[0:09] Good morning everyone we're

[0:10] gonna go ahead and call the

[0:12] joint interim standing Committee

[0:15] on revenue to order madam

[0:16] secretary would you please call

[0:16] the roll

[0:19] assembly member anderson for

[0:20] assembly member dasilva?

[0:24] assembly member Patchett for

[0:25] assembly member allant?

[0:30] assembly member mosca for

[0:30] assembly member wynn

[0:31] here

[0:36] assembly member cole for

[0:36] assembly memberber O'neal?

[0:42] vicechair Bacchus

[0:43] present

[0:46] senator donatete

[0:47] here

[0:50] Senator Ellison

[0:51] chairir neal

[0:54] Here

[0:59] OK so good morning everyone this

[1:00] is our6th

[1:03] meeting of the joint interim

[1:04] revenue onittee

[1:07] I wish it was our final but it's

[1:09] not we haven't we're going to do

[1:12] work session and not first but

[1:14] we do have another meeting. what

[1:14] is it October?

[1:17] on the cuz we're waiting for the

[1:21] cannabis study to come back

[1:23] and so we have an additional

[1:24] meeting that will happen in

[1:26] October because we wanted to see

[1:27] what the recommendations were

[1:29] coming from that cannabis study

[1:31] to see if there were any action

[1:32] items that we needed to do

[1:32] before session

[1:38] so with that we will move to

[1:40] agenda item number 2. I'd like

[1:44] to welcome the audience here any

[1:44] folks that are online

[1:47] and listening over the

[1:47] internet if you're in the room

[1:50] please mute your electronic

[1:50] devices

[1:54] we are going to hear several

[1:57] presentations today the first

[1:59] from Nevada Gaming Control Board

[2:00] and a representative from the

[2:02] Americanaming association on

[2:05] prediction markets operating in

[2:07] the United States, the gaming

[2:09] control board will provide a

[2:10] nevadaspecific

[2:14] focus so we can understand how

[2:16] prediction markets are impacting

[2:16] us innevada

[2:19] we then have representatives

[2:20] from Workforce connections

[2:23] who are going to talk about a

[2:24] very specific workforce

[2:26] correlation between workforce

[2:28] and foster youth and then we

[2:30] have our fiscal staff that is

[2:31] going to present an overview on

[2:34] Nevada's property taxes and

[2:36] provide an update on revenue

[2:37] collections

[2:40] it's super important to have

[2:42] that conversation because

[2:43] property tax has been a standing

[2:44] issue

[2:47] on whether or not we can fix the

[2:50] system or change it but we

[2:51] need to have a overall viewpoint

[2:54] and really that particular

[2:55] presentation is bringing back

[2:57] data that we had discussed I

[3:00] believe in 2020

[3:00] or

[3:02] 2122

[3:05] and so we were bringing it back

[3:07] pushing it back to the top so

[3:09] folks could see how we had done

[3:11] prior analysis on all different

[3:15] types of solutions and then

[3:17] bring those back forward to be

[3:20] present of mind for folks that

[3:21] are thinking about how to deal

[3:22] with the issue.

[3:24] and so with that

[3:28] we will open up for public

[3:30] comment I'll move to agenda item

[3:32] number3 and I will open the

[3:33] meeting for public comment is

[3:34] there anyone in Las Vegas for

[3:35] public comment?

[3:51] Good morning chairneal and

[3:52] members of the committee my name

[3:55] is Leemccallier I'm the

[3:57] executive director of the Nevada

[3:58] chapter of the American Academy

[4:01] of Pediatrics my primary goal

[4:02] today is to urge you to advance

[4:05] item B7 revising Nevada's tax on

[4:07] other tobacco products. I'd also

[4:09] urge this committee to go

[4:11] further and raise Nevada's

[4:13] cigarette tax itself. The

[4:14] academy's tobacco policy draws

[4:16] on the USsurgeon general's

[4:17] finding that price increases

[4:18] from

[4:20] excise taxes prevent youth

[4:22] initiation. Young people are 2

[4:25] to3 times more price

[4:27] sensitive than adults. cigarette

[4:30] use among teens has declined but

[4:31] e cigarettes, cigars and hookahs

[4:33] have not, which is exactly what

[4:34] your OTP proposal addresses

[4:37] that same evidence applies just

[4:39] as strongly to cigarettes and

[4:41] the two rates need to rise

[4:43] together otherwise kids simply

[4:44] switch to whichever product is

[4:44] cheaper.

[4:47] that's the ask I most want you

[4:50] to act on today the written

[4:52] testimony we submitted late

[4:53] yesterday goes considerably

[4:55] further long enough that I'd

[4:57] recommend reading it on a screen

[4:59] rather than printing it. I used

[5:01] that space to make a case I

[5:04] don't often get to make in HHs

[5:05] and education committee rooms

[5:07] advocates like me usually hear

[5:08] that our ideas are right but

[5:11] Nevada can't fund them. this is

[5:12] one of the few rooms where that

[5:13] funding question is actually

[5:14] yours to answer

[5:17] Our letter tries to show why

[5:19] investing in kids now costs far

[5:20] less than the alternative later.

[5:23] thank you for your time and your

[5:24] work this interim on behalf of

[5:26] Nevada's children and the

[5:26] pediatricians who care for them.

[5:32] Good morning Alexander Marks

[5:33] with the Nevada State Education

[5:35] association revenue isn't only

[5:37] what we collect it's what we

[5:38] choose not to collect.ack in May

[5:40] NSEA raised concerns about the

[5:41] cumulative impact of Nevada's

[5:42] tax giveaways on our ability to

[5:44] adequately fund our schools

[5:45] while districts are cutting

[5:47] staff services opportunities the

[5:48] state continues to give away

[5:50] revenue to large corporations.

[5:51] Nevada's given hundreds of

[5:53] millions of dollars in public

[5:54] support to professional sports

[5:55] and data centers which are

[5:56] perhaps the most egregious

[5:57] example of this misplaced

[5:59] priority we've set schools over

[6:00] stadiums schools over studios

[6:00] and

[6:01] now schools over servers

[6:03] we're not against the economic

[6:04] development but the best

[6:06] longterm economic development as

[6:08] a strategy that is a top tier

[6:09] public education system and a

[6:12] well prepared workforce for far

[6:12] too long Nevada's called

[6:14] corporate subsidies investments

[6:15] while public education is called

[6:16] spending when billion dollar

[6:18] industries come asking for money

[6:19] we're told it's an investment

[6:21] when educators urge the

[6:22] legislature and governor to

[6:23] seriously pass the plan we're

[6:24] told to be realistic. We

[6:25] constantly hear about what

[6:27] Nevada can't afford but somehow

[6:28] when billionaires and data

[6:30] center developers or Hollywood

[6:30] comes to Carson City the

[6:31] conversation conversation

[6:33] changes from how will we pay for

[6:35] it to how much do you need just

[6:36] last week the raiders are

[6:39] beneficiaries already of750

[6:40] million dollars in public

[6:41] funding and they're now asking

[6:42] for another75 million to upgrade

[6:44] a six yearold stadiumext summer

[6:46] Johnisher's A's are going to tap

[6:47] into their public financing

[6:49] after three failed attempts to

[6:50] expand the Hollywood handout a

[6:53] very unsuccessful special

[6:54] session goed has prefiled a

[6:56] BDR for the twentyseth session.

[6:57] data centers received nearly

[7:00] $238 million in tax breaks over

[7:00] the last few years nearly a

[7:01] quarter billion dollars

[7:03] Nevada chose not to

[7:06] collect.ervers stadiums studios

[7:07] there always seems to be another

[7:08] subsidy and another reason

[7:09] Nevada should give away our

[7:11] revenue but when it comes to

[7:12] adequately funding our schools

[7:13] suddenly the money's not there.

[7:15] Meanwhile Nevada remains4,000

[7:16] dollars behind the national

[7:18] average with the largest class

[7:20] sizes in the country we are most

[7:22] generous to those who need us

[7:23] the least our educators are not

[7:25] getting 20 year abatements the

[7:26] para not filling up her car, not

[7:28] the custodian buying groceries

[7:29] and not the teacher paying rent.

[7:30] The commission on school funding

[7:31] has already given us a plan to

[7:31] fully

[7:33] fund our schools so when it

[7:35] comes to revenue Nevada can't

[7:36] continue to be more generous to

[7:38] sports teams and server farms

[7:39] and the nevadans who teach our

[7:41] kids drive their buses, prepare

[7:42] their meals and keep our schools

[7:43] running seriously pass the plan

[7:51] madam Chairridaley Nevada State

[7:52] Education association the voice

[7:55] of Nevada educators for125 years

[7:57] when NSCA appeared before

[7:58] this committee back in January

[8:00] we urged you to advance the work

[8:01] of the commission on school

[8:03] funding modernizing the state's

[8:04] sales tax to include digital

[8:06] products is a small but

[8:08] important part of that plan.

[8:10] Last session NScA testified in

[8:12] support of AB453 because Nevada

[8:15] sales tax has not kept pace with

[8:17] our changing economy. Nevadda's

[8:18] increasingly purchased digital

[8:20] products eroding the sales tax

[8:21] base designed around physical

[8:23] goods. Senator Neal has been

[8:25] raising this issue since at

[8:27] least 2019, the commission on

[8:28] school funding followed suit and

[8:30] recommended capturing digital

[8:33] sales in their plan.addly the

[8:35] state has failed to actstead of

[8:36] seriously addressing revenue

[8:38] last session the state passed an

[8:41] education budget with only a $2

[8:43] per pupil increase. This left

[8:44] underfunded school districts

[8:46] this year with severe budget

[8:47] deficits staffing reductions,

[8:48] service

[8:51] cuts and even school closures.

[8:53] Nevada cannot build a worldclass

[8:54] public education system with an

[8:55] anemic revenue structure that

[8:57] increasingly fails to capture

[8:58] economic activity

[9:00] the commission on school funding

[9:02] gave Nevada a roadmap among the

[9:03] commission's revenue proposals

[9:05] modernizing the sales tax base

[9:07] is probably the lowest hanging

[9:09] fruit this committee can now

[9:11] take a small but important step

[9:13] forward.upport modernizing

[9:14] Nevada's tax base to generate

[9:16] sustainable revenue seriously

[9:17] pass the plan thank you.

[9:23] Cherneel members of the

[9:24] committee thank you for the

[9:25] opportunity to provide this

[9:27] public comment today my name

[9:29] ishannon Bilbra Axelrod and I am

[9:30] the policy and external affairs

[9:31] director for the childrenldren's

[9:32] cabinet.

[9:34] as nevada considers a longterm

[9:36] fiscal future we urge

[9:38] policymakers to explore and

[9:40] implement sustainable new

[9:41] revenue sources that will allow

[9:43] our state to make meaningful

[9:45] investments in children families

[9:47] and communities. Research

[9:48] consistently shows that

[9:51] investing in early childhood is

[9:52] one of the smartest economic

[9:52] investments a state can make

[9:56] Nobel rize winning economist

[9:58] James James Heckman found that

[9:59] high quality birth to five

[10:02] programs can generate an annual

[10:03] revenue on investment of

[10:06] approximately13% through

[10:08] improved education, health,

[10:09] employment and social outcomes.

[10:13] this need in nevada is

[10:16] significant.62% of Nevada's

[10:17] children underage5 live in

[10:20] households where all available

[10:22] parents are working, yet our

[10:27] state faces a66p66% gap between

[10:29] the supply of licensed childcare

[10:31] and potential demand. The

[10:34] estimate of economic loss from

[10:36] Nevada's childcare shortage is

[10:39] between4.2 billion and6.2

[10:40] billion over the next decade.

[10:44] childcare shortage is a problem

[10:45] in Nevada but we know that

[10:47] investing in early childcare

[10:50] early learning home visiting and

[10:51] family support services help

[10:53] children arrive at school ready

[10:55] to learn ready to succeed and

[10:57] enable parents to participate in

[10:59] the workforce these investments

[11:01] strengthen families today and

[11:03] buildnevada's future workforce

[11:05] at the same time we recognize

[11:08] that children don't just thrive

[11:09] basically on access to early

[11:10] childhood programs families

[11:13] also need affordable housing,

[11:15] healthcare foods care food

[11:17] security and behavioral health

[11:19] supports when parents struggle

[11:22] to meet basic needs children

[11:23] experience those impacts as

[11:25] well. this is not an either or

[11:27] conversationnevada needs a

[11:29] revenue system that is adequate

[11:32] sustainable and capable of

[11:33] supporting both a comprehensive

[11:35] early childhood system and the

[11:37] broader economic security

[11:39] programs that help families

[11:40] remain stable and resilient.

[11:43] we encourage the committee to

[11:45] pursume new revenue solutions

[11:47] that reflect the scale of

[11:49] Nevada's needs and the

[11:50] opportunity that comes from

[11:51] investing in our youngest

[11:53] children and families thank you

[11:54] so much for your time and your

[11:54] work.

[11:58] good morning chair and members

[11:59] of the committee my name is

[12:01] Cassie Charles here on behalf of

[12:03] asme the American Federation of

[12:04] State County and municipal

[12:05] Employees are hardworking state

[12:07] workers. first and foremost

[12:09] Aapsme supports the ongoing

[12:10] conversations in this committee

[12:11] regarding progressive revenue

[12:13] measures. Nevada's long past due

[12:14] for a tax structure that

[12:16] prioritizes family and public

[12:18] services over corporations when

[12:20] revenues don't meet expectations

[12:21] asks me workers who have

[12:22] dedicated their lives to public

[12:23] services are the first to be

[12:25] furloughed the first to be asked

[12:26] to make their dollar a stretch

[12:26] and the first to service

[12:29] our community members with less

[12:31] at Asme we are very much of the

[12:33] mindset that more water makes

[12:35] allba all boats float and assumi

[12:37] members this year have been

[12:39] asked to pay more for their

[12:41] healthcare they are seeing their

[12:43] per contribution rates go up and

[12:44] they've been left with

[12:45] bargaining agreements that have

[12:47] not been funded. we know that

[12:49] when you support public services

[12:50] you're supporting asking workers

[12:52] and we're supporting A workers

[12:52] you're supporting public

[12:54] services thank you so much for

[12:55] the work of this committee and

[12:56] we look forward to working

[12:56] together.

[13:01] Hi my name's Andrew Cclark. I'm

[13:03] the policy manager of

[13:05] Battleborne Progress we champion

[13:07] policies that provide

[13:09] everynevadan with a fair

[13:10] opportunity to succeed. We

[13:12] believe that that success starts

[13:14] at the state budget and that's

[13:15] why we're proud to house the

[13:16] Nevada Revenue coalition. Our

[13:18] state budget represents a quilt

[13:20] of competing needs patched

[13:22] together accessible healthcare,

[13:24] education from early childhood

[13:26] through adolescence on to higher

[13:28] education and jobs that pay fair

[13:29] wages to do everything from

[13:31] build Ccip projects provide

[13:32] social services and yes fight

[13:33] fires

[13:35] at the heart of this

[13:37] conversation is who pays and

[13:38] what they get in return.

[13:40] According to the institute on

[13:41] Taxationconomic policies

[13:44] landndmark study who pays it's

[13:46] Nevada families who pay. We are

[13:47] the fifth most regressive tax

[13:49] code in the entire country. Now

[13:50] we pay this cost through

[13:52] provider storages longer wait

[13:54] times at the hospital in an

[13:55] education system that is too

[13:57] often balanced on both teachers

[13:59] and students alike.tween a

[14:01] captain depreciating property

[14:02] tax system that shows a lack of

[14:04] appreciation for our communities

[14:06] and a definition of sales tax

[14:07] which is not kept pace with

[14:08] hownevadans live

[14:10] or spend. this committee has had

[14:13] the tenacity this interim to

[14:14] lead on these issueshead of

[14:18] the202017 legislative session,

[14:19] Nevada faces great challenges.

[14:20] the federal government has

[14:21] rethought its role in funding

[14:24] state government with $9.5

[14:25] billion in cuts coming down the

[14:27] pike over the next decade that

[14:29] leaves you all to have very

[14:30] tough choices ahead.

[14:33] furloughs and programmatic cuts

[14:36] have proven to be a permanent

[14:38] problem in a temporary solution.

[14:40] both calamity comes opportunity.

[14:42] today's agenda represents that

[14:43] opportunity to provide a tax

[14:45] code that is both uniform and

[14:47] equal in how we raise revenue

[14:48] and in turn the services that we

[14:50] providegether we can rem

[14:52] reimagine a state budget that

[14:53] works for everybody. Thank

[14:54] youchairneal and members of this

[14:55] committee for your work this

[14:57] interim for creating a fairer

[14:58] and more sustainable tax code.

[14:58] thank you.

[15:06] Hello my name is Nicole Chione

[15:07] and I manage the Nevada tobacco

[15:09] Control and Smokefree coalition.

[15:11] I'm here today to encourage this

[15:12] committee to continue its work

[15:13] on increasing Nevada's tobacco

[15:16] tax. first it first and foremost

[15:17] this is a public health

[15:18] initiative raising the price of

[15:20] tobacco remains one of the most

[15:21] effective tools we have to

[15:23] prevent young people from ever

[15:24] starting and to encourage

[15:26] current users to quit. The

[15:27] proposal presented to this

[15:29] committee in July increasing the

[15:30] cigarette tax by dollar75 cents

[15:31] per pack and bringing other

[15:33] tobacco products into tax parity

[15:34] is project

[15:36] ed to prevent approximately4,000

[15:38] Nevadicates from starting to

[15:39] smoke helped more than11,000

[15:41] adults quit and prevent

[15:44] nearly3900 premature deaths but

[15:45] there is also a significant

[15:47] fiscal benefit to the state. The

[15:48] proposal is projected to

[15:50] generate approximately66 million

[15:53] dollars in new annual revenue

[15:55] about51 million from cigarettes

[15:57] and14.6 million from parity for

[15:59] other tobacco products those

[16:01] projections already account for

[16:02] declining consumption and tax

[16:03] avoidance. We know from Nevada

[16:06] ' s own experience that reducing

[16:07] tobacco use and generating

[16:09] meaningful revenue are not

[16:11] mutually exclusive. after the

[16:12] state's last cigarette tax

[16:15] increase in 2015, annual tobacco

[16:16] tax revenue grew from

[16:17] approximately117 million dollars

[16:19] that year to more than156

[16:22] million dollars in 2025. The

[16:23] benefits extend beyond direct

[16:24] revenue

[16:26] The modeling projects more than

[16:28] $208 million in longterm

[16:29] healthcare savings including

[16:31] savings to medicaid and

[16:33] reductions of costs associated

[16:35] with cancer, cardiovascular

[16:37] diseases and smoking affected

[16:39] pregnancies and births. Nevada

[16:40] has an opportunity to enact a

[16:42] policy that prevents disease,

[16:43] saves lives, reduces future

[16:45] healthcare costs and provides

[16:48] significant new state revenue. I

[16:49] respectfully urge this committee

[16:51] to take up the tobacco tax

[16:52] proposal and continue the work

[16:53] necessary to move it forward in

[16:54] the 2027 legisl

[16:56] ative session thank you for your

[16:56] time and consideration.

[17:02] Good morning Chaneal and members

[17:03] of the committee I'm hector

[17:05] Arola policy fellow with the

[17:06] Nevada Environmental Justice

[17:07] Coalition and on behalf of our

[17:10] coalition we stand strong to

[17:11] support equitable tax reform

[17:12] that ensures funding for

[17:14] critical state services and

[17:16] ensures corporations finally pay

[17:18] their fair share in Nevada. for

[17:19] far too long working families

[17:20] have shouldered the burden while

[17:22] big businesses have not been

[17:24] held to the same standards we

[17:25] believe that when industries

[17:26] contribute fairly we can invest

[17:28] directly in making life easier,

[17:29] safer and more affordable for

[17:30] all Nevadans.

[17:32] due to recent federal decisions,

[17:35] Nevada significantly receives

[17:36] less federal funds in addition

[17:38] to our lack of state income tax

[17:39] revenue that gap leaves us with

[17:41] fewer sources to provide much

[17:42] needed services

[17:44] so now more than ever it falls

[17:46] on this body to identify ways to

[17:47] fill this budget shortfall and

[17:50] to to relieve the escalating

[17:52] affordability crisis to many

[17:53] to many Nevada families that

[17:55] have endured for the last few

[17:57] years we want to be very clear

[17:58] we do not support increasing

[17:59] regressive taxes and fees that

[18:02] fall on everydaynevadans and

[18:04] increase the cost of livingstead

[18:05] we urge you to focus on

[18:06] corporate and industrial taxes

[18:07] to carry a fairer load.

[18:09] Here's what that fair revenue

[18:11] can do for our state expand

[18:13] cooling hours cooling station

[18:15] center hours and station

[18:16] medicals emergency staff at the

[18:18] centers plan a drought

[18:21] tolerance shade tree canopy

[18:22] across our urban heat island

[18:24] neighborhoods improve air

[18:25] quality by replacing fossil fuel

[18:28] fossil fuel powered buses with

[18:29] zero emission electric

[18:30] alternatives likeevV buses and

[18:32] light rail redesign our roads

[18:34] and transit infrastructure to

[18:35] improve tracks traffic flow

[18:37] and make our streets safer and

[18:38] accessible and safe

[18:42] expand home weization and energy

[18:44] efficiency programs to provide

[18:45] relief to renters and homeowners

[18:47] with high energy burdens that

[18:49] means lowering utility bills for

[18:50] families and making our

[18:52] communities more resilient to

[18:54] extreme weather. these practices

[18:57] are practical life changing

[18:58] investments that address the

[18:59] real needs in every corner of

[19:01] our state Chair Neal and

[19:02] committee members we ask you to

[19:04] stand with working Nevadans and

[19:06] work towards innovative solution

[19:08] past tax reforms that are fair

[19:09] forward thinking and focused

[19:11] on the people who make Nevada

[19:12] strong. thank you for your time

[19:13] and to your service to the

[19:14] people of our state.

[19:20] Good morning chairneal and

[19:21] members of the committee my name

[19:23] is medina Youusovfzai and I

[19:24] serve as policy coordinator in

[19:26] South Asian organizer with

[19:27] oneapPI in Nevada, a grassroots

[19:29] nonprofit dedicated to advancing

[19:31] the civic participation of

[19:32] Asianer native Hawaiian and

[19:34] Pacific Islander communities

[19:35] across nevada. thank you for

[19:37] taking on this reexamination of

[19:38] our revenue streams this work

[19:40] matters directly to the families

[19:41] that we serve.c according to

[19:44] ITEPs who pays study, nevada has

[19:45] the fifth most regressive tax

[19:46] code in the country working

[19:47] families including the small

[19:48] business own

[19:50] ers and service workers in our

[19:51] community have carried more of

[19:52] that burden than they should.

[19:55] without new revenue 265,000

[19:57] Nevadans stand to lose snap

[19:59] access and14,000 could lose

[20:01] healthcare coverage. we are

[20:02] already seeing the strain

[20:04] locally our elders and limited

[20:05] English proficient neighbors are

[20:07] often the first to feel losses

[20:08] like these because they have the

[20:10] least room to absorb them. we

[20:11] also see this in the cost of

[20:13] raising a family here childcare

[20:14] innevada now costs more than

[20:16] college and programs like prek

[20:18] and headadart face a funding gap

[20:20] of over a billion dollars for

[20:21] many of our families raising the

[20:22] first generation to grow up in

[20:25] the va school system that gaphas

[20:26] whether a child gets the early

[20:28] support they need. We asked the

[20:29] committee to pursue revenue

[20:31] solutions that modernize our tax

[20:32] code and move us away from over

[20:34] reliance on regressive taxes,

[20:35] investing in public service,

[20:37] healthcare and child care is an

[20:38] investment in all of us. thank

[20:39] you for your time.

[20:45] Good morning Chairneal and

[20:46] members of the committee my name

[20:48] is Ronnie Young. I represent the

[20:50] IBW in Las Vegas, Nevada and I

[20:51] also speak on behalf of all the

[20:52] IBW within the state of Nevada

[20:53] in this moment

[20:55] and I just wanted to say thank

[20:56] you for all the work you're

[20:57] doing and the ongoing

[20:58] conversations chairneal that

[20:59] we've had regarding the data

[21:03] center tax incentives it

[21:05] is our stance that being good

[21:08] stewards of the state with in

[21:09] regards to economic

[21:11] development, environmental

[21:13] consciousness and and work and

[21:15] worker opportunities they're not

[21:17] mutually exclusive it is our

[21:20] stance that we feel that we can

[21:21] con we can ensure that

[21:22] ratepayers are not subsidizing

[21:25] cor po ration s being good

[21:28] stewards of water and the earth

[21:29] and provide good paying union

[21:31] jobs throughout the entire state

[21:33] of Nevada with data centers I

[21:35] think we just need to work

[21:36] collectively do it right which

[21:38] we I think we already are a good

[21:39] start and I know that there's a

[21:40] long road ahead and I appreciate

[21:41] the conversations that are

[21:43] already being had you know these

[21:46] are I could personally attest to

[21:47] someone that's built a data

[21:49] center here in Nevada before

[21:50] I came in this role that these

[21:51] are some of the safest cleanest

[21:55] best paying jobs a

[21:56] construction worker can work for

[21:58] that that gives them a longevity

[21:59] that is not usually seen in

[22:01] their industry but there are

[22:03] post construction opportunities

[22:06] that are I think a little

[22:07] lost in the in the noise and I

[22:09] think that they need to be

[22:10] highlighted a little bit more

[22:12] there is good paying post

[22:13] construction jobs depending on

[22:15] the scale of the data centers

[22:17] and while this these tax

[22:19] incentives have been in place

[22:20] for a long time we're not

[22:21] advocating for an increase in

[22:22] them. we just we

[22:24] asking that they stay the same

[22:26] and if and if we can make them

[22:28] into something that incentivizes

[22:29] the good actors to come to the

[22:31] state of Nevada I think it could

[22:33] be a wonderful win for everybody

[22:34] so thank you for your time and

[22:35] look forward to working with

[22:36] everyone in the future.

[22:43] so we will go to public comment

[22:44] in carson

[22:49] Good morning chairirneal and

[22:51] members of the committee my name

[22:53] is lisaafferetta, I am the

[22:55] executive director of the

[22:58] children's advocacy alliance a

[23:01] nonprofit nonpartisan statewide

[23:02] advocacy organization for

[23:03] children and families in our

[23:05] state and I'm here to talk

[23:07] briefly about what new revenue

[23:09] would mean for nevada's children

[23:11] you've already heard a little

[23:13] bit about childcare as many

[23:15] of you know after theOvid funds

[23:16] were finished up the

[23:20] eligibility for the childcare

[23:21] subsidy was reduced in nevada

[23:26] from85% to41% of the state

[23:28] median income we are currently

[23:31] serving around6000 children and

[23:32] families with that money and

[23:35] that represents fewer than10% of

[23:38] the eligible families we are

[23:40] working on a plan to create a

[23:42] statef funded childcare

[23:44] investment fund and just to

[23:46] double the number of children

[23:46] being served and bring it up

[23:51] to possibly close to 20% we

[23:53] would be looking at150 million

[23:55] dollars per year or300 million

[23:57] over the biennium so new

[23:59] revenues are critical to be able

[24:02] to serve these families who so

[24:04] much need this service and

[24:06] support in terms of childcare

[24:07] so they can go to work and

[24:10] provide a decent living for

[24:13] their families in the area of

[24:15] children's health we passed or

[24:16] the legislature passed last

[24:16] session SB16

[24:20] 5 which creates a behavioral

[24:22] health and wellness practitioner

[24:24] license. this is a new license

[24:26] of healthcare provider that can

[24:28] help do early interventions and

[24:29] supports for children with

[24:31] mental and behavioral health

[24:33] needs before they get to the

[24:35] crisis point to fully implement

[24:37] this bill which was funded last

[24:39] session we need to make sure our

[24:41] licensing boards have the staff

[24:43] that they need to process these

[24:45] new license applications as well

[24:46] as support thenevada healthalth

[24:47] Authority and

[24:50] their ability to credential

[24:53] providers and then also support

[24:55] uhmCOs in their contracting with

[24:58] providers we are still hearing

[24:59] from families that they're

[25:00] having difficulty getting the

[25:02] appointments and the services

[25:03] that they need and we need a

[25:05] little bit of infrastructure

[25:07] support to make that a reality

[25:09] and finally in child welfare

[25:12] we s we spend most of our money

[25:15] in terms of care foster care

[25:16] and interventions later on in

[25:17] the process

[25:20] we need to invest more in

[25:22] prevention and early investments

[25:24] in supporting families so they

[25:26] don't become system involved so

[25:28] they aren't dealing with crisis

[25:30] situations and this is another

[25:32] place where new revenue that is

[25:35] sustained and reliable will make

[25:36] a significant difference for

[25:39] Nevada families so we very much

[25:40] support the work you have been

[25:42] doing and looking at finding

[25:44] ways to create sustainable

[25:46] reliable funding investments for

[25:47] the children of Nevada

[25:49] and we support your work thank

[25:50] you very much

[25:55] thank you for that so we will go

[25:56] to the phone lines

[26:03] if you would like to provide

[26:05] public comment, please press

[26:06] star 9 to take your place in the

[26:08] queue. Again if you wish to

[26:10] provide public comment please

[26:12] press 9 to take your place in

[26:13] the queue.

[26:29] Hello can you hear

[26:33] Yes, go ahead

[26:38] great thank you. hi my name is

[26:41] Elizabeth Breeassper I

[26:43] live600 feet from the Keystone

[26:44] datataenter that they're

[26:45] building in Reno, Nevada

[26:47] was not

[26:48] notified about this

[26:51] ahead of time and then they

[26:53] started building the data center

[26:57] and now my income as a rental

[27:00] will be significantly changed my

[27:02] property value has already

[27:03] decreased over $200,000

[27:08] my taxes now for my motherinlaw

[27:10] quarters is more are more each

[27:11] quarter than it is for my main

[27:12] house

[27:14] and things just aren't making

[27:15] sense. I urge

[27:19] this committee to please

[27:21] reevaluate the tax abatements

[27:23] and income incentives granted to

[27:26] heavy load low job created data

[27:27] centers

[27:31] I request require a strict

[27:32] fiscal and resource impact

[27:35] studies being addressed on how

[27:36] the grid updates and water

[27:38] consumptions affect local

[27:40] taxpayers before any new

[27:40] developments are green lit.

[27:43] and they also ask to ensure that

[27:46] the financial burdens of

[27:48] powering these massive complexes

[27:49] f fall squarely on the

[27:51] developers and corporate

[27:52] entities profiting from them and

[27:55] not from the working families as

[27:56] it is you have the majority of

[27:58] people in my area unable to pay

[28:00] for their power bills we're

[28:02] talking about adding more fees

[28:05] to our Nvy bill when my neighbor

[28:08] on one side can't even stay

[28:08] inside their home during the

[28:09] heat

[28:12] so for the last three months

[28:13] they haven't been inside their

[28:15] home during the day and have to

[28:17] go down to the river to find

[28:18] some reprieve from the heat

[28:22] on the other side of my house

[28:23] my neighbor can't afford the

[28:25] heat and is burning pallets

[28:28] because we don't have we're all

[28:30] on oil heat and to have oil

[28:32] delivered has gotten so

[28:34] expensive it is unbelievable. I

[28:36] just ask that the committee to

[28:37] please see

[28:38] the

[28:40] humans that live inside this

[28:42] state as more than just

[28:45] stakeholders but as

[28:47] individuals that need freshwa

[28:48] and need

[28:50] the ability to afford our

[28:52] utilities as well as our homes

[28:53] thank you so much for your time

[28:54] today.

[28:57] Thank you next

[29:09] thank you chairneal on the

[29:10] committee my name is Shelby

[29:12] Swchwartz S W A R T Z and I am

[29:13] the executive director of

[29:15] Battleburnne Progress. I'm also

[29:16] the mom of two young boys and

[29:17] like so many Nevada families I

[29:18] think about our state budget in

[29:21] very practical terms Can my kids

[29:22] get the healthcare that they

[29:23] need? Will their schools have

[29:24] enough teachers and support

[29:25] staff can families afford

[29:27] childcare housing, groceries and

[29:28] utilities while still getting

[29:28] ahead.

[29:31] our state budget helps determine

[29:32] the answers to those questions

[29:34] it funds healthcare schools for

[29:36] early childhood through higher

[29:37] education good paying jobs

[29:39] infrastructure and so much more

[29:40] but we cannot talk about what

[29:41] our state funds without also

[29:43] talking about who is being asked

[29:44] to pay for it. Nevada has the

[29:46] fifth most aggressive tax system

[29:48] in the country. the lowest

[29:49] income Nevadans pay nearly12% of

[29:50] their income in state and local

[29:52] taxes while the wealthiest1% pay

[29:52] less than3%.

[29:55] that means the families with the

[29:57] least are paying proportionally

[29:59] more than4 times what the

[30:00] wealthiest Nevadans pay and

[30:02] families feel the consequences

[30:03] of that imbalance every single

[30:05] day we see it in healthcare

[30:06] providers shortages and longer

[30:07] waits for care we see it in

[30:08] overcrowded classrooms

[30:10] overworked educators and support

[30:12] staff stretched far too thin. We

[30:13] see it whenevernevadans are

[30:14] forced to make tough choices to

[30:15] do more with less.

[30:17] but our government has choices

[30:19] to make too as governorlombardo

[30:21] himself said recently Nevada's

[30:22] limited resources can only do so

[30:24] much, which begs the question

[30:25] why are our resources so

[30:26] limited?

[30:28] I appreciate that senator Neal

[30:29] has led this committee as it has

[30:31] spent the interim seriously

[30:32] examining the that exact

[30:34] challenge and looking for

[30:35] solutions underder your

[30:36] leadership we have an

[30:37] opportunity to build something

[30:39] better as a mom I want my kids

[30:40] to grow up in anevada where

[30:41] grade schools quality

[30:43] healthcare, safe communities and

[30:44] economic opportunity are things

[30:46] that every family can count on

[30:47] Nothing would disappear whenever

[30:48] the budget gets tight.

[30:51] that requires a tax system where

[30:52] everyone pays their fair share

[30:53] or the people with the lease are

[30:55] no longer asked to shoulder the

[30:56] greatest burden and where our

[30:58] revenue actually grows alongside

[30:59] our state thank you toyerneal

[31:01] and the members of the committee

[31:02] for the work you have done this

[31:03] interim and for continuing the

[31:04] conversation about how we build

[31:05] anevada that works for everybody

[31:06] and not just the select few

[31:11] Thank you.ext coer

[31:26] good morning members of interim

[31:28] revenue Committee for the record

[31:29] my name is Eddie Apoliser with

[31:32] ristrategies and pmI I am

[31:35] calling in today to address the

[31:37] work session item E7 as the

[31:38] committee reviews

[31:40] the tax structure on tobacco

[31:41] products in the state of Nevada.

[31:46] we're calling to encourage the

[31:48] committee to review what many

[31:49] other states across the country

[31:52] have done which is including a

[31:54] modifiedri tobacco product the

[31:56] MRTP designation as authorized

[31:57] by theood andug Administration.

[32:01] these products have gone through

[32:02] significant and timely

[32:06] scientific analysis and received

[32:08] MRTP designations because of

[32:10] their demonstration of moving

[32:12] consumers off of extremely

[32:14] dangerous cigarettes that harms

[32:15] the individual in public health

[32:19] onto a less harmful option and

[32:21] still allows the consumer to

[32:22] partake in their consumption of

[32:22] nicotine.

