally,
what
I
think
we
ought
to
do
is
probably
continue
it
with
a
mandate
to
try
to
implement
the
pilot
program
in
a
more
substantive
way
at
least
try
to
do
more
with
what
we
had,
because
I
think
that
this
avenue
of
teaching
of
instruction
and
and
progression
is
critical.
I
I
don't
think
we
do
it
well
enough,
and
so
I
I'm
I'm
leaning
against
terminating
this.
A
Thank
you
senator
picker,
and
I
believe
we
do
have
director
brant
cap
here,
director,
bran
kim.
Can
you
walk
us
through
so
we're
setting
the
network
which
was
created
in
statute
to
create
this
pilot
program
and
then
send
back
a
report
right
so
by
terminating
the
network?
It's
not
terminating
the
pilot
programs.
The
pilot
programs
will
continue
to
exist
as
they
have
been
created.
A
B
B
Currently
we
are,
the
department
is
working
with
a
group
called
knowledge
works
to
expand
the
pilot
so
that
we
can
get
other
schools
involved
in
my
office.
Mary
holsclaw
is
one
of
her
jobs
as
the
education
program.
Professional
is
the
oversight
of
the
this
network,
but
now,
as
we're
expanding
out
any
of
the
schools
that
are
looking
at
other
innovative
ways
to
have
students
have
an
exploration
of
their
educational
experience.
The
pilots
will
continue.
B
Mary
holsclaw
through
my
office
will
continue
to
support
them
now,
probably
not
in
the
term
of
a
pilot,
so
that
we
can
continue
to
grow
that
as
of
today,
what
we
are
aware
of,
with
working
with
knowledge
works
that
there
are
at
least
six
other
districts
looking
at
either
schools
or
a
school
within
a
school
to
try
to
jump
into
this
program
which
we're
excited
about
to
have
that
expand.
B
B
So
that
would
you
know
that
would
be
the
other
piece
there's
nothing
to
for
them
as
far
as
a
fiscal
loss.
If
we
were
to
terminate
that
side,
it's
more
just
so
that
we
could
allow
our
group
that
all
those
members
of
the
pilot
are
currently
with
our
blue
ribbon
task
force
and
are
involved
constantly
with
communication
with
us
right
now
and
then,
as
we
bring
on
these,
hopefully
additional
schools,
we've
asked
for
them
to
join
us
as
well.
A
Thank
you,
director,
brent,
kemp
and
and
just
and
for
senator
picker,
and
so
like.
I
just
confirmed
just
based
on
my
conversations
I
had
had
leading
up
to
this
work
session,
that,
by
deleting
the
statute
that
deletes
the
network,
we're
not
deleting
the
statute
that
deletes
the
the
pilot
program,
those
would
still
exist.
It
was
just
the
statue
that
would
remain
if
left
in
ineffective
because
they
fulfilled
their
legislative
obligation,
which
was
to
provide
the
report
of
the
pilot
programs.
So
I'm
not
sure
if
that
you
have
any
other
follow-up
questions.
C
I
do
just
one,
and
that
is
my
understanding-
was
that
the
preliminary
we
did
not
get
a
final
report
that
covered
all
of
the
mandated
deliverables
from
the
original
bill,
and
so
that's
probably
part
of
my
concern
is
that
I
didn't
I
didn't.
I
had
the
sense
that
it
wasn't
actually
completed
and
so
terminating
before
completion
is
problematic.
Am
I
just
was
I
just
misinformed.
A
B
Apologies
chair
director
brown
camp
again
for
the
record.
The
the
report
from
the
committee
has
been
finalized
by
the
committee.
It
is
with
superintendent,
ebert
and
deputy
moore
for
their
final
review
to
submit
to
you.
So
it
is.
The
committee
has
signed
off
on
it.
They've
approved
it
in
their
meeting,
so
it
is
now
just
in
the
final
review
with
the
department.
C
All
right,
madam
chair,
if
I
might
just
jump
back
in
keith
pickard
for
the
record
that
I
just
I
think
it's
inappropriate
to
terminate
the
network
before
they
finalized
their
report.
If
we're
days
away,
maybe
it
won't
matter,
but
I
just
think
that
we
need
to
finish
the
project
we
need
to,
let
it
play
out
and
then,
if,
if
they
don't
have
anything
more
to
do,
there's
no
necessity
for
us
to
terminate
them
if
they're
complete.
C
I
I
would
suggest
that
we
maybe
table
this
until
that
report
comes
in.
We
can
verify
that
it's
met
all
of
the
requirements.
All
the
deliverables
have
been
completed
and
then
we
would
take
the
vote.
A
Thank
you
senator
picker,
and
I
appreciate
your
concerns
and
I
just
want
to
remind
you
that
our
work
sessions
are
just
recommendations,
so
they
won't
be
terminated
immediately.
So
our
recommendations
get
put
into
a
final
report
and
then
I
will
have
to
go
present
them
in
front
of
the
legislative
commission
that
who
then
has
to
approve
them
and
then,
if
they
are
approved,
they
come
back
as
a
bdr
during
the
2023
legislative
session.
So
if,
at
that
time
I
think
they
have
not
produced
their
final
report.
A
Oh
yeah,
approve
or
amend
the
legislative
commission
would
approve
or
amend
our
recommendations,
and
at
that
time
you
know
once
if
a
bdr
is
produced
and
we
bring
it
to
the
2023
legislative
session
and
they
haven't
produced
their
final
report.
That
bdr
does
not
need
to
move
forward,
but
if
they
have,
then
we've
already
started
the
process
of
again
cleaning
up
the
statutes
for
something
that's
fulfilled.
It's
legislative
duty
instead
of
waiting
two
years.
C
I
certainly
understand
that
that
that
impulse-
I
guess,
I'm
just
too
much
a
rule
follower.
If,
if
we
set
up
the
rules,
we
set
up
the
expectations
we
really
ought
to
follow
through,
but
anyway,
I'm
not
going
to
make
a
motion
to
table
something
that
wouldn't
be
appropriate,
but
anyway,
I've
said
enough.
Thank
you.
B
E
Yeah
and
I'm
just
going
to
say
if,
if
I
can
amend
the
motion,
if
we've
done
it,
no.
E
So
so
no,
the
only
other
thing
I
would
say
is
that,
while
they're
looking
into
all
of
this
in
2019,
we
passed
the
national
guard
youth
challenge
program
that
I
think
is
probably
another
option
or
another
way
to
make
sure
that
we're
doing
competence,
competency
based
teaching
or
instruction
so
just
to
make
sure
that
that's
included
in
the
mix
whatever
they
do.
Just.
A
A
Okay
and
now-
and
I
mean
there
isn't
the
reality-
is
I
mean
once
they
fulfill
their
legislative
duty?
There
is
no
further
requirements
of
the
network,
so
if
we
leave
them
in
statute,
nothing
nothing
happens.