[32:25] we encourage the committee to

[32:27] review MRTP discounts as many

[32:29] other states have done when

[32:31] you're analyzing the tax code as

[32:34] a possible BDr we're hopeful

[32:37] that in engaging in an MRTP

[32:39] discount the method would

[32:41] incentivize the use of these

[32:43] harm reduction tobacco products

[32:44] into the state of Nevada which

[32:46] are currently not being sold

[32:48] because it incentivizes

[32:51] consumers to purchase and use

[32:52] cigarettes instead of instead of

[32:53] these MRTP

[32:55] products thank you for your time

[32:57] and attention to this we look

[32:58] forward to working with you in

[32:59] the future.

[33:04] Thank you next caller

[33:17] co her with the last three

[33:20] digits 270 please press6 to

[33:20] unmute yourself.

[33:28] Good morning toneal and members

[33:29] of the committee this is

[33:30] Christian Solomon and I serve as

[33:33] the western director of rise we

[33:34] are a Gen Z advocacy

[33:36] organization serving Nevada's

[33:38] college students and youth. I'm

[33:39] speaking in support of the

[33:41] ongoing efforts to reexamine our

[33:43] tax code and modernize revenue

[33:45] which will be crucial to shaping

[33:46] the future for our young

[33:47] Nevadans that we can all be

[33:49] proud of. We envision a future

[33:51] where our state is in a much

[33:52] better position to fund higher

[33:54] education and prevent the burden

[33:55] of tuition rate increases

[33:57] from falling on the backs of

[33:59] students and working families

[34:01] where a state education can

[34:02] remain affordable for young

[34:04] Nevadans and the faculty who run

[34:06] it can maintain decent pay and

[34:08] benefits we want a future where

[34:10] students can have reprieve

[34:11] knowing that critical services

[34:13] like regional transportation are

[34:15] robust and can get them to their

[34:17] jobs their classes and their

[34:19] recreation on time and

[34:21] unencumbered where transit is

[34:22] accessible to all corners of our

[34:24] state and to everyone on the

[34:24] socioeconomic scale

[34:27] despite the national

[34:29] affordability crisis that we're

[34:31] seeing today young people are

[34:32] not looking to Washington for

[34:33] the sweeping changes needed to

[34:36] make this future a reality we're

[34:36] looking to our neighbors in

[34:39] front of us hearing his body in

[34:41] a municipal bodies across our

[34:42] state to formulate sustainable

[34:44] revenue plans that will turn our

[34:44] goals into a reality

[34:47] thank you so much to chairir

[34:49] Neal and vice chairirbacchus for

[34:50] your cons consistent leadership

[34:52] on revenue and to the rest of

[34:53] the committee for your work have

[34:54] a good one.

[35:00] Thank you.ext caller.

[35:13] you hear me

[35:15] yes go ahead

[35:17] thank you

[35:20] good morning chairneal and

[35:21] members of the committee my name

[35:23] is Naomijoy and I'm a resident

[35:25] of henderson, Nevada in89011.

[35:28] I'm calling in today just to

[35:30] voice my support in repealing

[35:32] Nevada's data center tax

[35:34] abatements our economy, food

[35:35] prices, housing costs and

[35:36] healthcare have all increased

[35:37] exponentially especially over

[35:40] the last18 months and Nevadans

[35:42] have suffered the consequences.

[35:43] We need money invested in the

[35:45] people and not big tech. I do

[35:46] applaudsenator Neal and

[35:48] encourage each of you to support

[35:50] her efforts and any of that rain

[35:51] and dennisstators

[35:53] surveillance tack and any other

[35:54] services or products that

[35:55] support their operations they

[35:56] are a threat to our economy

[35:58] our environment and our First

[36:00] Amendment rights. We deserve to

[36:02] not merely survive but to thrive

[36:05] here as Nevadans and we're tired

[36:06] of waiting for our leadership to

[36:07] put the people first. please

[36:09] remember us in your legislative

[36:10] decisions moving forward thank

[36:10] you for your work thus far.

[36:15] Thank you.ext caller

[36:25] Good morning members of the

[36:27] committee and chair Senator Neal

[36:28] for the record my name is Julie

[36:28] Kemp.

[36:30] I wanted to show my support for

[36:32] abDR which would end tax

[36:32] abatements for data centers

[36:35] as a community we are fighting

[36:36] all over the valley against data

[36:37] centers being built in our

[36:39] backyard for many reasons

[36:40] including the quality of our

[36:42] air, water, the preservation of

[36:44] our water and energy and the pre

[36:45] prevention of mass surveillance

[36:46] and the prevention of unwanted

[36:48] Ai takeover which is looking

[36:49] more and more like a threat to

[36:51] human existence. we do not want

[36:53] data centers and our local

[36:54] government officials were

[36:55] elected to represent the people

[36:56] and what we want for our

[36:58] communities as this is how

[36:59] democracy is supposed to work

[37:01] not the other way around with

[37:02] that, I thank you for looking to

[37:02] the public for

[37:05] our thoughts and opinions on tax

[37:06] abatements for data centers by

[37:08] removing tax abatements for data

[37:09] centers you accomplish two

[37:11] objectives first you remove a

[37:13] large incentive from these large

[37:14] corporations who are clamoring

[37:15] to build in our communities and

[37:17] protected government land.

[37:19] Second, you make space for other

[37:20] businesses to come in who

[37:22] contribute positively to our

[37:24] economy by creating meaningful

[37:25] long lasting jobs and are better

[37:26] for our environment and

[37:28] humanity. It gives me hope to

[37:29] think about a future in Nevada

[37:31] where we foster a sense of

[37:32] community and sustainability to

[37:32] the growth of small

[37:35] businesses who supply good

[37:36] paying jobs products and

[37:37] services to our local

[37:39] communities somewherewhere along

[37:40] the way the corporate takeover

[37:42] of our entire economy has

[37:44] rendered us reliant on companies

[37:45] who care more about their bottom

[37:46] line in shareholders than the

[37:48] members of our communities who

[37:49] work there we need to start

[37:51] putting Nevadans first not

[37:52] corporations and most definitely

[37:54] not data centers I look forward

[37:56] to the day when I can spend my

[37:57] money locally where the money

[37:59] stays here in Nevada supporting

[38:00] local businesses their employees

[38:02] and their families as it stands

[38:02] a barely shop in

[38:05] personsa more. I mostly purchase

[38:07] online from small independent

[38:08] sellers everywhere you go here

[38:10] in Las Vegas and henderson it's

[38:11] difficult to find an

[38:13] independently owned business for

[38:14] necessary household products or

[38:15] a restaurant with good quality

[38:16] ingredients and homemade

[38:18] recipes. I refuse to eat at

[38:20] corporate restaurants or shops

[38:21] at large corporate stores who

[38:22] don't pay their employees a

[38:24] living wage or don't even have

[38:25] safe or equitable work

[38:27] environments more so I think

[38:28] it's high time that we as a

[38:30] community and a country curb our

[38:31] support for corporations and

[38:32] their shareholders we need to

[38:33] take

[38:36] back our control of local of our

[38:37] local economy and as they say

[38:38] keep it local thank you for your

[38:39] time

[38:45] BPS is at our last caller?

[38:49] Yesir we have no additional

[38:50] callers on the line.

[38:51] thank you for that

[38:52] all right

[38:55] thank you everyone for calling

[38:57] in for public comment we will

[39:00] now move to agenda item number4

[39:05] members this is approval of the

[39:07] minutes from May13,2026

[39:09] hopefully you guys have had a

[39:12] chance to review them I will

[39:13] entertain a motion to approve

[39:17] the May13,2026 meeting minutes

[39:19] so moved so have a first from

[39:23] bu yearbacus second from Senator

[39:26] Deatete all those in favor say

[39:26] aye

[39:29] any opposed say nay

[39:34] seeing no opposition the motion

[39:36] passes thank you the approval

[39:37] of the minutes

[39:41] has been approved. We will now

[39:43] move to agenda item number5

[39:45] which is the overview and

[39:48] discussion of prediction markets

[39:50] we will havereyor

[39:53] vice president of government

[39:55] affairs government relations for

[39:57] the American Gaming association

[40:00] to present first and then we

[40:01] will have thenevada gaming

[40:02] control board go after

[40:06] Hi Mister York are you ready?

[40:10] yes ma'am I am chairneal

[40:11] vicechair backc is and members

[40:13] of the committee my name is

[40:14] Trace York and I thank you for

[40:17] the opportunity to testify today

[40:18] on behalf of the American Gaming

[40:19] Association and I'm very pleased

[40:21] to also testify with my

[40:23] friend Chairman Dreitzer so I

[40:27] have a very short but but fairly

[40:28] all encompassing PowerPoint

[40:29] presentation that I'm going to

[40:32] share my screen with for

[40:33] the committee so give me one

[40:34] second

[40:37] I hope everyone can see this. I

[40:38] think there might be a a second

[40:40] or two delays so forgive me on

[40:43] that but I'll start off by

[40:44] just kind of stating the obvious

[40:46] that that Chairman Drreitzer

[40:48] and I and those in the room know

[40:49] which is sports betting on

[40:51] prediction markets like alci and

[40:54] Poly market makes a mockery of

[40:55] congressional intent they

[40:57] strip Americans of important

[40:58] consumer protections and they're

[41:00] costing states a fortune and

[41:02] lost state tax revenue.

[41:03] thankfully Nevada is fighting

[41:04] back

[41:06] and going after these bad actors

[41:07] head on

[41:17] So to begin I'd like to give a

[41:20] brief overview of the AGA who

[41:22] our members are and the impact

[41:24] that the legal regulated gaming

[41:26] industry has which no state

[41:27] knows better than the state of

[41:29] Nevada. The AGA represents

[41:30] commercial and tribal casinos

[41:33] gaming manufacturers state

[41:35] regulated sports books and

[41:36] technology and payment providers

[41:38] many of which are located within

[41:39] the state of Nevada.

[41:42] the gaming industry has an

[41:44] economic impact of nearly330

[41:46] billion dollars nationwide

[41:48] supports1.8 million jobs and

[41:51] generates over52 billion dollars

[41:52] in state tax and tribal revenue

[41:52] share.

[41:55] the legal gaming industry in the

[41:56] United States is one of the most

[41:58] highly regulated in the country

[42:01] with over8,400 state and tribal

[42:03] gaming regulators overseeing

[42:05] operations this stands in stark

[42:06] contrast to how prediction

[42:08] markets are quote unquote

[42:09] regulated by a small federal

[42:12] agency with only600 employees

[42:13] questionable enforcement

[42:15] capability and only one

[42:16] commissioner when they are

[42:18] supposed to be5 which I'll get

[42:18] to a little bit more shortly.

[42:23] for an overview of where gaming

[42:25] is legally right now in 2026

[42:27] this map shows you that almost

[42:29] every state in the country has

[42:31] some form of legal gaming

[42:32] whether it's casino gaming

[42:34] tribal gaming sports betting

[42:37] online casino etc. only a few

[42:39] decades ago legal gaming was

[42:40] restricted to just Nevada and

[42:42] then later to New Jersey but

[42:43] that's clearly no longer the

[42:44] case

[42:46] Furthermore, the supreme court

[42:49] overturned PaSA in 2018 and gave

[42:50] the states the right to

[42:52] determine whether or not to

[42:53] legalize sports betting. This

[42:55] map shows you that over 40

[42:57] jurisdictions have chosen to do

[42:59] so over the last eight years.

[43:01] This is one of the fastest rates

[43:02] of public policy adoption

[43:04] throughout the country in any

[43:04] format in recent memory.

[43:08] Moreover,32 states have

[43:10] legalized online sports betting

[43:12] which gets to the heart of the

[43:13] issue with socalled prediction

[43:14] markets also offering sports

[43:16] gambling but doing so outside of

[43:18] the state and tribal frameworks

[43:18] that have been created

[43:21] if a state wants to legalize

[43:23] online sports betting each

[43:24] individual state creates the

[43:25] laws and regulations that govern

[43:27] those operations if a state

[43:29] decides it's not the right time

[43:31] or they may never do so that is

[43:32] also the state's prerogative. P

[43:33] prediction markets are

[43:35] attempting to throw that state

[43:37] regulated system and the state's

[43:39] ability to decide overall out

[43:40] the window and in front of an

[43:41] oncoming semi.

[43:45] so what are sports event

[43:46] contracts which has become the

[43:47] focal point of so much

[43:49] litigation and debate over the

[43:51] last year and a half or so let's

[43:53] be clear on one thing

[43:55] socalled sports event contracts

[43:56] are nothing but sports betting.

[43:58] A customer puts money on a

[44:00] sports outcome and gets paid if

[44:01] they are correct. that's a

[44:03] sports bet. there is no economic

[44:05] consequence from combining the

[44:07] outcome of a March madness game

[44:08] and a New York Yankees game.

[44:09] that is a sports betting parley

[44:12] when they were originally

[44:13] created event contracts were

[44:15] structured as a derivatives

[44:17] contract that pays a person

[44:18] based on a specified event or

[44:19] occurrence such as a

[44:21] macroeconomic indicator

[44:23] generally used for hedging

[44:25] purposes. They are ostensibly

[44:27] regulated as I mentioned earlier

[44:28] by the federaleral Commodities

[44:30] Futures Trading Commission or or

[44:33] the CFTC which bizarrely allows

[44:35] designated contract markets such

[44:37] as prediction markets to self

[44:39] certify that the contracts that

[44:40] they are offering to the public

[44:43] don't violate the commodities

[44:45] exchange Act or CFTc

[44:47] regulations. I'll say that again

[44:50] thecFTc allows prediction market

[44:52] platforms to self certify their

[44:55] own contracts in markets that

[44:56] they're offering to the public

[44:59] that they don't violate the CEA

[45:01] or CFTC regulations. CFTc

[45:04] regulations which by the way

[45:05] prohibit event contracts on

[45:07] things such as war,

[45:09] assassination, gaming or any

[45:10] activity that is

[45:12] unlawful under state or federal

[45:12] law

[45:15] the commodities exchange Act was

[45:17] updated in 2010 during the

[45:19] debate over the Dodd-rank

[45:22] financial reform actct which was

[45:23] which was passed to combat the

[45:27] 2008 economic crisis. Absurdly

[45:28] according to prediction markets,

[45:31] the updated CEA was so clear

[45:32] that Congress intended to allow

[45:34] sports gambling in all5y states

[45:37] that it took1f years for someone

[45:39] to realize what Congress had

[45:41] done. This obviously defies

[45:42] belief. The six year battle to

[45:43] overturn Paspa

[45:45] and allow the states to

[45:46] determine whether or not to

[45:48] legalize sports betting occurred

[45:51] after the CEA was updated but

[45:52] prediction markets would have

[45:53] everyone believe in their theory

[45:55] that Congress authorized

[45:57] nationwide sports gambling as

[45:59] they as they are providing now a

[46:01] full8 years before Paspa was

[46:02] overturned.

[46:05] this next this next slide should

[46:07] raise some eyebrows with

[46:09] everyone. It shows a litany of

[46:10] different types of advertising

[46:12] from prediction markets to

[46:14] Americans where they are clearly

[46:16] calling themselves legal sports

[46:17] betting including an item in the

[46:19] upper right corner showing a

[46:22] young paid influencer saying

[46:23] that she was able to pay her

[46:25] rent after gambling through

[46:27] alci. This is the this is the

[46:29] message that prediction markets

[46:31] are sending to Americans

[46:32] including teenagers to the

[46:32] courts they

[46:35] say we aren't sports gambling to

[46:37] the public they willingly admit

[46:38] that they are

[46:42] so why are sports in particular

[46:44] so important to these operators

[46:45] so this particular graph shows

[46:48] trading volume from 2025

[46:50] reported by Calci which reports

[46:52] their own data and a portion of

[46:54] volume that is in yellow is the

[46:56] socalled trading that is

[46:58] happening on sports as you can

[46:59] see if you go back looking at

[47:02] 2024 there was no betting on

[47:04] sports whatsoever. there was no

[47:05] yellow grap yellow in that graph

[47:08] in a court filing in 2024

[47:08] Kalshy's lawyers admitted

[47:12] to a federal district judge that

[47:14] the CEA did not intend to allow

[47:16] to allow betting on sporting

[47:17] events such as the Superowl.

[47:20] Once 2025 rolled around they

[47:22] reversed their decision and

[47:24] unilaterally decided sports

[47:26] gambling for everyone on any

[47:28] given day gambling on sports and

[47:30] sports parleys accounts from

[47:33] anywhere between80 to90% of the

[47:35] overall volume that is driven on

[47:36] prediction markets. These

[47:38] platforms are sports books with

[47:38] a few other markets on the side

[47:42] there is no doubt about that and

[47:44] unlike the vast majority of

[47:45] legal sports books in the United

[47:47] States where the gambling age is

[47:49] 21 years old on prediction

[47:51] markets it's only18. Every

[47:53] parent with a senior in high

[47:54] school or kids attending college

[47:55] should be immensely concerned

[47:55] about this

[47:58] so what are the main public

[48:00] policy concerns well as you can

[48:01] see here there's certainly a

[48:03] litany of them. first sports

[48:04] gambling through prediction

[48:06] markets completely undermines

[48:07] state and tribal authority over

[48:09] gambling regulation which has

[48:11] been the purview of the states

[48:13] and tribes for decadesstead of

[48:14] allowing states to decide what

[48:16] if any gambling should be legal.

[48:17] these operators are ignoring all

[48:20] of it. What the elected

[48:20] representatives who serve in

[48:22] state legislatures across the

[48:24] country want to do is completely

[48:26] irrelevant to them. Their

[48:26] message to you all and

[48:29] other state policymakers is

[48:31] crystal clear your gambling

[48:33] laws, your consumer protection

[48:35] laws none of them matter to us

[48:38] we're so sorry. Sports gambling

[48:39] through prediction markets is

[48:40] also clearly diverting tax

[48:42] revenue that states use to fund

[48:44] important programs which we at

[48:47] theagGA estimate to be over1.3

[48:49] billion dollars in lost revenue

[48:50] to the state so far and that is

[48:52] very likely an understatement.

[48:54] their consumer protections if

[48:56] there are any fall far short of

[48:56] the protections that states have

[48:58] developed over the last eight

[49:00] years and as I mentioned

[49:01] previously they allow anyone

[49:03] eight years of age or older to

[49:05] gamble on their sites and are

[49:07] marketing to Americans that

[49:08] these contracts are financial

[49:10] investments not a form of

[49:11] entertainment which is an

[49:13] enormous risk to people

[49:15] especially young men changing

[49:16] that messaging from being a form

[49:19] of entertainment to a financial

[49:20] investment that should become

[49:21] just as much a part of your

[49:24] financial portfolio as your401k

[49:26] is absurd. The legal sports

[49:26] betting industry market

[49:28] sports betting as a form of

[49:30] entertainment that should be

[49:32] done so responsibly and provides

[49:34] the tools to do so. Prediction

[49:35] markets advertise to teenagers

[49:37] and young people that instead of

[49:39] saving to buy a car or books for

[49:41] their college class that this is

[49:42] a financial investment that they

[49:44] instead should invest that money

[49:46] in a thirteenle parlay which as

[49:48] the previous advertising

[49:50] demonstrated could or it with a

[49:53] plus800% odds could pay your

[49:55] rent that's the type of people

[49:56] that we're dealing with and of

[49:57] course

[49:59] this activity does conflict with

[50:00] other federal laws such as

[50:01] theyre Act and the gaming

[50:02] Regulatory Act.

[50:05] so what does the legal landscape

[50:07] look like across the country so

[50:09] far so as you can see here 21

[50:11] states are in active federal and

[50:13] state litigation against

[50:15] prediction markets to prevent

[50:16] them from offering sports

[50:17] gambling without being regulated

[50:20] by the state so far 9 federal

[50:21] courts of appeals have pending

[50:23] cases which means that this

[50:25] entire issue is very likely to

[50:26] make its way up to the United

[50:27] States Supreme Court next year

[50:29] and I will also note that as you

[50:31] can tell on this map this is a

[50:32] very bipartisan issue this is

[50:33] these are

[50:35] both democratic and Republican

[50:36] attorneys general that are

[50:37] fighting this federal overreach

[50:38] in court.

[50:42] Additionally,10 states including

[50:43] the state of Nevada have sued

[50:45] prediction markets in state

[50:46] court and Nevada has been one of

[50:48] the successful states to kick

[50:49] prediction markets out of the

[50:51] state to prevent them from offer

[50:53] from offering illegal sports

[50:54] gambling. This is the most

[50:56] effective way until the supreme

[50:58] court decides on the legality of

[50:59] all of this how to protect your

[51:01] citizens is to sue these

[51:03] prediction markets in state

[51:05] court this is an effort by

[51:06] Chairman Dreitzer and General

[51:07] Ford that should be applauded

[51:08] and followed by other states to

[51:09] protect their citizens

[51:11] Furthermore, when the CFTC's

[51:13] loan commissioner testified

[51:15] before Congress last year during

[51:17] his confirmation hearing he

[51:18] pledged when asked by senators

[51:19] that he would leave the legality

[51:22] of sports event contracts up to

[51:24] the courts. However, after he

[51:25] was confirmed, Chairmanelig

[51:28] reversed himself and the CFTc

[51:31] has now actively sued states in

[51:33] federal court in10 different

[51:34] in10 different states on the

[51:35] other side as I mentioned

[51:38] earlier we have44 bipartisan

[51:38] state attorneys general that

[51:39] have gone

[51:41] on the record opposing sports

[51:42] gambling through prediction

[51:45] markets which in 2026 is an

[51:47] unbelievable feat and we've also

[51:49] seen legislation to attempt to

[51:51] deal with this issue be

[51:52] introduced in se7 different

[51:53] states so far throughout2026.

[51:58] to wrap things up there's a

[51:59] number of things that state

[52:01] legislators can do to help wage

[52:02] this battle from pressing your

[52:03] members of Congress to deal with

[52:05] this at the federal level and

[52:06] protect states' rights to

[52:08] adopting state resolutions

[52:10] working and urging your governor

[52:12] to increase coordination with

[52:13] federal and state partners

[52:15] supporting your attorney general

[52:16] to take enforcement action and

[52:18] advancing legislation clarifying

[52:19] that sports gambling through

[52:21] prediction markets is illegal.

[52:23] Nevada has already done many of

[52:24] these things and again I commend

[52:25] all the public officials for

[52:26] taking the fight straight to

[52:26] these ro

[52:29] gue actors but in discussions

[52:31] with your fellow legislators in

[52:33] other states educating them on

[52:35] this issue is imperative and the

[52:36] AGA stands ready to be a

[52:37] resource for anything that you

[52:37] may need.

[52:40] I've taken up a lot of time

[52:41] already and I want to to get

[52:42] things over to Chairman Dreitzer

[52:43] but I'll conclude with this

[52:45] Congressional intent was clear

[52:47] sports betting should not be

[52:50] traded on financial markets. I

[52:52] know it you know it and Calhy's

[52:54] lawyers made clear in federal

[52:54] court that they know it too

[52:58] this is my contact information

[52:59] and I thank you for your time

[53:01] and your efforts this is a

[53:03] critical issue to the survival

[53:04] of the legal gaming industry as

[53:06] we know it and we cannot let

[53:08] relax until it's resolved. So

[53:09] thank you again for your

[53:10] leadership and I'm happy to turn

[53:12] it over to Chairman Dreitzer

[53:13] now and answer any questions

[53:14] thereafter.

[53:17] thank you so much for that

[53:18] before we get to Chairman

[53:21] Dreitzer assemblywoman anderson

[53:23] has a question for you and then

[53:25] we have another question thank

[53:27] you chair and thank you so much

[53:29] Mr York for your

[53:31] presentation. I'm loving your

[53:34] passion on this subject is

[53:36] besides educating legislators is

[53:37] there any sort of education

[53:38] going on from your organization

[53:39] to the public.

[53:42] especially when individuals

[53:43] under the age of 21.

[53:47] we we certainly are there we

[53:48] there are a number of public

[53:50] relations campaigns going on and

[53:51] we also have been working very

[53:53] closely with gaming regulators

[53:54] to try to make sure that the

[53:55] difference between these

[53:57] prediction markets and legal

[53:59] sports betting options is

[54:00] delineated to the to the

[54:02] greatest extent that we can

[54:04] unfortunately prediction markets

[54:05] have been spending hundreds of

[54:06] millions of dollars in

[54:08] advertising both through

[54:10] through advertising on the

[54:12] internet and social media

[54:13] directly to young people and

[54:14] many of the

[54:16] advertising that would never be

[54:18] authorized by any state for

[54:20] example there has been reporting

[54:22] of prediction market platforms

[54:24] going to fraternities on college

[54:27] campuses and paying fraternity

[54:29] brothers to to to

[54:30] participate in recruiting their

[54:33] fellow their fellow students to

[54:35] to sign up and and and gamble

[54:36] on these prediction market sites

[54:38] and the more that the mores of

[54:39] their fellow students they that

[54:41] they get signed up the more

[54:42] money that they get paid a lot

[54:43] of the influencers that they

[54:44] have been

[54:47] that they have been paying to to

[54:49] advertise online have have been

[54:51] found to be under the age of 18

[54:54] and so this obviously again

[54:56] would never be allowed in states

[54:57] it's it's completely

[54:59] preposterous that they're even

[55:01] allowed to do this and I

[55:02] think it clearly shows you the

[55:03] type of quote unquote regulation

[55:06] that is going on right now which

[55:07] is very little and so it's a

[55:08] major concern of ours we are

[55:10] doing our best to try to push

[55:12] back and make sure that not just

[55:13] not just not just the students

[55:14] but also parents

[55:16] and teachers and folks that have

[55:19] a real influence over over you

[55:20] know seniors in high school and

[55:22] young college kids that they

[55:24] also know the threat that

[55:25] these that these platforms play

[55:26] and so we're trying to kind of

[55:28] do in all of the above approach

[55:29] to make sure that everyone has

[55:32] the necessary has the

[55:33] necessary information and make

[55:35] sure that it gets down to those

[55:36] young kids because on the other

[55:38] side they're again is hundreds

[55:39] of millions of dollars being

[55:41] spent in all of the channels

[55:43] that these young people use

[55:44] to try to get them to do the

[55:44] opposite

[55:47] Thank you. Follow up chair

[55:51] thank you so much thank you for

[55:52] that answer. great hearing it.

[55:54] not happy to hear that there's

[55:56] individuals literally getting

[55:57] other people to join these

[55:58] markets.

[56:02] so the nevada gaming

[56:03] commission this might actually

[56:04] be more be more appropriate for

[56:06] the next individual, but the

[56:09] nevada casinos they have given

[56:11] money to help our gays anonymous

[56:13] or gamblers anonymous and other

[56:17] mental health areas to allow

[56:19] for more education around the

[56:21] dangers of gambling and

[56:22] especially when you become

[56:23] addicted to it do you know of

[56:25] any of the current corporations

[56:27] that are utilizing this this

[56:28] form of online gaming are any of

[56:28] those

[56:32] giving money to any of the

[56:34] Gamblers anonymous and or ways

[56:35] to help people that do become

[56:36] addicted to gaming.

[56:38] to gambling

[56:40] so I can't I can't tell you that

[56:42] there's a there's a there's a

[56:45] national group called NcPg which

[56:46] is National Council for problem

[56:49] Gamblers and they recently took

[56:52] an astonishing $2 million from

[56:53] the prediction market operator

[56:55] Calie to essentially become some

[56:59] part of Ncpg and even though

[57:02] clearly we all believe that that

[57:03] what alci is offering is

[57:05] unquestionably gambling Ncpg

[57:06] created some kind of financial

[57:10] carveout that allowed them to

[57:12] to join the organization in my

[57:13] view purely from a pr standpoint

[57:15] to try to make themselves look

[57:17] good which also resulted in the

[57:19] Michiganaming Controlboardard

[57:21] leaving NCpg in protest and I

[57:24] believe I believe there's

[57:25] there's an organization I'm not

[57:26] I wasn't sure if it's the gaming

[57:28] control board but one of the

[57:29] organizations in Nevada maybe it

[57:31] was the Nevada chapter that also

[57:34] ended up leaving NCpg in protest

[57:35] of that move because they should

[57:36] not be recognized as

[57:38] anything other than what they

[57:41] are which is gambling and

[57:44] largely again as as a as a as an

[57:45] industry writ large prediction

[57:47] markets do not have any kind of

[57:48] the comprehensive responsible

[57:50] gaming protocols that the that

[57:52] the legal licensed state

[57:53] regulated sports betting

[57:54] industry does.

[57:56] thank you so much and thank you

[57:57] chairir for that time.

[58:01] thank you assemblywoman

[58:03] backcchus thank you so much

[58:05] madam chairir. I I kind have two

[58:08] lines of questioning one I

[58:11] was very interested in the the

[58:13] reverse suits that are happening

[58:15] where the states are being

[58:17] sued and federal government and

[58:19] I was trying to take a look at

[58:20] in my mind I thought it was

[58:22] probably for declaratory relief

[58:23] like if a state was going to

[58:26] implement a law or to deem I

[58:28] guess a lot in violation of

[58:28] federal law something along

[58:31] those lines and so when I was

[58:32] trying to match everything up if

[58:34] you could kind of elaborate I'm

[58:36] just kind of curious like

[58:38] what those suits are on like a

[58:40] high level like arizona didn't

[58:42] look like they had any in

[58:44] introduced legislation so I'm

[58:45] trying to kind of figure out

[58:47] what the basis of the lawsuits

[58:48] are.

[58:51] sure so that that is a great

[58:52] question and I appreciate you

[58:53] for asking it so the the answer

[58:56] is is that it it varies from

[58:57] state to state so there have

[58:59] been some instances for example

[59:01] Minnesota is a good is a good

[59:03] example as well as Kentucky

[59:05] where the legislature passed

[59:07] legislation that attempted to

[59:08] regulate and tax these

[59:11] prediction market platforms at

[59:12] some level or another in

[59:13] Minnesota they attempted to ban

[59:15] them entirely in Kentucky they

[59:17] basically said you're operating

[59:18] illegally but until this is all

[59:19] res

[59:19] ol ve d we're going to tax you

[59:23] at a14.25% tax rate both of

[59:25] those states ended up being sued

[59:27] by the prediction markets in

[59:28] state court in this in the case

[59:31] of Minnesota thecFTc also sued

[59:33] them and in the the the case of

[59:35] Kentucky attorney General

[59:36] Coleman actually sued the

[59:37] prediction markets right back in

[59:39] Kentucky state court and many of

[59:41] the other cases you mentioned

[59:43] arizona the Arizona attorney

[59:44] general actually brought

[59:47] criminal charges against against

[59:48] Kalshi in their litigation

[59:51] which was not again prompted

[59:53] by any state legislation it was

[59:54] based on an investigation that

[59:55] they had done and the and the

[59:57] violation of their state laws as

[59:59] they saw it there have also been

[1:00:01] other there have also been

[1:00:03] other instances for example in

[1:00:06] Iowa and in Utah where there has

[1:00:08] been no legislation that has

[1:00:09] been passed. there has been no

[1:00:12] enforcement action taken by the

[1:00:13] attorney general but the

[1:00:15] prediction markets have gone and

[1:00:16] met with the attorney general's

[1:00:18] office and asked them a question

[1:00:18] that every single

[1:00:20] attorney general in the United

[1:00:21] States of America would

[1:00:23] unequivocally answer the same

[1:00:25] way which was do you plan on

[1:00:27] taking any enforcement action

[1:00:29] against us that was the question

[1:00:31] posited to both of those As and

[1:00:34] they said as every A in this

[1:00:36] country would say we cannot tell

[1:00:37] you what kind of action we are

[1:00:40] or are not contemplating. that

[1:00:41] was enough to get them sued in

[1:00:43] federal court by the prediction

[1:00:45] markets not saying no we won't

[1:00:47] take action against you that's

[1:00:48] how absurd a lot of this has

[1:00:49] gotten

[1:00:49] and then of course

[1:00:53] some of it is just based on

[1:00:56] public comments AGagG brown

[1:00:58] and and and governor Cox in in

[1:01:01] Utah made strong statements but

[1:01:02] again no no actual legal

[1:01:04] enforcement action to that date

[1:01:06] and that got them sued so this

[1:01:07] is the type of landscape

[1:01:09] unfortunately that we're dealing

[1:01:11] with sometimes the the lawsuits

[1:01:14] start with litigation sometimes

[1:01:16] they sometimes they start by

[1:01:18] just an investigation into the

[1:01:19] into the products and the

[1:01:20] operations by predi

[1:01:22] ction markets that that

[1:01:24] generates organically fromagG's

[1:01:25] offices for example in

[1:01:27] massachusetts they were the

[1:01:29] first state to sue prediction

[1:01:31] markets in state court and that

[1:01:32] was just again based on an

[1:01:34] investigation that they did into

[1:01:36] the laws that they believed that

[1:01:37] prediction markets were

[1:01:38] violating and then in other

[1:01:39] cases again you have you have

[1:01:41] litigation being started by the

[1:01:43] prediction market companies

[1:01:46] simply because anagG has said we

[1:01:47] we will we cannot confirm or

[1:01:49] deny what we plan on doing which

[1:01:50] again every

[1:01:52] ag G in this country would have

[1:01:53] answered the exact same way and

[1:01:55] so that's the type of litigious

[1:01:57] nonsense that unfortunately that

[1:02:00] that we're dealing with and they

[1:02:02] they are trying to take they are

[1:02:03] trying to take advantage of a

[1:02:06] moment in time but at this

[1:02:08] point in the game there have

[1:02:09] been37 different

[1:02:13] federal and state rulings that

[1:02:15] have been issued both by federal

[1:02:17] and state judges across the

[1:02:19] country many in the same states

[1:02:20] met multiple in the state of

[1:02:20] Nevada

[1:02:23] and the states have won31 out of

[1:02:25] those37. so we're batting with

[1:02:27] an84% winning percentage right

[1:02:29] now and I think that's and think

[1:02:31] that's pretty good and and

[1:02:32] and I hope that I hope that

[1:02:33] that continues.

[1:02:37] can't help but make the joke

[1:02:39] that obviously it sounds like if

[1:02:40] I was on the prediction market

[1:02:41] I'd be betting for the states so

[1:02:44] that's kind of interesting

[1:02:45] another thing I noted you know

[1:02:47] it sounds like some of these

[1:02:49] cases aren't ripe and they

[1:02:51] jumped ahead my other question

[1:02:55] pertained to the I know

[1:02:57] you put a amount of economic

[1:03:01] development that is being lost

[1:03:03] due to the situation and I

[1:03:04] don't know if you have any

[1:03:05] charts I know that's economic

[1:03:08] impact of328 billion dollars

[1:03:13] and I guess you do have the tax

[1:03:15] impact of being52.7 billion do

[1:03:16] you have any idea if broken up

[1:03:17] by states like potentially what

[1:03:19] the state of Nevada is losing

[1:03:20] due to these markets.