This
will
create
more
work
for
future
for
future
chairs
of
the
interim
sunset
subcommittee.
A
But
okay,
I'm
going
to
go
to
assemblywomankuzama.
A
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
kasama
committee
members,
so
we
have
a
motion
to
terminate.
A
Those
opposed
hey,
okay,
we
have
committee
secretary,
we
have
all
those
in
favor,
with
the
exception
of
senator
pickard
in
the
form
of
an
a
motion,
carries
thank
you,
director,
bran
kemp,
for
being
here
and
again.
Thank
you
for
indulging
the
conversation
committee
members
again.
A
I
do
want
to
remind
everyone
that
we
are
just
making
recommendations
here
and
ultimately,
the
we
have
to
take
these
and
make
our
case
in
front
of
the
legislative
commission
who
has
the
ultimate
say
in
whether
they
approve
the
recommendations
that
came
out
of
our
committee
or
whether
they
want
to
amend
the
recommendations
and
again,
we've
seen
them
not
take
all
recommendations
before
in
the
past,
as
you've
heard
from
our
policy
analyst
and
so
and
if
those
that
they
do
take
still
have
to
come
before
the
2023
legislative
session.
A
F
The
committee
on
testing
for
intoxication
was
established
in
1983
to
certify
and
approve
testing
devices
to
determine
the
amount
of
alcohol
in
a
person's
blood
to
keep
a
list
of
such
approved
devices
and
certify
the
individuals
in
the
proper
use
of
such
device
of
such
devices.
In
1993,
the
legislator
amended
the
duties
of
the
committee
certified
devices
for
testing
a
person's
breath
to
determine
the
percent
by
weight
of
alcohol
in
a
person's
breath.
Today.
F
The
purpose
of
the
committee
is
to
certify
and
approve
breath
testing
devices
as
being
accurate
and
reliable
to
test
for
intoxication
to
keep
a
list
of
such
approved
devices
and
certify
individuals
in
the
proper
operation
of
such
devices.
The
committee
was
reviewed
by
sunset
subcommittee
for
the
first
time
at
the
march
30
2022
meeting
during
this
meeting.
Representatives
of
department
of
public
safety
stated
that
the
committee
has
met
not
more
than
one
or
two
times
per
year,
and
the
meeting
schedule
is
primarily
driven
by
the
need
to
approve
a
new
device.
F
During
the
review
of
the
committee,
representatives
of
dps
state
of
the
department
is
developing
recommendations
to
amend
nrs,
284
c
600
through
284
c
.640,
to
wreck
to
remove
requirements
which
are
no
longer
necessary
and
to
expand
the
role
of
the
committee
to
evaluate
other
types
of
impaired
driving
substance,
detection
technologies
and
techniques.
These
recommendations
have
been
submitted
to
the
subcommittee
and
are
attached
to
this
work
session
document.
As
attachment
a
the
question
before
the
subcommittee
is:
does
the
subcommittee
wish
to
recommend
continuation
or
termination
of
the
committee
if
the
subcommittee
recommends
termination?
F
Is
there
a
recommendation
for
consolidation
with
another
entity
or
a
recommendation
to
have
the
committee's
duties
transferred
to
another
entity?
If
the
subcommittee
wishes
to
recommend
continuing
the
committee,
does
the
subcommittee
want
to
recommend
any
changes
to
the
committee
chair,
haragi,
deputy
director,
brookman
and
administrator
davey
from
dps
are
available
on
zoom
to
discuss
the
committee?
Thank
you.
A
A
I
was
more
at
ease
after
reading
through
the
nrs
and
realizing
that
what
they
do
is
actually
just
make
recommendations
to
the
department
of
public
safety
so
and
they're
just
looking
to
again
expand
a
little
bit
from
making
recommendations
on
the
concentration
of
alcohol,
but
adding
in
other
impaired
substances,
and
so
I
do
have
a
question
on
just
that
language
and
deputy
director
br
bregman.
If
you
want
to
jump
in
and
answer
this
good,
the
adding
the
language
of
or
other
impairing
substances,
could
you
kind
of
walk
me
through?
A
B
I
am
going
to
turn
the
question
over
to
amy
davey,
who
is
my
expert
on
this,
but
you
know
we
are
dealing
with
poly
substance
abuse
now,
and
so
we
are
looking
for
technology
that
will
allow
us
to
test
for
poly
substances,
which
will
probably
just
tell
us
that
poly
substances
are
in
play.
It
may
not
even
tell
us.
B
Could
be
including
marijuana
and
other
drugs,
but
let
me
have
amy
davey
clarify
that
for
you,
because
she
is
definitely
my
expert
in
traffic
safety
good
morning.
This
is
amy
davey
from
the
office
of
traffic
safety.
To
specifically
answer
your
question,
what
we're
seeing
is,
yes,
the
the
scope
of
the
committee
has
been
focused
on
certifying
equipment
for
detection
of
alcohol
used
in
dui.
B
Specifically
in
the
conversation
that's
going
on
right
now
and
according
to
the
national
conference
of
state
legislatures,
24
states
have
statutes
authorizing
some
form
of
oral
fluid
specimen
use
other
terms
include
saliva
and
other
bodily
substances
in
dui
cases,
and
what
we're
seeing
in
use
in
other
states
right
now
is
oral.
Fluid
testing
devices
for
cannabis,
use.
A
Thank
you,
miss
davey
and
then
just
for
clarification.
I
know
I
had
this
question,
so
I'm
assuming,
I
hope,
other
members
had
it
too,
but
poly
substances
just
means
more
than
one
yes,
ma'am,
oh
okay,
thank
you,
and
just
and
and
with
the
language
change
I
just
I
just
want
to
make
sure.
A
I
don't
want
to
assume
anything
so
with
the
recommendations
that
you're
giving
for
the
changes
to
the
nrs,
it
would
be
again
deleting
some
language
that
is
no
longer
less
necessary,
but
then
adding
in
the
language
that
would
allow
you
to
make
recommendations
regarding
best
practices,
the
use
of
new
technologies
and
these
new
technologies
for
not
just
the
detecting
alcohol,
but
also
detecting
other
substances,
and
basically
this
statute
just
allows
you
to
give
recommendations
to
the
department
of
public
safety,
and
then
they
decide
whether
they
implement
your
recommendations.
Is
that
correct.
B
Yes,
that
is
correct.
Nevada
is
the
only
state
in
the
country
that
does
not
have
a
state
laboratory.
We
use
local,
a
number
of
local
laboratories
or
private
laboratories
under
contract.
Those
laboratories
have
different
practices
and
standards
for
testing.
B
So
the
committee
for
testing
on
testing
for
intoxication
has
really
been
used
to
you
know
to
sort
of
provide
that
oversight
role
and
what
we'd
like
to
see
is
that
they
also
be
allowed
to
make
recommendations
on
on
toxicological
testing
and
create
standards
for
testing
outside
of
just
alcohol
testing
and
dui.