[1:03:25] should should I should clarify

[1:03:26] thatt those figures that

[1:03:27] you're quoting are is actually

[1:03:29] the economic impact that the

[1:03:32] legal gaming industry provides

[1:03:35] nationwide to to to the

[1:03:36] states that they're active in so

[1:03:37] the the the members that are

[1:03:40] located in Nevada that theagGA

[1:03:42] represents that's the amount of

[1:03:44] of tax revenue and economic

[1:03:46] impact that the legal industry

[1:03:48] is generating which is which

[1:03:49] has the potential to be

[1:03:51] undermined by the prediction

[1:03:52] markets and

[1:03:53] I mentioned a little bit later

[1:03:54] in the presentation I'm sorry if

[1:03:56] that wasn't clear that that

[1:03:57] the prediction markets we

[1:03:59] estimate I believe somewhat

[1:04:01] conservatively that states have

[1:04:05] lost over1.3 billion dollars in

[1:04:06] tax revenue that is being

[1:04:08] siphoned away because of these

[1:04:10] prediction market activities

[1:04:12] and so again I think that that

[1:04:13] is probably actually in in an

[1:04:15] underestimate I think that there

[1:04:17] are some other smart folks

[1:04:18] that are looking at it and think

[1:04:19] the number is is significantly

[1:04:21] higher but states have lost over

[1:04:22] a billion

[1:04:24] dollars in tax revenue that goes

[1:04:25] to fund extremely important

[1:04:27] things whatever the state

[1:04:28] decides it goes to whether it's

[1:04:29] education whether it's

[1:04:30] infrastructure those types of

[1:04:32] things that money is being

[1:04:34] siphoned off and I think that

[1:04:36] state departments of revenue and

[1:04:38] and certainly the the the

[1:04:39] agencies that are charged with

[1:04:41] overseeing the the programs that

[1:04:42] derived a lot of their funding

[1:04:44] from sports betting tax revenue.

[1:04:45] I know of a number of of states

[1:04:48] where that where that revenue is

[1:04:49] starting to dwindle and I think

[1:04:50] I think we all know why that is

[1:04:54] thank you for that and when

[1:04:55] looking at your chart it seems

[1:04:57] like that number will continue

[1:04:58] to expand unless something's

[1:05:00] done so thank you thank you

[1:05:00] madam ma'am thank you

[1:05:03] thank you for that so are are

[1:05:05] you gonna stay on Mr York while

[1:05:09] chairdreiter presents OK

[1:05:10] so we're gonna call

[1:05:12] thank you so we're gonna call

[1:05:15] chairreitzer up from the Nevada

[1:05:16] Gaming control boardard.

[1:05:21] Welcome to interim

[1:05:24] very good

[1:05:29] good morning chairirneal

[1:05:31] vicechair Bacchus and

[1:05:32] distinguished members of the

[1:05:33] joint interim standing Committee

[1:05:34] on Revenue

[1:05:37] for the record my name is Mike

[1:05:38] Dreitzer and I serve as the

[1:05:40] chairman of the Nevada Gaming

[1:05:41] Control Board. I appreciate the

[1:05:43] opportunity to appear before you

[1:05:45] today and discuss prediction

[1:05:46] markets and the concerns they

[1:05:49] raise for Nevada during my

[1:05:50] presentation I also will be

[1:05:51] providing an update on our

[1:05:52] effort to protect the state of

[1:05:53] Nevada against these growing

[1:05:54] threats

[1:05:59] the board has taken a very

[1:06:01] active approach to limit the

[1:06:02] operations of prediction markets

[1:06:04] in the state of Nevada. these

[1:06:07] petition markets offer sports

[1:06:08] betting and everyone who sees it

[1:06:08] knows it.

[1:06:11] that's what the federal court in

[1:06:13] our cases have said and that's

[1:06:15] very obvious as Mr York has said

[1:06:18] it is quite clearly an en run to

[1:06:20] allow sports wagering in all 50

[1:06:21] states in the country.

[1:06:25] for instance over 90% ofaloci's

[1:06:27] revenue comes from sports

[1:06:28] betting to give you an idea of

[1:06:29] the magnitude of what's

[1:06:32] happening. Last year alci

[1:06:34] crypto.com and Robinhoodod sued

[1:06:36] the Nevada Gaming

[1:06:38] Controlboardard seeking a ruling

[1:06:38] that they were allowed to

[1:06:41] operate unlicensed gaming in the

[1:06:42] state the federal district court

[1:06:44] disagreed and ruled for the

[1:06:46] state. The prediction markets

[1:06:47] appealed to theinth Circuit and

[1:06:49] a ruling in that matter is

[1:06:50] expected any day

[1:06:51] we are hopeful that the court

[1:06:53] will see them for what they are

[1:06:55] and affirm the district court's

[1:06:57] ruling at the same time the

[1:06:59] board has also gone on the

[1:07:02] offensive we have taken the

[1:07:04] position that of course these

[1:07:04] are

[1:07:07] activities that are

[1:07:08] unacceptable in the state of

[1:07:10] Nevada it's unlicensed gambling

[1:07:11] and we brought enforcement

[1:07:13] actions in state court

[1:07:15] againstalshi polymarket and

[1:07:17] coinbase. The board did not

[1:07:18] bring enforcement action against

[1:07:19] Robinhoodod and crypto.com

[1:07:21] because they agreed to stand

[1:07:23] down during the pending appeal.

[1:07:25] state court judges entered

[1:07:26] preliminary injunctions against

[1:07:29] coinnbase on March 26thalshi

[1:07:31] May4th and Polymarket on

[1:07:33] July8th. each preliminary

[1:07:34] injunction order obligated these

[1:07:37] prediction markets to bar users

[1:07:39] in Nevada from placing

[1:07:41] prohibited bets by a date

[1:07:43] certain the final deadline for

[1:07:45] any of these is polymarket

[1:07:46] which is August 22nd.

[1:07:49] the board's investigators have

[1:07:51] checked to ensure that the

[1:07:52] prediction markets are meeting

[1:07:54] their obligations notablyalhi

[1:07:57] was required to fully bar users

[1:07:58] in Nevada from placing

[1:08:00] prohibited bets by August12 but

[1:08:02] the investigator's work showed

[1:08:04] that Calci did not meet that

[1:08:06] deadline and we are currently

[1:08:07] seeking penalties from Kalshi

[1:08:10] for its failure to abide by that

[1:08:12] court order in a timely manner

[1:08:13] and I'm gonna say this solely

[1:08:14] because this is really the

[1:08:16] important upshot of all of this

[1:08:16] the result is that

[1:08:19] all prediction markets that were

[1:08:22] known to be operating in nevada

[1:08:24] have been required to restrict

[1:08:24] their operations.

[1:08:28] and that that of course is

[1:08:29] critical as has been indicated

[1:08:31] we are pending additional court

[1:08:35] cases both federally and in many

[1:08:37] states and it's very important

[1:08:39] again to say that all prediction

[1:08:40] markets that were known to be

[1:08:41] operating in Nevada have been

[1:08:43] required to restrict their

[1:08:44] application their their

[1:08:44] operations

[1:08:48] we are not alone in our success

[1:08:49] litigation against prediction

[1:08:51] markets is occurring throughout

[1:08:52] the country as has been

[1:08:53] indicated the vast majority of

[1:08:55] courts have agreed with our side

[1:08:57] and ruled that states can

[1:08:58] regulate prediction markets like

[1:08:59] they regulate gambling

[1:09:02] specifically13 trial courts have

[1:09:04] favored the states o trial

[1:09:05] courts have favored the

[1:09:07] prediction markets and decisions

[1:09:09] are still pending in five trial

[1:09:10] courts. The only federal court

[1:09:12] of appeals to have ruled is

[1:09:14] thehirdcircuit in a 2 to1

[1:09:14] decision it ruled for Kalshi

[1:09:17] New Jersey has stated it will

[1:09:18] ask the US Supreme Court to

[1:09:20] review the case and the petition

[1:09:23] is due by September3rd. Several

[1:09:25] other appeals have been argued

[1:09:26] in addition to ours in theinth

[1:09:28] Circuit and decisions are

[1:09:29] expected imminently in those

[1:09:31] cases as well as well. these are

[1:09:33] the ourth Circuit in Maryland,

[1:09:34] theixth Circuit Ohio and

[1:09:36] Tennessee and the Massachusetts

[1:09:39] Supreme Court judicial court

[1:09:42] the legal arguments are quite

[1:09:44] clear the state's success in our

[1:09:44] litigation is no

[1:09:48] surprise it's absolutely settled

[1:09:50] law that the state's not the

[1:09:51] federal government regulate

[1:09:53] gambling. it's a traditional

[1:09:54] police power of the state's

[1:09:55] recognized by the US Supreme

[1:09:58] Court. The court reaffirmed this

[1:09:59] in Murphy versus the NcAA in

[1:10:02] 2018 when it said that each

[1:10:04] state gets to decide how it

[1:10:04] wants to regulate gambling full

[1:10:05] stop.

[1:10:07] because gambling is well

[1:10:09] recognized as an area of

[1:10:10] traditional state regulation

[1:10:12] there is a strong presumption

[1:10:14] against preemption that is a

[1:10:15] strong presumption that the

[1:10:17] federal law does not push aside

[1:10:19] state gambling law which it

[1:10:21] doesn't in this case if Congress

[1:10:23] wanted to push aside state laws

[1:10:25] on gambling. Congress would have

[1:10:27] to say that very clearly and

[1:10:28] they most certainly have not.

[1:10:29] The prediction markets have

[1:10:31] argued that the federal

[1:10:33] commodities exchange the CEA

[1:10:34] preempts state gambling law

[1:10:35] meaning that

[1:10:38] if they list their sports bets

[1:10:39] on a market regulated by the

[1:10:40] commodity Futurestrading

[1:10:42] Commission otherwise known as

[1:10:44] the CFc and the sports bets can

[1:10:47] only be regulated by thecFTc and

[1:10:48] not by any state or Indian

[1:10:51] tribe. The CFTc supports the

[1:10:52] prediction market's position as

[1:10:54] has been indicated but the CFdc

[1:10:56] previously took the opposite

[1:10:58] position and disclaimed any

[1:11:00] ability to regulate gaming so

[1:11:03] this is a recent abrupt about

[1:11:04] face. there is ab no evidence to

[1:11:08] show that is what Congress

[1:11:09] intended. The CEA is about

[1:11:11] regulating commodity derivatives

[1:11:13] such as corn and soybean

[1:11:15] futures. these are products that

[1:11:16] companies traditionally have

[1:11:18] used to hedge financial risk.

[1:11:21] Sports bets are not commodity

[1:11:22] derivatives they are for

[1:11:24] entertainment. they do not hedge

[1:11:26] any existing risk and the

[1:11:27] betting itself creates a risk

[1:11:31] it simply is not true that

[1:11:33] anything a company chooses to

[1:11:35] list on a CFdc regulated market

[1:11:37] is subject to the CFTC's

[1:11:38] exclusive jurisdiction that is

[1:11:40] just not what the statute says.

[1:11:42] The statute only applies to

[1:11:43] commodity derivatives such as

[1:11:45] swaps and sports bettingsl

[1:11:46] sports bets clearly are not

[1:11:49] swaps the CFTCs and the

[1:11:50] prediction market's position

[1:11:51] would take away the state's

[1:11:53] ability to regulate gambling and

[1:11:55] would shift all sports betting

[1:11:57] from licensed sports books to

[1:11:58] the CFTc which is clearly an

[1:11:59] absurd result

[1:12:02] The CFTC is not a gaming

[1:12:04] regulator. it does not have the

[1:12:06] expertise or the resources to

[1:12:08] effectively regulate gaming and

[1:12:09] in the past it's specifically

[1:12:11] disclaimed that it was a gaming

[1:12:13] regulator. The CFTC is in the

[1:12:14] prediction market's position is

[1:12:16] also absurd. The CEA says that

[1:12:18] if a consumer contract is a swap

[1:12:19] then it must be traded on the

[1:12:22] CFTc regulated exchange if

[1:12:24] sports bets are swapped sports

[1:12:25] betting would have to be done on

[1:12:27] CFc regulated markets and

[1:12:28] clearly Congress never intended

[1:12:29] that

[1:12:31] in terms of the state's

[1:12:33] interests that we are protecting

[1:12:36] we are making the CFTs the

[1:12:37] important state interests if

[1:12:38] they move forward and are

[1:12:41] successful the CFTc would be the

[1:12:43] nation's gaming regulator which

[1:12:45] of course would be a serious

[1:12:47] affront to the state of Nevada

[1:12:48] and all states that otherwise

[1:12:50] regulate gaming successfully and

[1:12:52] have done so for many decades as

[1:12:53] a district court in our case

[1:12:54] said

[1:12:57] this is direct

[1:13:00] contrast to decades of

[1:13:00] federalism principles

[1:13:07] Taking away the NGCb's ability

[1:13:09] to fully regulate sports betting

[1:13:11] would be financially devastating

[1:13:13] to the state of Nevada. Gaming

[1:13:14] revenue is obviously a

[1:13:16] significant part of the state

[1:13:17] budget for for Nevada the

[1:13:20] CFTC and the prediction market's

[1:13:22] position could take that away

[1:13:25] completely and so we are clear

[1:13:27] it doesn't end with sports

[1:13:29] betting this could very clearly

[1:13:31] over time and the door has been

[1:13:33] left open to have the supply to

[1:13:34] other types of gambling

[1:13:37] besides sports betting

[1:13:38] including casino gaming and of

[1:13:40] course online wagering of other

[1:13:40] sorts

[1:13:43] it would take away the state's

[1:13:44] ability to protect their

[1:13:46] citizens for example Nevada

[1:13:48] banns people under 21 from

[1:13:49] gambling and the prediction

[1:13:52] markets do not allowing 18

[1:13:54] yearolds to gamble. Other key

[1:13:56] areas of consumer protection

[1:13:58] that are in a great concern

[1:14:00] within this scheme are money

[1:14:01] laundering protections, know

[1:14:03] your customer requirements

[1:14:04] problem gambling of which there

[1:14:06] are little to no protections

[1:14:10] with these federal prediction

[1:14:11] markets patronon dispute

[1:14:14] resolution insider betting slash

[1:14:16] lack of fair wagering. one thing

[1:14:17] we do know in the state of

[1:14:19] Nevada is that when someone

[1:14:20] risks their money

[1:14:23] at at a casino or at another

[1:14:25] licensed gaming establishment

[1:14:26] that they are getting the

[1:14:27] opportunity for a fair wager, I

[1:14:30] think that the news reports of

[1:14:32] the various events that have

[1:14:33] occurred

[1:14:35] the cheating that has occurred

[1:14:36] as it pertains to prediction

[1:14:39] markets is quite clear and

[1:14:40] there's no protection or very

[1:14:41] limited protection in

[1:14:43] that regard

[1:14:45] there also has as been indicated

[1:14:47] by Mr York been misleading and

[1:14:48] inappropriate adverti

[1:14:55] a broad coalition of44 states

[1:14:56] plus the district of Columbia

[1:14:57] has has been indicated has filed

[1:14:59] ames amicus briefs to say that

[1:15:02] the CFc and the prediction

[1:15:03] market's arguments are flat

[1:15:05] wrong. Many other individual and

[1:15:07] groups have filed amicus briefs

[1:15:08] in support of the states

[1:15:09] including a broad coalition of

[1:15:11] Indian tribes the AGA a

[1:15:13] professor who is a CFTC expert

[1:15:16] and multiple responsible gaming

[1:15:18] organizations in conclusion we

[1:15:20] at the Nevada Gaming Control

[1:15:20] Board have done everything

[1:15:21] possible

[1:15:24] to fight this matter and made

[1:15:26] our stance very clear that any

[1:15:28] involvement by our licensees in

[1:15:31] the prediction markets is a

[1:15:33] status that is incompatible with

[1:15:34] their ability to participate in

[1:15:36] gaming in Nevada and it was

[1:15:37] important that we take that

[1:15:41] stand we look forward to the

[1:15:43] court rulings because we most

[1:15:44] certainly feel as though and

[1:15:46] know as so we are in the right

[1:15:49] given the history Nevada last

[1:15:50] year Nevada Gaming

[1:15:50] Controlboardard

[1:15:53] proudly celebrated its 70th

[1:15:56] anniversary as the gold standard

[1:15:57] of regulation not only in the

[1:15:58] United States but in the

[1:16:01] world.aming regulation is

[1:16:02] complex.aming regulation is

[1:16:04] nuanced but it is the

[1:16:08] underpinning for all those who

[1:16:09] invest in gaming and all of

[1:16:11] those who participate in the

[1:16:13] gaming industry and it was

[1:16:14] necessary to preserve that so

[1:16:16] again I just want to repeat the

[1:16:19] one point that the goal has been

[1:16:20] achieved and that is all sports

[1:16:21] predi

[1:16:24] ction market contracts have been

[1:16:25] restricted from the state of

[1:16:26] Nevada so the cases will keep

[1:16:27] going through the court but

[1:16:29] importantly as we head towards

[1:16:32] football season which of course

[1:16:33] will be very busy for us as it

[1:16:36] always is traditionally there

[1:16:38] have been successful

[1:16:39] restrictions placed on the

[1:16:41] prediction markets as the sports

[1:16:43] betting I thank you for your

[1:16:45] time and I'd be happy to

[1:16:46] answer any questions that you

[1:16:46] may have

[1:16:49] thank you for that senator

[1:16:50] Danyna

[1:16:55] thank you chair. first and

[1:16:57] foremost, thank you for the

[1:16:58] presentation and for your

[1:16:58] commentary

[1:17:01] I'm of the belief that

[1:17:03] prediction markets are the

[1:17:05] greatest threat to our our

[1:17:07] state's economy. this is

[1:17:08] probably one of the most

[1:17:09] pervasive issues that has been

[1:17:10] rising in the last couple of

[1:17:10] years

[1:17:14] and there are components of this

[1:17:16] that I think probably started

[1:17:18] off as frivolous and now have

[1:17:19] become nefarious on purpose by

[1:17:21] some of the bad actors

[1:17:22] specifically Kalcy and

[1:17:22] Polymarket.

[1:17:25] I guess my question is

[1:17:28] I understand the regulatory

[1:17:30] standpoint of the gaming control

[1:17:31] board and you're currently in

[1:17:32] litigation so I'm not gonna ask

[1:17:33] questions relating to that

[1:17:34] because I know it's a it would

[1:17:35] be hard to comment on them

[1:17:39] I think my main quest I have two

[1:17:41] questions first and foremost in

[1:17:42] the moments that

[1:17:45] coci and some of the production

[1:17:47] markets were operating in the

[1:17:48] state so it's my understanding

[1:17:50] gaming control boardard

[1:17:50] responded sent them a cease and

[1:17:51] desist letter

[1:17:53] but there were still active days

[1:17:55] that they were perhaps taking

[1:17:56] bets or so forth from any

[1:18:00] resident of this state I

[1:18:03] guess my question is does the

[1:18:04] gaming control board right now

[1:18:06] have the ability to identify any

[1:18:09] potential victims retroactively

[1:18:11] that may have participated

[1:18:12] while those prediction markets

[1:18:14] were operating in the state

[1:18:14] before they closed their

[1:18:16] operations subject to the cease

[1:18:18] and desist. Is that something

[1:18:20] that we can gather

[1:18:23] within the current regulatory

[1:18:25] authority I guess my the reason

[1:18:26] why I'm asking this is

[1:18:30] clearly someone needs to go

[1:18:31] to jail in my opinion this has

[1:18:33] been pretty criminal and some of

[1:18:34] the actions that have taken

[1:18:34] place nationally

[1:18:37] and if there was a minor that

[1:18:39] was trading under this

[1:18:41] prediction market that was

[1:18:42] located in our state I mean

[1:18:43] there has to be a level of

[1:18:44] restitution that needs to be

[1:18:46] paid for and so I guess my

[1:18:47] question is do we have already

[1:18:48] the regulatory authority to

[1:18:50] identify who these victims of if

[1:18:51] there is such cases in our

[1:18:52] state.

[1:18:55] well first of all let me say

[1:18:58] that there have been

[1:19:02] certainly a prediction market

[1:19:04] contracts that have gone on in

[1:19:06] the state of Nevada and it has

[1:19:09] been a herculean task and a a

[1:19:11] strong test coordinated with the

[1:19:12] support of governor Lombardo and

[1:19:14] the attorney general's office to

[1:19:16] support the Nevada Gaming

[1:19:18] Control Board to do what we can

[1:19:21] to importantly restrict them

[1:19:22] across the state that's where

[1:19:23] our

[1:19:26] focus has been at this point to

[1:19:28] put a stop to it because again

[1:19:31] these are not just contracts in

[1:19:32] the abstract to your point

[1:19:34] senator they hurt people right

[1:19:37] and they hurt minors there's

[1:19:39] there's evidence across the

[1:19:41] country where people are

[1:19:43] putting money into these

[1:19:44] contracts as as was indicated

[1:19:47] earlier to try and make the rent

[1:19:49] instances where they were put

[1:19:51] in as young people and they

[1:19:52] shouldn't have been doing it

[1:19:55] you know even sub eight in some

[1:19:58] cases so I would say we are

[1:20:00] at the phase of this where we

[1:20:02] needed to conclude that and

[1:20:03] that's right where we are right

[1:20:05] now and so we're sort of at that

[1:20:07] juncture because the first and

[1:20:10] foremost it was to reach a

[1:20:11] point where we could say that

[1:20:14] all such activities' been

[1:20:17] restricted in terms of looking

[1:20:19] at victims you know certainly

[1:20:21] that's something that it's

[1:20:22] within our charge and is

[1:20:22] important to us

[1:20:25] of course to look at anybody

[1:20:26] who's been a victim of what

[1:20:28] would be a gaming crime but

[1:20:30] right now I would say our focus

[1:20:31] is

[1:20:34] restricting the effectively

[1:20:36] restricting the activity which

[1:20:37] we've done and we are awaiting

[1:20:39] further the court ruling and

[1:20:41] this is I can say to you a very

[1:20:44] dynamic situation, right? we

[1:20:45] could be sitting here today and

[1:20:47] then a week from now we could

[1:20:48] have more developments so I

[1:20:50] would say we are still in phase

[1:20:52] one which is focusing strictly

[1:20:52] on

[1:20:55] limiting and fully

[1:20:56] restricting the activities in

[1:20:56] the state and that's what we've

[1:20:57] done.

[1:21:00] and sheriff I might follow up

[1:21:03] the so thank you for that

[1:21:06] I think the question that I have

[1:21:09] is more so as a followup.

[1:21:10] obviouslybviously all of us are

[1:21:11] watching what the federal

[1:21:13] courts do in terms of their

[1:21:15] response at some point in near

[1:21:16] distant future we will know

[1:21:19] what that answer is. My main

[1:21:20] concern and this is something

[1:21:23] that we can talk off offline is

[1:21:25] one when that decision makes

[1:21:26] when when that decision is made

[1:21:28] in terms of what the regulatory

[1:21:29] standpoint will be for the

[1:21:30] states versus the federal

[1:21:31] government and so forth is I

[1:21:33] want the I want to preserve the

[1:21:34] ability for the for you all to

[1:21:34] be able

[1:21:36] to look at from the enforcement

[1:21:38] of being able to

[1:21:39] retroactively identify if there

[1:21:41] were any potential victims

[1:21:42] whether under age or someone

[1:21:45] that made a wager and there

[1:21:46] was insider trading collected

[1:21:48] to it right whatever the

[1:21:49] protocols that you established

[1:21:50] but number two

[1:21:53] I am very concerned that this is

[1:21:56] going to be a proliferation of

[1:21:57] the gray market that other

[1:21:59] copycats are gonna come and try

[1:22:01] to attempt the same and so what

[1:22:02] I'm scared of and perhaps

[1:22:06] just to there

[1:22:08] there's a regulatory standpoint

[1:22:10] that I think we I would love

[1:22:12] your feedback on on

[1:22:14] technologies evolving people

[1:22:15] have access to VPns their

[1:22:17] circumnavigating geo fences

[1:22:20] umalhi is still I received the

[1:22:23] advertisements everyday for

[1:22:26] my age group right of of like

[1:22:28] I their advertisements are on my

[1:22:30] social media and so even

[1:22:31] though they're not legal in our

[1:22:32] state and they still have the

[1:22:33] ability to practice there's

[1:22:34] still clearly marketing towards

[1:22:34] consumers in our

[1:22:37] state and so my point being

[1:22:39] is it sounds like even if there

[1:22:40] is this court decision to be

[1:22:41] made there's still some things

[1:22:42] that we have to look at from the

[1:22:44] regulatory standpoint so if

[1:22:45] there's ideas that you may have

[1:22:47] on how to clamp it down. I mean

[1:22:48] that certainly and to increase

[1:22:49] reinforcement I think that would

[1:22:50] be something that we should talk

[1:22:51] about but I don't know if you

[1:22:52] have any response to that. I do

[1:22:54] well let me just say a few

[1:22:55] things because obviously all

[1:22:57] this is happening at once now

[1:22:59] rest assured we are

[1:22:59] extraordinarily

[1:23:02] aggressive at the gaming control

[1:23:05] board around using our

[1:23:07] enforcement resources to make

[1:23:08] sure that there's no further

[1:23:08] proliferation

[1:23:11] in the state of Nevada again

[1:23:13] importantly we needed to say

[1:23:15] that we have addressed all of

[1:23:17] the known actors but on any

[1:23:18] given day without obviously

[1:23:20] going into the details of our

[1:23:22] investigative approach and

[1:23:23] investigative technique you're

[1:23:24] absolutely right there are other

[1:23:25] actors that pop up who say we're

[1:23:28] going to offer a statewide or a

[1:23:31] nationwidedCM and we are

[1:23:33] constantly vigilant to make sure

[1:23:35] that they are not opening up in

[1:23:37] Nevada and if they are we pursue

[1:23:38] them aggressively right because

[1:23:39] the idea

[1:23:42] is that we're only as strong as

[1:23:43] sort of our weakest link so to

[1:23:45] speak and if we've addressed the

[1:23:46] ones that we've addressed to

[1:23:47] have make sure that they cannot

[1:23:50] continue in the state we're

[1:23:51] always looking to see if other

[1:23:53] ones pop up and I will say this

[1:23:56] most certainly my charge as

[1:23:57] chairman of the game and control

[1:23:59] boardard is to make sure that we

[1:24:01] that any violations of the

[1:24:02] the

[1:24:03] the laws as it pertain to

[1:24:07] gambling are prosecuted

[1:24:08] pursued and prosecuted to the

[1:24:09] fullest extent of the law and I

[1:24:11] can say on a regular basis we

[1:24:13] receive all sorts of information

[1:24:15] in this space and other spaces

[1:24:17] and we're tracking down every

[1:24:18] single one of them right so what

[1:24:19] I would say to you and to your

[1:24:21] constituents or to whoever was

[1:24:24] was interested if there is

[1:24:27] evidence that something was

[1:24:28] done that would appear to

[1:24:31] potentially be a core unfair or

[1:24:32] violates state law

[1:24:35] or have anything to do with

[1:24:37] underage gambling bring that to

[1:24:39] us and we will pursue it we

[1:24:41] track down every single lead,

[1:24:42] every single thing that comes

[1:24:44] across our desk so on one hand

[1:24:45] we're stemming the tide and

[1:24:47] we're making sure that you know

[1:24:49] there are no new actorsi too see

[1:24:51] all the ads and all the the

[1:24:52] pronouncements of the newer

[1:24:53] companies that come out and say

[1:24:55] hey we're going to go fi0 states

[1:24:57] and we make sure that that's not

[1:24:59] true that no matter what that

[1:25:00] we're going to protect Nevada

[1:25:01] and make sure that the new

[1:25:02] new a

[1:25:04] ctor s likepollyarkin and Cal

[1:25:05] she that there won't be new ones

[1:25:07] that we've we've we've blocked

[1:25:09] them and if they haven't then

[1:25:10] we've been very legally

[1:25:11] aggressive we've perhaps been

[1:25:13] one of the most aggressively

[1:25:15] legal states in the country in

[1:25:17] terms of our our legal posture

[1:25:19] and then if there is evidence of

[1:25:20] of of something to do with

[1:25:26] a crime or something that is a

[1:25:27] violation of the nevada Gaming

[1:25:29] Control Act we look into it so

[1:25:31] let us know and obviously this

[1:25:33] is going to continue as this all

[1:25:35] becomes clearer but but as a but

[1:25:38] as a cornerstone we we need to

[1:25:40] keep going in court right to

[1:25:40] make sure that you know

[1:25:44] that are the rights are are

[1:25:45] protected and that the state of

[1:25:46] Nevada's protected properly

[1:25:51] assemblywoman anderson

[1:25:55] thank you so much for the

[1:25:56] presentation and for the work

[1:25:58] you guys do from the whole

[1:25:58] gaming board.

[1:26:01] I'm an alternate on this

[1:26:03] committee so I have not done as

[1:26:05] much homework as I should have

[1:26:06] to prepare for this, so I have

[1:26:08] numerous questions but I

[1:26:09] think I'll start off first with

[1:26:12] the actual item right now that

[1:26:13] seems to me most concerning,

[1:26:15] which has nothing to do with you

[1:26:16] that's the commodities futures

[1:26:17] trading commission.

[1:26:20] from what it sounds like there

[1:26:21] are

[1:26:23] there's legislation that they

[1:26:25] are forwarding and it's supposed

[1:26:27] to have5 commission

[1:26:28] commissioners is it accurate

[1:26:29] that there's only one at this

[1:26:31] time can you dig into that a

[1:26:33] little bit more. Yeah, at this

[1:26:35] time it's absolutely accurate

[1:26:37] that there is one chairman of

[1:26:40] the CFTC there is a

[1:26:42] designation or supposed

[1:26:43] designation for five

[1:26:45] commissioners but there is only

[1:26:47] one and there has been as a

[1:26:49] factual matter an ongoing

[1:26:50] rulemaking process

[1:26:53] that he has moved forward with

[1:26:54] and you know there's

[1:26:56] different views about the

[1:26:57] legality of that the

[1:26:59] appropriateness of all of that

[1:27:00] but that is in fact the case

[1:27:02] that he's moving forward with a

[1:27:05] a rulemaking that by all

[1:27:08] accounts is very very

[1:27:11] supportive of the positions of

[1:27:12] these prediction market

[1:27:13] companies who seek to offer

[1:27:15] sports prediction contracts and

[1:27:17] again fundamentally that can

[1:27:20] that proceeds as it proceeds and

[1:27:21] we in Nevada can only can

[1:27:23] control what we can control but

[1:27:25] the reality is is that it's it's

[1:27:29] sports betting the outcome of

[1:27:31] the the nicks and the Pacers is

[1:27:33] not an investment it's an enter

[1:27:34] it's a piece of entertainment

[1:27:40] and we have regulated

[1:27:43] this space successfully you

[1:27:44] know in some form or fashion for

[1:27:44] over70 years

[1:27:47] and the other thing that I'll

[1:27:49] say too that I said many times

[1:27:50] publicly is

[1:27:53] regulation is a key cornerstone

[1:27:57] to the ability of the industry

[1:27:58] to thrive because they know they

[1:28:00] have certainty they know they

[1:28:01] have fairness all of the things

[1:28:04] that you need as a foundational

[1:28:07] element to support this great

[1:28:10] gaming industry of ours and

[1:28:12] when what we see is what I have

[1:28:15] come to call regulation by tweet

[1:28:17] where there are

[1:28:19] pronouncements on social media

[1:28:22] about today we care about this

[1:28:24] and today we care about minors

[1:28:25] gambling and today we care about

[1:28:27] know your customer. well these

[1:28:28] are things that we've been

[1:28:30] caring about and have worked on

[1:28:31] and have knowledge and have

[1:28:33] successfully regulated for more

[1:28:36] than you know se decades right?

[1:28:40] So that is just not enough

[1:28:41] and then as Mr York pointed out

[1:28:43] just the staffing levels that

[1:28:44] you see at the CFTc they just

[1:28:45] don't

[1:28:48] have the people or the expertise

[1:28:49] and think that that you know

[1:28:51] they say they're working on it

[1:28:53] but that's it's a major concern

[1:28:55] and from our perspective you can

[1:28:59] be consumer friendly which as

[1:29:01] regulators we are but also

[1:29:02] engage in consumer protection

[1:29:05] and so the idea is that you know

[1:29:07] you have to have all of these

[1:29:09] things which combine to make for

[1:29:11] a robust regulatory system which

[1:29:13] some have expressed significant

[1:29:14] concern that the CFc currently

[1:29:15] doesn't offer

[1:29:17] with their one commissioner and

[1:29:18] their very limited staff

[1:29:23] Thank you. I've got so many

[1:29:24] questions but I will not ask all

[1:29:26] of them right now but I do have

[1:29:29] two more if I may does that

[1:29:31] individual who is currently the

[1:29:33] only employ the only individual

[1:29:35] on the board and or other

[1:29:37] employees of the commission they

[1:29:40] have to file an ethics item

[1:29:42] as to if they're currently

[1:29:44] working with any organizations

[1:29:46] which I believe the the Nevada

[1:29:48] Gamingtrol board has had to do

[1:29:49] like if you have any sort of

[1:29:50] other relationships

[1:29:53] with anything which I don't

[1:29:54] think anybody does at this time

[1:29:55] but

[1:29:58] does the commodities' future

[1:30:00] do they have to file anything to

[1:30:01] say that they've worked in this

[1:30:03] area or who they are currently

[1:30:04] working with or if they have

[1:30:05] stock in any of these companies.

[1:30:08] well what I'll say is as you

[1:30:11] pointed out quite correctly as a

[1:30:12] state official myself and other

[1:30:14] state officials we have a very

[1:30:16] extensive ethics filing

[1:30:18] that's required even more so in

[1:30:20] terms of from the perspective of

[1:30:21] the gaming control board in

[1:30:23] terms of holding of gaming

[1:30:26] stocks and you know or the

[1:30:28] inability to do that in my

[1:30:29] position the inability to

[1:30:32] wager all those things right? I

[1:30:34] cannot speak with any type of

[1:30:34] authority as to what the ethics

[1:30:38] requirements are for the CFTc

[1:30:42] happy to as a point of of of

[1:30:44] order or fact get back to you

[1:30:46] on that but from my perspective

[1:30:47] I could not speak with authority

[1:30:49] on that but I can't say that

[1:30:51] it's an important part of what

[1:30:53] we do to maintain our

[1:30:55] independence in this process and

[1:30:56] make sure we have all of the

[1:30:58] ethical boxes checked in

[1:30:59] accordance with state law and

[1:31:01] even frankly go above and beyond

[1:31:03] that to make sure that the

[1:31:04] public can be confident that the

[1:31:05] decision

[1:31:08] s that we make in regulating the

[1:31:10] industry are done in such a way

[1:31:12] that they're evenhanded and fair

[1:31:14] and are not subject to undue

[1:31:14] influence.

[1:31:17] thank you so much and thank you

[1:31:19] for making that very clear about

[1:31:21] the Nevada Gaming Commission and

[1:31:22] the ethics that in a high

[1:31:24] standard that you all have to

[1:31:25] follow both the control board

[1:31:26] and the commission at both

[1:31:28] levels we are very high

[1:31:30] standards in that way yes thank

[1:31:32] you and my last question if I

[1:31:34] may chair again I do I see the

[1:31:36] commercials that's about the

[1:31:37] extent of my knowledge of these

[1:31:39] of these prediction markets are

[1:31:42] these prediction markets usually

[1:31:44] owned by a corporation that is

[1:31:44] that has stock or is it

[1:31:49] usually privately owned or how

[1:31:50] exact where where are they

[1:31:52] licensed through is it done

[1:31:53] through a state I I'm just I'm

[1:31:56] confused as to how there's

[1:31:58] actually the corporation

[1:32:00] licenger and taxation.

[1:32:03] as well that goes through that

[1:32:04] so

[1:32:07] they they many of them are

[1:32:09] are private companies which

[1:32:11] obviously reduces the amount

[1:32:15] of you know visibility into

[1:32:16] their conduct and their

[1:32:16] activities

[1:32:19] so many of them them are private

[1:32:20] I suppose they could be public

[1:32:23] as well and they are

[1:32:26] ostensibly regulated by the

[1:32:28] CFTc which again from our

[1:32:31] perspective makes sense and for

[1:32:32] years and years this

[1:32:34] conversation didn't have to

[1:32:35] happen because everybody knew

[1:32:37] and sort of acted appropriately

[1:32:39] in terms of what the lines were

[1:32:41] economic hedges through

[1:32:43] things like interest rates

[1:32:45] and soybean prices and and corn

[1:32:46] and those sorts of things that's

[1:32:47] what

[1:32:49] this has been for many years

[1:32:50] until all of us and and even the

[1:32:52] the CFTc had said so and even

[1:32:54] Calci had said so until all of a

[1:32:55] sudden within the last eight

[1:32:56] months they said well no

[1:32:59] and there's absolutely as I

[1:33:01] indicated in my testimony no

[1:33:03] evidence to suggest that

[1:33:05] Congress spoke plainly on this

[1:33:07] there's there's a saying that

[1:33:08] you know you can't hide an

[1:33:10] elephant in a mouse hole right

[1:33:12] and so that the case here is

[1:33:14] that there's no evidence that

[1:33:14] the federal government on any

[1:33:15] level

[1:33:18] would have allowed them to take

[1:33:21] these contracts for sports

[1:33:23] prediction right? if anything

[1:33:25] what Murphy the case Murphy I

[1:33:27] cited shows it's quite the

[1:33:29] opposite and so we feel really

[1:33:31] strongly about our legal opinion

[1:33:32] our legal position.

[1:33:33] obviouslybviously that's in the

[1:33:35] courts and to Senator Donate's

[1:33:37] point you know when I took the

[1:33:38] job I

[1:33:41] there's an element to this

[1:33:43] obviously I can't talk about

[1:33:44] because we have multiple

[1:33:45] litigations going at once. how

[1:33:48] I do need to have the

[1:33:48] discussion about

[1:33:51] public policy and I do need to

[1:33:53] have the general discussion of

[1:33:55] why this is so wrong and why

[1:33:56] this can't stand and why it's an

[1:33:58] existential threat. I have to do

[1:34:01] that in my job and can't

[1:34:02] just hide behind this notion

[1:34:03] that well we're in litigation I

[1:34:05] can't talk about it there are

[1:34:06] certain elements of this that I

[1:34:08] can talk about and I have talked

[1:34:08] about it and I know we'll

[1:34:09] continue to talk about it and to

[1:34:11] your earlier question assembly

[1:34:14] member Anderson around education

[1:34:16] very important that we

[1:34:18] educate the the the state

[1:34:18] legislature other state legis

[1:34:21] la ture s the public so they

[1:34:23] understand the dangers of all of

[1:34:25] this it isn't just as harmless

[1:34:28] fun idea of hey you can now do

[1:34:30] sports betting in5 state this is

[1:34:33] hurting people this is taking

[1:34:35] students who otherwise would

[1:34:36] spend money on their tuition

[1:34:39] and this is having them apply

[1:34:40] that to to betting

[1:34:43] on on a on an exchange and

[1:34:45] you know I will say this back to

[1:34:48] your question senator donate

[1:34:50] you know this is a story that

[1:34:50] has many more chapters to

[1:34:51] unfold.

[1:34:55] again right now we're focused on

[1:34:57] where I can proudly sit before

[1:34:58] you and say that we have

[1:35:00] restricted this conduct in the

[1:35:02] state of nevada and if new

[1:35:03] actors come along we're gonna

[1:35:04] take them on to game of whack a

[1:35:06] mole in a way right because they

[1:35:07] can come from any which

[1:35:09] direction but there are many

[1:35:11] more chapters in here one of

[1:35:13] which you know may include the

[1:35:15] things that you mentioned

[1:35:16] disgorgement other things that

[1:35:17] could potentially happen down

[1:35:19] the road right so a lot of

[1:35:21] chapters there were still in

[1:35:22] what I would consider to be the

[1:35:23] early

[1:35:23] stage of this thing but

[1:35:27] conclusively when the patrons

[1:35:31] go to wager at the first week of

[1:35:32] the NFl season which is

[1:35:33] historically one of the largest

[1:35:38] handle weekends of the the

[1:35:40] year they will do so with

[1:35:42] confidence and and with the

[1:35:44] inability to do these prediction

[1:35:45] contracts for the reasons stated

[1:35:48] so

[1:35:51] thank you for that. So I will

[1:35:52] ask the I guess

[1:35:54] final two questions and close

[1:35:55] out this presentation so the

[1:35:57] first question it's fairly

[1:35:58] simple. the second one is more

[1:36:00] like a legal thought question

[1:36:02] cause I'm just super curious but

[1:36:03] it's between that second

[1:36:06] question would be between you

[1:36:07] and Mr Yorke. so the first

[1:36:10] question is if if a if a current

[1:36:13] corporation is currently in a

[1:36:14] contract with one of these

[1:36:17] actors right and making money

[1:36:18] post the decision

[1:36:23] what how how would that

[1:36:26] information be shared how

[1:36:26] would that information because

[1:36:29] I don't wanna out anyone but I

[1:36:31] literally had a conversation

[1:36:33] like a week and a half ago where

[1:36:35] there was a corporation that

[1:36:36] currently has a contract with

[1:36:37] Polymarket.

[1:36:39] and they're currently doing

[1:36:41] business and making revenue with

[1:36:43] polymarket and I was just like

[1:36:45] how is that possible right

[1:36:48] because it it had been had been

[1:36:49] for more than a year

[1:36:55] Yes, and and I well let me just

[1:36:56] say that senatorneal I I

[1:36:57] certainly share those

[1:36:59] frustrations and we in Nevada

[1:37:00] have been very strong saying

[1:37:01] that

[1:37:03] to participate with those

[1:37:05] companies and and and we we

[1:37:07] regulate our licensees right and

[1:37:09] to participate with those

[1:37:11] companies renders one

[1:37:14] incompatible to participate in

[1:37:15] Nevada's gaming industry. we've

[1:37:17] said that but there's only so

[1:37:19] many things that we can control

[1:37:20] it is frustrating to see

[1:37:24] sports leagues sports teams

[1:37:27] enter into these arrangements

[1:37:28] these financial arrangements

[1:37:30] they do so under the the color

[1:37:32] of this pending litigation

[1:37:35] which obviously we disagree with

[1:37:36] that point of view

[1:37:39] it's you know a

[1:37:40] financiallyd driven decision

[1:37:42] that of course I fully disagree

[1:37:44] with and now you know

[1:37:47] look it the matter is going

[1:37:49] through the courts and you know

[1:37:50] I would expect at some point

[1:37:51] there'll be a reckoning related

[1:37:53] to that but in terms of what we

[1:37:56] can control now those things

[1:37:56] happen and they

[1:38:01] they hide behind high priced

[1:38:03] legal opinions frankly now I'll

[1:38:05] say this to you know you can you

[1:38:07] know they get these high pressed

[1:38:10] legal opinions but when you read

[1:38:12] the penal codes of the states

[1:38:13] that don't allow gambling or you

[1:38:15] read our code which allows

[1:38:17] gambling only under a licensed

[1:38:20] circumstance those are the laws

[1:38:21] so we have laws that must be

[1:38:22] followed so I fully agree with

[1:38:24] you. I share your frustration

[1:38:25] but in many instances

[1:38:27] entities within corporate

[1:38:31] America are you know relying on

[1:38:32] these these opinions and relying

[1:38:34] on this uncertainty which I hope

[1:38:37] and expect given the law that

[1:38:39] will be will be settled here but

[1:38:40] there's no more satisfying

[1:38:41] answer than that at this stage

[1:38:43] but it's a concern and we in

[1:38:45] Nevada regulating our

[1:38:47] licensees, making gaming safe

[1:38:49] for the state of Nevada and the

[1:38:50] patrons in the state of Nevada

[1:38:52] we do all we can within our

[1:38:54] borders there's other

[1:38:55] discussions with other stateser

[1:38:58] if asked my opinion nationwide I

[1:39:00] will give it and have given it

[1:39:01] but other states have different

[1:39:04] pressures different approaches

[1:39:06] and we do what we can to keep as

[1:39:07] I say the state of Nevada the

[1:39:08] streets are clean these

[1:39:09] companies are out

[1:39:15] thank you for that and so here's

[1:39:17] here's more of the I guess legal

[1:39:19] thought question so when you

[1:39:21] were doing the presentation and

[1:39:24] also Mr York basically a

[1:39:25] couple of statements were made

[1:39:27] the statement from you which is

[1:39:29] you know it's pretty clear that

[1:39:33] the state's govern gambling

[1:39:36] right and so Congress has opened

[1:39:36] that door

[1:39:40] and then the second comment that

[1:39:41] Mr. York had brought up which

[1:39:43] was one of the examples I don't

[1:39:45] know if it was Kentucky or

[1:39:49] arizona who then was sued by

[1:39:52] the CFTC right so then it made

[1:39:53] me start asking the question

[1:39:56] whether or not if the state

[1:39:59] itself would sued or parties

[1:40:01] because you know I started

[1:40:03] thinking about two things,

[1:40:06] right? The Murphy decision right

[1:40:07] and what

[1:40:11] was listed in alito's comments

[1:40:13] around when he was laying out

[1:40:14] pasta and how pastpa works and

[1:40:17] and one of the like clear

[1:40:19] statements that he had put in

[1:40:23] the opinion was that the

[1:40:25] constitution confers upon

[1:40:27] Congress the power to regulate

[1:40:28] individuals not states right?

[1:40:31] and then I started to read

[1:40:35] you know the chevron ruling

[1:40:37] which basically was overturned

[1:40:41] by loper right which then in

[1:40:45] that decision they in loper

[1:40:46] decision they said the court

[1:40:50] held that when confronted

[1:40:50] with statutory ambiguity.

[1:40:55] a court should not defer to an

[1:40:57] agency's interpretation but

[1:40:59] should do the ordinary job of

[1:41:01] interpreting statutes right

[1:41:04] so when I was thinking about

[1:41:06] those two pieces together right

[1:41:08] there appears to be some kind of

[1:41:10] reconciliation that needs to

[1:41:10] happen

[1:41:13] because I started thinking

[1:41:14] about

[1:41:14] the

[1:41:17] comments that were made on

[1:41:21] CFTC's rule right so I was I was

[1:41:24] it I was I was provided a few

[1:41:26] weeks back on what NRA's

[1:41:29] comments were to seeFCFTc's

[1:41:31] rules and the comments that were

[1:41:35] made around

[1:41:37] that I it would seem I don't

[1:41:38] know if it would be ambiguity of

[1:41:39] the rule or just plain out

[1:41:44] ignoring reality of what they

[1:41:46] should be really ruling on right

[1:41:49] and so I started to wonder have

[1:41:51] those arguments and you probably

[1:41:53] can't even say that but have

[1:41:55] those arguments been made about

[1:41:58] whether or not the CFTC is

[1:41:58] overstepping

[1:42:02] now with the loper decision

[1:42:03] right which pretty much

[1:42:05] overruled Chevron. they no

[1:42:07] longer in the position of of

[1:42:09] having the power to just say you

[1:42:12] know as an agency under this1984

[1:42:14] decision I can therefore say xy

[1:42:17] and z because pretty much it was

[1:42:20] removed with the loafer decision

[1:42:20] so

[1:42:24] what what has there been any

[1:42:26] conversation around that nuanced

[1:42:26] point

[1:42:31] around the CFTC's ruling and and

[1:42:33] it's and reconciling what the

[1:42:35] loper decision pretty much said

[1:42:38] right? I mean that's what I want

[1:42:38] to know

[1:42:40] in a long way getting there

[1:42:43] and then I'll probably pivot to

[1:42:44] the pasta thing too.

[1:42:50] well senator that to your

[1:42:51] comments a moment ago I have to

[1:42:53] be a little bit careful but what

[1:42:55] I will say is you know the

[1:42:58] state of Nevada the has

[1:43:00] has been working with Mayorrown

[1:43:01] law firm

[1:43:02] and

[1:43:06] obviously the NRA hasn't been

[1:43:09] been put in the case as well and

[1:43:10] they are represented bymcdonald

[1:43:13] Carrano and we have so between

[1:43:16] all of this in terms of Nevada's

[1:43:18] interests and then the interests

[1:43:18] of NRA

[1:43:23] excellent counsel and I can

[1:43:25] assure you that every single

[1:43:28] argument that needs to be

[1:43:28] brought forth is being brought

[1:43:29] forth

[1:43:30] and we are aggressively

[1:43:34] making sure that all of the

[1:43:35] angles that

[1:43:38] need to be brought forth and

[1:43:40] considered are being considered

[1:43:41] probably about as much as I

[1:43:42] should say on that

[1:43:50] thank you for that. I just it's

[1:43:50] just a squirrely

[1:43:53] world where I guess

[1:43:56] legal principles that you

[1:43:56] believe

[1:43:58] to be sound

[1:43:59] and present

[1:44:03] are then being challenged in it

[1:44:04] in

[1:44:04] and

[1:44:09] leaving everything to some I

[1:44:10] guess obscure

[1:44:14] I would say obscure endings

[1:44:16] right and I guess I guess that's

[1:44:17] currently the environment we're

[1:44:19] in right there are no straight

[1:44:20] paths you're not following a

[1:44:20] yellow brick road you're

[1:44:21] actually following

[1:44:27] agencies that are

[1:44:29] federal agencies that are

[1:44:32] overstepping I think and

[1:44:34] really not thinking about

[1:44:38] the dynamic between federalism

[1:44:41] and how states actually keep a

[1:44:42] certain amount of power

[1:44:45] versus what the federal

[1:44:46] government may want to tell them

[1:44:48] to do but there is a fine line

[1:44:50] and I think that is what the

[1:44:52] Murphy decision kind of set

[1:44:54] forth right they set forth what

[1:44:56] is the relationship between

[1:44:59] states and congre right and they

[1:45:01] really spelled it out you know

[1:45:02] in the Alito decision when he

[1:45:04] really spelled out like he went

[1:45:05] into that whole archaic

[1:45:07] principle around the anti

[1:45:08] commandeering where we were all

[1:45:10] like what is this like why are

[1:45:11] we going back to1868 but he

[1:45:12] literally

[1:45:17] spelled out like what the role

[1:45:18] is between Congress and what is

[1:45:20] the role between states and what

[1:45:23] Congress can force a state to do

[1:45:25] and what they cannot force us to

[1:45:27] do and in this case we have a

[1:45:29] private actor who without the

[1:45:30] consent of the state

[1:45:34] is running around doing business

[1:45:35] in the state of Nevada without

[1:45:37] our consent and we're trying to

[1:45:39] figure out how to how to pull

[1:45:41] that back and how to

[1:45:46] put controls in that need to be

[1:45:48] there and I would say that the

[1:45:49] federal government is not

[1:45:51] necessarily a partner in that

[1:45:53] right that's my opinion which

[1:45:54] which I appreciate and again you

[1:45:54] know

[1:45:59] the the focus from when it

[1:46:00] waschir Hendrick and now myself

[1:46:02] I took over about14 months ago

[1:46:04] stepped right into this and the

[1:46:05] focus the daily focus

[1:46:10] has been to restrict and stop

[1:46:10] this conduct in the state of

[1:46:11] Nevada.

[1:46:14] every day that's that's the

[1:46:15] that's what's on the bulletin

[1:46:18] board to stop it right now we've

[1:46:19] we've achieved that.

[1:46:21] and the matter's gonna keep

[1:46:23] going through the courts. I

[1:46:26] obviously we obviously

[1:46:29] within the board agree with you

[1:46:31] and we actually agree with

[1:46:33] the Earl whatal she had said

[1:46:35] earlier and what the CFTC had

[1:46:37] said earlier which is that

[1:46:40] sports contracts are not

[1:46:41] permissible then all of a sudden

[1:46:43] they change their mind and I go

[1:46:45] back to my earlier comment when

[1:46:47] there was an individual who was

[1:46:48] interviewed who said something

[1:46:49] he's in the he's in the

[1:46:50] prediction market business

[1:46:53] and he said this is an end run

[1:46:55] around sports betting plain and

[1:46:57] simple so we agree with you we

[1:47:00] agree with that that concept

[1:47:00] in terms of

[1:47:03] this issue we're we're

[1:47:05] protecting the state of Nevada

[1:47:07] and the things will keep going

[1:47:08] through the courts but we have

[1:47:09] stopped the conduct which is

[1:47:11] critical and that was no small

[1:47:15] feat. We had to some actors were

[1:47:16] easier to stop than others some

[1:47:18] have been very aggressive and we

[1:47:19] stopped them too

[1:47:22] and so as I said earlier there's

[1:47:24] many more chapters of this

[1:47:26] book but we come before you at a

[1:47:28] point where we've stopped this

[1:47:30] and the legal interpretation

[1:47:31] obviously you can see from our

[1:47:33] filings and our approach that we

[1:47:35] we agree with much of what

[1:47:38] you've said and you know

[1:47:39] we're we're doing the best we

[1:47:42] can within within what what's

[1:47:44] what's happening here we

[1:47:46] definitely disagree with the the

[1:47:48] CFTc's approach on this and

[1:47:53] we will continue to fight there

[1:47:56] may be 24 moredCms which pop up

[1:47:56] tomorrow.

[1:47:58] and we're gonna fight them too

[1:48:01] because that is my commitment to

[1:48:03] to you and and to the state that

[1:48:04] we fight that

[1:48:09] so it it has to unfold so yes I

[1:48:10] agree with what you're saying we

[1:48:13] have kept this completely you

[1:48:15] know to the issue of fairness

[1:48:17] and to the issue of of following

[1:48:20] the law and you know it's our

[1:48:23] expectation that in the end

[1:48:25] the the law will be followed

[1:48:27] it's just a matter of the damage

[1:48:28] that will be done until we get

[1:48:29] there.

[1:48:30] and that's unfortunate

[1:48:34] fairil if I might if I might be

[1:48:35] able to add one more comment to

[1:48:37] piggyback on on on the

[1:48:38] chairman's remarks and to go

[1:48:40] back to what you were saying

[1:48:42] regarding thecFTC being kind of

[1:48:44] a small rogue agency where

[1:48:45] they're now taking this

[1:48:47] authority that was never

[1:48:50] expressly given to them and they

[1:48:51] certainly are not equipped to

[1:48:53] handle it. there actually was a

[1:48:56] recent rebuke in a in a legal

[1:48:57] ruling from a federal district

[1:48:59] judge in a case that that came

[1:49:00] out of Connecticut and

[1:49:03] I think you will find it

[1:49:05] extraordinary as I did that

[1:49:06] there there have been two cases

[1:49:08] recently one in Michigan and one

[1:49:09] in the state of New York where

[1:49:13] the CFTC has sought to has

[1:49:14] sought to call upon what they

[1:49:17] call their exclusive authority

[1:49:21] to to basically say that a state

[1:49:23] court ruling on whether or not

[1:49:25] to prohibit sports betting

[1:49:26] through prediction markets it

[1:49:30] can be ignored and that that is

[1:49:30] a particular

[1:49:31] ly

[1:49:35] on awe inspiring thing for for

[1:49:37] for an a federal agency like the

[1:49:39] CFTc which as the chairman

[1:49:41] stated was was originally stated

[1:49:44] to created to to regulate

[1:49:46] soybean and soybean futures and

[1:49:48] wheat futures is now basically

[1:49:50] telling the prediction market

[1:49:52] companies that they ostensibly

[1:49:54] regulate that they can ignore

[1:49:56] lawful court orders at some

[1:49:57] point and a federal judge

[1:50:00] recently within the last two

[1:50:02] weeks in in in anecticut case

[1:50:05] specifically called out thecFTC

[1:50:07] for even attempting to to go

[1:50:09] about that that line of legal

[1:50:12] reasoning basically saying that

[1:50:14] any authority that the CFTC

[1:50:15] thinks that they have is not

[1:50:17] going to conflict with with any

[1:50:19] court's rulings and that they

[1:50:20] they have to abide by them just

[1:50:22] like everyone else and so it was

[1:50:24] a pretty extraordinary rebuke to

[1:50:26] a pretty extraordinary move by

[1:50:28] the CFTc in in in my view

[1:50:30] and the only other thing that

[1:50:31] I'll you know mention to go back

[1:50:33] to the conversation about you

[1:50:35] know these these companies that

[1:50:36] are now doing deals with sports

[1:50:38] leagues and individual sports

[1:50:40] teams and the entire theory of

[1:50:42] the case I personally believe

[1:50:43] for this is they are attempting

[1:50:45] to get too big to fail as

[1:50:47] quickly as they can and so that

[1:50:48] it just in their view it

[1:50:51] makes it more difficult for

[1:50:53] likely the supreme court to

[1:50:55] strike down what is80 to90% of

[1:50:57] their business if they are so

[1:50:58] integrated or trying to get as

[1:50:58] integrated

[1:51:01] as they can into the fabric of

[1:51:02] American culture and what I mean

[1:51:03] by that is it's not just

[1:51:05] individual sports teams or

[1:51:06] individual sports leagues they

[1:51:08] also have they have

[1:51:09] information sharing deals with

[1:51:11] with you know the CnNs of the

[1:51:13] world and the CNBC's of the

[1:51:15] world and so you know their

[1:51:16] official sponsors for media

[1:51:18] organizations and all of these

[1:51:19] different types of things and so

[1:51:20] I think they're burrowing in

[1:51:22] they're trying to raise money at

[1:51:24] historic valuations now you know

[1:51:25] they're they're looking at

[1:51:27] trying to get up to30 to40

[1:51:28] billion dollars in valuations

[1:51:31] and again the you know these at

[1:51:32] least the two largest prediction

[1:51:33] market companies are both

[1:51:35] private so these are this is

[1:51:36] private raising they may go

[1:51:39] public at some point but all

[1:51:40] of this again is to just try to

[1:51:42] get to a point where they appear

[1:51:44] to be too big to fail and you

[1:51:47] know at the end of the day I I

[1:51:48] believe and I hope that that

[1:51:48] that

[1:51:50] the United States Supreme Court

[1:51:51] is going to look at the law and

[1:51:53] make a determination on what the

[1:51:54] law is and I think at the end of

[1:51:56] the day the question will come

[1:51:58] down to not how broadly broad a

[1:51:59] definition of a swap is but what

[1:52:01] it's going to come down to is

[1:52:03] what did Congress intend because

[1:52:05] as the chairman said earlier you

[1:52:06] know hiding hiding elephants

[1:52:07] and mouse holes that's kind of

[1:52:09] like the legal principle and

[1:52:11] that if if if Congress intended

[1:52:14] to preempt a traditional area of

[1:52:17] regulation by the states in any

[1:52:18] industry but in this case

[1:52:18] gambling

[1:52:21] they would have expressly done

[1:52:23] so and not and not you know

[1:52:24] simply expanded the definition

[1:52:27] of a swap and it took someone 15

[1:52:28] years to realize oh by the way

[1:52:30] Congress authorized nationwide

[1:52:31] sports betting. It literally

[1:52:34] defies belief and that's why you

[1:52:36] know at the end of the day I

[1:52:38] I I think we're going to win and

[1:52:40] commend all of all of you for

[1:52:40] for your

[1:52:43] for your engagement on this and

[1:52:45] as well as chairman Dreiter's

[1:52:46] leadership and General Ford and

[1:52:47] governor Lombardo as well

[1:52:50] can can I make just a couple of

[1:52:52] points to follow on that the

[1:52:54] certainly we have heard and it's

[1:52:55] been said and it makes sense at

[1:52:57] some level this idea that

[1:52:58] they're trying to become too big

[1:52:59] to fail so they're doing all

[1:53:00] these these contracts I think

[1:53:01] that's a red herring in the

[1:53:05] sense that we're not out to

[1:53:07] pursue their failure it doesn't

[1:53:09] have to be one or the other they

[1:53:10] can

[1:53:12] they'll never be too big to

[1:53:14] regulate. The point is all this

[1:53:18] conduct if they choose to not

[1:53:20] all of it but you know they can

[1:53:23] come to Nevada we would be you

[1:53:24] know willing to have them come

[1:53:26] to Nevada and get a license like

[1:53:28] everybody else and potentially

[1:53:31] pursue some of the things

[1:53:32] they're doing in Nevada that

[1:53:34] they otherwise can't do without

[1:53:36] a license so we're not

[1:53:38] rooting for their the prediction

[1:53:39] market's failure we just want

[1:53:40] them to come in and do

[1:53:42] it the right way and get a

[1:53:46] license and and bes vetted

[1:53:48] to ensure that they meet the

[1:53:49] standards of the privileged

[1:53:51] license of gaming in the state

[1:53:53] of Nevada and of course they to

[1:53:54] date have shown no interest in

[1:53:57] that so the point is it doesn't

[1:53:58] have to be all or nothing it

[1:54:00] doesn't have to be you know the

[1:54:02] they too big to fail they're not

[1:54:04] too big to regulate and we

[1:54:06] should as other states should

[1:54:08] have the ability to regulate

[1:54:08] them and to make our decision

[1:54:12] about the best way to make sure

[1:54:14] that they are suitable to allow

[1:54:16] them to engage in the gaming

[1:54:17] industry in the state of Nevada

[1:54:18] and to the extent that they

[1:54:19] continue to have no interest in

[1:54:20] that we will continue to fight

[1:54:22] with everything we have to make

[1:54:24] sure that our rights are

[1:54:24] protected.

[1:54:26] so thank you for that and

[1:54:30] and and I just it's a short

[1:54:32] question and then it's really my

[1:54:33] final question and then we're

[1:54:34] going to close this out and move

[1:54:36] to the next presentation but

[1:54:38] if we bring them in under the

[1:54:40] regulation like let's say you

[1:54:42] know all the fighting ends and

[1:54:43] it's like right we agreed to be

[1:54:44] regulated

[1:54:46] or punished or whatever

[1:54:51] what do you think the rate

[1:54:53] should be?hould they roll into

[1:54:56] the existing6.75 or should it be

[1:54:57] a higher rate because

[1:54:58] technically

[1:55:02] I mean I'm a revenue cheer

[1:55:04] right so I'm always thinking

[1:55:06] like if they're outside and like

[1:55:07] in addition to

[1:55:11] should that be a higher rate

[1:55:13] because technically there

[1:55:17] they're not a casino

[1:55:22] they're not they will become a

[1:55:24] form of licensee but that would

[1:55:25] be defined

[1:55:26] on what that licensee is

[1:55:31] I'm going to senator Neon

[1:55:32] committee members I'm going to

[1:55:33] defer to the legislature and to

[1:55:35] that process it's it's not my

[1:55:38] place to say what the rate

[1:55:40] should be it's my s job to

[1:55:43] dutifully execute on it that

[1:55:45] which the legislature and the

[1:55:46] governor ultimately decide so

[1:55:47] I'm gonna I'm gonna sidestep

[1:55:49] that but what I will say is this

[1:55:50] and I think this is an important

[1:55:52] point when you talk there's this

[1:55:54] notion that somehow

[1:55:56] their technology is so different

[1:55:57] that it couldn't be

[1:55:59] re gu late d in the state of

[1:56:02] Nevada that is nonsense right

[1:56:04] now I'm not suggesting that we

[1:56:06] might not need some changes to

[1:56:09] our our regs to somehow allow

[1:56:11] some sort of you know

[1:56:13] prediction type product in

[1:56:15] Nevada it's possible right we'd

[1:56:16] have to look at that but this

[1:56:18] notion that we don't have the

[1:56:19] ability to regulate their

[1:56:23] conduct is absolute nonsense

[1:56:26] and we look if if it's the will

[1:56:26] of the state and then the

[1:56:29] ul ti mate ly the will of the

[1:56:31] players that they like these

[1:56:32] types of products and there's a

[1:56:34] way to bring them in under our

[1:56:35] regulation which I believe

[1:56:36] largely there could be

[1:56:40] and whatever tax status is

[1:56:42] decided upon we can regulate

[1:56:44] them. they try and say that

[1:56:45] there's something completely

[1:56:47] different the reality is it's a

[1:56:48] betting exchange and we're very

[1:56:51] capable of regulating that

[1:56:52] and making sure it's safe,

[1:56:54] making sure whatever taxes are

[1:56:56] decided upon are paid properly

[1:56:58] all of that we can do all of

[1:56:59] that we've shown for70 years we

[1:57:00] can do it and we can do it

[1:57:02] they're not that special right

[1:57:04] we can do that so we we would

[1:57:05] welcome that technology

[1:57:08] into the state if the powers

[1:57:10] that be decided they wanted it

[1:57:11] and we could faithfully regulate

[1:57:13] it in the state so this notion

[1:57:15] that we wouldn't know how to do

[1:57:16] it we've been called we've been

[1:57:18] insulted we've been called slot

[1:57:20] regulators and you who are not

[1:57:22] sophisticated who don't

[1:57:24] understand how what what

[1:57:25] they're doing is different

[1:57:27] that's nonsense we can

[1:57:28] absolutely regulate them but of

[1:57:30] course they've shown no interest

[1:57:31] in that. Well I appreciate that

[1:57:33] comment. maybe there'll be a

[1:57:35] sophisticated tax rate. No I'm

[1:57:36] sorry

[1:57:38] as you wish

[1:57:44] you know raising revenues the

[1:57:47] thing to do ok well thank you

[1:57:49] thank you Mr York thank youchair

[1:57:51] Drreiter for coming in and doing

[1:57:53] this really thoughtful

[1:57:54] presentation wanted to make sure

[1:57:54] we got that in

[1:57:58] and this has been very

[1:58:00] informative and educational, so

[1:58:02] I'm hoping that you know I know

[1:58:03] there's going to be some

[1:58:05] legislation on this but I just

[1:58:08] wanted to make sure we got this

[1:58:08] on the record

[1:58:11] if there was any future action

[1:58:15] that the revenueittee was

[1:58:16] considering

[1:58:19] something but we

[1:58:21] appreciate your time this

[1:58:22] morning and thank you so much.

[1:58:24] thank you very much

[1:58:27] so with that yeah we will close

[1:58:28] agenda item number

[1:58:39] and then we will go to agenda

[1:58:40] item number7.

[1:58:43] No do we do that

[1:58:48] didn't do we didn't do6view

[1:58:51] are you doing the overview of

[1:58:55] the taxes? can we can we I know

[1:58:57] Mr Nakamoto can we do the

[1:58:58] workforce folks

[1:58:59] then come back to that

[1:59:05] madam Chairmi Nakamura with

[1:59:07] fiscal analysis division for the

[1:59:08] record I am not doing the

[1:59:10] presentation on the gaming so

[1:59:12] but it is your call. yeah let's

[1:59:13] do7

[1:59:17] and then we'll come back to6.

[1:59:20] because it flows in with the

[1:59:22] overview of the sales tax tax

[1:59:25] rate anyway so I'm gonna I'm

[1:59:26] gonna members I'm gonna

[1:59:27] rearrange this

[1:59:32] I'm gonna take7 which is the

[1:59:34] overview discussion of workforce

[1:59:35] development programs in the

[1:59:36] state of Nevada because it's a

[1:59:37] very narrow

[1:59:41] conversation and then we'll

[1:59:44] combine the gaming tax fees and

[1:59:46] then the sales sales and use tax

[1:59:47] rate

[1:59:48] conversation together

[2:00:30] OK all right thank you we

[2:00:31] just we have a member that is

[2:00:33] went to the wrong place

[2:00:36] didn't know he was coming

[2:00:41] but ok let's move on to agenda

[2:00:42] item number7. you may begin when

[2:00:43] you're ready.

[2:00:47] thank you madam chair for the

[2:00:48] record my name is Irene

[2:00:50] Bustamantha Adams and I'm joined

[2:00:50] by my two

[2:00:52] colleaguesiccardorillalobos here

[2:00:54] on my left our chief programme

[2:00:56] officer at Workforce Connections

[2:00:58] and Brett Miller are strategic

[2:01:02] analysis manager we have many

[2:01:02] requests from our leadership

[2:01:04] team and unfortunately our

[2:01:06] executive director representing

[2:01:08] our team is at another event we

[2:01:10] are dividing in order to address

[2:01:13] the many demands of our time he

[2:01:14] asked me to convey his regrets

[2:01:14] to the

[2:01:17] committee for not being present

[2:01:19] and he appreciates the

[2:01:20] opportunity for us to share the

[2:01:21] work with you all

[2:01:28] So this is a picture that I've

[2:01:30] shared before it is a picture

[2:01:32] of the workforce ecosystem that

[2:01:33] is funded through workforce

[2:01:35] innovation Opportunity Act or

[2:01:38] weOa for short. these are

[2:01:40] federal funds given to17

[2:01:42] different entities in this

[2:01:45] ecosystem we are referred to as

[2:01:48] title I eachach entity has a

[2:01:49] formula attached to how that

[2:01:50] money is allocated from the

[2:01:54] federal level here's what I

[2:01:54] want you to remember

[2:01:58] workforce connections is a small

[2:02:01] portion of the funds we do not

[2:02:05] control all17. that is an entire

[2:02:07] ecosystem and so workforce

[2:02:09] connections is ressponsible for

[2:02:11] the southern portion of the

[2:02:13] state of Nevada so it's clark

[2:02:17] Esmeralda Lincoln and ny and so

[2:02:19] you'll hear about the northern

[2:02:20] portion right after us with our

[2:02:23] counterpart from Nevadaorks and

[2:02:24] our mission we've stated it

[2:02:24] before is

[2:02:27] to connect employers to a ready

[2:02:28] workforce.

[2:02:31] so your committee asked us to

[2:02:35] answer3 questionsgras and

[2:02:36] employment outcomes for foster

[2:02:37] care

[2:02:43] 2 how did AB354 from the 2017

[2:02:46] legislative session was used

[2:02:48] to guide our workforce planning

[2:02:50] and service delivery and3 how

[2:02:51] does workforce connection

[2:02:53] support workers and employers as

[2:02:55] Ai and automation reshape job

[2:03:00] so in the question regarding

[2:03:02] foster care you asked us to

[2:03:05] focus on a couple of thingsfs

[2:03:07] over the last10 years are

[2:03:10] outreach efforts demographics

[2:03:11] statistics and placement of

[2:03:12] employment

[2:03:15] and i'll hand it over to

[2:03:17] my colleague. Yeah thank thank

[2:03:19] you Irene Ricardo Vilobos for

[2:03:21] the record that's Rri C Ar D

[2:03:25] Oviolobos vil L a L O B O S I

[2:03:26] think what I wanted to do here

[2:03:29] was set context for the work

[2:03:30] we do as a local workforce

[2:03:31] development board for theun

[2:03:32] Nevada region

[2:03:35] and just to provide some context

[2:03:37] and perspective it notes here

[2:03:38] that there's over36,000

[2:03:41] disconnected young people those

[2:03:42] are young people who are neither

[2:03:44] working nor in school between

[2:03:44] the ages of16 to 24.

[2:03:47] weoa the workforce innovation

[2:03:49] Opportunity Actitle One funds

[2:03:51] that workforce connectction

[2:03:53] receives has the opportunity

[2:03:55] to serve approximately1,000

[2:03:56] young people per year.