B
But
you
are
correct.
It
is
weekly
advisory
study
and
and
recommendation
based
to
the
department
of
public
safety.
A
A
A
Okay,
thank
you
committee
members.
Well,
that
is
the
work
session
for
the
entities
that
we
reviewed,
but
we
still
have
a
few
items
to
take
action
on
under
the
work
session.
So
at
this
time
I'm
going
to
hand
it
over
to
our
policy
analyst
to
go
over
item
b
under
our
work
session
document.
Mr
malgadejo.
F
Thank
you,
chair
haruhi,
for
the
record
cesar
mcgrath
community
policy,
analyst
on
may
18th.
The
subcommittee
reviewed
an
update
on
the
board
of
the
board
of
homeopathic
medical
examiners.
F
The
discussion
between
the
subcommittee
members
and
representatives
of
the
board
included
a
review
of
the
board's
expenditures,
revenues
and
and
debt,
which
is
approximately
111
000
owed
to
the
office
of
the
attorney
general,
which
was
has
been
accruing
since
2004
representatives
of
the
board
indicated
that
the
board
is
making
monthly
payments
of
fifteen
hundred
dollars
to
the
oag.
F
In
addition,
the
board
reported
that
its
annual
revenue,
which
is
mainly
funded
by
issuing
licenses
and
certificate
and
certificates,
has
had
a
relevant
range
of
twenty
five
thousand
and
thirty
five
thousand
dollars
over
the
last
two
decades
before
adjourning.
The
meeting
subcommittee
members
noted
that
the
legislator
would
benefit
from
receiving
regular
updates
on
the
operations
of
the
board.
F
Madam
chair,
we
do
have
mr
charles
greene
secretary
treasurer
of
the
nevada
board
of
homeopathic
medical
examiners
here
in
las
vegas
with
us.
If
you
have
any
questions.
A
Thank
you,
mr
margaret
hall
committee
members,
I
believe
and
senator
pitt.
I
believe
this
was
pointed
out
by
you
at
our
last
meeting,
and
so,
if
you
have
want
to
turn
it
over
to
you
first
to
see
if
you
have
any
questions
or
if
you'd
like
to
make
the
motion
to
request
the
letter
to
the
board
that
they
report
back
to
the
subcommittee
during
the
2023-24
interim
regarding
the
board's
composition,
licensing
operations
and
the
status
of
its
debt
owed
to
the
oag.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I
appreciate
the
recognition.
This
is
one
thing
that
actually
senator
spearman
and
I
have
been
dealing
with
since
we
both
got
on
this
subcommittee
many
years
ago.
C
I
I
do
think
that
it's
important
to
ask
them
to
report
back
during
the
next
interim.
I
think
that
we
should
also
consider
not
necessarily
in
a
formal
letter,
but
at
least
in
the
record,
for
the
ag's
office
to
consider
is
that
I
I
think
that
some
of
their
billing
practices,
given
their
understanding
of
the
board's
makeup
their
finances.
C
C
And
so
I
would
suggest
that
we
also
and
maybe
include
in
the
letter
or
include
a
letter
to
the
oag,
to
consider
waiving
the
any
balance
that
exists
in
order
to
give
them
the
ability
to
make
use
of
the
limited
funds
that
they
have
coming
in
to
better
support
the
board,
and
so
that
wasn't
on
the
work
session
document.
If
it's
appropriate.
A
Thank
you
senator
pickard,
and
it
looks
like
that.
Request
has
been
made
before
and
it
was
we're.
Looking
we'll
get
you
the
information,
but
that
was
a
request
that
was
made
before
of
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
during
the
last
interim,
and
I
believe
there
was
certain
reasons
why
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
could
not
move
forward
with
granting
that.
But
we
will
get
the
information.
Our
policy
analyst
is
currently
working
on
it
to
distribute
it
to
you
and
to
the
committee
of
members
as
well,
but
looks.
C
Yeah
well,
and
we
should
try
it
until
it
works.
I
think,
but
I'm
I'm
fine
with
that.
A
Okay,
so
I
so
thank
you
senator
pickard
and
I
think
committee
members
is
there
any
questions
I
think
vice
chair
has
a
question
before
we
move
forward
advice,
chair.
E
Thank
you
and
I'd
like
to
thank
our
committee
council,
ms
ellen
o'grady,
for
getting
me
some
information,
one
of
the
things
that
I
was
concerned
with,
and
I
believe
what
I
read
is
it's
a
class
d
felony
for
anyone
to
practice,
homeopathic
or
any
other
type
of
health
or
healing
techniques.
Without
a
license.
I
don't.
E
I
don't
know
if
that
is
the
strongest
that
it
can
be,
but
one
of
the
things
I'd
really
like
to
see
is:
I
want
to
make
sure
that,
because,
because
this
is
expanding
and
the
term
homeopathic
has
taken
on
many
forms,
it's
it's
it's
almost
like
you
know
you,
you
have
the
golden
arches
and
then
somebody
wants
to
imitate.
E
It
has
purple
arches
right,
and
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
people
know
what
they're
getting,
and
so,
if
that
is
not
a
the
stiffest
penalty,
that
other
states
are
doing,
I'd
like
to
make
sure
that
we
look
at
what
is
the
stiffest,
and
how
can
we
in
addition
to
protecting
the
consumer
after
the
fact?
What
do
we
need
to
do
that
is
preventative
in
nature,
so
that
so
that
it
alerts
people
that
everyone
who
says
they
are
may
not
be,
and
the
risk
is
just
greater
than
cosmetic.
E
A
Thank
you
vice
chair
and
then
I
do
have
a
question
for
you,
mr
green.
Did
you
have
you
previously
had
the
conversations
with
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
regarding
waiving
the
ode
fees.
H
Again,
charles
green,
no,
I
have
not
remember
this
board
was
terminated
in
19
and
and
was
somewhat
a
skeleton
crew.
So,
for
a
long
time
there
was
nothing
done.
I
walked
into
quite
a
fiasco
here
and
trying
to
understand
what
was
what
and
I
audited
all
the
way.
I
I'm
an
accountant,
my
education,
so
I've
audited
it
back
all
the
way
to
2014
where
I
could
find
records
and
I'm
compiling
that
information.
H
Now
and
yes,
the
attorney
general's
office
has
we
have
applied
before,
but
this
is
a
new
board
and
a
new
day
and
the
government
felt
unnecessary
to
terminate
the
board
hire
for
or
promote.
Four
new
members
and
we'd,
like
we've,
got
a
and
I'm
out
fielding
other
physicians
to
try
to
bring
our
board
membership
up
to
six,
which
is
extremely
important
for
us
moving
forward.
H
H
I
haven't
requested
any
funds
at
all
which,
at
our
next
board
meeting
I'm
going
to
have
to
request
some
funds
to
to
to
pay
for
some
of
this
research,
but
in
looking
at
some
of
the
alternatives
that
the
board
was
up
against
as
well,
one
where
they
were
thinking
about
transferring
it
to
another
division,
was
the
cost
of
that
and
and
and
and
that
was
again
more
than.
C
H
Our
class
two
assistant,
the
recommendations,
were
over
forty
five
thousand
dollars
and
that's
again,
thirty
thousand
dollars
in
the
board
even
takes
in
part
of
the
problem
is
no
one's
out.
Promoting
this
board.
No
one's
out
talking
about
what
homeopathics
do
the
general
public
doesn't
have
a
clear
understanding.
What
even
homeopathics
are,
but
it's
a
medicine.
That's
been
practiced
for
a
system
of
medicine,
that's
been
practiced
for
200
years
and
we're
one
of
only
two
states,
the
united
states.
That
has
that.
H
So
I
think
we
we've
got
a
leg
up
on
the
future
here,
for
preventative
medicine
and
and-
and
I
want
to
be
somewhat
of
a
catalyst
to
move
that
opportunity
forward
for
the
citizens
of
nevada.
I've
been
in
nevada
50
years.
I
love
this
state.
I've
graduated
high
school
and
college
here.
I've
been
in
the
health
industry
50
years,
and
I
think
I
have
a
lot
to
offer
here,
but
nobody's
really
taken
the
ball
and
run
with
it
most.
H
The
physicians
that
have
been
in
charge
here,
working
their
practice,
they're,
not
I'm
a
ceo
of
four
different
companies.
Some
are
promoters
so,
but
I
think
the
most
important
thing
is
that
I
serve
my
constituents.
My
50
physicians
are
17
physicians
and
nature
and
aphs
and
has
right
now
to
service
them,
and
one
of
the
things
we
want
to
do
is
bring
on
some
computer
analytics
that
allow
them
to
do
a
better
job
as
a
homeopath
and
and
and
those
opportunities
are
out
there.
A
Thank
you,
mr
green
and
committee,
and
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
I
would
like
to
move
forward
with
sending
a
letter
to
the
board
requesting
that
they
report
back
to
the
subcommittee
during
the
next
legislative
interim
regarding
their
composition,
licensing
operations,
and
I
know
that
we
have
previously
said
the
status
of
its
debt
owed
to
the
oag.
But
because
again,
this
is
something
that
we
think
has
been
previously
tried
before.
A
What
I
would
like
for
you
to
do,
seeing
that
this
is
a
new
board,
is
again
reach
out
to
the
office
of
the
attorney
general.
So
I
don't
necessarily
think
that
we
should
send
a
letter
to
the
office
of
the
attorney
generals,
but
I
think
the
board
should
reach
out
to
the
office
of
the
attorney
generals
to
work
with
them
to
see
if
it
is
a
possibility
of
getting
any
of
the
fees
waived
and
then
report
back
at
the
next
legislative
interim.
H
Yeah,
thank
you
for
that
opportunity.
I'll,
certainly
compile
a
letter
and
talk
to
the
ag's
office
and
you
kind
of
go
over
the
history
with
them
and
where
we
are
and
kind
of
here
where
we
want
to
go,
and
hopefully
you
know
being
an
accountant.
I
try
to
be
fiscally
responsible
here,
so
we
certainly
can't
pay
our
bills
if
we're
stymied
with
debt
from
the
ag's
office.
So
that
would
be
if
I
could
have
a
clear
slate
moving
forward.
A
A
A
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record
sister
margaret
community
policy
analyst
during
the
2019-2020
interim,
the
subcommittee
reviewed
a
fraction
of
the
existing
professional
and
occupational
regulatory
bodies
as
part
of
that
review
included
in
inquiring
about
the
number
of
members
who
are
black,
indigenous
and
people
of
color
or
a
bypoc
to
continue
its
education
and
outreach
efforts.
F
After
the
final
meeting
of
the
2019-2020
interim,
the
subcommittee
voted
to
send
a
letter
to
certain
regulatory
bodies
encouraging
the
recruitment
of
bypoc
members
to
reflect
the
diversity
of
the
state.
This
interim,
the
members
of
subcommittee,
continue
their
inquiry
about
the
racial
or
ethnic
background
of
persons
who
are
appointed
appointed
to
nevada's
boards
commissions
or
other
similar
entities.
F
To
address
these
concerns,
the
subcommittee
may
consider
amending
chapter
232-a
of
nrs,
which
governs
appointments
by
the
by
the
governor
to
public
bodies
to
to
address
the
appointment
by
the
governor
to
certain
to
certain
public
bodies
to
reflect
the
demographics
of
this
state.
A
Thank
you,
mr
margaret
okay
committee
members.
It
would
be
my
recommendation
and
I'd
be
looking
for
a
motion
for
the
recommendation
to
amend
chapter
232a
of
nrs
to
declare
that
it's
a
public
policy
of
the
state
of
nevada
that
accept,
as
otherwise
required
by
law.
Persons
appointed
to
the
governor,
but
by
the
governor
to
certain
public
bodies
must,
to
the
extent
practical,
practicable,
reflect
the
diversity
of
the
state,
including
without
limitation,
the
age,
gender,
sexual,
ethnic
and
geographic
diversity
of
this
state
members.
Any
questions
advice
here.
E
Yeah
so
we
dealt
with
the
whole
alphabet's
there.
You
said
sexual
visits
that
include
sexual
identity
or
presentation,
oh
because
we've
got
without
limitation,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
that
may
be
implied.
But
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
include
that
as
well
because
of
soji
too.
A
A
C
Yes,
thank
you
just
a
question
for
mr
grady
as
well.
This
came
up
in
the
last
legislative
session
as
well
as
we
start
getting
into
race,
conscious
and,
and
you
know,
or
or
minority
conscious
decision
making
and
certain
constitutional
demands
or
limitations
on
things
like
quotas
and
the
like.
B
This
language
is
actually
based
on
another
statute,
nrs
281.002,
that
relates
to
the
same
public
policy
and
state
employment.
So
we
were
just
mirroring
that
language.
It
has
some,
you
know
to
the
extent
practicable
language
in
there,
so
we
I
think
it
it
should
be
fine
based
on
the
you
know,
there's
it's
not
making
it
a
requirement.
C
A
Thank
you
and
members
again
I'd
be
looking
for
a
motion
to
move
forward
with
the
recommendation
with
the
addition
of
vice
chair's
recommendation
of
adding
in
sexual
identity
as
well.
I
have
a
motion
by
vice
chair.
Do
I
have
a
second.
E
Thank
you
and
thank
you
senator
piglet
for
bringing
up
that
particular
observation,
and
I
just
I
want
to
say
that
you
know
supporting
this,
for
me
is
not
about
quota
supporting
this,
for
me
is
about
making
sure
that,
with
that
everyone's
voice
and
everyone's
observation,
their
experience
is
included
when
we're
making
policy
decisions,
because
when
they
are
not,
the
voices
that
are
missing
from
the
table
are
also
missing
from
the
policy,
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear
that
we're
not
talking
about
quotas-
and
I
know
that
was
something
that
was
banted
around.