[2:03:59] how it works out to about60

[2:04:02] to700 young people that are

[2:04:04] enrolled in programming as new

[2:04:06] enrollments and then about3

[2:04:08] to400 that actually carry over

[2:04:10] year after year because it's not

[2:04:13] that they start July 1 all 1000

[2:04:14] then continue throughout the

[2:04:15] year enrollments happen on an

[2:04:16] ongoing basis

[2:04:19] we all wea requires us to

[2:04:20] provide services to various

[2:04:21] youth populations facing

[2:04:23] significant barriers youth

[2:04:26] where justice involved homeless

[2:04:28] parenting pregnant youth with

[2:04:29] disabilities and high school

[2:04:31] dropouts and we know that as a

[2:04:32] local workforce board only

[2:04:33] having the capacity to do 1000

[2:04:36] that it takes a a coalition and

[2:04:39] a partnerships in the community

[2:04:41] to focus on serving those youth

[2:04:42] who are most in need and and of

[2:04:43] course we serve foster youth

[2:04:45] this with the this is focused

[2:04:46] about but I think it's important

[2:04:48] for this committee to understand

[2:04:49] that our legislation mandates us

[2:04:51] to not just focus on foster

[2:04:53] youth but youth facing

[2:04:54] significant barriers to

[2:04:54] employment

[2:04:57] and so and that happens with

[2:04:58] us through theloyingv

[2:04:59] youthubwork.

[2:05:07] the way that we engage youth

[2:05:10] before they age out is through

[2:05:12] our employee vi hub youth hub

[2:05:14] network and just to mention a

[2:05:15] few things that have happened

[2:05:16] that I wanted to make sure this

[2:05:17] committee was aware of is as far

[2:05:19] as engagement with organizations

[2:05:22] serving youth in the foster care

[2:05:24] system about to age out

[2:05:25] there's partnerships and

[2:05:26] engagement with a monthly on a

[2:05:28] monthly basis with Childhan to

[2:05:30] provide career readiness

[2:05:31] biweekly orientations with the

[2:05:32] Clark County step upgrame

[2:05:35] and then annual Clark County

[2:05:37] Department of Familyervice

[2:05:39] foster youth graduation outreach

[2:05:40] that we are engaged in

[2:05:41] there's a referral network

[2:05:43] working with organizations

[2:05:46] that refer foster youth to

[2:05:48] the system and youth who are

[2:05:49] about to age out and again a few

[2:05:50] that are noted there is our

[2:05:52] participation in the foster care

[2:05:52] chamber on a quarterly basis

[2:05:56] attending sheriff joy inhaler's

[2:05:58] creation events and job fairs

[2:05:59] working with a legal aid of

[2:06:01] southern nevada I foster Eagle

[2:06:03] Quest Olive Crest and we're

[2:06:04] currently in the works to

[2:06:05] partner with Saint Jude's rannch

[2:06:09] to open a restaurant titled

[2:06:11] the blooming Bistro where foster

[2:06:13] youth who are there and are

[2:06:14] about to age out and gain

[2:06:15] workbased learning experiences

[2:06:19] in our rural communities we

[2:06:21] also haveloyingv youth hubs

[2:06:23] where they work to serve foster

[2:06:24] youth and those about to age out

[2:06:27] Acor which is advocates for

[2:06:29] children of rural Nevada is

[2:06:31] ournight countunty employee the

[2:06:34] youthhub partners with them

[2:06:35] focused on youth who are about

[2:06:37] to approach adulthood and

[2:06:39] wanting to capture them before

[2:06:40] they transition into adulthood

[2:06:42] and out of services Knight

[2:06:43] County school districtmcKinney

[2:06:45] ento programme is a referral

[2:06:47] partnership and one particular

[2:06:49] focus there is to key in on

[2:06:50] through the employment of a

[2:06:51] youth hub in our rural community

[2:06:54] on youth who've been abandoned

[2:06:54] as they near the age of eight

[2:06:57] and then as it notes here the

[2:06:59] wrongwood Familysourceenter

[2:07:01] where staff coordinates

[2:07:03] co enrollment with workforce

[2:07:05] programming and that's just them

[2:07:06] doing their services and us

[2:07:07] doing our part to provide

[2:07:08] workforce development

[2:07:12] couple key demographics of the

[2:07:14] foster youth served again

[2:07:16] they're noted there uh58% are

[2:07:17] between the ages of 8 to 21

[2:07:21] it notes the gender breakdown

[2:07:23] uh39% or1f to17 then it notes

[2:07:25] notes the ethnic breakdown

[2:07:27] amongst whites African Americans

[2:07:29] and Hispanics and then it knows

[2:07:30] some of the barriers that

[2:07:32] they've faced coming into the

[2:07:33] weowa programme that we actually

[2:07:34] capture100% of the population

[2:07:39] is identified as lowincome and

[2:07:40] or receiving public

[2:07:40] assistance

[2:07:42] I'll turn over to my colleague

[2:07:43] Brett Miller.

[2:07:49] So moving on to employment

[2:07:51] placements and outcomes Wc

[2:07:53] identified172 businesses were

[2:07:54] foster youth

[2:07:58] Oh Brett Miller for the record

[2:08:02] Workforce nections WC

[2:08:04] identified172 businesses where

[2:08:06] foster youth and our system were

[2:08:08] placed for employment secondcond

[2:08:10] quarter employment was65.3%

[2:08:11] which means they were employed

[2:08:15] roughly6 months fourth

[2:08:18] quarter was57.1% which is

[2:08:21] equivalent to roughly a year and

[2:08:24] median quarterly wages were3,524

[2:08:25] dollarsy industry

[2:08:28] the largest concentrations were

[2:08:31] in retail35 businesses followed

[2:08:33] by restaurants and food service

[2:08:35] hospitality and gaming staffing

[2:08:38] services healthcare, social

[2:08:39] assistance and government

[2:08:40] education and nonprofits.

[2:08:45] top occupations included fast

[2:08:47] food and counter workers

[2:08:49] stockers and order fillers

[2:08:51] cashiers, security guards retail

[2:08:53] salespersons and customer

[2:08:56] service representatives this

[2:08:57] tells us where the placements

[2:08:59] are landing largely entry

[2:09:01] level service sector roles and

[2:09:03] it's the baseline we used to

[2:09:05] think about wage progression and

[2:09:06] where to target training

[2:09:13] So the next question that you

[2:09:15] asked us from from this

[2:09:17] committee had to do with

[2:09:20] AB354 from the 2017 session

[2:09:22] which you sponsored madam chair

[2:09:24] and this bill required the

[2:09:25] Department of Employment

[2:09:28] Training andrehabilitation deer

[2:09:30] to compile certain data in

[2:09:32] relations to unemployment it

[2:09:34] required agencies providing

[2:09:35] workforce development to

[2:09:37] coordinate efforts and resources

[2:09:39] to reduce the unemployment rate

[2:09:40] for certain demographic groups.

[2:09:41] Mister Miller

[2:09:47] so how does AB354 continue to

[2:09:49] guide our workforce strategy

[2:09:52] the report doesn't sit on its

[2:09:55] own we use it alongside

[2:09:57] laborbour's market information

[2:10:00] employer demand and local

[2:10:01] economic data and it drives a

[2:10:03] specific sequence of decisions

[2:10:05] we use it to identify

[2:10:06] unemployment trends by

[2:10:06] demographic group

[2:10:09] that lets us prioritize

[2:10:12] investment towards populations

[2:10:13] with the highest barriers to

[2:10:16] employment from there we align

[2:10:17] our workforce investments with

[2:10:20] the occupations and industries

[2:10:22] where employer demand actually

[2:10:24] exists and we use the geographic

[2:10:26] data to decide where to locate

[2:10:28] our employee in v hubs close to

[2:10:30] where the need is not just where

[2:10:32] it's convenient. We also factor

[2:10:34] into how we select and

[2:10:36] coordinate the service providers

[2:10:36] we competitively procure

[2:10:39] so they're capable of serving

[2:10:42] the populations the data

[2:10:44] flagsinally we track participant

[2:10:46] outcomes against that same data

[2:10:46] to find service gaps

[2:10:50] and refine outreach and funding

[2:10:53] priorities going forward so it

[2:10:55] runs full loopstand the need

[2:10:57] invest target services and

[2:10:58] measure whether outcomes are

[2:10:59] improving.

[2:11:04] And then here's the third and

[2:11:07] final question this one is

[2:11:09] related to Ai and automation in

[2:11:12] 2024 when we presented to this

[2:11:13] committee we were asked how

[2:11:15] these two things were changing

[2:11:16] the employment landscape

[2:11:19] this time you wanted us to dig a

[2:11:20] little deeper and talk about our

[2:11:23] efforts to mitigate job losses

[2:11:25] the number of state job loss

[2:11:29] by automation the number of

[2:11:30] private sector jobs we believe

[2:11:31] have been lost in future

[2:11:32] strategy

[2:11:37] So with regards to mitigating

[2:11:38] job placement from Ai and

[2:11:40] automation our approach here

[2:11:42] centers on investing in employer

[2:11:44] identified training rather than

[2:11:45] workforce connections

[2:11:47] prescribing which Ai skills

[2:11:50] matter we do that through two

[2:11:53] channels industry sector

[2:11:55] partnerships convene employers

[2:11:57] in our regions target growth

[2:11:59] sectors to identify emerging

[2:12:00] workforce needs

[2:12:04] skill gaps and technological

[2:12:07] change which supports proactive

[2:12:09] preparation before a job

[2:12:10] requirement shifts out from

[2:12:12] under someone incumbent worker

[2:12:15] training previously funded

[2:12:17] employer led upskilling of

[2:12:19] current employees that function

[2:12:21] continues to be funded through

[2:12:22] through Deeter and workforce

[2:12:23] connections as worker upskilling

[2:12:27] bothth are built to help workers

[2:12:29] retain employment and stay

[2:12:32] competitive as new technology

[2:12:32] enters our workforce.

[2:12:36] their workplace summarizing we

[2:12:39] don't set the Ai skills agenda

[2:12:41] employers do. Our role is to

[2:12:42] fund the upskilling and

[2:12:43] reskilling they tell us their

[2:12:45] workers need to adapt

[2:12:48] stay employed and advances

[2:12:49] the technology changes around

[2:12:50] them

[2:12:55] With regards to job loss

[2:12:58] estimates the committee asked

[2:13:00] for two specific figures the

[2:13:02] numbers state jobs lost to Ai

[2:13:03] and automation and the number of

[2:13:05] private sector jobs believed

[2:13:08] lost broken out by lower skill

[2:13:10] and professional occupations

[2:13:12] we're not going to offer any

[2:13:15] estimates to this number Dieter

[2:13:17] research and analysis is the

[2:13:19] appropriate source for statewide

[2:13:20] job loss data of this kind and

[2:13:21] that's where those figures

[2:13:22] should come from.

[2:13:24] we'd rather appoint the

[2:13:26] committee to the agency position

[2:13:27] to produce a reliable number.

[2:13:32] And then moving on to future

[2:13:34] strategies to help Nevadans work

[2:13:35] alongside AI

[2:13:40] hre basic strategies going

[2:13:43] forward first build Ai ready

[2:13:46] skills short term industry

[2:13:49] recogd training in AI literacy

[2:13:50] data analysis, prompt

[2:13:52] engineering and digital workflow

[2:13:55] tools and expand the capacity of

[2:13:57] training providers in our region

[2:13:59] to actually deliver these basic

[2:14:00] AI skills training

[2:14:03] secondcond we'd augment workers

[2:14:06] rather than replace them we use

[2:14:08] industry sector partnerships to

[2:14:09] identify productivity gains from

[2:14:12] AI that let employers retain

[2:14:12] their workforce

[2:14:15] and we push for jobs to be

[2:14:17] redesigned towards customer

[2:14:19] service critical thinking and

[2:14:20] relationship management the

[2:14:22] things that AI still doesn't do

[2:14:23] very well

[2:14:26] while the incorporating AI into

[2:14:29] workflows in ways that worker

[2:14:30] productivity rather than that

[2:14:34] enhances the worker productivity

[2:14:35] rather than eliminates workers

[2:14:37] Third

[2:14:41] proactively anticipate change.

[2:14:43] we use labor market information

[2:14:44] employer surveys and analytics

[2:14:49] to identify occupations that

[2:14:50] carry the greatest automation

[2:14:50] risk

[2:14:53] and we target early retaining

[2:14:55] retraining towards pathways

[2:14:57] where demand is strong before

[2:14:59] displacement happens not after

[2:15:03] so basically skills redesigned

[2:15:05] jobs and early warning that

[2:15:06] would be the strategy

[2:15:12] Thank you madam chair and

[2:15:13] committee members we

[2:15:14] appreciate each one of you for

[2:15:16] your service to this

[2:15:18] community and to the state and

[2:15:20] thank you also for allowing us

[2:15:21] to share our work and we are

[2:15:22] ready for any questions you may

[2:15:23] have.

[2:15:26] OK. thank you for that.embers

[2:15:26] any questions?

[2:15:30] OK I do. so on

[2:15:32] question two

[2:15:36] well no let me start with

[2:15:37] question one on the foster youth

[2:15:39] so I'll so I'll explain and I

[2:15:41] and I know that in the

[2:15:44] presentation you mentioned

[2:15:45] you know we just don't focus on

[2:15:47] foster youth which which I

[2:15:48] understand that too

[2:15:50] so

[2:15:53] I would say about well two

[2:15:55] things that are driving this

[2:15:57] conversation so about I would

[2:16:00] say about two years ago I went

[2:16:00] through and I looked at

[2:16:03] all of the workforce reports

[2:16:06] from 2012 forward, right and one

[2:16:06] of the

[2:16:09] groups that consistently stayed

[2:16:11] in outside of veterans was

[2:16:14] foster youth so year over year

[2:16:15] for every workforce report

[2:16:17] foster youth were still the

[2:16:20] category that seemed to be the

[2:16:21] most challenging and seemed to

[2:16:24] be a group that was

[2:16:26] constantly constantly in need of

[2:16:27] employment services right?

[2:16:30] Second thing that drew this

[2:16:30] conversation

[2:16:35] few months ago I was invited

[2:16:37] to meet foster children who were

[2:16:41] aging out I was invited by a

[2:16:44] her name wasarraRaines who

[2:16:46] you know been taking children

[2:16:47] out and we met and it was a

[2:16:49] whole like you know meet a

[2:16:50] senator or whatever at a bowling

[2:16:51] alley

[2:16:52] and

[2:16:58] as they were the young girls

[2:17:00] were talking to me was is a mix

[2:17:00] of Latino and black girls

[2:17:04] they you know one group was

[2:17:06] talking to me about politics

[2:17:08] which were the Latino females

[2:17:09] then the black girls were

[2:17:12] talking to me about how the

[2:17:12] system was you know

[2:17:14] not necessarily nice to them.

[2:17:19] one of the adults was worried

[2:17:21] that one of the girls who was

[2:17:24] aging out that her only job

[2:17:25] opportunity was going to be

[2:17:26] either to be sex trafficked or

[2:17:28] prostitute

[2:17:30] and I was like well why would

[2:17:31] that be an outcome?

[2:17:34] aren't isn't she in workforce

[2:17:36] programs I mean we know that

[2:17:37] she's getting ready to get a

[2:17:38] high school

[2:17:40] why haven't we put things in

[2:17:41] place

[2:17:44] so of course I reached out to

[2:17:46] the county we had a series of

[2:17:48] conversations on like why is why

[2:17:50] does this conversation exists

[2:17:52] because it should not exist. I

[2:17:52] should not be a

[2:17:58] faced with a dialogue where I'm

[2:17:58] trying to figure out

[2:18:03] why a 18 year old girl and then

[2:18:06] another schimed in saying that

[2:18:07] they had not had any

[2:18:08] opportunities

[2:18:12] for workforce then I found out

[2:18:15] that the county I guess had

[2:18:19] offered them jobb corp right and

[2:18:21] then the girl didn't accept

[2:18:23] jobborp which is in Reno because

[2:18:25] she lives in Vegas so why would

[2:18:28] a child move from her current

[2:18:31] environment and go to Reno to a

[2:18:32] place where she doesn't know

[2:18:33] she's already a foster youth,

[2:18:35] which means she has limited

[2:18:37] family contact so whoever her

[2:18:38] contacts are are her friends

[2:18:38] right

[2:18:41] the circle of influence which

[2:18:42] happened to be other18 and17

[2:18:43] yearold girls.

[2:18:47] so it got me on this rabbit hole

[2:18:49] right because I was just like

[2:18:51] well the data says this is a

[2:18:54] constant group that is a in

[2:18:55] constant need of services so I

[2:18:57] wanted to ask the question where

[2:18:58] are they going

[2:19:00] and then my conversation with

[2:19:02] the county you know I started

[2:19:05] asking like oh you know what

[2:19:06] about you know the virtual

[2:19:07] reality goggles causez I

[2:19:08] remember when that was presented

[2:19:11] in there at the libraries right

[2:19:13] and then they were like oh I

[2:19:14] didn't know about that and I was

[2:19:16] just like how is that not

[2:19:18] possible that it's unknowown

[2:19:20] that you know Br goggles are out

[2:19:23] here right that had been over

[2:19:26] four years it was precovid or it

[2:19:27] became a real thing in covid

[2:19:28] like how do you

[2:19:31] get a real life experience on

[2:19:33] job work by using thevR goggles

[2:19:35] causez I distinctly remember

[2:19:37] when Dideter came in asking for

[2:19:39] the money the library in North

[2:19:40] Las Vegas was saying oh we're

[2:19:41] going to put this in our

[2:19:43] libraries and we were like ok

[2:19:44] cool we'll give you the money to

[2:19:45] pay for it.

[2:19:49] so it started this conversation

[2:19:50] because either there is a gap

[2:19:55] or the vendor who is receiving

[2:19:56] money right to do x

[2:19:59] is not connecting with these

[2:20:00] children, right?

[2:20:03] and I don't know if you guys

[2:20:04] were at the recent event at

[2:20:05] Childhaven cause I didn't check

[2:20:07] all the tables you might have

[2:20:09] been where SEIU took it upon

[2:20:10] themselves to then host

[2:20:12] a career fair

[2:20:17] to then bring I think over 20

[2:20:19] different partners into the

[2:20:20] juvenile justice Jim

[2:20:24] to meet the childldhaven

[2:20:27] students and also to meet the

[2:20:28] students that are within

[2:20:31] juvenile justice that may also

[2:20:32] be incarcerated not

[2:20:33] childldhaven

[2:20:37] and from my understanding this

[2:20:39] was like the first time that

[2:20:41] there had been a major event

[2:20:45] where 20 different career

[2:20:48] vendors had came into that space

[2:20:50] to then talk about what you can

[2:20:50] be right?

[2:20:52] so of course

[2:20:57] me being me right? I wanted to

[2:20:59] get on the record what is the

[2:21:01] work that's being done number

[2:21:03] one because if anybody out there

[2:21:04] that's a government agency

[2:21:05] whether or not it be

[2:21:10] or subdivision within a agency

[2:21:13] or subdepartment within a

[2:21:15] city is saying oh I don't know

[2:21:17] what services are there

[2:21:21] I can then point to this

[2:21:23] legislative record to be like

[2:21:25] well you just got a listing from

[2:21:28] not everyone but majority who

[2:21:30] are vendors or who are giving

[2:21:33] contracts to vendors on what is

[2:21:35] available right? because I

[2:21:36] should never have a conversation

[2:21:38] where the option is prostitution

[2:21:42] and there was no conversation on

[2:21:44] whether or not you can be

[2:21:47] something else right and so just

[2:21:48] to give you the background and

[2:21:50] yeah of course you guys have met

[2:21:51] me before I get really

[2:21:53] passionate on social community

[2:21:55] issues because I spend my days

[2:21:59] in the community and for

[2:22:00] whatever reason I get found in

[2:22:03] in spaces that I never imagined

[2:22:04] I would be in right cause even

[2:22:05] when I was sitting in the

[2:22:07] bowling alley at ed rock I was

[2:22:08] my sister was with me she's a

[2:22:09] pharmacist and I was just like

[2:22:11] did I just get

[2:22:14] handed a set of problems that I

[2:22:18] may not be ready to shoulder

[2:22:20] and walk around you know and try

[2:22:23] to solve right because of course

[2:22:24] if a problem is presented to me

[2:22:27] right a real human scale problem

[2:22:30] my heart goes out and I want to

[2:22:31] fix it right? I want to engage I

[2:22:34] want to use whatever limited

[2:22:34] power I have

[2:22:38] to convene conversations around

[2:22:39] the issue.

[2:22:43] and workforce is one of the

[2:22:44] issues that is a topic in

[2:22:44] revenue.

[2:22:48] so with that background that is

[2:22:51] why I ask question one. so for

[2:22:52] everybody else who's gonna come

[2:22:53] to this table and present now

[2:22:55] you know why I was asking

[2:22:56] question one

[2:23:01] and so hopefully you know we can

[2:23:02] build a record of

[2:23:06] if I talk to anybody next year

[2:23:08] while I spend the next six years

[2:23:10] of my reality potentially in

[2:23:12] this in the legislature that I

[2:23:13] will not be faced with this

[2:23:14] question again right?

[2:23:17] because now everyone should

[2:23:20] align themselves to the services

[2:23:21] that were listed in this

[2:23:22] document and get yourself

[2:23:22] together.

[2:23:25] and figure out how to get

[2:23:28] young girls and boys who are

[2:23:30] aging out of the foster system

[2:23:33] successfully employed and at

[2:23:34] least provide them the

[2:23:34] opportunity to imagine

[2:23:38] that they can have a better life

[2:23:40] and a career

[2:23:41] and that's the

[2:23:47] Thank you madam chairir. I love

[2:23:49] the question and I appreciate

[2:23:50] your passion because you're

[2:23:53] fiercely an advocate for things

[2:23:56] that need to come to fruition

[2:24:00] so my colleague Ricardo

[2:24:02] Villaloboso and start the

[2:24:03] conversation yeah thank you

[2:24:04] Ireneiccardo Vilos for the

[2:24:06] record and and I want ditto that

[2:24:08] madam chairir thank you for

[2:24:09] caring you know about our young

[2:24:11] people and for the committee you

[2:24:12] know caring about our young

[2:24:13] people

[2:24:15] I mean I think as I mentioned

[2:24:18] to you there's36,000

[2:24:18] disconnected young people in

[2:24:19] Cclark County alone

[2:24:22] our funds are finite you know we

[2:24:25] serve 1000 as I said60 to700 per

[2:24:26] year but it's barely a dent

[2:24:29] we've started to convene a

[2:24:31] coalition of partners that is

[2:24:32] the opportunity youth coalition

[2:24:35] and basically they are partners

[2:24:37] that are serving in the youth

[2:24:38] space now not all of them are

[2:24:40] foster care centric you know but

[2:24:45] eagle Quest i oster

[2:24:47] some others partners you know

[2:24:48] that are in the foster care

[2:24:49] space are there they're not

[2:24:50] necessarily funded partners from

[2:24:51] us but they're doing their

[2:24:52] things in their space we we

[2:24:54] don't direct them or tell them

[2:24:55] or have accountability with them

[2:24:56] they're they're partners part of

[2:24:57] the coalition

[2:24:59] so we're definitely trying to do

[2:25:01] what we can for the36000 as a

[2:25:02] whole, right? I think as far as

[2:25:04] young people not hearing about

[2:25:04] it

[2:25:08] you know we have over 27

[2:25:10] American job centers branded as

[2:25:11] employing the hubs in southern

[2:25:12] Nevada region that's you

[2:25:14] knowlinncoln niasorrell and

[2:25:16] Clark County we we have a

[2:25:18] presence in in various

[2:25:19] communities as my colleague

[2:25:20] Brett mentioned earlier

[2:25:21] there's no dearth

[2:25:25] we could if we had more funding

[2:25:27] if I'll just be frank if the

[2:25:28] state provided us funding and

[2:25:30] wanted us to specifically key in

[2:25:30] on foster youth we would gladly

[2:25:32] do that

[2:25:33] if the say says we want you to

[2:25:34] focus on juvenile justice youth

[2:25:36] we would gladly do that we're

[2:25:36] barely scratching the surface

[2:25:41] and so we we've never been

[2:25:42] under enrolled you know we've

[2:25:43] never a matter of fact we

[2:25:45] tend to over enroll our young

[2:25:47] people in programming as I

[2:25:49] mentioned just for foster youth

[2:25:51] the things we're engaged in

[2:25:53] the referral partner network is

[2:25:54] just specific to foster youth

[2:25:54] that I noted in this

[2:25:55] presentation

[2:25:58] but it's also with a juvenile

[2:26:00] justice youth homeless youth

[2:26:03] the the the barriers of popula

[2:26:05] or the populations that face

[2:26:07] these significant barriers and

[2:26:09] so we do get the word out

[2:26:11] will you come across an

[2:26:12] individual that has not heard

[2:26:14] about it absolutely you know

[2:26:15] absolutely I'd love to get the

[2:26:18] word out to36000 young people

[2:26:19] and a matter of fact the

[2:26:20] workforce connections were

[2:26:22] bringing on two young people to

[2:26:23] be content creators

[2:26:25] to specifically target

[2:26:27] through social media platforms

[2:26:29] or outreach to young people is

[2:26:30] that kind of idea by young

[2:26:30] people for young people by young

[2:26:31] people

[2:26:35] and so and not that you know

[2:26:36] folks in our generation you'd be

[2:26:37] doing that stuff but we want the

[2:26:38] young people doing that and we

[2:26:39] do believe the war needs to get

[2:26:40] out but

[2:26:42] unfortunately there will be a

[2:26:44] time when we reach our cap and

[2:26:45] our funds are finite, you know

[2:26:47] we would love to do more and

[2:26:48] we're working with

[2:26:50] various organizations to try to

[2:26:51] bring in additional funding

[2:26:54] but if we were given funding and

[2:26:55] instead specifically focus on

[2:26:56] foster youth again I want to be

[2:26:57] clear we would gladly willingly

[2:27:02] And if I can add madam chair for

[2:27:03] the record I renebootamante

[2:27:05] adams. I think that paints the

[2:27:07] picture right so that you know

[2:27:08] that those funds that we owe

[2:27:10] with funds are federal dollars

[2:27:14] are threshold is000 young adults

[2:27:18] that's not even enough but

[2:27:20] strategically and you're going

[2:27:21] to hear from Clark County later

[2:27:24] on they approached us to do

[2:27:27] some pilot around a career

[2:27:29] pathways and so we are ending

[2:27:30] that pilot

[2:27:32] and we'll have a report for

[2:27:34] them by the end of this year on

[2:27:36] the success of our efforts and

[2:27:38] that's intentional it wasn't

[2:27:39] that it was mandated it wasn't

[2:27:42] in the legislature but it was

[2:27:44] just intentional picking up the

[2:27:45] phone and calling and saying how

[2:27:47] could we if we if they made that

[2:27:50] investment as a local

[2:27:51] municipality how could we and

[2:27:54] that's the kind of strategic

[2:27:55] approach we have been taking as

[2:27:56] an entity to have these

[2:27:58] conversations with c local

[2:27:59] municipalities but we would also

[2:28:00] welcome

[2:28:02] a conversation with the state

[2:28:05] Dieter has tried some pilots

[2:28:07] with us based on the demographic

[2:28:09] data but could we collectively

[2:28:13] do more? yes would we want

[2:28:14] you guys to be intentional about

[2:28:16] saying driving in this direction

[2:28:19] yes and so I just say that

[2:28:22] there's a a lot of room for

[2:28:23] collective impact we're not

[2:28:25] being mandated but what we are

[2:28:27] doing is being intentional and

[2:28:28] there's just a lot of room for

[2:28:29] growth.

[2:28:37] So assembly woman backus and

[2:28:38] then senator Deatete.

[2:28:41] thank you so much madam chairir

[2:28:42] when you were talking about

[2:28:45] like state state resources a

[2:28:47] a couple of us obviously sit on

[2:28:48] our money committee as well and

[2:28:50] we start where can we find money

[2:28:52] to invest in these programs

[2:28:53] because

[2:28:56] some of my pro bono work I mean

[2:28:57] before I got really entrenched

[2:28:58] in the legislature was

[2:28:59] representing students in our

[2:29:01] foster care system and it makes

[2:29:02] me sad because I do know like

[2:29:05] I've seen the progression of

[2:29:06] some of our youth when they age

[2:29:08] out and they may not be college

[2:29:10] bound cause we do a lot in that

[2:29:13] good space to provide free

[2:29:14] college tuition for those that

[2:29:16] do age out of the system but

[2:29:18] there's really the those that

[2:29:19] just kind of are like not lost

[2:29:20] but trying to they have to

[2:29:21] either go through a work path or

[2:29:23] not and so I've had kids that

[2:29:24] have gone up to Reno

[2:29:26] but you know I keep thinking

[2:29:27] about different pots and I'm not

[2:29:28] sure if they're appropriate one

[2:29:30] pot we immediately thought about

[2:29:32] is the funding that Dieter gets

[2:29:34] off the wage assessments and I

[2:29:35] wasn't sure if that was just it

[2:29:37] was just limited to

[2:29:38] rehabilitation or if that is a

[2:29:39] pot that we could looked at in

[2:29:41] another pot and I make clark

[2:29:42] County people are sitting back

[2:29:44] there and this may not be

[2:29:46] appropriate as we also have to

[2:29:48] reinvest monies from the

[2:29:52] state that were intended to

[2:29:53] you know limit our foster care

[2:29:54] youth

[2:29:57] usually and I know we have a

[2:29:58] lot of money out there that we

[2:29:59] need to reinvest and I wasn't

[2:30:01] sure if this is an appropriate

[2:30:02] space because now these children

[2:30:04] have already aged out of the

[2:30:05] system so we're just kind of

[2:30:07] being creative on some thoughts

[2:30:08] not sure if you guys have any

[2:30:09] thoughts on either of those

[2:30:14] I would say yes yes and yes

[2:30:16] that's it assembly member

[2:30:18] backc is we have got to be

[2:30:19] creative. I'm not talking about

[2:30:21] new revenue I'm talking about

[2:30:23] the existing revenue and how do

[2:30:24] you look at the first agency

[2:30:26] that you spoke about they have

[2:30:27] been intentional to build a

[2:30:29] relationship and that takes

[2:30:32] collective impact leaders that

[2:30:34] want to be at the table and

[2:30:35] figuring it out so I'm not

[2:30:36] talking about new money I'm

[2:30:38] talking about the existing money

[2:30:40] and how are we more strategic in

[2:30:43] the investments of those now

[2:30:44] some of it has to be a pilot

[2:30:44] like we can't just

[2:30:48] throw a large amount of money

[2:30:51] so it has to be strategic it has

[2:30:53] to be intentional and then

[2:30:55] demonstrate that the needle can

[2:30:59] be moved and we we have that

[2:31:01] already in existence we've done

[2:31:03] small pockets of that

[2:31:04] information but I would just say

[2:31:07] on your AB428 from last

[2:31:08] legislative session that's a

[2:31:10] vehicle that's being used and so

[2:31:13] the short answer is yes and yes

[2:31:14] I'll just make a comment I I

[2:31:15] think

[2:31:17] there's probably some pockets of

[2:31:18] money and maybe these

[2:31:19] conversations are appropriate

[2:31:21] offline so we can kind of

[2:31:22] reexamine how we're investing

[2:31:24] funds and maybe we use them the

[2:31:27] best that we can use them from

[2:31:28] other spaces that may be notre

[2:31:29] I'm so sorry did I cut you off?

[2:31:30] did you have something down

[2:31:32] ma'am I just wanted to add a

[2:31:32] comment Riccardo Vilos for the

[2:31:33] record thank you for that

[2:31:36] again just to piggyback on my

[2:31:37] colleague Irene's comment

[2:31:39] Deeter's been a great partner in

[2:31:41] this space Dieter funded us

[2:31:43] last year half a million dollars

[2:31:46] to focus onun youth again when I

[2:31:46] sayun youth it's that whole

[2:31:50] subpopulation foster youth

[2:31:50] juvenile etc.

[2:31:53] and then there were some

[2:31:55] great outcomes from it and and

[2:31:56] so they reinvested a million

[2:31:58] dollars this year for southern

[2:31:59] Nevada and I believe my

[2:32:00] colleague will share invested a

[2:32:01] million dollars for the north to

[2:32:03] focus onpunity youth we have one

[2:32:04] of the highest disconnection

[2:32:04] rates in the in the country

[2:32:07] and so Dieter has been a

[2:32:09] great partner a willing partner

[2:32:10] and they've shown it by their

[2:32:11] actions so I do want to commend

[2:32:12] them and recognize them

[2:32:12] publicly.

[2:32:16] I would just echo that I know

[2:32:17] director soul has done some good

[2:32:18] work so I'll echo your comments

[2:32:18] thank you.

[2:32:20] Senator Denett

[2:32:24] thank you madam chair and thank

[2:32:25] you so much for the

[2:32:27] presentation.uick first question

[2:32:29] because it's more of a this

[2:32:31] is gonna be more commentary that

[2:32:33] could result into like data

[2:32:35] requests does workforce

[2:32:37] connections right now oversee

[2:32:39] the employee the employnevada

[2:32:40] hubs I didn't know if I caught

[2:32:41] that in like what's your

[2:32:42] relationship to it do you

[2:32:43] control the funding for them or

[2:32:45] you the board like I'm trying to

[2:32:46] understand more of the

[2:32:48] regulatory structure. thank you

[2:32:48] for the question so

[2:32:51] at a federal level they're

[2:32:53] labeled or recognized identified

[2:32:54] as American job centers

[2:32:56] so that's kind of the federal

[2:32:57] recognition what we did in the

[2:32:59] state of Nevada was brand them

[2:33:01] as employing the hubs and so

[2:33:03] employingvhubs that's where

[2:33:04] and there's career hubs that

[2:33:05] focus on adults youth hubs that

[2:33:07] focus on youth and the business

[2:33:09] hubs that focus on businesses

[2:33:11] and so as the local workforce

[2:33:13] development board we received

[2:33:15] the WIOA funds and then through

[2:33:17] a competitive procurement

[2:33:19] process have service

[2:33:21] providers that actually deliver

[2:33:22] the services to individuals

[2:33:23] throughout the state

[2:33:26] and so we're more our role as

[2:33:27] workforce connections the local

[2:33:29] workforce development board is

[2:33:30] monitoring for compliance and

[2:33:31] providing technical assistance

[2:33:32] to these

[2:33:37] But I if I could add senator I

[2:33:39] would just say that what's been

[2:33:41] magical is the strategic

[2:33:44] partnerships so that 27 that

[2:33:46] doesn't occur in every other

[2:33:47] state. It occurs here and the

[2:33:50] reason why is intentionality and

[2:33:52] partnerships so those entities

[2:33:53] like the libraries like the

[2:33:56] chambers like city halls they

[2:33:58] don't have to have an employee

[2:33:59] an American job set an employee

[2:34:02] in hub in their place they

[2:34:03] invite us and so we are

[2:34:06] in there and are able to expand

[2:34:08] our footprint because of those

[2:34:10] relationships so that means that

[2:34:11] they don't charge us for

[2:34:13] infrastructure they don't charge

[2:34:15] us for electricity or for water

[2:34:17] they invite us to be able to

[2:34:18] serve the constituents so they

[2:34:20] don't have to travel far to be

[2:34:22] able to get the services that's

[2:34:24] happening in this region and

[2:34:26] it's a state best practice and

[2:34:27] that's been our key magical

[2:34:29] thing is to be able to expand

[2:34:30] our footprint because most

[2:34:32] states just have one ande

[2:34:33] everybody has to travel to that

[2:34:34] one center

[2:34:34] not here.