E
You
know
back
in
the
70s
and
80s
and
maybe
a
little
bit
of
the
90s,
but
we're
not
talking
about
quotas,
we're
really
talking
about
making
sure
that
there
is
ample
space
for
at
the
table
for
every
person
who
is
paying
taxes,
because
what
we're
really
talking
about
here,
we're
talking
about
the
people
that
pay
our
salaries
and
we
cannot
include,
we
cannot
exclude
them.
So
it's
not
about
the
quotas,
it's
about
foot,
nevada's
49
by
poc
right
now,
and
it's
probably
even
more
than
that
after
20
20
census.
E
So
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
all
of
the
voices
there's
an
opportunity
for
all
of
the
voices,
and
I
know
one
of
the
things
that
was
said
back
in
the
60s
70s
and
80s.
When
we
were
talking
about
making
sure
everyone
has
a
seat
at
the
table
was
well.
May
we
probably
can't
find
them?
Yes,
you
can,
because
all
you
have
to
do
is
look
hard
enough,
look
wide
enough
and
they
are
there,
and
so
people
get
hired
not
because
of
a
particular
ethnicity,
a
race,
gender
identity.
E
They
don't
get
hired
because
of
that
they
get
hired
because
of
qualifications,
and
incidentally,
they
fall
under
one
of
those
categories.
But
if
we
don't
put
this
in
policy,
then
it's
always
easy
for
people,
the
escape
clause
for
people
who
don't
want
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion.
The
escape
escape
clause
for
them
is
that
well,
we
couldn't
find
anyone
and
it's
never
been
mandated.
So
we're
not
talking
about
quotas,
we're
talking
about
making
sure
that
the
table
is
expanded.
There
are
enough
seats
at
the
table
so
that
everyone's
life
experience
everyone's
perception.
A
A
F
During
this
interim,
the
subcommittee
members
reviewed
several
several
entities
and
discovered
that
several
boards
and
commissions
possessed
member
vacancies,
some
of
which
had
not
been
filled
in
some
time.
To
address
this
concern,
the
subcommittee
may
consider
amending
chapter
232-a
to
require
nevada's
board's
commissions
and
similar
entities
to
submit
to
the
governor
a
list
of
persons
qualified
for
membership
within
a
specif
specified
period
of
time
after
such
a
position
becomes
vacant.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
A
One
of
the
things
that
we've
consistently
heard
is
that
they
have
trouble
making
quorums
and
so
that
they
don't
meet
and
positions
go
unfilled
or
unappointed
right,
and
so
one
of
the
things
I
really
wanted
to
do
was
you
know,
put
the
onus
on
the
board
or
the
nct
to
notify
the
appointing
position
here,
the
governor's
office
of
a
vacancy
right
and
with
the
person
who
they
would
like
to
see,
appointed
and
and
and
so
instead
of
going
in
and
making
a
change
to
every
single
commission
and
every
single
board
and
every
single
entity.
A
B
A
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
record,
says
our
mogu
community
policy,
analyst
nevada,
revised
statute,
232
b
.210
sets
forth
the
makeup
of
the
sunset
subcommittee
and
establishes
the
requirements
of
the
subcommittee.
In
addition,
the
nrs
requires
subcommittee
to
meet
at
the
time
and
place
specified
by
the
call
of
the
chair
due
to
these
oh
and
the
subset,
and
the
statute
also
requires
that
the
chair
and
vice
chair
be
elected
at
the
first
meeting
of
the
subcommittee
due
to
these
requirements.
F
Lcb
staff
generally
works
with
the
the
chair
or
vice
chair
from
the
previous
legislative
interim.
If
available
to
schedule
the
first
meeting
of
the
interim,
as
well
as
to
call
the
meeting
to
order
in
the
past,
we've
had
to
work
we've,
the
staff
has
had
to
open
the
first
meeting
because
there
was
no
previous
chair
or
vice
chair
reappointed
to
this
subcommittee.
F
In
order
to
address
these
concerns,
the
subcommittee
may
consider
amending
nrs
232
b.210
to
require
the
chair
of
the
legislative
commission
to
appoint
the
chair
and
the
vice
chair
each
representing
a
different
house
of
the
legislature,
and
this
is
similar
to
other
interim
committees.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Thank
you,
mr
malaga,
and
I
think
for
the
efficiency
of
the
sunset
subcommittee
and
future
interims.
I
think
this
is
probably
the
best
way
to
go
again.
It
would
give
the
new
chair
of
the
sunset
subcommittee
time
before
the
first
meeting,
to
start
working
with
staff
so
that
the
committee
can
be
up
and
running
by
their
first
meeting.
Instead
of
waiting
for
a
chair
advisor
to
be
appointed.
A
To
require
the
chair
of
the
legislative
commission
to
appoint
the
chair,
and
vice
chair
each
representing
a
different
house
of
the
legislature
for
the
sunset
subcommittee.
I
have
a
motion
by
vice
chair.
Do
I
have
a
second?
I
have
a
second
by
assembly,
woman
kasama.
Do
I
have
any
discussion
on
the
motion
seeing
none
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
I
I
I.
A
All
those
opposed,
nay
motion
carries
unanimously.
Thank
you
committee
and
thank
you
committee
members.
That
was
our
last
work
session
for
this
interim.
So
thank
you
all
for
being
here
today.
Our
next
agenda
item
is
agenda.
Item
number
six,
mr
margaret,
our
subcommittee
policy
analyst
will
provide
a
presentation
on
the
responses
to
sunset
subcommittee
form
number
three
submitted
by
the
department
of
wildlife
and
the
state
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources,
mr
manuela,
when
you're
ready,
please
begin.
F
F
We
did
provide
a
table
of
all
of
these
various
nrs
requirements
during
the
january
26
meeting
this
table
has
been
uploaded
to
the
sunset
subcommittee
overview
page
and
that
this
this
provides
the
the
entire
all
the
all
the
regulatory
bodies
that
are
required
to
implement
such
a
program
and
to
submit
information
to
the
sunset
subcommittee
on
january,
26
2022,
the
sunset
subcommittee
selected
to
collect
certain
information
regarding
the
criminal
history
of
an
applicant
for
an
occupational
professional
license,
specifically
from
the
department
of
wildlife
and
the
state
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources
to
determine
whether
the
restrictions
imposed
by
these
agencies
are
appropriate.
F
In
the
document
that
was
provided
by
staff
for
today's
meetings,
it's
uploaded
into
our
meeting
meeting
material,
there's
a
small
table
that
provides
the
list
of
occupations
and
certifications
and
licensees
licenses
that
are
provided
by
the
department
of
wildlife
and
department
of
conservation,
natural
resources.
F
One
applicant
for
a
hunting
and
fishing
master
guide
was
disqualified
because
of
violations
concerning
operating
a
motor
vehicle
in
a
wilderness
area
and
five
hunting
and
phishing
sub-guide
applicants
were
disqualified,
one
for
not
completing
a
hunt
return
card.
One
applicant
was
disqualified
for
two
separate
cases,
including
a
conviction
of
criminal
trespass
in
another
state
and
a
hunting
and
hunting
a
mountain
lion.
Without
a
tag,
three
applicants
were
disqualified
for
the
use
of
a
trail,
a
trail
camera
during
prohibited
times.
F
The
sunset
subcommittee
form
number
three
also
asks
whether
information
on
the
licensure
process
and
disqualifying
crimes
appear
on
on
the
entity's
website.
Department
of
wildlife
reported
that
this
information
does
appear
on
their
website.
A
list
of
disqualifying
crimes
is
included
in
the
instruction
documents
for
each
of
this.
Their
specific
licenses
now
moving
on
to
the
state
department
of
conservation,
natural
resources,
this
department
reported
that
it
did
not
receive
any
positions
regarding
any
determination
on
an
applicant's
criminal
history.
F
The
occupations
regulated
by
the
department
include
well
driller
and
weather
modification
and
control.
In
addition,
the
department
has
received
zero
applications
for
a
license
or
permit
for
weather
modification
and
control
pursuant
to
chapter
544
of
the
nrs.
So
there
hasn't
been
any
any
applications
for
licensed
period
for
weld
drillers.
F
Details
pertaining
to
the
application
and
examination
process
for
obtaining
a
well
drillers
license
are
available
on
the
division
of
water
and
resources
website.
However,
it
does
not
include
a
list
of
disqualifying
crimes
according
to
the
department.
The
current
regulatory
structure
and
application
process
does
not
require
it
does
not
inquire
into
an
applicant's
criminal
history.
Therefore,
neither
a
list
of
disqualifying
crimes
nor
a
petition
process
has
been
developed,
as
as
there
is
currently
no
basis
to
deny
an
applicant
based
on
criminal
history
for
weather
modification
and
control.
F
Madam
chair,
in
this
report
from
staff,
I've
also
included.
F
These
reports
are
supposed
to
be
submitted
on
a
quarterly
basis,
and
these
reports
include
the
number
of
petitions
submitted
to
the
regulatory
body,
the
number
of
determinations
of
disqualification
made
by
the
regulatory
body.
The
reasons
for
such
determinations
and
any
other
information
requested
by
the
director
or
which
the
regulatory
body
determines
will
be
helpful.
F
Again.
These
questions
are
almost
exactly
the
same
questions
as
the
subcommittee
requests
of
the
regulatory
bodies
during
their
review.
So
it's
almost
like
there's
a
little
bit
of
redundancy
between
the
process
of
substance,
a
committee
does
to
review
the
regulatory
bodies
and
the
information
that's
reported
on
a
quarterly
basis.
Again
within
the
legislative
library.
We
do
have
reports
submitted
to
the
legislature
that
covered
the
period
july,
1
2019,
when
the
legislation
was
enacted
through
june
30
2021,
and
these
reports
are
included
in
attachment.
F
A
and
reports
submitted
to
the
legislature
that
cover
july
1
2021
through
may
16
2022.
These
reports
are
are
available
on
attachment
b.
Madam
chair,
that
provides
all
the
information.
This
report.
A
Thank
you,
mr
margaret
and
committee
members.
You
heard
from
mr
margaret
there's
a
there's
a
bit
of
duplication
and
the
reality
is
there's
a
quarterly
requirement
for
this
information
to
be
sent
to
the
legislature,
but
it's
not.
They
don't
send
it
right,
and
so
I
do
want
to
take
action
under
this
item,
because
I
think
here
at
the
sunset
subcommittee,
we
have
a
little
bit
more
of.
B
F
Think
about
I'm
sure
for
the
record
cesar
mcgregor
committee,
community
policy
analyst.
So
there
is
a
couple
entities
that
have
been
very
active:
southern
nevada
health
district
has
been
very
active
and
they
are
submitting
these
quarterly
reports
as
required,
and
so
is
the
department
of
agriculture
and
and
there's
been
additional
entities
that
have
submitted
this
report.
The
last
during
the
2021
calendar
year,
I
have
heard
from
certain
nc's
that
have
reported
they
just
weren't
aware
that
this
information
was
required.
F
F
Nothing
has
has
happened
with
this
information,
but
again
this
is
the
exact
same
information
that
they
report
is
the
exact
information
that
the
subcommittee
sunset
subcommittee
considers,
and
one
thing
to
consider
is
because
the
sunset
subcommittee
requested
dcnr
to
provide
this
information.
We
were
made
aware
of
that
that
the
well
drillers
there's
no
criminal,
there's
no
criminal
violations
that
impact
getting
a
license
by
well
drillers
and
then
so
just
to
confirm
the
chair's
statement.
A
And
my
I
would
add
to
that,
that
we
have
the
authority
to
take
action
too,
that
we
can
make
recommendations
based
on
the
information
we
receive
and
statutory
recommendations,
and
so,
like
I
mean
this,
is
putting
a
little
bit
more
work
on
future
sunset
subcommittees
and
sunsets
of
committee
staff.
But
I
think
there's
benefit
in
requiring
sunset
subcommittee
to
review
a
certain
amount
of,
and
mr
mangadejo
I'm
going
to
lean
on
you
for
this.
A
But
are
we
currently
required
to
review
a
certain
amount
of
entities
and
if,
if
not
I'd
like
to
put
that
in
in
the
motion
that,
where
that
future
sunset
subcommittees
are
required
to
review
a
minimum
of,
I
think
five
agencies,
if
that's
not
too
much
five
agencies
for
they're,
to
require
them
to
fill
out
form
number
three.
Do
you
know
if
we
currently
are
required
to
review
a
certain
number.
F
For
the
record,
cesar
margaret
community
policy
analyst,
I
do
not
believe
that
there
is
a
requirement
for
a
specific
requirement
for
the
sunset
community
review
certain
amount
entities,
and
I
don't
believe
the
legislation
also
specifies
how
often
we're
supposed
to
be
reviewing.
I
think,
at
the
beginning
of
the
interim,
you
decided
to
specifically
asked
this
information
from
the
department
of
wildlife
and
and
dcnr,
but
I
don't
believe,
there's
a
specific
requirement.
A
Thank
you,
mr
montgomery,
so
committee
again,
I
think
we
should
again
creating
more
work
for
future
sunset
subcommittees,
but
I
think
it's
important
that
this
committee,
that
we
make
a
motion
that
this
committee
review
them
at
every
subcommittee
at
every
interim,
maybe
add
that
into
statute
and
add
in
a
number
of
agencies
that
they
have
to
review
so
that
we
make
sure
just
like
with
the
board's
commission
entities
that
we're
getting
through
the
list
of
everyone
and
that,
if
they're
not
submitting
their
reports
like
they're
supposed
to
that
at
least
since
that
subcommittee
is
holding
them
accountable
and
reviewing
their
information
and
making
the
recommendations
to
the
legislative
commissions
for
any
statutory
changes.