[2:34:40] you are firing me up sorry I'm

[2:34:42] just so now now to give you the

[2:34:43] commentary of the of the of the

[2:34:44] challenge so

[2:34:47] I have actually gone through the

[2:34:49] employee andv hub I was

[2:34:51] unemployed not too long ago

[2:34:54] so I've seen the challenges

[2:34:56] just in full transparency

[2:34:57] hopefully the voters don't

[2:34:59] penalize me for this but you

[2:35:01] know I have navigated this

[2:35:03] difficulty and I think that

[2:35:06] as you all are thinking through

[2:35:08] the strategies of how you meet

[2:35:08] workers where they're at.

[2:35:11] in this if they find

[2:35:13] themselves in that precarious

[2:35:15] situation, I will be honest that

[2:35:17] the current system that we have

[2:35:20] does not work when you are

[2:35:21] and this is and I've had this

[2:35:22] discussion with Dieter as well

[2:35:23] so I'm just telling you guys

[2:35:25] because it's gonna this is going

[2:35:26] to be a data request

[2:35:29] when Dieter requests you to go

[2:35:32] to an employee invub right you

[2:35:32] get the email notification

[2:35:34] saying you have to be there at a

[2:35:35] certain time you can't miss it

[2:35:39] as part of that circumstance

[2:35:41] when you are triaged when you

[2:35:42] arrive at the employer nv hub

[2:35:45] you're asked to do some

[2:35:46] mental health

[2:35:49] questionnaire which by the way

[2:35:51] no one reads and then after

[2:35:53] waiting in line you wait for

[2:35:55] your appointment then you get

[2:35:56] your appointment and then they

[2:35:58] just ask you about alert your

[2:35:59] situation you know what you're

[2:36:01] dealing with and then they

[2:36:02] scheduled the next one and they

[2:36:03] say make sure that you apply for

[2:36:05] two jobs and we'll see you at

[2:36:06] your next appointment.

[2:36:08] The reason why I'm explaining

[2:36:10] that to you as a circumstance is

[2:36:10] because I do not believe

[2:36:14] our state including the work

[2:36:15] that you guys are doing withloy

[2:36:16] andV and I don't know who's

[2:36:17] responsible but that's why I'm

[2:36:18] asking who is responsible for

[2:36:19] overseeing how these programs

[2:36:22] are facilitated is we are not

[2:36:23] actually doing the triage

[2:36:25] services that we need and

[2:36:26] looking at the workers based on

[2:36:29] the skills that they have. they

[2:36:31] are going to be to the questions

[2:36:32] that we're seeing in these

[2:36:33] presentations. there are going

[2:36:35] to be displaced workers that are

[2:36:37] working professionals white

[2:36:40] collar jobs that we're doing law

[2:36:40] accounting and so forth

[2:36:44] and we are treating every single

[2:36:46] person that is un unemployed as

[2:36:49] a cookie cutter. here's your

[2:36:51] application here's the next stop

[2:36:52] and I don't think our current

[2:36:54] infrastructure including through

[2:36:55] the work that you guys are doing

[2:36:57] are meeting that demand and so

[2:37:00] what I would like to see is a

[2:37:01] plan of how you're going to

[2:37:03] reform how we do triage for

[2:37:04] workers as they're coming

[2:37:06] through and what wrapround

[2:37:07] support services we're actually

[2:37:10] looking at per worker because

[2:37:10] unfortunately the placement

[2:37:14] of working professional into

[2:37:16] a a job at

[2:37:19] in retail and so forth might not

[2:37:20] make as appropriate sense and I

[2:37:22] think this is going to become a

[2:37:24] a worse issue that we're

[2:37:25] gonna face. I think obviously

[2:37:26] that comes more in the

[2:37:27] conversation with how we work

[2:37:28] with higher ed and making sure

[2:37:29] that workers are retrained and

[2:37:30] that they actually have the

[2:37:32] resources or supporting

[2:37:33] entrepreneurship in a different

[2:37:35] manner but I just I will be

[2:37:36] honest, I don't think you guys

[2:37:37] are doing the work that we need

[2:37:38] to be doing right now and I

[2:37:39] would be happy to figure it out

[2:37:41] because I don't think

[2:37:43] certainly their taxpayer dollars

[2:37:44] that could be expended better

[2:37:46] instead of treating everyone

[2:37:46] like a factory line, but I don't

[2:37:47] know if you guys have

[2:37:50] any commentary to that madam

[2:37:51] chair through you Riccardo Vilos

[2:37:52] for the record thank you for

[2:37:52] that senator

[2:37:55] you know we always believe and

[2:37:56] continuously improving you know

[2:37:57] our efficiencies right for the

[2:37:59] human being that comes in for

[2:38:00] services I'm not exact exactly

[2:38:01] sure which employingvhub you

[2:38:04] went to you know or there's

[2:38:05] nuances in it you know as far as

[2:38:07] which direction you went and we

[2:38:08] don't want to get the

[2:38:10] conversation with the the human

[2:38:11] about oh you're here for this

[2:38:13] you need to go see TitleI oh

[2:38:14] you're here for that go see

[2:38:15] Title 2 ohitle1 we just want to

[2:38:16] provide

[2:38:19] but it does make a difference

[2:38:20] what your process is depending

[2:38:22] on which one you go to so that

[2:38:23] that's number one nonetheless it

[2:38:28] you I think the other thing too

[2:38:31] is that that I would share so

[2:38:33] we keep a track we we track

[2:38:34] customer traffic at our American

[2:38:35] job centers.

[2:38:39] we have on average on a

[2:38:42] weekly average4 to500 touch

[2:38:45] points on a weekly basis

[2:38:46] let's say so it's about if

[2:38:49] you round it out to52 weeks is

[2:38:51] probably about1314 maybe close

[2:38:53] to15,000 you know humans and

[2:38:54] some or another kind of coming

[2:38:55] across our system

[2:38:57] the funding that we have in

[2:38:59] southern Nevada is only has

[2:39:00] the capacity to serve1,500

[2:39:00] people.

[2:39:04] yet about15,000 are coming

[2:39:04] across the system

[2:39:07] the staffing capacity you

[2:39:09] know is an issue that we look at

[2:39:11] you know and so sometimes quite

[2:39:12] frankly to address it we either

[2:39:14] say hey serve more or serve less

[2:39:15] people so you can be more

[2:39:16] efficient

[2:39:18] right or continue to serve the

[2:39:20] need and it it it creates

[2:39:21] bottlenecks quite frankly you

[2:39:23] know and so we're looking at it

[2:39:24] to create efficiencies for

[2:39:25] sure

[2:39:27] and so I appreciate that

[2:39:29] feedback I appreciate that

[2:39:31] insight that that insight

[2:39:32] insight and we'll definitely

[2:39:33] take it to heart and we're we're

[2:39:34] looking at it though because

[2:39:35] this isn't the first time we've

[2:39:37] heard about our efficiencies but

[2:39:38] that's the context we deal with

[2:39:40] If I could add senator one of

[2:39:41] the things that I learned in

[2:39:44] coming into the space is that

[2:39:45] that we owe of funds at least

[2:39:47] from aitle I perspective that we

[2:39:49] have ownership over is to serve

[2:39:51] those that have the highest

[2:39:53] barriers that need to be removed

[2:39:55] like somebody doesn't have

[2:39:59] right myself migrant farm

[2:40:00] worker right? I didn't have

[2:40:02] mentors in my life. I didn't

[2:40:05] have my first job that you know

[2:40:07] my my parents got for me it was

[2:40:12] just me and so compound that

[2:40:14] if I were to have a kids at a

[2:40:16] young age I was homeless I was

[2:40:17] in a foster care system that's

[2:40:23] our clientele now if you're a an

[2:40:24] accountant maybe looking for

[2:40:27] work if you are you know you

[2:40:30] said something about law yes

[2:40:32] another entity in the ecosystem

[2:40:34] it that's their

[2:40:39] target market could we do

[2:40:41] better absolutely and that takes

[2:40:43] intentionality it is the

[2:40:45] willingness and we're headed in

[2:40:47] that direction. are we perfect?

[2:40:49] no but thank you for exposing

[2:40:50] where we need to improve.

[2:40:59] no additional questions

[2:41:05] I will cause we have probably

[2:41:06] some additional conversation

[2:41:08] we'll probably have offline but

[2:41:09] number one thank you guys for

[2:41:10] coming to present

[2:41:12] you know I care about

[2:41:15] several topics but

[2:41:19] 354 is just something I'm just

[2:41:20] gonna keep checking on while I'm

[2:41:23] in the building the AI is I

[2:41:24] think going to be a constant

[2:41:24] conversation

[2:41:28] because they're serious

[2:41:30] projections out there on on huge

[2:41:31] job losses in several sectors

[2:41:34] and I just think it's

[2:41:35] something that has to become a

[2:41:38] part of our constant topic as a

[2:41:41] legislature being proactive and

[2:41:42] making sure that we have systems

[2:41:43] in place

[2:41:47] when those losses happen and

[2:41:49] because not everybody is

[2:41:51] going to be upskilled into a new

[2:41:54] area, right and so there's a

[2:41:56] huge question on what that looks

[2:41:59] like how we're going to mitigate

[2:42:02] that how we're gonna slow

[2:42:05] this down to try to keep some

[2:42:07] normalcy to employment which is

[2:42:09] my goal how to slow it down and

[2:42:12] keep some normalcy right not

[2:42:12] complete wipeouts.

[2:42:18] and so I think that that's why

[2:42:19] you know to bring up question

[2:42:21] two and three why that's on the

[2:42:24] agenda is because you know I

[2:42:25] think it's just a need to

[2:42:26] constantly monitor and be

[2:42:29] proactive, right? so we thank

[2:42:30] you for your presentation and

[2:42:32] for your time waiting and this

[2:42:33] morning and listening to our

[2:42:34] prediction markets.

[2:42:38] thank you madam all right

[2:42:43] so we will go to the next

[2:42:45] presenter which isilt Stewart of

[2:42:46] Nevadaorks.

[2:43:12] Hi good morning my name's meelt

[2:43:13] Stuart I'm the CEO for

[2:43:15] Nevadaorks. Nevada Works is the

[2:43:16] local workforce development

[2:43:19] board for the 13 counties that

[2:43:20] were forced connections does not

[2:43:22] cover so as you heard

[2:43:23] workforce connectctions

[2:43:24] coverslinncolnn ass meal and

[2:43:25] Clark and we cover the rest of

[2:43:28] the state which is70,000 square

[2:43:31] miles about three quarter of a

[2:43:34] million people and so most of

[2:43:36] what you're going to hear me say

[2:43:39] today is very very similar right

[2:43:40] because the ecosystem

[2:43:41] is is very similar

[2:43:43] but we have you know a unique

[2:43:45] set of challenges due to

[2:43:47] that70,000 square miles and so

[2:43:49] all kind of contextualize that

[2:43:50] just a little bit please

[2:43:53] so this the the questions

[2:43:56] that that that you asked I'm

[2:43:57] and I'm not gonna kind of repeat

[2:43:58] some of the same things that you

[2:43:59] heard. I wanna really get to

[2:44:01] some the meat of what I think it

[2:44:02] was that some of the questions

[2:44:03] that you're asking so next slide

[2:44:05] so

[2:44:06] as you heard Workforce

[2:44:08] connectction say foster youth

[2:44:10] yes right yes thank you for

[2:44:11] having this conversation. we

[2:44:12] think that it's it's it's vital

[2:44:13] conversation to have

[2:44:18] the foster youth are one of

[2:44:19] multiple barriers or different

[2:44:21] kinds of barriers that

[2:44:23] individuals can have and and

[2:44:24] need our support right you need

[2:44:26] our service so foster youth

[2:44:28] are are served through that

[2:44:31] broader ecosystem and you

[2:44:33] know the when we're bringing

[2:44:35] them into the ecosystem if we go

[2:44:36] to the next slide

[2:44:39] we don't always know that they

[2:44:41] are foster youth, right? I mean

[2:44:42] they have to self identify. they

[2:44:44] have to tell us that they're so

[2:44:45] foster youth and quite frankly

[2:44:48] as we think in terms of

[2:44:49] eligibility, right when we

[2:44:50] talking when we're talking about

[2:44:52] federal funding or funding in

[2:44:53] general there's eligibility

[2:44:54] requirements associated with

[2:44:56] that and and there's multiple

[2:44:57] different thresholds or

[2:44:59] eligibility thresholds for for

[2:45:01] out of school youth for those 6

[2:45:04] to 24 yearolds and so there are

[2:45:06] times where you know, I check a

[2:45:06] box right? I

[2:45:10] I was made eligible because I am

[2:45:11] pregnant parenting or or what

[2:45:13] have you and we don't capture

[2:45:15] that so so rather than you know

[2:45:17] have the conversation around the

[2:45:18] foster youth in general, I think

[2:45:19] it's a you know the conversation

[2:45:21] is to your point Senatorneal how

[2:45:22] do we you know how that's a

[2:45:24] terrible story right and

[2:45:26] everybody in this room hears

[2:45:27] that and says we need to be

[2:45:30] better and and100% so so how

[2:45:31] do we do that right so we're

[2:45:34] we're developing a system that

[2:45:36] anybody that that can can come

[2:45:36] in the door and then

[2:45:38] we help them accordingly and so

[2:45:39] next slide please

[2:45:43] so again they don't always

[2:45:45] necessarily tell us that they

[2:45:47] are that they are foster

[2:45:48] youth but that doesn't matter

[2:45:50] right so we're going to serve

[2:45:51] them in a way that meets their

[2:45:54] needs and irrespective of of

[2:45:55] whether they've identified as

[2:45:56] foster youth or not next

[2:45:57] slide

[2:46:01] so with regards to AB354, I mean

[2:46:03] the the easiest way that I can

[2:46:04] put this is that when we get the

[2:46:05] AB354 report

[2:46:08] 12 of our 13 counties meet that

[2:46:09] one of those thresholds in one

[2:46:10] way shape or form

[2:46:13] and and so what does that mean?

[2:46:15] It means that that's our

[2:46:16] delivery of service model. I

[2:46:18] mean we have made this delivery

[2:46:18] our our service model be

[2:46:19] reflective

[2:46:23] of the the greater need so if we

[2:46:25] think in terms of of for

[2:46:29] example 92% of the folks that

[2:46:31] the across our our region are

[2:46:32] are

[2:46:34] meet one of the barriers or one

[2:46:35] of the thresholds for

[2:46:37] eligibility for for the

[2:46:39] services that we that that we

[2:46:43] provide the the 20 to 24

[2:46:45] yearolds because the report's

[2:46:46] broken up into certain

[2:46:48] categories but that 20 to 24

[2:46:51] yearold across again uh12 of the

[2:46:53] 13 counties they rise up to that

[2:46:55] level where it would it would

[2:46:59] trigger the the AB354 so

[2:47:01] so I say it to see this that

[2:47:02] that is our model right? so we

[2:47:07] use AB354 to help us focus

[2:47:08] investments but if we

[2:47:12] we have to use the we have to in

[2:47:13] order to have an impactful model

[2:47:15] we have to really build

[2:47:18] the model or the ecosystem to be

[2:47:20] able to serve all those all

[2:47:22] those def different demographics

[2:47:25] so one of the things that we

[2:47:27] were able to do as an example

[2:47:29] we saw that across 9 of the 13

[2:47:31] counties Native Americans tri

[2:47:32] tribes were

[2:47:36] we met that threshold

[2:47:40] for AB354 and so four years

[2:47:42] ago Nevadaorks applied for and

[2:47:43] received a good jobs

[2:47:44] challengellen grant through the

[2:47:46] US Department of Commerce and so

[2:47:47] what it allowed us to do is

[2:47:48] really transform our

[2:47:50] organization from a kind of a

[2:47:53] compliance type organization

[2:47:55] to organization that really is

[2:47:56] trying to be innovative and and

[2:47:57] continuously improve and meet

[2:47:59] these types of needs so it

[2:48:00] helped us to stand up industry

[2:48:01] sector partnerships which you

[2:48:02] which you heard

[2:48:04] this morning fromorkforce

[2:48:05] Connections but what it also did

[2:48:08] we had a very specific focus on

[2:48:10] rural communities and the tribes

[2:48:12] and so there are 22 tribes

[2:48:14] across the the Nevada works

[2:48:15] region and so we're very

[2:48:16] intentional about it we use a

[2:48:18] navigator model where you heard

[2:48:20] the workforce

[2:48:21] connectctions team so say that

[2:48:24] 27 different employing v hubs or

[2:48:25] touch points throughout the

[2:48:28] their region we have 9

[2:48:29] official across70,000 square

[2:48:30] miles

[2:48:33] and so we recognize that that's

[2:48:34] not going to do it that's not

[2:48:35] gonna cut it and so we took a

[2:48:38] navigator model where we put our

[2:48:40] employees in those communities

[2:48:43] and so with laptops and have

[2:48:46] laptop have Wi i will travel and

[2:48:47] so we go into these libraries,

[2:48:49] we go into these community

[2:48:51] centers and we serve individuals

[2:48:52] not only through the employee v

[2:48:54] hubs but also wherever you know

[2:48:56] where we need to be in

[2:48:58] schools high schools and so on

[2:48:59] next slide

[2:49:02] so we we didn't wait for the

[2:49:04] tribes to come to us, right? We

[2:49:05] we went to them and so the model

[2:49:09] is recognizing that AB354, you

[2:49:11] know fed into the the idea or

[2:49:13] the concept that we needed to

[2:49:15] serve the tribes have a specific

[2:49:16] tribal navigator's name is

[2:49:17] Thurmond he is a tribal member

[2:49:20] and he does a great job of

[2:49:22] building trust with the with the

[2:49:24] tribes and so that has

[2:49:25] evolved to the point where we

[2:49:26] have now developed three

[2:49:28] memorandum of understandings

[2:49:28] with with three different tribes

[2:49:33] where where we are their their

[2:49:34] their workforce development

[2:49:35] partner if you will or helping

[2:49:38] them lead their workforce

[2:49:40] development efforts we've also

[2:49:43] worked with the erro offices in

[2:49:45] in the tribes and so on so

[2:49:46] without boring you I'll say that

[2:49:49] you know that that AB354 has

[2:49:51] really fed into our delivery

[2:49:53] service model and and the tribes

[2:49:55] are one specific place

[2:49:57] that we can point to where

[2:49:58] that happens next slide.

[2:50:01] oh yes sir I got please again

[2:50:03] yeah

[2:50:07] so with regards to Ai and

[2:50:09] automation really the same

[2:50:10] conversation right how do we

[2:50:10] predict

[2:50:14] so 11 example right now

[2:50:15] literally right now is happening

[2:50:18] I think literally the meetings

[2:50:20] having right now which is a

[2:50:23] partnership with trucking

[2:50:24] meadows Community College washo

[2:50:26] County School District and they

[2:50:30] came to Nevada works

[2:50:31] and said look at you guys have

[2:50:32] an industry sector partnerships

[2:50:34] you're convening employers and

[2:50:36] so you have that that ecosystem

[2:50:38] prebuilt we want to talk about

[2:50:40] AI we want to talk about how we

[2:50:40] can educate our students we want

[2:50:44] to talk about with employers

[2:50:45] to figure out what what type of

[2:50:46] training that they need and we

[2:50:47] also want to get the signals

[2:50:49] from employers on where they see

[2:50:51] the puckettting where they see

[2:50:52] you know where there might be

[2:50:53] some some jobs that are that are

[2:50:56] going away and so we've

[2:50:58] convened e different industry

[2:51:00] sectors and are having those

[2:51:02] conversations right now and

[2:51:04] so again it's it's recognizing

[2:51:06] what what what the needs

[2:51:07] right now but also trying to

[2:51:08] project those out into the

[2:51:09] future

[2:51:12] and and I'll kind of pivot to

[2:51:14] some of the kind of conceptual

[2:51:15] questions here right so the

[2:51:17] model in northern Nevada is

[2:51:18] different the employment

[2:51:19] rehab model in northernnevada is

[2:51:20] different than here in southern

[2:51:22] Nevada not only in the quantity

[2:51:26] of of of hubs that we have

[2:51:28] but also in order to develop

[2:51:30] some economies of scale if if

[2:51:32] you recall the the the former

[2:51:35] job connect offices right? so

[2:51:37] so Nevada works and and deed are

[2:51:38] basically repurposed or

[2:51:39] rebranded through

[2:51:41] this employee and v her

[2:51:45] branding the existing

[2:51:47] jobb connect offices that

[2:51:48] were throughout the throughout

[2:51:48] the region

[2:51:51] and so we designated those as

[2:51:52] through wheo it's called an

[2:51:54] affiliate site and so that means

[2:51:56] that that that we owe us

[2:51:58] services are available there

[2:51:59] we do have what's called a

[2:52:00] comprehensive center where we're

[2:52:02] required to bring in multiple

[2:52:04] partners and and you know

[2:52:07] convene thosenevada works is the

[2:52:09] the leaseholder the the operator

[2:52:11] you know making sure that that

[2:52:12] we're we're we're pointing

[2:52:14] people in the right direction

[2:52:17] but but also recognizing that

[2:52:18] uhsenator

[2:52:21] you know your experience as

[2:52:22] unfortunate as it was is a

[2:52:25] lesson for us but at the same

[2:52:26] time

[2:52:28] what and and this is you know

[2:52:29] this this is

[2:52:32] tough because the workforce

[2:52:34] innovation andpportunity Act

[2:52:35] allows for the creation of these

[2:52:37] local areas these local boards

[2:52:38] what it doesn't give us is

[2:52:40] authority to tell these partners

[2:52:43] what to do and so we convened

[2:52:45] these these we convene

[2:52:47] these hubs and we develop

[2:52:48] memorandums of understanding and

[2:52:50] how we're going to deliver

[2:52:52] services and and the local

[2:52:55] boards are responsible for these

[2:52:56] American job centers the

[2:52:58] challenges and and I shouldn't

[2:52:58] say challenge the the where

[2:52:59] where there

[2:53:02] may be better opportunities is

[2:53:04] that you know we have to rely on

[2:53:06] good graces and and and

[2:53:07] memorandums of understanding and

[2:53:10] so on and so if a partner is

[2:53:13] serving someone in a particular

[2:53:16] way we can help we can you know

[2:53:17] we we talk about continuous

[2:53:19] improvement, we talk about best

[2:53:20] practice, we talk about the

[2:53:21] customer experience we talk

[2:53:23] about humancented design we talk

[2:53:24] about what should happen when

[2:53:26] somebody walks through that door

[2:53:28] and and the routing that they

[2:53:28] should receive based on

[2:53:31] you know a questionnaire

[2:53:33] that they start with but then

[2:53:35] continue to as they meet with

[2:53:36] partners that partner may

[2:53:38] uncover something else and so we

[2:53:40] route them through not only the

[2:53:43] the literal physical location

[2:53:45] but throughout the ecosystem and

[2:53:46] so we're actually obligated to

[2:53:49] do a warm handoffs where

[2:53:50] where through these centers

[2:53:52] we're obligated to say it's not

[2:53:54] just a business card and go

[2:53:56] across across town in good luck

[2:53:56] it's actually making those

[2:53:58] connections and so one of

[2:53:58] the things one of the

[2:54:01] tools that we've adopted in

[2:54:02] northern nevada is a is a

[2:54:05] product called Alice and and and

[2:54:06] they also use it here in

[2:54:07] southern event I think for youth

[2:54:08] is that correct

[2:54:10] is that right? So basically it

[2:54:13] is this this virtual ecosystem

[2:54:15] where nonco located partners

[2:54:17] can be part of the system

[2:54:19] and we make those referrals

[2:54:21] they're they're trackable and

[2:54:22] and so on so I say all that to

[2:54:25] say that there's a lot of good

[2:54:27] work that is being done.

[2:54:29] Dieter again is a great partner

[2:54:31] you heard that from from

[2:54:32] Workforce Connections I'll echo

[2:54:34] that as well one of the

[2:54:35] things is we think in terms of

[2:54:37] funding you heard a you know

[2:54:38] you heard us this morning say

[2:54:40] eligibility you heard us say

[2:54:42] barriers and so on and the

[2:54:44] federal dollars are the ones

[2:54:46] that generally are the most

[2:54:48] prescriptive right? herere's

[2:54:49] here's the money and here's the

[2:54:52] eligibility thresholds and

[2:54:53] sodier has been and has been

[2:54:55] quite generous with to both

[2:54:57] local boards but but that

[2:54:59] funding allows us to do things

[2:55:00] like the industry sector

[2:55:02] partnerships like some of the

[2:55:03] other efforts that that it's

[2:55:05] really hard to do withwhe funny

[2:55:06] you know pause there and answer

[2:55:07] any questions you might have

[2:55:09] assemblywoman Anderson.

[2:55:13] Thank you chair and thank you

[2:55:15] for the presentation I'll give

[2:55:17] you a little chance to get some

[2:55:18] water actually have two

[2:55:20] questions. The first question

[2:55:23] comes from slide8s. I I really

[2:55:25] like the fact that you made it

[2:55:26] very clear that you came out and

[2:55:28] worked with the tribal councils

[2:55:28] on your own

[2:55:31] when it came to creating a

[2:55:33] dedicated tribal navigator wass

[2:55:35] this somebody that you worked

[2:55:36] with through the department with

[2:55:37] Stacy Montooth's department or

[2:55:39] was this something that you

[2:55:40] found somebody on your own with.

[2:55:43] yeah we act uhmier for the

[2:55:44] record thank you for the

[2:55:45] question we actually

[2:55:49] predated really that the the the

[2:55:51] formal establishment so it

[2:55:53] it actually it's kind of a

[2:55:55] little bit in reverse so yeah we

[2:55:57] did we did hire a travel

[2:55:59] navigator and and and so part

[2:56:00] of what the what our ribone

[2:56:02] navigator does is works with

[2:56:05] Stacy but also you and our

[2:56:08] tech hub has a as part of

[2:56:10] that they have a tribal

[2:56:10] component and so we actually

[2:56:13] wes we provide a great deal

[2:56:16] of assistance to both Stacy

[2:56:17] and to you and our tech hub

[2:56:20] thank you mayy I ask a second

[2:56:20] question chairir?

[2:56:23] thank you my other question

[2:56:25] had to do towards the end where

[2:56:27] it had to do we turn employer

[2:56:28] signals into targeted training.

[2:56:30] Is this done by

[2:56:33] a questionnaire that is asked

[2:56:35] about or is this done by

[2:56:36] voluntary because you had

[2:56:38] mentioned earlier in the program

[2:56:39] finding out if somebody had been

[2:56:40] a member of the

[2:56:44] think the foster care so is this

[2:56:46] a voluntary thing or is it that

[2:56:47] you expect everybody to fill out

[2:56:48] questionnaires. how do you find

[2:56:51] out? Yeaheltster record so a

[2:56:53] little bit of all that and so

[2:56:54] as we convene employers through

[2:56:55] the industry sector partnerships

[2:56:58] so the model is we have to start

[2:57:01] from somewhere so we we have

[2:57:03] economists that basically

[2:57:05] does some research and and

[2:57:07] tries to identify the signals

[2:57:09] that were that are that are seen

[2:57:10] you know at the at the federal

[2:57:10] or even state level and then we

[2:57:11] take that to

[2:57:13] these industry sector partners

[2:57:15] and say validate this is is what

[2:57:17] we're seeing knows is this data

[2:57:19] resonates sometimes it doesn't

[2:57:20] sometimes as we think in terms

[2:57:22] of regions there are times

[2:57:22] where you know

[2:57:27] for as an example you know is

[2:57:28] this the age you you know this

[2:57:29] is what the the thes the federal

[2:57:31] says and and and some of the

[2:57:32] importers like I wish I could

[2:57:33] pay that right there's no way

[2:57:35] that we could hire somebody for

[2:57:37] for that wage and I just use

[2:57:38] that as an example but we do

[2:57:41] provide surveys we do have

[2:57:44] you know conversations we do

[2:57:46] that not only in the the

[2:57:47] formal convenings and and we

[2:57:49] have multiple different levels

[2:57:50] where there's the employers are

[2:57:51] involved and then we have a

[2:57:52] separate meeting where

[2:57:53] where where we have

[2:57:57] the the ecosystem say ok this

[2:57:58] is what we heard now how are we

[2:57:59] going to react and we do that

[2:58:01] intentionally because what we

[2:58:03] don't want to do is you know,

[2:58:05] have this this model where we're

[2:58:06] here from the government and

[2:58:07] here's what we can do for you

[2:58:09] that's not the model right? The

[2:58:10] model is let's listen to what

[2:58:12] the employers are you know are

[2:58:13] signaling and what they're

[2:58:14] actually telling us and then how

[2:58:16] do we activate the system,

[2:58:19] activate partners to to meet

[2:58:20] those needs so short answers a

[2:58:21] little bit of all that.

[2:58:25] thank you and so that brought up

[2:58:27] a followup if I may I'm just

[2:58:29] gonna go forward. especially

[2:58:30] with the fact that this is

[2:58:31] around the pyramidlake area so

[2:58:33] that it automatically made me

[2:58:36] think of how there's a large

[2:58:38] boom in that area of numerous

[2:58:40] different organizations coming

[2:58:41] out there so is this more

[2:58:45] employeed driven or is this more

[2:58:47] employerd driven that's number

[2:58:49] one and then number 2 as I look

[2:58:50] out and I see a few friends that

[2:58:51] are involved in some other

[2:58:53] things do you ever work with the

[2:58:54] unions in apprenticeship

[2:58:54] programs

[2:58:59] yes to the second question but

[2:59:00] and I'll elaborate just but

[2:59:02] can you I'm not sure I

[2:59:03] understood the first question

[2:59:04] completely. are you asking for

[2:59:07] the when it comes to the listen

[2:59:09] to employers actually you say it

[2:59:10] right there that like with Ai

[2:59:12] changes that you need to make on

[2:59:13] training is this based upon what

[2:59:15] the employer's need or what the

[2:59:17] employees need so like sometimes

[2:59:19] I'd love to think it's both

[2:59:20] honestly and and and what I

[2:59:22] mean by that is you know

[2:59:23] we're getting these signals or

[2:59:24] the data directly from

[2:59:24] employers

[2:59:27] but but as part of these

[2:59:29] conversations we're asking

[2:59:32] them to kind of tell us what the

[2:59:34] ecosystem needs to do for those

[2:59:35] employees that may not you know

[2:59:39] may not survive or or or might

[2:59:42] need to transition so it it's

[2:59:43] you know the industry sector

[2:59:44] partnerships are definitely

[2:59:47] employerd driven the the rest

[2:59:49] of the ecosystem as we think in

[2:59:50] terms of our two sets of

[2:59:52] customers employers and and

[2:59:53] career seekers the career

[2:59:54] seekers can also be a source of

[2:59:58] knowledge and so we tap into

[3:00:00] that as well with regards to

[3:00:03] the to the unions short

[3:00:06] answer is yes and so we

[3:00:07] have the builders and trades

[3:00:10] union of northern Nevada is on

[3:00:12] our board obunnner is a trusted

[3:00:14] partner. we work with Rob all

[3:00:16] the time nevada works and and

[3:00:17] one of the things I hadn't

[3:00:18] mentioned yet is that Novaors is

[3:00:21] so much more than WIOA we have

[3:00:23] ive years ago when I came on

[3:00:24] as CEO we were let's for

[3:00:24] purposes of this

[3:00:28] conversation say we were100%

[3:00:30] weoa which is around6 million

[3:00:32] dollars a year we have

[3:00:34] received I just mentioned a

[3:00:36] good jobs challengellen grant we

[3:00:37] received aer apprenticeship

[3:00:38] buildingilding America grant

[3:00:39] which is a statewide grant that

[3:00:41] we work with with Workforce

[3:00:43] nections on and I could go down

[3:00:46] the list but so we always now

[3:00:48] about 20 to 22% of our funding

[3:00:49] so we've really cast a wide net

[3:00:51] and I say all that to say that

[3:00:53] you know we we think in terms

[3:00:54] of capacity right as we have

[3:00:55] somebody

[3:00:57] coming into the ecosystem, how

[3:00:58] can we bring additional capacity

[3:01:00] to bear and so apprenticeships

[3:01:02] is part of that model but

[3:01:03] I'll actually take it one step

[3:01:05] further the answer is yes we are

[3:01:07] unions and trades but that

[3:01:08] the apprenticeship

[3:01:10] buildingilding America grant is

[3:01:11] also nontraditional and nonunion

[3:01:13] so we're making very very

[3:01:15] intentional around working

[3:01:18] with UnlV around the

[3:01:19] professionalsion the teacher

[3:01:21] paraprofessional apprenticeship

[3:01:23] have also Nevadaorks has

[3:01:24] become what's called an

[3:01:24] intermediary for a couple of

[3:01:27] different apprenticeships and

[3:01:28] the and the idea there is that

[3:01:30] reduce some of the

[3:01:33] friction and and paperwork and

[3:01:34] and whatnot that goes in so

[3:01:38] we've done that for CAs

[3:01:40] surface we've done it for

[3:01:41] C andA for

[3:01:44] early childhood education we're

[3:01:45] working in children's cas so and

[3:01:46] and I can just go down the list

[3:01:49] really appreciate that I think

[3:01:50] when I was listening to that

[3:01:51] answer though it did come up

[3:01:52] with one more question I'm not

[3:01:53] sure if this is actually in your

[3:01:54] purview or not

[3:01:57] do you ever work with companies

[3:01:59] that basically are doing this

[3:02:01] hire to fire practice which

[3:02:03] unfortunately is a reality and

[3:02:04] more and more manufacturing

[3:02:06] areasil sir for the record so so

[3:02:07] that is antithetical to our

[3:02:09] model right? so if we think in

[3:02:11] terms of of WIA for example so

[3:02:13] all the funding that we get has

[3:02:15] metrics associated with it and

[3:02:16] so we do the good work because

[3:02:17] it's the right thing to do, but

[3:02:18] we also have to make sure that

[3:02:19] we check boxes so we can

[3:02:20] continue to get that funding

[3:02:22] and so if we think in terms of

[3:02:25] WIOA you saw that you know

[3:02:27] Ricardo mentioned you know

[3:02:28] employed second quarter after

[3:02:29] exit employed fourth quarter

[3:02:31] after exit and so on so

[3:02:35] we would never want to deal with

[3:02:36] those hire to fire but the

[3:02:38] system the way it's developed we

[3:02:39] have to be very conscious of

[3:02:41] that so the short answers no we

[3:02:43] we know we we does it happen

[3:02:45] sure I mean but but you know

[3:02:47] really the the model that we're

[3:02:48] trying to create is this is a a

[3:02:49] a

[3:02:52] collaborative and

[3:02:54] ecosystem and quite frankly it

[3:02:57] it those those organizations

[3:02:58] those businesses that are hired

[3:02:59] to fire they're going to get

[3:03:01] selected out over time for sure

[3:03:02] just want to make sure that

[3:03:03] that's on the record that they

[3:03:05] should not be working with

[3:03:08] because that is taking advantage

[3:03:10] of employers go out of business

[3:03:11] thank you thank you chair

[3:03:15] thank you for your presentation

[3:03:17] we appreciate you coming

[3:03:19] we will

[3:03:23] close the presentation from

[3:03:24] battlettleorks and call Mr

[3:03:26] Corbett up executive director of

[3:03:28] the division of workforce

[3:03:29] andconomicvelopment of College

[3:03:30] of southern Nevada.