A
B
A
And
I
think
that's
really
up
for
like
us
as
a
committee
to
decide,
do
we
want
to
leave
it?
Do
we
want
to
leave
the
the
not
quarterly
we'll
leave
the
quarterly
reports
in
there
that
they
have
to
proactively,
send
it
to
the
alleged
commission
and
maybe
reduce
the
number
or
do
we
want
to
transfer
the
responsibility
to
the
sunset
subcommittee
and
have
them
request
the
information?
I
think
that's
really
for
art.
B
E
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
say
overall
the
information
that
that
we
request
and
I
support
your
recommendation.
I
just
know
the
last
two
times
that
I've
participated
on
sunset
committee.
We
can
request
the
information
from
the
boards
and
the
commissions,
but
rarely
do
we
get
everyone
to
respond,
which
is
why
I
had
the
bill
last
time
to
put
teeth
into
it.
E
If
they
don't
respond,
then
the
governor
has
the
ability
to
freeze
their
funds,
and
so
they
can't
use
anything
because
the
information
that
we're
getting
is
important
information
and,
I
think,
sometimes,
even
though
the
financial
stability
of
the
board
or
the
commission,
the
board
especially
comes
from
the
members
or
from
the
licensees,
even
though
that
is
the
case.
If
they
do
something
that
is
outside
of
the
legal
boundaries
and
they
get
sued,
they
don't
sue
that
board.
E
So
if,
if
the
sunset
committee
requests
it,
there
probably
should
be
some
type
of
a
bdr
in
place
that
puts
teeth
in
it,
so
they
because
they're
they're,
they
should
be
be
submitting
it
when
we
request
it,
but
many
times-
and
I
was
I
was
horrified
last
time.
I
think
we
got
less
than
maybe
10
15
percent
of
the
boys
that
responded
and
they
just
kind
of
said.
Well,
we
don't
have
to.
Yes,
you
do.
E
Yes,
you
do
it's
the
it's,
the
state
board
of
what
and
you're
you're
you're
using
the
name
of
nevada,
and
so
unless
they
want
to
be
the
ones
that
fit
the
bill,
because
when
they
don't
do
the
right
thing,
it's
the
taxpayers
of
nevada.
That
are
on
the
line,
so
these
reports
are
very
important
and
whatever
we
need
to
do
to
put
teeth
in
them
to
make
sure
that
they
respond.
I
think
we
should
do
that
too.
C
C
In
fact,
my
idea
or
my
thought
is
that
we
should,
I
certainly
understand
we
don't
need
to
swap
staff
with
reports
that
are
largely
ignored.
I
think
that's
a
mistake.
I
think
reducing
the
numbers,
maybe
to
an
annual
report
would
be
appropriate,
but
I
certainly
don't
want
to
eliminate
the
requirement
for
a
report,
because
that
means
that
sunset
subcommittee,
staff
and
members
have
to
be
aware
of
everything
and
we're
a
citizen
legislature.
C
We
have
other
interests
and
and
requirements
on
our
time.
We're
not
going
to
be
paying
that
broad
attention
to
so
many
disparate
and
various
entities
and
and
their
reports.
So
a
lot
can
fall.
You
know
through
the
cracks
they
it
can
go
unnoticed
if
we
aren't
actively
looking
for
it.
C
However,
if
we
get
a
report
that
then,
as
we
look
at
it
because
it's
required
to
come
in,
we
can
you
know,
staff
can
alert
us
to
a
certain
obvious
problems
and
maybe
some
not
so
obvious
problems,
and
then
we
can,
as
a
subcommittee,
decide
whether
or
not
we
want
to
address
it.
But
if
we
leave
it
up
to
the
subcommittee
to
you
know,
do
all
of
the
investigation
on
our
own
initiative.
C
I
think
that
we're
putting
a
lot
of
stock
or
a
lot
of
faith
into
a
body
that
we
have
no
idea
who's
going
to
be
on
the
subcommittee.
C
I
think
that
we
should
maintain
the
requirements
for
the
reports
on
at
least
an
annual
basis
that
then
staff
can
call
through
and
help
the
committee
understand,
and
I
certainly
support
the
idea
that
a
an
administrative
body
any
in
fact,
whether
that
be
within
the
judiciary
or
the
executive
branch
needs
to
be
responsive
to
the
legislative
branch.
Ultimately,
we
represent
the
people
and
we
are
the
check
that
protects
them.
C
So,
if
we're
not
doing
an
adequate
job
through
either
our
own
busy
schedules,
and-
and
so
we
miss
things
or
you
know-
maybe
we're
not-
we
don't
have
people
that
are
driving
the
boat
that
are
really
as
engaged
as
our
current
leadership
is.
I
think
that
it
does
a
disservice
to
our
constituents
to
our
citizens.
C
So
I
I
would
think
that
I
would
certainly
support
senator
spearman's
notion
of
putting
teeth
in
the
reporting
requirements
and
holding
individuals
accountable
for
not
providing
that
as
opposed
to
just
the
state,
broadly
as
she
mentioned,
but
also.
I
think
we
should
maintain
a
reporting
requirement
of
at
least
an
annual
basis
so
that
we
are
less
likely
to
let
things
fall
through
the
cracks.
A
Thank
you,
senator
pickard,
and
no,
I
I
agree
with
assemblywoman
kasama's
thought
process
that
many
of
our
state
agencies
are
operating
with
such
a
high
vacancy,
and
unfortunately,
mr
I
mean
senator
pickard.
We
don't.
The
sunset
subcommittee
doesn't
get
the
reports
that
are
required
to
come
in
quarterly
those
don't
come
to
us
or
to
our
staff.
A
Those
are
sent
to
ledge
commission,
and
so
we
never
actually
get
to
see
those
and
they
don't
come
to
our
our
staff
either,
and
so
that's
why
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
and
future
sunset
subcommittees
had
the
authority
and
responsibility,
because
the
reality
is
in
its
first
year
of
implementation,
only
two
agencies,
so
we're
not
missing
out
on
anything
because
nobody's
nobody's
sending
them
in.
We
had
two
agencies
report
in
and
in
the
following
years.
I
think
it
was
four
agencies
in
the
last
two
years.
A
A
I
do
want
to
put
the
the
onus
on
future
sunset
subcommittees
to
be
proactive
and
request
this
information
and
get
it
and
review
it.
It's
the
job
we
were
elected
to
do
to
to
make
sure
that
we
are
performing
the
functions
of
the
committees
that
we
sit
on,
and
so
I
would
like
to
make.
A
And
so
I
would
like,
I
would
like
you
know,
to
make
a
change
so
that
the
onus
isn't
on
the
severely
understaffed
state
agencies
to
have
to
do
a
report
every
single
year
if
they
don't
need
to
and
if
it's
not
going
to
be
reviewed
or
by
anyone,
but
to
have
the
sunset
subcommittee.
Select
the
agencies
just
like
we
select
the
boards
and
commissions
that
we
want
to
review
so
that
we
get
through.
We
make
sure
that
we're
getting
through
the
full
list
of
everyone
put.
A
The
onus
on
future
sunset
subcommittees
to
request
these
forms
from
agencies
who
haven't
filled
them
out
before
and
review
them
and
make
recommendations
to
the
ledge
commission
and-
and
I
agree,
I
think
I
don't
think
we
have
the
time
right
now-
to
discuss
and
figure
out
what
that
enforcement
mechanism
is
going
to
be.
But
I
agree,
and
I
think
it's
something
that
we
need
to
look
at
and
bring
during
session
to
to
have
an
enforcement
mechanism
to
require
these
agencies
that
when
the
sunset
subcommittee
requests
the
information
that
they
provided
and
so
again
I'm.
A
C
Sure,
and-
and
I
agree
with
what
you
were
saying
in
terms
of
the
impetus
to
jump
back
in
and
to
request
the
the
the
the
responses
I
I
completely
agree,
but
as
a
subcommittee
of
the
legislative
commission,
it
may
be
simply
an
internal
thing
that
we
can
deal
with
to
make
sure
that
we
are
getting
those
reports.
C
I
recognize
that
often
subcommittees
are
populated
by
members
of
the
broader
committee,
and
that's
not
the
case
here,
but
I
I
just.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
putting
more
on
the
sunset
subcommittee's
plate,
then
they
can
manage.
We
talk
about
being
understaffed
in
certain
agencies.
I
would
imagine
that
if
we
expand
our
mission
significantly
to
now
be
reviewing
entities
or
agencies
that
we
haven't
historically
reviewed,
that
that's
going
to
put
more
pressure
on
an
already
overwhelmed
staff,
but
I
agree
with
the
impulse.
C
A
Now-
and
I
appreciate
that-
and
I
think
it's
going
to
be
for
for
future
sunset
subcommittee
members
to
decide
what
the
composition
of
reviews
looks
like
whether
I
think
I
think
the
sunset
subcommittee
has
always
reviewed
about
20
boards
and
commissions,
and
so
maybe
that
goes
down
to
15
boards
and
commissions
and
five
agencies
for
this
form
right.
We
last
interim
could
have
been
due
to
covered,
but
we
only
reviewed,
I
think,
about
10
10
agencies,
boards
and
commissions
and
the
other
sunset
subcommittee,
there's
20..
So
it's
always
at
the
discretion
of
that.
A
What
that
committee,
chair
and
vice
chair
are
willing
to
do,
and
so
I
think
again
we
shouldn't
discount
what
the
future
sunset
subcommittees
look
like,
and
I
think
we
do
a
very
good
job
at
reviewing
the
boards
commissions
and
agencies
that
come
before
us
and
selecting
them.
A
And
so
I
just
I
think
we
I
don't
think
that
we
can
leave
it
to
the
agencies
to
submit
a
form
because
they've
proven
to
not
do
it,
and
I
think
we
need
to
request
request
it
from
them
through
this
committee
and
then
take
action
as
a
for
enforcement.
If
they
don't
respond,
just
like,
we
would
with
a
board
if
they
don't
come
and
they
don't
come
and
present
in
front
of
us
when
requested.
C
B
A
review
of
each
board
and
commission
in
the
state
which
is
not
provided
for
in
the
constitution
or
established
by
executive
order.
So
that's
the
general
authority
of
the
sunset
subcommittee
and
then
there's
a
specific
statute
that
we're
talking
about
on
the
criminal
history
that
just
talks
about
a
general
review
of
each
professional
or
occupational
licensing,
board
and
regulatory
body,
and
that
has
the
meaning
that's
in
nrs
622.060
and
I
think
that's
just
the
title.
54
board.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
members
and
so
again,
I
would
like
to
restate
my
recommendation
and
I
appreciate
everyone.
You
know
participating
in
the
discussion
and
and
again
this
is
at
my
recommendation
after
seeing
through
this
committee,
what
we
has
been
coming
into
this
the
state
what
hasn't
been
coming
into
the
state
and
what
I
would
like
to
see
come
into
the
state
in
terms
of
reports.
I
think
this
is
an
important
issue.
A
I
think
we
all
agree
on
that,
and
so
I
would
like
for
us,
as
a
committee,
to
take
action
under
this
agenda
item
to
remove
the
requirement
for
the
regulatory
bodies
to
submit
a
quarterly
report
and
leave
the
requirement
in
so
this
is
already
a
requirement
of
the
sunset
subcommittee
leave
the
requirement
in
for
the
subcommittee
to
request
and
review
this
information
every
enti
interim
and
to
select
a
minimum
of
three
agencies
to
review
every
interim.
C
A
Okay,
we
have
senator
pickard
in
a
nay
motion,
carries.
Thank
you,
committee
members.
That
was
the
last
item
before
we
get
to
public
comment,
so
I
would
like
to
remind
everyone
that
I
will
start
with
those
present
here
in
las
vegas.
I
will
head
to
carson
city
and
then
check
the
telephone
lines.
A
A
B
E
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
echo
those
comments
and
also
extend
them
to
our
staff
who
work
diligently
behind
the
scenes.
Every
time
you
see,
the
camera
move,
somebody's
moving,
the
camera
and
somebody's
taking
notes.
Somebody
will
transcribe
the
notes,
so
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
them
and
to
all
the
members
of
this
committee.
E
A
Thank
you
vice
chair,
okay,
members,
okay.
Well,
I
do
just
want
to
take
a
moment
to
make
some
comments
as
well.
I
want
to
take
a
moment
to
thank
the
committee
members.
It's
been
an
honor
serving
as
your
chair
and
a
privilege
to
work.
Alongside
of
you,
as
we
do
the
important
work
that
we
were
assigned
to
do
of
this
committee.
It's
not
easy
reading
through
a
series
of
reports,
every
single
committee
meeting,
but
it's
I've
always
enjoyed
it.
A
I
like
the
inside
look
into
the
the
boards,
the
commissions
that
oversee
and
hire
things
that
are
so
important
to
our
state,
especially
our
occupational
licensing
boards
right.
They
are
the
ones
who
to
hire
and
and
govern
big
occupations
in
our
state
and
for
us
to
be
able
to
be
a
part
of
that.
I
think
it's
so
important
and
I
appreciate
your
thoughtful
suggestions
and
input
during
every
meeting.
I
echo
what
vice
chair
said.
You
know
these
discussions
can
get
heated,
but
that's
part
of
the
job
and
that's
what
we
do.
We
ask
questions.