[3:03:35] for the record we will go to

[3:03:36] lunch at1:30.

[3:03:38] we will try to fit in as much

[3:03:39] as we can and then we'll break

[3:04:13] Good afternoon everybody

[3:04:14] Stavanorbett with the

[3:04:15] collegelege of southern Nevada I

[3:04:16] currently serve as the executive

[3:04:18] director for the division of

[3:04:20] workforce madam chairir

[3:04:22] honorable members thank you for

[3:04:23] the opportunity to come and

[3:04:25] share about the great work that

[3:04:27] is happening not only with the

[3:04:28] two presentations that you heard

[3:04:30] prior to myself but also

[3:04:31] within the College of southern

[3:04:34] Nevada as a whole. one of the

[3:04:35] things I do want to associate

[3:04:38] upfront is in thewoa space

[3:04:39] College of southern Nevada

[3:04:40] particularly our adult basic

[3:04:40] education

[3:04:44] program serves asitle 2 when we

[3:04:46] talk about the weoa ecosystem

[3:04:47] and so you've heard a lot of

[3:04:49] Title1 TitleI, etc and so we're

[3:04:52] number two and that is through

[3:04:53] our AFfla which is the American

[3:04:56] Education Family Literacy Act

[3:04:58] the state that is funded that is

[3:04:59] federal dollars from the

[3:05:01] department of Education that

[3:05:02] runs through the Nevada

[3:05:04] Department of Education goes

[3:05:06] to all the community colleges

[3:05:08] clark County school district

[3:05:10] some of the universities

[3:05:10] colleges southern

[3:05:13] Nevada receives about 2.3

[3:05:14] million of that to serve

[3:05:17] approximately1000 students

[3:05:19] which are individuals who do not

[3:05:21] have a high school diploma and

[3:05:22] looking so just want to preface

[3:05:24] that role and what the

[3:05:26] opportunity is and whatitle2 and

[3:05:26] how it's narrated for the

[3:05:27] support.

[3:05:31] just to give you a brief

[3:05:33] overview we are the largest

[3:05:34] workforce training provider in

[3:05:35] southern Nevada again College

[3:05:37] Souther Nevada has closed to

[3:05:40] uh35,000 students we do have

[3:05:41] what we call community embedded

[3:05:44] or satellite campuses we have

[3:05:47] about13 of these campuses across

[3:05:49] the geographic area all in

[3:05:51] southern Nevada all the way from

[3:05:53] each municipality to

[3:05:55] unincorporated to unincorporated

[3:05:56] all the way out to mesquite

[3:05:58] our newest workforce center is

[3:05:59] called the westide Education

[3:06:02] Training Center this is embedded

[3:06:03] right off of the historic west

[3:06:06] side it is also in line with the

[3:06:07] census data in terms of where

[3:06:09] the highest number of

[3:06:11] individuals who are unemployed

[3:06:13] and also along with individuals

[3:06:14] who have opportunities for

[3:06:17] social and economic mobility

[3:06:19] this was a huge opportunity and

[3:06:21] collaboration with not only

[3:06:23] the local workforce board but

[3:06:25] also the city of Las Vegas the

[3:06:26] governor's office of economic

[3:06:27] ve lo p ment we've been open

[3:06:30] about six months now and to date

[3:06:33] have served about300 individuals

[3:06:37] uh123 of those have already

[3:06:38] completed short term industry

[3:06:39] recognized credentials

[3:06:41] approximately 90% of those

[3:06:45] individuals are employed this

[3:06:47] also is in collaboration with

[3:06:49] local workforce board as well as

[3:06:50] Deeter who has been mentioned

[3:06:51] who is also a partner for us.

[3:06:54] I mentioned a little bit about

[3:06:56] the adult education workforce

[3:06:58] training one of the things that

[3:06:59] makes our workforce training a

[3:07:01] little unique as we use what is

[3:07:03] called an IET which is an

[3:07:04] integrated education training

[3:07:07] model so the about 99% of the

[3:07:09] students that come to us are

[3:07:11] individuals who cannot wait 2

[3:07:13] years,4 years for a degree.

[3:07:15] These are individuals that are

[3:07:17] providing for their family

[3:07:18] economic stress is alive and

[3:07:20] well and so they come to us for

[3:07:22] these short term training so

[3:07:22] that they get into

[3:07:25] employment as quickly as

[3:07:27] possible we have programs

[3:07:29] that last as long as4 weeks all

[3:07:31] the way up to16 weeks but

[3:07:32] nothing longer than that16

[3:07:32] weeks.

[3:07:35] so again those individuals

[3:07:37] come to us just in the southern

[3:07:39] Nevada region alone there's

[3:07:42] about 230,000 individuals that

[3:07:43] don't currently have a high

[3:07:44] school diploma or an

[3:07:44] equivalency.

[3:07:47] and so this also allows the

[3:07:49] population to simultaneously

[3:07:51] work on their high school

[3:07:53] equivalency while they're

[3:07:55] becoming trained the IET model

[3:07:57] contextualizes the academicn

[3:07:59] components of what they need

[3:08:02] with the workforce program so

[3:08:03] rather than say hey go take math

[3:08:05] 97 and all of us were there were

[3:08:06] like where am I ever going to

[3:08:09] use this in life the integrated

[3:08:10] education training model says

[3:08:11] you're going to have applied

[3:08:13] math specific to the workforce

[3:08:14] training that you're engaged in

[3:08:15] so if you're

[3:08:17] in a health scienceence program

[3:08:19] the mathematic academics that

[3:08:21] you're absorbing is directly in

[3:08:22] line to that profession if

[3:08:23] you're in advanced manufacturing

[3:08:25] the mathematics is directly in

[3:08:27] line to that so you see

[3:08:29] instantly as a student oh this

[3:08:31] is why I need to learn it and

[3:08:32] it's directly connected to their

[3:08:32] own future orientation.

[3:08:36] we have the pathways which

[3:08:37] are very diverse from rapid

[3:08:39] response I just talked about

[3:08:41] noncredit we also haveredit

[3:08:43] aligneducational paths what I

[3:08:45] will share is that those

[3:08:47] students that come to us become

[3:08:48] employed get their training

[3:08:49] their industry recognized

[3:08:52] credential get employment the

[3:08:54] average matriculation rate

[3:08:55] across the United States is

[3:08:58] about18 to 22% of those

[3:09:00] individuals go on to a degree at

[3:09:01] the college of southern Nevada

[3:09:03] we're at30%. That means30% of

[3:09:04] those students

[3:09:05] who didn't even think high

[3:09:07] school was for them are now

[3:09:09] going into a degree pathway

[3:09:10] because they've had a positive

[3:09:10] experience

[3:09:13] a financial strategy when I

[3:09:15] talk about braided funding this

[3:09:16] is something you've heard from

[3:09:17] meilt and Irene and doctorctor

[3:09:19] Viallobos and Brett what we are

[3:09:21] able to do is over at our

[3:09:22] centers that I talked about we

[3:09:25] do haveitle one representation

[3:09:27] that sits within the facilities

[3:09:28] at the College of southern

[3:09:29] Nevada we have TitleI

[3:09:31] Wagnereiser through Deeter that

[3:09:33] has an individual and then of

[3:09:34] course colleges in

[3:09:35] southernnevada has her own

[3:09:37] philanthropic and or grant

[3:09:40] funding as well so when we

[3:09:40] receive a grant we usually have

[3:09:43] a target to meet hey you have to

[3:09:45] hit60 students 9 times out of10

[3:09:47] we'll go 20 to30% above that

[3:09:50] because we cofund those students

[3:09:53] with Title1 TitleI and other

[3:09:54] philanthropic dollars. So by

[3:09:56] braiding it allows us to extend

[3:09:57] those dollars but remember

[3:10:00] just like workforce connections

[3:10:02] andil said hey you have there

[3:10:03] are millions of dollars serves

[3:10:04] up to1,500 people collectively

[3:10:08] 231,000 individuals but out a

[3:10:09] high school diploma our funding

[3:10:12] allows us to serve 1000 of those

[3:10:13] per an annual basis.

[3:10:16] when we talk about the

[3:10:18] AB354 very similar to what Milt

[3:10:21] said that is our delivery

[3:10:23] strategy we're in the places

[3:10:25] that where we have the census

[3:10:27] track that say this is where the

[3:10:28] highest poverty exists. this is

[3:10:29] where the highest unemployment

[3:10:31] exists we work very closely with

[3:10:33] the city where we do targeted

[3:10:35] outreach and targeted

[3:10:37] recruitment. so in conjunction

[3:10:38] with the city of Las Vegas they

[3:10:40] have an internal messaging

[3:10:41] system where based on their

[3:10:43] wards they have a direct

[3:10:44] audience of

[3:10:46] individuals whether it's wardd 1

[3:10:48] andwardd5 where we currently

[3:10:49] reside for our first two

[3:10:52] training centers goes out thus

[3:10:54] targeting surveying what are you

[3:10:54] interested in

[3:10:57] they get a response we then

[3:10:59] develop the training and with

[3:11:01] the employer based on that.

[3:11:03] First example is we have a

[3:11:06] cohort of about 24 young folks

[3:11:07] going through an EMT program.

[3:11:12] City of Las Vegas deployed this

[3:11:15] mechanism identified within

[3:11:19] wardd5 and particularly89106

[3:11:21] area code where this high

[3:11:23] poverty lowe employment exists

[3:11:27] got 240 responses Out of that we

[3:11:28] were able to fill the course at

[3:11:31] capacity with 24 students who

[3:11:34] are now paid by through Title I

[3:11:34] TitleI CSN

[3:11:38] and taking class in December

[3:11:40] they will graduate we're talking

[3:11:42] to the chief of the city of Las

[3:11:44] Vegas who's already guaranteed

[3:11:45] as long as they pass and they do

[3:11:47] well they'll be able to put on

[3:11:49] the city of Las Vegas ENt

[3:11:52] uniform come December January so

[3:11:53] that I just wanted to share that

[3:11:54] as one example of the

[3:11:56] attentionality to make sure that

[3:11:57] we're highly targeting the

[3:11:59] community that we're in and that

[3:12:01] we know these economic factors

[3:12:02] have an impact on

[3:12:07] for us everything is datad

[3:12:08] driven if it doesn't if it

[3:12:09] doesn't show up in the data and

[3:12:12] it's somebody's opinion we don't

[3:12:14] do it it doesn't its hasn't

[3:12:16] yielded us the outcomes that

[3:12:17] we're looking for they talk

[3:12:20] about a humancented design

[3:12:21] process that's exactly the

[3:12:23] practice that we follow. we make

[3:12:24] sure that those young adults

[3:12:26] that are entering the workforce

[3:12:28] because of the sources with

[3:12:30] Title1itleI and CSN it's a

[3:12:32] holistic approach we're not just

[3:12:33] looking hey we're just here to

[3:12:34] train you and if you get it

[3:12:34] great

[3:12:37] no it's also about that

[3:12:39] contextualized component that I

[3:12:40] spoke about the number one thing

[3:12:42] that we hear from employers

[3:12:44] that's missing soft skills selff

[3:12:45] leadership

[3:12:48] being able to have communication

[3:12:51] skills being on time so we

[3:12:52] incorporate all those and

[3:12:53] integrate those or contextualize

[3:12:56] those into all our training

[3:12:57] programs when we talk about the

[3:12:59] different interventions AFla

[3:13:03] which are a which I referenced

[3:13:05] earlier Rhodes is also a was a

[3:13:07] pilot that was funded through

[3:13:09] Dieter. it was about half a

[3:13:11] million dollars to serve about70

[3:13:13] students in this exactly

[3:13:15] workforce ecosystem. we end up

[3:13:17] serving over100 because of that

[3:13:19] braided funding approach

[3:13:21] average of 90% training

[3:13:25] completion average of about80%

[3:13:27] employment. so again one of the

[3:13:29] things that you'll see a theme

[3:13:30] here is if we don't meet those

[3:13:31] numbers we lose our funding

[3:13:35] it's it's not a model that just

[3:13:37] says here's money go train if

[3:13:39] we're not meeting those numbers

[3:13:40] the board will come back to us

[3:13:42] based on what is on the eligible

[3:13:43] training provider list says hey

[3:13:45] you're not meeting that

[3:13:47] threshold. some of you may be

[3:13:49] familiar with shorter ell first

[3:13:50] time that'll be an additional

[3:13:51] funding stream but it'll just be

[3:13:53] a last dollar type of component

[3:13:56] but same thing these metrics are

[3:13:56] across all workforce training

[3:14:01] minimum their request is70%

[3:14:03] completion70% placement we're

[3:14:04] already exceeding that here in

[3:14:05] southern Nevada.

[3:14:09] this had a significant impact

[3:14:11] some of the images you're

[3:14:13] looking at now are from the

[3:14:14] westsideducation Training Center

[3:14:16] we all of our trainings are in

[3:14:18] line with what we see as the

[3:14:21] indeman occupations so this is

[3:14:23] from the LvGEA theorkforce

[3:14:25] nections the chamberlueprint we

[3:14:26] also do work with David Schmidt

[3:14:28] from Deeter who provides us

[3:14:30] labor market information as well

[3:14:33] on a continual basis one of

[3:14:34] the things we do is there was a

[3:14:36] lot of hey CNC is coming down

[3:14:37] the pipeline we started

[3:14:39] a CNC program we were

[3:14:41] overproducing talent we stopped

[3:14:43] the program. if the program does

[3:14:46] not lead to unemployment that's

[3:14:47] not how you treat people. you

[3:14:48] don't put them in a training for

[3:14:50] eight weeks they develop a skill

[3:14:51] and now the employer is not

[3:14:52] there.

[3:14:55] now if that comes back in demand

[3:14:57] we'll reimplement it and move

[3:15:00] forward and so our areas our

[3:15:02] health sciences advanced

[3:15:03] manufacturing computer

[3:15:05] information technology and the

[3:15:07] skill trades CSN does serve as a

[3:15:09] school of record for16 building

[3:15:11] trades we have a very close

[3:15:12] relationship with the southern

[3:15:14] Nevada building trades. what

[3:15:15] that means that serving as a

[3:15:17] school of record when people say

[3:15:19] hey don't go to consider the

[3:15:21] trades instead of college here

[3:15:22] the

[3:15:24] trades is college. they are

[3:15:25] earning credit through their

[3:15:27] apprenticeship program. they're

[3:15:29] literally6 credits away after

[3:15:31] they complete their journeymen

[3:15:33] or their apprenticeship program

[3:15:35] these individuals are6 credits

[3:15:36] away from getting their

[3:15:39] associates in apprenticeship

[3:15:42] studies and so it's it's making

[3:15:45] sure that individuals go on and

[3:15:47] you'll see some of the trade

[3:15:50] leaders who are retired use that

[3:15:51] and now have a four year degree

[3:15:52] and have a whole another

[3:15:54] life because of utilizing

[3:15:55] that strategy.

[3:15:57] I've already talked a little bit

[3:15:59] about roads one of the things

[3:16:01] we're most excited about is our

[3:16:02] resilience for Nevada this is

[3:16:04] also a workforce grant it is the

[3:16:06] only workforce grant specific in

[3:16:08] Nevada through the department of

[3:16:11] healthalth and Humanervices for

[3:16:14] individuals who have passed or

[3:16:14] in were in recovery

[3:16:17] and so as you know there are

[3:16:19] some if based on your background

[3:16:22] related to recovery you may not

[3:16:23] be able to be eligible for

[3:16:25] employment so we work very

[3:16:26] closely with the local

[3:16:27] municipalities if we can work

[3:16:29] with those judges

[3:16:32] to se or modify the record so

[3:16:34] they can get employment we have

[3:16:36] case managers that work with the

[3:16:38] judicial the judicial system to

[3:16:38] be able to do that

[3:16:41] we also work very closely what

[3:16:43] we call as recovery friendly

[3:16:44] employers so they're straight

[3:16:47] out hey yes we hire individuals

[3:16:49] who've had this experience this

[3:16:51] lived experience in the past and

[3:16:53] so what we see a lot of those in

[3:16:54] our peer support specialists

[3:16:56] advanced manufacturing and some

[3:16:58] community healthcare workers we

[3:17:00] just finished our first year. we

[3:17:02] were supposed to serve65. we

[3:17:04] actually serve 95 but again

[3:17:07] average8085% employment rate.

[3:17:08] This also is

[3:17:11] now causing us to look at CSN as

[3:17:15] are we also a recovery friendly

[3:17:17] entity because a lot of these

[3:17:18] roles that were building and

[3:17:19] working with the

[3:17:21] recoveryfriendly recovery

[3:17:23] community requires lived

[3:17:25] experience and so we're

[3:17:26] beginning to navigate what that

[3:17:27] looks like in terms of that

[3:17:28] infrastructure.

[3:17:32] shared intake again I talked

[3:17:33] about the the integration with

[3:17:36] Title1 TitleI what does that

[3:17:37] look like in terms of a

[3:17:41] streamlined experience also

[3:17:43] making sure that what we

[3:17:44] recognize with these grants that

[3:17:45] have been provided directly

[3:17:47] tocSN it eliminates the

[3:17:49] redundant processes we've talked

[3:17:52] about Senator Deonte you

[3:17:54] talked about efficiencies

[3:17:56] these this type of opportunity

[3:17:57] does eliminate redundant

[3:17:58] processes significantly

[3:18:01] ac ce le rate s the time that we

[3:18:03] can see a student if a student

[3:18:05] says hey I'm unemployed I need

[3:18:07] to go to work like now and get

[3:18:11] them trained it allows us to be

[3:18:12] able to support them that much

[3:18:14] quicker and again it's a

[3:18:16] complete wraparound service to

[3:18:18] make sure that these students

[3:18:19] are successful again with our 13

[3:18:21] sites across the different areas

[3:18:23] also allows us to be where

[3:18:26] everybody is again this is

[3:18:28] the grand opening when about67

[3:18:28] months ago at our westside

[3:18:29] education

[3:18:31] training center there's another

[3:18:33] one being built called the Etsy

[3:18:35] which is you guessed it the east

[3:18:38] sideducation training center and

[3:18:40] then a couple years down the

[3:18:42] road and these are all in

[3:18:43] partnership with the city of Las

[3:18:45] Vegas we'll have a metzi which

[3:18:47] is a medical education and

[3:18:48] training center so the beautiful

[3:18:49] thing about these is we're

[3:18:51] building brick and mortar and

[3:18:53] infrastructure and what that

[3:18:55] does is allow us to expand the

[3:18:56] services that that you've heard

[3:18:58] here between all three

[3:18:58] presentations this morning so

[3:18:59] the

[3:19:01] model that we're talking about

[3:19:03] will exist at the Etsy will also

[3:19:05] exists at the medical education

[3:19:07] training center again the

[3:19:08] biggest thing is what we're

[3:19:10] realizing is collectively we

[3:19:13] need to look at more dollars.

[3:19:14] it's very easy if we were to

[3:19:16] step on the gas we can run

[3:19:17] through our money probably6

[3:19:19] months through the the annual

[3:19:21] money that is provided and

[3:19:23] that's why we started braiding

[3:19:25] these funds so that not only can

[3:19:26] we serve more but we can also

[3:19:28] stretch the dollars. all of us

[3:19:28] have been in place where we

[3:19:29] braided funds

[3:19:32] some call it other things but

[3:19:33] exactly to extend resources and

[3:19:35] make sure we can continue to

[3:19:38] deliver those high services. I

[3:19:39] talked already a little about

[3:19:41] afflow what that does what

[3:19:43] that's provides in a perfect

[3:19:45] world somebody comes works on

[3:19:47] there high school equivalency is

[3:19:48] enrolled in the short term

[3:19:51] training becomes employed CSN is

[3:19:53] also the only college in Nevada

[3:19:55] where you have dual enrollment

[3:19:58] for adults it's a federal

[3:19:58] program called bility to

[3:19:59] benefitnefit

[3:20:02] we have great philanthropic

[3:20:03] partners like Bank of America

[3:20:06] and MGM who covers the first six

[3:20:09] credits of these adult learners

[3:20:10] they then become eligible for

[3:20:13] Ffafa so just like there's dual

[3:20:14] enrollment for high school

[3:20:17] students this allows us to also

[3:20:18] have dual enrollment for adult

[3:20:19] learners.

[3:20:22] Washington state has had this

[3:20:23] program in place probably the

[3:20:25] longest which means about10

[3:20:28] years what they have found is

[3:20:29] individuals secure their two

[3:20:31] year degree before they actually

[3:20:32] secure their high school

[3:20:34] equivalency. I don't know about

[3:20:36] you, I'm a horrible test taker

[3:20:37] in order you're pass your GED

[3:20:38] you have to take a test

[3:20:41] if you're not a great test

[3:20:44] taker, a lot of people give up

[3:20:47] never get their GED but if

[3:20:48] you're enrolled in a two year

[3:20:48] degree

[3:20:51] which is not your your destiny

[3:20:54] is not based on one test but a

[3:20:55] series of courses for you to

[3:20:57] develop your knowledge base we

[3:20:59] see a higher population so now

[3:21:00] they don't even have to look

[3:21:01] back at their high school

[3:21:03] equivalency because they have

[3:21:05] their two year degree they have

[3:21:06] workforce training and they go

[3:21:07] on and have a successful life.

[3:21:11] lastst thing I'll share is about

[3:21:13] our business development we also

[3:21:15] do provide you've heard the term

[3:21:17] incumbent workers we work very

[3:21:18] closely with Dieter and

[3:21:19] Workforce connectction on their

[3:21:21] industry sector partnership

[3:21:24] dollars as well as their

[3:21:27] upscaling training dollars so

[3:21:29] what we do is work with local

[3:21:31] employers they identify what are

[3:21:32] the talent gaps in their

[3:21:34] businesses to keep team members

[3:21:36] to stay competitive and also to

[3:21:38] be relative in the workforce our

[3:21:39] workforce trainings have about

[3:21:44] a 15 fifteen% variance every 16

[3:21:44] weeks

[3:21:47] that's how quick business and

[3:21:50] industry moves so we make

[3:21:51] sure that whatever that student

[3:21:53] is from class to class they're

[3:21:55] experiencing the most updated

[3:21:57] techniques strategies because we

[3:21:58] want them to be the most

[3:22:01] competitive individuals as they

[3:22:03] go into the workforce and so

[3:22:04] that's where the customized

[3:22:06] training comes in if you go

[3:22:08] and you ask for a suit and you

[3:22:10] tell us as the employer you want

[3:22:11] one sleeve longer than the other

[3:22:13] that's what you're gonna get.

[3:22:14] we're not gonna argue with you

[3:22:14] you're the employer you know how

[3:22:16] to run your business

[3:22:17] excuse me

[3:22:20] and so that is also a way that

[3:22:22] we contribute to workforce

[3:22:25] and economic development and

[3:22:26] businesses industry competitive

[3:22:28] competitiveness and

[3:22:28] sustainability.

[3:22:32] lastly and I think I said

[3:22:33] that last time

[3:22:38] So past tense

[3:22:41] henderson chamber we were very

[3:22:43] closely with Scott in the

[3:22:45] henderson chamber. he has a

[3:22:47] consortium of manufacturers we

[3:22:48] actually have about6 or7

[3:22:50] manufacturers that we currently

[3:22:51] work with not only for entry

[3:22:53] level but also for this

[3:22:55] upscaling component we meet on a

[3:22:57] monthly basis this group of

[3:22:59] manufacturers tells us to our

[3:23:01] face this is the training we

[3:23:02] want. Here's the job

[3:23:03] descriptions here's the contact

[3:23:05] with the HR so when your

[3:23:07] students graduate I'm giving you

[3:23:08] the name of that HR rep so

[3:23:09] there's

[3:23:11] that warm handoff in that direct

[3:23:13] connection it's those type of

[3:23:16] intentional strategies like

[3:23:17] Miss Irene was talking about

[3:23:18] that leads to that success.

[3:23:23] noncredit health sciences again

[3:23:26] is our quick our our fastest

[3:23:26] growing sector here in southern

[3:23:27] Nevada.

[3:23:31] and so a lot of our short

[3:23:33] term trainings our entry level

[3:23:35] positions we don't fund a

[3:23:36] training that is not going to

[3:23:37] yield a minimum of $20 an hour.

[3:23:41] we don't do12 dollars,15

[3:23:43] dollarsdivis normally can do

[3:23:45] that on their own. The trainings

[3:23:47] that we have make sure that at a

[3:23:49] minimum they're walking out of

[3:23:50] the door and making a minimum

[3:23:51] of40,000 dollars a year. that's

[3:23:55] not a lot.1fteen years ago maybe

[3:23:57] but still that's the threshold

[3:23:58] that we want to make sure that's

[3:23:59] part of the business industry to

[3:24:01] say hey what is competitive

[3:24:02] wages look like?

[3:24:09] ai there's a a college wide we

[3:24:10] have an Ai ambassador

[3:24:13] that is informing and meeting

[3:24:16] with what does artificial

[3:24:18] intelligence look like within

[3:24:18] the collegelege of southern

[3:24:21] nevada and she has a task

[3:24:23] forcece on AI where all the

[3:24:24] institutions meet and talk about

[3:24:26] what this component looks like

[3:24:28] it is already embedded it's here

[3:24:30] it's embedded in manufacturing

[3:24:32] and it's embedded in healthcare

[3:24:34] it's embedded in business

[3:24:36] operations our responsibility is

[3:24:37] to make sure that where it's

[3:24:39] embedded these are incorporated

[3:24:40] into our trainings so

[3:24:43] that that that individual has

[3:24:44] competencies awareness and

[3:24:47] success based on what it is

[3:24:48] those AI skills are that are

[3:24:51] required so that they're also s

[3:24:54] successful so for us AI is

[3:24:56] another tool and another skill

[3:24:58] that is incorporated in

[3:25:00] contextualized because the job

[3:25:02] requested and again the goal is

[3:25:04] to make sure our students are

[3:25:05] successful.

[3:25:09] I talked about the digital

[3:25:10] integration employerdriven

[3:25:12] curriculum, short term training

[3:25:14] wrap it up skilling and again

[3:25:19] it for us the AI dialogue has

[3:25:20] actually we've had an increase

[3:25:22] of companies that have reached

[3:25:24] out to us to say hey because

[3:25:26] we've incorporated AI into our

[3:25:27] business model

[3:25:29] what does that look like from a

[3:25:31] training perspective? Our SMmes

[3:25:33] meet with their SMmes we take

[3:25:34] directly from the job

[3:25:35] description and the roles that

[3:25:37] the business give us it's

[3:25:38] incorporated and contextualized

[3:25:41] as part of the training that

[3:25:42] student comes out with that

[3:25:43] skill that that employer has

[3:25:44] asked for.

[3:25:47] I talked about again this is

[3:25:49] probably being a theme to

[3:25:51] diversify it does it have to be

[3:25:52] new funding? No could it be more

[3:25:54] strategic funding like Irene

[3:25:56] said absolutely and I think

[3:25:56] those are worth having some

[3:25:57] conversations

[3:25:58] the pipeline

[3:26:04] again 231,000 individuals we

[3:26:05] get about 1000 of those that

[3:26:08] come to us to a year we have

[3:26:09] ongoing within the division of

[3:26:13] workforce about7,000 students

[3:26:14] who are someplace in their

[3:26:16] trajectory of their learning and

[3:26:17] then career experience.

[3:26:23] Again going back to AB354 we are

[3:26:25] intentionally in those areas

[3:26:28] that AB354 narrates talks about

[3:26:30] that should be reached we

[3:26:32] have direct conversation with

[3:26:34] those employers all the time

[3:26:35] what are the things we preface

[3:26:37] is to make sure that hey as

[3:26:39] business and industry is growing

[3:26:41] and is diversifying so should

[3:26:43] the talent pipeline so that's

[3:26:44] where the city of Las Vegas

[3:26:45] comes in with their direct

[3:26:47] targeting outreach being able to

[3:26:49] pull individuals who've already

[3:26:50] identified an interest

[3:26:53] the employer's already lined up

[3:26:55] we reverse engineer we don't do

[3:26:57] a training and then go find an

[3:26:58] employer I don't know if you

[3:26:59] ever seen that movie Arthur

[3:27:01] where he shoots and then says it

[3:27:03] and he says pool and then shoots

[3:27:04] and says hit the bullet hit the

[3:27:06] bullet we don't do that we start

[3:27:07] with the employer first and then

[3:27:11] develop the training from

[3:27:12] there I know I aged myself with

[3:27:13] that movie I was just like are

[3:27:15] we talking about the cartoon Ar

[3:27:17] there like what it was the

[3:27:18] eightys movie that's my bad

[3:27:23] do you again our whole thing

[3:27:24] is about equitable social

[3:27:27] mobility individuals if you

[3:27:29] qua if you make less than40,000

[3:27:31] a year you're gonna qualify for

[3:27:33] the training and support one of

[3:27:34] the biggest successes that we've

[3:27:37] had is when the employers embed

[3:27:39] the training that CSM delivers

[3:27:43] into the job description once a

[3:27:46] in a job seeker sees that hey

[3:27:47] it's not just I need a four year

[3:27:48] degree but I can take the 16

[3:27:49] week

[3:27:51] CSN class and you're going to

[3:27:52] hire me

[3:27:53] we get people that are willing

[3:27:55] to pay out of pocket and they

[3:27:57] saved up however they got the

[3:27:59] money that's not us to ask but

[3:28:01] we do see a lot of out of pocket

[3:28:02] pay when they know if they take

[3:28:04] the training that that employer

[3:28:06] is going to accept that training

[3:28:07] that's huge in the health

[3:28:09] industry CcSd does that for

[3:28:11] several of our trainings

[3:28:13] we're now starting to get

[3:28:15] manufacturers to list that

[3:28:17] ourciSN customized trainings are

[3:28:20] part of that process and so

[3:28:21] that's how we sustain that

[3:28:22] employment and that talent

[3:28:22] pi pe line

[3:28:23] thank you

[3:28:26] we have one question

[3:28:28] assembliman to silva

[3:28:30] thank you chair

[3:28:33] Mr Corbett it's always good

[3:28:35] to see you my constituent and my

[3:28:37] neighbor. I know you quickly

[3:28:38] glanced on this but the east

[3:28:39] side training center at just a

[3:28:40] two part question about that of

[3:28:42] course so firstly what's the

[3:28:43] actual progress with that like

[3:28:45] how is it looking like with

[3:28:46] the program looking like what is

[3:28:49] it said to be an open opening

[3:28:51] what what parts of the workforce

[3:28:52] are you going to be specifically

[3:28:54] focusing on the if there's going

[3:28:55] to be a specific focus and then

[3:28:57] secondly is the fact that I

[3:28:58] think that training center is

[3:29:00] ideally located it's on the

[3:29:00] corner of a washing I'm sorry

[3:29:01] bonanz and pickles

[3:29:05] there are over5 potentially6

[3:29:06] high schools within a seven

[3:29:07] minute drive that we're talking

[3:29:08] about anywhere from10,000

[3:29:09] to12,000 you know a

[3:29:13] 13 to 8 year olds who are

[3:29:15] looking for a some kind of a a

[3:29:16] step that they can take after

[3:29:18] they graduate so I was wondering

[3:29:19] if there's any relationships

[3:29:20] that are being built with those

[3:29:21] particular schools within that

[3:29:23] area there0% assembly men and

[3:29:24] and so

[3:29:26] we're looking at breaking

[3:29:27] ground probably January so6

[3:29:28] months.

[3:29:31] what we know about the wetsy

[3:29:32] it took him about12 months

[3:29:33] construction

[3:29:34] and so I firstee as

[3:29:39] at the earliest running programs

[3:29:42] as early as January2028. so

[3:29:43] about 16 months away se7 months

[3:29:44] away

[3:29:46] I'm glad that you mentioned

[3:29:47] the high schools we're working

[3:29:50] with several high schools now on

[3:29:51] an innovate an intervention

[3:29:53] based workforce strategy which

[3:29:55] is well identify those high

[3:29:57] school seniors who said I'm not

[3:29:58] going they're on target to

[3:29:59] graduate

[3:30:00] but they're not really

[3:30:02] interested or either in post sec

[3:30:04] and postsecondary anything they

[3:30:04] just don't know

[3:30:07] and so what we've been able to

[3:30:09] do at western high school and

[3:30:10] we're opening it up to a couple

[3:30:11] more high schools specifically

[3:30:13] in the historic west side area

[3:30:17] is going and provide training

[3:30:19] the last quarter of that

[3:30:20] student's high school year. so

[3:30:23] when they graduate they're also

[3:30:24] receiving an industryrecod

[3:30:27] credential and so it's bringing

[3:30:29] the CTE model to them at these

[3:30:30] comprehensive high schools where

[3:30:32] those CTE programs are not as

[3:30:34] robust so we'll do that

[3:30:34] similarly with a desert

[3:30:39] pines rancho Elorrado, Vegas and

[3:30:40] sunrise

[3:30:45] OK thank you for that we

[3:30:48] appreciate your presentation you

[3:30:48] spending your morning with us

[3:30:52] we will close this out and we

[3:30:53] will try

[3:30:57] to fit in the gaming taxes and

[3:30:58] then we'll break for lunch.

[3:31:00] so we'll go back to agenda item

[3:31:01] number6

[3:31:03] and then we will break for

[3:31:07] think everybody's hungry

[3:31:43] i ne al and members of the

[3:31:44] committee, thank you for

[3:31:44] having us today

[3:31:47] my name is Shelly Newe I'm

[3:31:49] the senior economic analyst for

[3:31:50] the Nevada Gaming Control Board

[3:31:54] and we've been asked to give

[3:31:56] an overview of the gaming taxes

[3:31:57] and fees that are imposed by the

[3:31:58] state of Nevada

[3:32:00] and with that said all'll go

[3:32:02] ahead and start our slide

[3:32:02] presentation.

[3:32:07] often in the gaming industry we

[3:32:09] break our licensees down so

[3:32:11] you're gonna see in our

[3:32:13] taxing labels you're going to

[3:32:14] see that we are broken and we've

[3:32:15] broken them down into restricted

[3:32:17] and nonrestricted. I thought it

[3:32:19] was important to point that out

[3:32:20] because as you look at some of

[3:32:22] the fees you'll see that in the

[3:32:23] in the name are restricted

[3:32:27] licensees are those who have1f

[3:32:28] slot machines

[3:32:31] not more than1f so it's1f or

[3:32:33] less and then if you have16 it

[3:32:35] moves you to the nonrestricted

[3:32:36] licensing category

[3:32:39] so anybody who has16 or more

[3:32:40] slot machines or if you want to

[3:32:41] do game and tables or any

[3:32:44] combination thereof you'll fall

[3:32:44] into that category

[3:32:47] uhd additionally you'll hear in

[3:32:49] the gaming industry that you

[3:32:50] hear us refer to group one and

[3:32:52] group two licenseesroup one

[3:32:54] licensees are those having gross

[3:32:55] revenue over approximately8

[3:32:58] million dollars and they'll fall

[3:32:59] under the purview of the audit

[3:33:01] division anyone in the

[3:33:02] nonrestricted falling under

[3:33:04] that8 million dollars threshold

[3:33:06] approximately will be under the

[3:33:06] purview of our tax and license

[3:33:07] division.

[3:33:11] so moving on to our next slide,

[3:33:13] our revenues are broken down

[3:33:16] into majors and minors as you

[3:33:17] had a chance to maybe go through

[3:33:19] our slide you saw some of the

[3:33:20] percentages majorjors are

[3:33:21] obviously major because they

[3:33:23] bring in over 9 some% of the

[3:33:24] revenue right now they're around

[3:33:25] 92.5%

[3:33:29] the two majors are are

[3:33:31] percentage fee collections and

[3:33:33] our live entertainment tax

[3:33:35] collections in February of this

[3:33:38] year we had a presentation by

[3:33:39] Michael Nakamoto who gave a

[3:33:41] presentation on the LEt we are

[3:33:42] also here to answer some of

[3:33:43] those questions

[3:33:46] percentage fee collections is

[3:33:48] what we're gonna focus on here

[3:33:49] we didn't reenter any

[3:33:50] information on the LAT since

[3:33:51] that was back in February

[3:33:56] our minors we have a number of

[3:33:59] miners there from annual feast

[3:34:01] quarterly fees and then operator

[3:34:02] so to speak type license fees

[3:34:05] and then we'll go through each

[3:34:06] one of those briefly as we touch

[3:34:07] on the slides as we move

[3:34:08] forward.

[3:34:12] our first one here is the

[3:34:13] percentage fees

[3:34:16] this is obviously the largest

[3:34:18] one that we have it's

[3:34:21] approximately85.2% this last

[3:34:23] fiscal year of what brought in

[3:34:25] the the tax dollars for gaming

[3:34:26] those are the numbers that you

[3:34:27] see there for fiscal year 25 and

[3:34:30] 26. it is based on the

[3:34:32] monthly taxable gross gaming

[3:34:33] revenue

[3:34:36] and a licensee will pay it in

[3:34:37] the following month it's due by

[3:34:38] the1fth of the following month

[3:34:42] it is a tiered structure at3.5%

[3:34:45] for the first54.5% of84 and

[3:34:47] then6.75 of everything after

[3:34:48] that

[3:34:50] oftentimes when we're talking

[3:34:51] though you're just gonna hear us

[3:34:54] say6.75 there is still that3.5

[3:34:55] and4.55 we just don't say that

[3:34:56] because it's cumbersome to to

[3:34:57] throw that out there

[3:34:59] the last fee update was in

[3:35:03] 2003 back during the 20th

[3:35:05] special session of the

[3:35:07] legislature due to the budget

[3:35:09] deficit we went from that

[3:35:11] smaller percentage to the6.2r to

[3:35:13] the675 nothing else in that

[3:35:15] structure in the tier structure

[3:35:16] changed for those lower levels

[3:35:22] So moving on we also have our

[3:35:24] quarterly nonrestricted slot

[3:35:26] fees are quarterly restricted

[3:35:28] slot fees the collections for

[3:35:29] both fiscal years are there as

[3:35:30] you can see

[3:35:34] for the quarterly nonrestricted

[3:35:36] slot fee it's a fee that's based

[3:35:39] on a per slot machine basis

[3:35:41] and that's for a nonrestricted

[3:35:43] licensees the last update was

[3:35:44] in'81 when it was10 dollars a

[3:35:44] slot machine

[3:35:47] then we have our quarterly

[3:35:49] restricted slot fees and there's

[3:35:51] a range there and again back in

[3:35:53] the appendix we give you the

[3:35:55] breakdown of how those are

[3:35:57] paid by our licensees and it's

[3:35:58] on a per device type

[3:36:00] tier structure there

[3:36:05] other than that because

[3:36:07] it's a long appendix I'm not

[3:36:08] going to go through that I'll

[3:36:11] let you do that as you peruse

[3:36:12] peruse the appendix there

[3:36:15] then we have our quarterly

[3:36:16] nonrestricted game fees

[3:36:20] this payment is based on the

[3:36:21] number of games and

[3:36:22] nonrestricted licensee is

[3:36:24] operating each quarter. if you

[3:36:26] go to the statue if you try to

[3:36:28] tie the dollars to our appendix

[3:36:29] you're not going to do that

[3:36:32] because the statute has the rate

[3:36:34] in there at an annual rate so

[3:36:35] it's applied at a quarterly rate

[3:36:37] so you take 1/4 of that number

[3:36:38] you'll get to what you see in

[3:36:38] the fee structure

[3:36:41] again the last update was

[3:36:42] in1981

[3:36:45] and I'll move on to the next tax

[3:36:49] and and the quarterlies combined

[3:36:50] the three that we just kind of

[3:36:51] talked about they bring in about

[3:36:53] 2% of the collections overall so

[3:36:54] it's not a material number

[3:36:59] the unredeemed wagering vouchers

[3:37:01] it's also one of our miners

[3:37:03] this is where

[3:37:07] 75 % of the value of the

[3:37:09] unredeemed wagering vouchers

[3:37:12] on a quarterly basis go on to

[3:37:14] the tax return filed by our

[3:37:17] licensees they remit what they

[3:37:18] do is they place basically100%

[3:37:20] of the value on there takes75%

[3:37:21] that gets submitted to the state

[3:37:24] in whole. The other 25% gets

[3:37:27] added back into the respective

[3:37:29] revenue so whether it's slots or

[3:37:32] sports and or quino where

[3:37:33] there's vouchers it will get

[3:37:34] added back to the respective

[3:37:35] revenue

[3:37:37] and then the percentage fee tax

[3:37:38] is paid where you'll see

[3:37:41] that6.75% component hit

[3:37:44] so it's not that they keep it

[3:37:45] and don't pay tax some people

[3:37:47] think that they don't pay tax

[3:37:48] when it goes back to them they

[3:37:49] do pay taxes just a percentage

[3:37:50] fee tax

[3:37:54] then we have our manufacturer

[3:37:56] and distributor license fees

[3:37:57] for those coming in the door

[3:37:59] that want to be licensed as a

[3:38:00] manufacturer or a distributor

[3:38:04] they have to pay an annual fee

[3:38:06] the rates are right there

[3:38:09] where you have the1000 and

[3:38:12] the500 and again last update was

[3:38:13] in1983

[3:38:17] and we'll move on those were

[3:38:19] implemented more more so for

[3:38:21] oversight not because they were

[3:38:23] bringing in revenue dollars it

[3:38:24] was to give us oversight so that

[3:38:26] we didn't have nefarious

[3:38:28] individuals putting equipment

[3:38:29] and and technology out there

[3:38:35] Our operator of an interactive

[3:38:37] gaming license is our next fee

[3:38:41] those wanting to be licensed

[3:38:43] for interactive gaming will pay

[3:38:45] an initial fee of500,000 dollars

[3:38:47] that gets them two years and

[3:38:48] then from there the annual fee

[3:38:49] thereafter is 250,000

[3:38:53] there hasn't been any change

[3:38:56] this change here would occur at

[3:38:59] the commission level the board

[3:39:00] and commission level where they

[3:39:01] would change it as opposed to

[3:39:02] the legislative level

[3:39:06] moving on to our next one

[3:39:10] we have the manufacturers of

[3:39:10] inter gaming

[3:39:13] interactive gaming systems

[3:39:15] license so if you want to

[3:39:16] manufacture one of those systems

[3:39:19] you can also be licensed your

[3:39:21] fee is125,000 thereafter it's

[3:39:24] 25,000 and there has been no

[3:39:24] change to that fee.

[3:39:26] since it's been implemented

[3:39:31] another one of our minors is

[3:39:33] the slot route operator this

[3:39:34] authorizes the holder to place

[3:39:35] slot machines in a licensed

[3:39:37] location and share in the

[3:39:38] profits therefrom

[3:39:41] their individuals that

[3:39:43] basically will go around where a

[3:39:44] small business doesn't want to

[3:39:45] have the manpower to do it so

[3:39:47] they take on a slot route

[3:39:49] operator. they come and do all

[3:39:50] of the work and they get in that

[3:39:53] profit sharing and share the

[3:39:54] funds that that come in from

[3:39:55] those devices and

[3:39:59] again it's not a large tax

[3:40:01] dollar that comes in the door

[3:40:02] when we get to those latter

[3:40:03] pages where I break that out for

[3:40:04] you

[3:40:07] then we have an operator of an

[3:40:09] information services license

[3:40:12] and this authorizes a person to

[3:40:13] sell and provide information to

[3:40:14] a licensed sports pool

[3:40:17] this is in essence is the data

[3:40:19] feed so it's basically

[3:40:21] information services just saying

[3:40:22] hey here's what I think the

[3:40:25] lines the odds the point

[3:40:27] spread should be and then the

[3:40:29] lacies actually do the work to

[3:40:31] accept or alter those lines

[3:40:32] when they push it

[3:40:35] through.gain the annual fee

[3:40:36] is6000 dollars there hasn't been

[3:40:38] any change. The idea behind this

[3:40:41] was that while we do have the

[3:40:43] data feed going in it's the

[3:40:44] wager where the taxes are still

[3:40:44] going to be

[3:40:46] paid at the the licensee level

[3:40:48] so again that's why there hasn't

[3:40:49] been a change to that

[3:40:53] interactive gaming service

[3:40:54] provider license

[3:40:57] authorizes the holder to act as

[3:40:59] an interactive gaming service

[3:41:00] provider they help keep that

[3:41:03] platform a service provider is

[3:41:05] not the one who's necessarily

[3:41:07] operating it they'll sort of

[3:41:08] push the payments through the

[3:41:09] cycles just making sure that it

[3:41:11] happens so that the interactive

[3:41:12] gaming operator has a

[3:41:13] functioning properly

[3:41:16] again no fee update to that

[3:41:20] and not a large tax fee

[3:41:20] there

[3:41:25] the other tax collections

[3:41:27] that we have we have the

[3:41:28] nonrestricted restricted annual

[3:41:29] slot tax and we have the

[3:41:32] nonrestricted annual games tax

[3:41:34] both of those are ones that the

[3:41:36] gaming control board administers

[3:41:39] the amount that the annual

[3:41:40] slot tax brought in

[3:41:45] is the ir7.9 million in fiscal

[3:41:47] year 25 and in fiscal year 26 it

[3:41:49] was37.8 milliongain that money

[3:41:51] we just administer it and it

[3:41:53] goes back out to the respective

[3:41:54] parties that you see

[3:41:56] the annual games fee

[3:41:59] we have that the proceeds are

[3:42:02] retained we have a portion that

[3:42:04] we retain it still goes to the

[3:42:07] state we do a calculation

[3:42:08] every year we reconcile with the

[3:42:09] controller's office and it's a

[3:42:11] small portion where the 97,

[3:42:13] and101000 are the portion that

[3:42:16] was retained for the services of

[3:42:16] administering the tax

[3:42:19] and then the rest goes back into

[3:42:20] the general fund

[3:42:23] and it's divided to the county

[3:42:26] so every month our our tax and

[3:42:28] license division will process

[3:42:29] and send money out to our

[3:42:30] counties there's an

[3:42:31] undistributed portion when they

[3:42:32] get to year end they rew it up

[3:42:33] they calculate

[3:42:35] what our portion is for

[3:42:37] administering it. they pushed

[3:42:38] that back and then

[3:42:48] So in looking at our collections

[3:42:50] for the last10 years years there

[3:42:52] you can see what the growth rate

[3:42:54] has been or the decline has

[3:42:57] been on a year over year basis

[3:42:58] that's how those are presented

[3:43:05] then moving on here the majority

[3:43:06] of the collections come from

[3:43:09] Clark County where you see86.7%

[3:43:10] come from the Clark County

[3:43:13] market6.9% comes from the washoe

[3:43:16] county marketgain those are the

[3:43:18] primary total collections being

[3:43:20] that1.2 billion dollar figure

[3:43:23] that you see there in our recent

[3:43:24] fiscal year 26

[3:43:27] moving on let me move back

[3:43:29] here when you see the breakdown

[3:43:31] there you can see the

[3:43:32] percentages the percentage fees

[3:43:33] again was a major live

[3:43:35] entertainment tax was one of our

[3:43:37] majors those two in total their

[3:43:41] makeup that 92.5% again it

[3:43:43] varies when the fees come in

[3:43:44] where that percentage of be but

[3:43:45] it's been over 90% for a long

[3:43:46] time

[3:43:50] our annual taxes range around

[3:43:53] that3.1% our quarterly taxes in

[3:43:55] total about 2% getting us to

[3:43:56] that100% of our collections

[3:44:04] on the back I provided the

[3:44:05] license information because when

[3:44:06] you're looking at if it's a

[3:44:08] nonrestricted or a per device

[3:44:10] type fee it's important to know

[3:44:13] the breakdown we have over 2000

[3:44:16] restricteds this past fiscal

[3:44:18] year we have over465

[3:44:20] nonrestricted locations of that

[3:44:23] about133 or group one the

[3:44:24] remainder are group two

[3:44:26] and again you can see the

[3:44:27] manufacturers distributors so

[3:44:29] those are the groups that fall

[3:44:30] into those categories where you

[3:44:32] see the fees if you wanted to

[3:44:33] to look at how those

[3:44:34] calculations are done

[3:44:39] our next breakdown has the slot

[3:44:40] machines by type so again that

[3:44:43] you can see how many devices

[3:44:45] are coming in on those tax

[3:44:47] returns when those are filed and

[3:44:49] we we follow those again the

[3:44:50] number is climbing in the

[3:44:53] multidenomination category

[3:44:55] simply because you have a

[3:44:57] variety to offer patrons

[3:44:59] that's what our licensees have

[3:45:00] said in our conversations.

[3:45:06] Going on to the next one again

[3:45:07] this is for our restricted

[3:45:09] locations this is the breakdown

[3:45:12] of their devices just wanted

[3:45:14] to have you be able to see the

[3:45:15] totals there again the multi

[3:45:18] denom are the largest groups for

[3:45:19] the restrictedss

[3:45:20] as well

[3:45:26] then we get to the page here

[3:45:27] where we talk about our table

[3:45:29] counter and our card games we

[3:45:31] just have a breakdown there

[3:45:32] because again if you're

[3:45:33] wondering on the games and

[3:45:35] how those fees are paid if it's

[3:45:37] on a by gameme you have the

[3:45:40] totals there to do those

[3:45:41] calculations and you can see

[3:45:43] what's popular out on the floors

[3:45:45] throughout the state of Nevada

[3:45:46] by seeing those numbers

[3:45:49] I I know you're still presenting

[3:45:51] but I I guess

[3:45:54] go ahead and finish I just

[3:45:58] are you sure you don't wanna ask

[3:46:00] it's hurting my soul so

[3:46:04] well'll just I'll just do the

[3:46:06] simple one so on the on the

[3:46:09] nonrestricted slot machines by

[3:46:10] type. I mean

[3:46:13] I knew this was an issue but I

[3:46:15] thought that you know they were

[3:46:17] very limited but there's still a

[3:46:19] lot of slot machines after they

[3:46:20] got rid of the penny.

[3:46:23] that's still a high number,

[3:46:25] right so how how are how is that

[3:46:26] being mitigated now that the

[3:46:27] penny is no longer being minted.

[3:46:31] so in terms of the penny

[3:46:32] cessation

[3:46:35] the devices themselves generally

[3:46:36] at most of our licenses other

[3:46:37] than those who have really old

[3:46:38] devices

[3:46:43] we'll kick out a voucher and so

[3:46:46] in our discussions with our

[3:46:47] licensees to see if the penny

[3:46:48] cessation would present a

[3:46:51] problem to them. Many of them

[3:46:53] stockpiled pennies and have

[3:46:55] pennies for the next 2 to3

[3:46:57] fiscal years because they

[3:46:59] were planning for that so in

[3:47:00] terms of the devices that they

[3:47:00] offer

[3:47:04] they they never had a penny

[3:47:05] machine where you're literally

[3:47:07] dropping pennies and you you'll

[3:47:09] still feed coin if that if I'm

[3:47:10] understanding your question

[3:47:12] correctly is the penny piece is

[3:47:15] not an issue because the voucher

[3:47:16] is typically what's issued from

[3:47:18] the devices they're going to go

[3:47:19] to a redemption machine and get

[3:47:22] paid if it issues a new voucher

[3:47:22] for the change component

[3:47:26] there's you know and again it

[3:47:28] would depend on licenseee

[3:47:29] they'll either have to go to the

[3:47:32] cage or in some cases the

[3:47:33] redemption machine will kick out

[3:47:35] the exact change so there's

[3:47:37] still allowed to do that when we

[3:47:38] gave the industry notice

[3:47:41] allowing them to round up

[3:47:42] some of them are still trying to

[3:47:44] decide what they want to do but

[3:47:45] because they've stockpiled

[3:47:47] pennies they are still paying to

[3:47:50] the cents for those who maybe

[3:47:51] didn't have pennies or don't

[3:47:52] have them on hand at the moment

[3:47:53] they are choosing and have to

[3:47:54] identify

[3:47:56] identify it in their internal

[3:47:57] controls whether they're going

[3:47:59] round up or do the round up

[3:48:01] round down depending on whether

[3:48:02] it's you know the two sons down

[3:48:04] or the three or four cents up

[3:48:07] and so they've been factoring

[3:48:08] that in and if they keep the

[3:48:11] documentation you know again

[3:48:13] they'll get to take the ride off

[3:48:14] but because they've been

[3:48:15] stockpiling pennies right now it

[3:48:17] is not a concern but because the

[3:48:19] devices themselves issue

[3:48:20] vouchers. there hasn't been a

[3:48:21] concern

[3:48:24] I had heard from one of the

[3:48:26] local casinos that they were

[3:48:30] having to like get pennies from

[3:48:31] like so if they're in like

[3:48:33] another state kind of shuffling

[3:48:37] pennies between casinos that

[3:48:39] may not actually be here because

[3:48:41] there was a penny shortage so it

[3:48:43] was almost like do you have any

[3:48:44] pennies on hand? can we have

[3:48:44] some

[3:48:47] so knowing that

[3:48:49] you know again not only

[3:48:51] licensees planned so I'm I'm

[3:48:52] sure that there might be a few

[3:48:54] licensees that haven't maybe

[3:48:55] stockpiled their pennies per se

[3:48:57] but I reached out to a number of

[3:48:59] our licensees but for those who

[3:49:01] didn't that is part of why we

[3:49:02] issued the industry notice that

[3:49:04] said because you may not have it

[3:49:05] because we know that getting

[3:49:06] pennies may be an issue we're

[3:49:07] giving you the opportunity to do

[3:49:10] the round up roundow or the

[3:49:10] round up

[3:49:13] you know to pay your patron you

[3:49:14] have to identify it has to be

[3:49:16] clear to the patron and so they

[3:49:18] have that out so they're not

[3:49:19] required to have to go try to

[3:49:21] chase down the pennies if

[3:49:23] they didn't plan for that but

[3:49:24] again in speaking with many of

[3:49:25] our licensees because I was

[3:49:27] doing an evaluation of that to

[3:49:29] see what the impact would be for

[3:49:31] our fiscal year for the next 2

[3:49:32] to 3 years. I wanted to know if

[3:49:33] it would impact us but many of

[3:49:34] them have come back and said

[3:49:36] we've been stockpiling pennies

[3:49:36] and been able to pay our

[3:49:38] customers and we're making them

[3:49:39] whole so

[3:49:43] and and just one final comment

[3:49:44] and then we'll just close this

[3:49:45] out because I know everybody's

[3:49:46] hungry it's like somes it's it's

[3:49:52] some of the statutes haven't

[3:49:55] been changed in like43 years or

[3:49:58] is it45 I mean but43 as a

[3:50:00] minimum 40 years they haven't

[3:50:01] been touched.

[3:50:05] and again the gaming control

[3:50:07] board only administers what

[3:50:09] comes through legislation so

[3:50:12] I'm sure as the casinos you know

[3:50:13] go through thinking where do we

[3:50:15] want to stand on that they play

[3:50:16] a part in that you know with the

[3:50:17] lobbyists or any of the interest

[3:50:19] groups at the end of the day

[3:50:20] we're just going to administer

[3:50:20] what

[3:50:22] what is changed

[3:50:27] and and that's where we you know

[3:50:29] we don't pick a policy saying

[3:50:30] hey change this order hey change

[3:50:31] that one this will make it

[3:50:33] better, this will make it worse.

[3:50:34] we're just gonna administer

[3:50:36] the tax that that gets

[3:50:36] implemented in law

[3:50:43] I think you had one

[3:50:46] or you were done

[3:50:51] Yeah, so in in our slide

[3:50:52] count you know I wanted you to

[3:50:53] see or to be able to see that

[3:50:55] the devices went down. I know

[3:50:56] there's been some questions

[3:50:59] that I've had with uhlCB as well

[3:51:01] as the governor's officeice

[3:51:03] of finance about device count

[3:51:05] and you know where do we stand

[3:51:07] and you could see for before

[3:51:09] COVID the device count was up

[3:51:11] for the slots and the same is

[3:51:13] true on the tables when we go to

[3:51:14] the next slide but in looking

[3:51:16] at our collections you're still

[3:51:17] gonna see that

[3:51:20] even though device count is

[3:51:22] going down they've been able

[3:51:25] to focus on whether it be

[3:51:29] promotions whether it be

[3:51:30] what they're offering for their

[3:51:31] rooms or their meals or

[3:51:32] whatever's going to draw

[3:51:33] somebody in because again

[3:51:35] tourism the macroeconomics

[3:51:36] everything is playing a part

[3:51:39] when COID when we came back out

[3:51:41] ofOVID our licensees didn't

[3:51:43] necessarily have employees

[3:51:44] come back to work

[3:51:47] and in order you know to have

[3:51:49] more devices and have more games

[3:51:51] you need the employees that are

[3:51:53] gonna support those extras

[3:51:55] that you have and they they

[3:51:57] didn't come back but then you

[3:51:58] also look at we had the social

[3:52:01] distancing requirements we

[3:52:02] have more innovative games if

[3:52:03] you look at some of the slot

[3:52:04] machines they're bigger than

[3:52:06] ever they take up more space but

[3:52:07] they offer more games so that's

[3:52:09] why you see sort of the the

[3:52:11] trend of moving to the multi

[3:52:13] denom games because they want

[3:52:14] variety and it

[3:52:16] frees up that space so that you

[3:52:17] still don't cause that concern

[3:52:18] that some people have related to

[3:52:19] the health issue

[3:52:23] and then our licensees have said

[3:52:25] because if they don't bring all

[3:52:27] the games back whether it be the

[3:52:29] devices or the table games

[3:52:30] they're focusing on the quality

[3:52:32] of the clients the quality of

[3:52:35] the customers trying to cater

[3:52:38] because in the end it also saves

[3:52:39] them money from a monetary

[3:52:40] standpoint based on my

[3:52:40] discussions with our licensees

[3:52:41] so

[3:52:43] I think in seeing what our

[3:52:44] licensees have done across the

[3:52:45] state

[3:52:48] you know in the events the

[3:52:50] efforts from our Las Vegas

[3:52:52] conventionenter Authority and up

[3:52:53] in Reno where they're focusing

[3:52:56] on you know trying to to bring

[3:52:56] the events that will draw the

[3:52:58] people in all of those things

[3:52:59] help they'll drive the room

[3:53:02] revenue they'll drive the food

[3:53:04] and some of those it may not

[3:53:06] drive necessarily the gaming but

[3:53:07] our licensees have done well

[3:53:08] with

[3:53:11] you know what they have

[3:53:13] because again the employee count

[3:53:15] has gone down so you'll see in

[3:53:17] the abstract report that I

[3:53:19] referenced as one of the

[3:53:20] resources for you and it comes

[3:53:22] in the legislative report that

[3:53:23] we submit at the beginning of

[3:53:24] the year before the session

[3:53:25] starts

[3:53:27] we referenced a number of

[3:53:29] employees you'll see their net

[3:53:30] income you'll see their gaming

[3:53:31] income you'll see all of their

[3:53:34] taxes the payroll you'll see the

[3:53:36] health of the industry and where

[3:53:39] they're at and so you know

[3:53:41] all of those things taken into

[3:53:42] account but overall the

[3:53:43] collections have still gone up

[3:53:47] I think that says about a lot

[3:53:48] about the licensees and working

[3:53:49] with what they have and focusing

[3:53:51] on the quality of the the

[3:53:53] customer and the clients that

[3:53:54] come through despite the

[3:53:55] macroeconomic situations

[3:54:13] I don't think members want to

[3:54:16] ask any questions do you? No. so

[3:54:18] thank you for your

[3:54:20] presentation. I'm sure I have

[3:54:21] lots of questions offline

[3:54:26] but this was a really good

[3:54:27] presentation if if we don't have

[3:54:29] the link if you could just share

[3:54:31] the link for the abstract report

[3:54:34] just so you know folks have

[3:54:34] it or

[3:54:38] something you can send so folks

[3:54:38] can read it

[3:54:41] that would be helpful but

[3:54:42] once again thank you for your

[3:54:44] presentation and I will follow

[3:54:44] up

[3:54:47] and we will go ahead and break

[3:54:49] for lunch and then finish out

[3:54:50] this agenda and work session so

[3:54:54] thank you everybody for sticking

[3:54:55] with this but it's been

[3:54:57] informative so

[3:55:01] OK

[3:55:03] we are on recess

[3:55:39] so we'll do lunch for like 20

[3:55:40] minutes for anybody that's just

[3:55:41] waiting for the presentation

[3:55:42] we'll be right back we'll make

[4:25:03] good afternoon everyone we are

[4:25:04] coming back from recess

[4:25:08] we will so I need to make an

[4:25:10] announcement assemblywoman

[4:25:13] Anderson is now

[4:25:16] subing for assemblywoman

[4:25:16] backcchus and

[4:25:21] assemblyman de Silva is now here

[4:25:23] for himself and so if we could

[4:25:24] correct the record for

[4:25:30] the rest of the meeting on who

[4:25:30] is present

[4:25:32] madam secretary

[4:25:35] it would be appreciated. OK.

[4:25:40] so and also assemblywoman

[4:25:42] backcchus is absent excuse for

[4:25:42] the record.

[4:25:47] OK so we are now going to go to

[4:25:48] agenda item number8.

[4:25:51] which is the overview and

[4:25:52] discussion of sales and use tax

[4:25:53] rate

[4:25:56] and call Mister Schiller county

[4:25:57] manager and Joannajacob.

[4:25:59] government affairs manager

[4:26:23] good afternoon chair. I am

[4:26:25] Joannajacobs for the record and

[4:26:27] with clark County and I am just

[4:26:29] gonna see if I can start our OK

[4:26:30] there it goes

[4:26:33] I hope everybody enjoyed their

[4:26:35] lunch and it's a pleasure to be

[4:26:38] with you this afternoon

[4:26:40] here at the table with me is our

[4:26:41] Clark County manager Kevin

[4:26:44] Schiller and to my left is our

[4:26:47] director of social servicesjamie

[4:26:49] Sorenson. we also have

[4:26:52] present today our director of

[4:26:54] clinical services Jill Moranno

[4:26:55] we're gonna kind of rotate in

[4:26:56] and out as we go through our

[4:26:59] presentation because the funding

[4:27:00] that we're going to talk about

[4:27:00] funds a variety of programs in

[4:27:02] lar k County

[4:27:05] so I'll hand it over to our

[4:27:07] county manager who's going to

[4:27:08] walk us through the first couple

[4:27:09] slides

[4:27:13] good afternoon chair and members

[4:27:14] of the committee. I'm glad you

[4:27:14] got some lunch.

[4:27:19] so pleasure to be here. I'll

[4:27:21] first say for the record

[4:27:22] Kevin Schiller county manager

[4:27:25] and also it was nice sitting in

[4:27:27] the audience today listening to

[4:27:28] the conversation because I think

[4:27:30] some of the challenges you guys

[4:27:31] are all referencing our

[4:27:32] challenges we're trying to kind

[4:27:32] of work through

[4:27:37] so we'll hit that and then s

[4:27:38] strictly speaking to the

[4:27:40] presentation just as a way of

[4:27:43] kind of historical perspective

[4:27:47] in 2019 the legislature

[4:27:51] passed AB309 that enabled the

[4:27:53] board to move forward with the

[4:27:54] increase on the sales and use

[4:27:57] tax and they did that by one

[4:27:59] quarter of cent for certain

[4:28:00] programs

[4:28:03] they adopted that first

[4:28:05] ordinance in August it was

[4:28:07] effective in January of 2020 and

[4:28:10] then they imposed a sunset in

[4:28:13] June30th of 2021 in April of

[4:28:15] 21 the board removed that sunset

[4:28:18] and making it permanent. it

[4:28:19] was very specific to certain

[4:28:21] categories so those

[4:28:23] categories included homelessness

[4:28:24] workforce initiatives truancy

[4:28:25] and then prek education

[4:28:30] for Fy26 this totaled

[4:28:34] about80,859 $1000 and then some

[4:28:36] other miscellaneous revenues at

[4:28:36] about48,000

[4:28:39] we will be finalizing that

[4:28:41] report later this year once

[4:28:44] all the sea tax revenues are

[4:28:44] reconciled

[4:28:48] a little bit about this

[4:28:50] though in terms of AB309

[4:28:50] first

[4:28:54] credit and thanks to the

[4:28:56] legislature for creating this

[4:28:58] enabling language cause I don't

[4:28:59] think you guys had a crystal

[4:29:01] ball for what was coming but

[4:29:03] when that was passed and we

[4:29:04] moved forward

[4:29:06] and you'll hear me reference

[4:29:08] this a couple times when we deal

[4:29:10] with social services where we

[4:29:12] deal with human services funding

[4:29:14] I'm preaching to the choir on

[4:29:17] the federal funding mechanisms

[4:29:19] we use and what that comes with

[4:29:22] as as we're experiencing now

[4:29:24] we're anticipating rule changes

[4:29:26] we're constantly reporting on

[4:29:27] that and when you come to

[4:29:28] programmatic setup and you come

[4:29:31] into emergencies it might

[4:29:33] becomes much harder with the

[4:29:34] federal funding but on

[4:29:35] this slide that you're looking

[4:29:36] at

[4:29:39] what I really was trying to show

[4:29:40] and that's why I kind of talked

[4:29:42] about 2019 and why you might

[4:29:43] have had a crystal ball or you

[4:29:46] might not have but it was life

[4:29:49] saving as we entered into covid

[4:29:52] if you will recall we had

[4:29:53] theARS Act which was the initial

[4:29:56] tranche of federal funding and

[4:29:57] then if you remember there was a

[4:29:58] gap between cares andarpa

[4:30:02] we set up a lot of emergency

[4:30:05] programs and cares this AB309

[4:30:07] funding actually served a very

[4:30:09] vital purpose when we were

[4:30:10] funding that gap and then when

[4:30:11] you look at kind of the overall

[4:30:14] expenditures going from 20 to 26

[4:30:16] what you'll see is with the

[4:30:19] infusion of that ArRA funding

[4:30:21] our revenues actually went up

[4:30:23] which is your blue bar and then

[4:30:24] you can kind of see what's

[4:30:27] happened in 24,25 and 26 we're

[4:30:28] getting to the point now where

[4:30:29] we're actually expending more

[4:30:30] than we're bringing

[4:30:32] in in relationship to the

[4:30:33] programs that you're going to

[4:30:34] hear about here shortly

[4:30:37] these programs we kind of

[4:30:40] made a commitment when we first

[4:30:41] entered into this space and also

[4:30:42] with our federal funding that we

[4:30:43] really didn't want to create

[4:30:44] things that we couldn't sustain

[4:30:47] I think you're going to see

[4:30:49] that we've had quite a few

[4:30:51] successes around the use of

[4:30:54] those funds from either a

[4:30:55] divergent component or to a

[4:30:56] direct service component

[4:30:59] but I do want to talk about the

[4:31:01] fact that moving forward as we

[4:31:03] watch the economics as we watch

[4:31:05] what's happening in terms of

[4:31:07] things and changes this

[4:31:09] funding remains critical to

[4:31:11] serving human beings I think

[4:31:12] those of you that know me this

[4:31:16] is a passion for me we are

[4:31:17] very invested in this we

[4:31:18] recognize the county's

[4:31:21] responsibility in serving our

[4:31:22] most vulnerable adults and youth

[4:31:25] and this has just been a

[4:31:27] critical mechanism for all of us

[4:31:29] we'll get into some of the

[4:31:30] programs I'm gonna hand it over

[4:31:32] to Jamie Sorenson our social

[4:31:33] services director and I'm gonna

[4:31:37] have him walk through the

[4:31:39] category and the differentiating

[4:31:41] programs and then we certainly

[4:31:42] will be answering questions as

[4:31:42] we move forward so I'll hand it

[4:31:43] over to you Jamie.

[4:31:49] good afternoon chairirneal and

[4:31:51] committee membersjamie Sorenson

[4:31:53] and I'm gonna talk a little

[4:31:55] bit about some of the

[4:31:57] programs and services funded by

[4:32:00] AB309 and I'll start with

[4:32:05] slide number4 looking at

[4:32:06] emergency shelter and bridge

[4:32:10] housing we talk about our

[4:32:11] homelessness services generally

[4:32:13] in a staircase model it begins

[4:32:15] with outreach for those who are

[4:32:18] experiencing unsheltered

[4:32:20] homelessness all the way up to

[4:32:22] renting an apartment and

[4:32:24] owning a home and so people can

[4:32:25] enter at anywhere in that

[4:32:27] staircase model of housing

[4:32:30] services we know that from

[4:32:31] the last pick count

[4:32:34] January2nin,2026 that there

[4:32:36] were43% of the people

[4:32:38] experiencing homelessness in

[4:32:39] sheltered homelessness.

[4:32:42] and we believe that that's

[4:32:43] because of clark County's

[4:32:46] investment in shelter beds in

[4:32:47] the community we have

[4:32:50] noncongregate shelters we have 9

[4:32:51] of those we also have a

[4:32:54] navigation center in total

[4:32:56] with the navigation center and

[4:32:58] the noncongregate shelters we've

[4:33:03] got1729 beds and in Fy26 the

[4:33:04] noncongregate shelters and

[4:33:08] navigationenter served7,781

[4:33:08] people.

[4:33:11] also we have congregate shelters

[4:33:14] we have uh5 of those3 of those

[4:33:20] are funded by AB309 and in Fy

[4:33:24] 27 for those noncongregate

[4:33:27] shelters we have beds daily

[4:33:28] for657 individuals

[4:33:31] combined in the community

[4:33:33] with all the different levels of

[4:33:36] beds that we have for people we

[4:33:36] have over 9000

[4:33:39] and that includes navigation and

[4:33:42] emergency shelters permanent

[4:33:44] supportive housing other

[4:33:45] permanent housing and rapid re

[4:33:54] In terms of the percentages

[4:33:55] of different types of beds that

[4:33:56] we have available in the

[4:33:59] community about39% of our beds

[4:34:01] are emergency shelter

[4:34:03] permanent support of housing

[4:34:05] represents 22% of the bed's

[4:34:07] rapid rehousing 20% other

[4:34:09] permanent housing11% in

[4:34:10] transitional housing7%.

[4:34:14] and the p pick count this

[4:34:18] year we did see a12% increase in

[4:34:19] people experiencing homelessness

[4:34:23] again as I mentioned uh43% of

[4:34:24] those people were in shelter

[4:34:25] homelessness we saw the

[4:34:28] highest proportion of

[4:34:29] individuals between the ages of

[4:34:32] ir5 and44 as the population

[4:34:34] experiencing homelessness and

[4:34:36] they they represent 26% in

[4:34:37] terms of that age group

[4:34:45] we also in terms of

[4:34:49] trying to use data to understand

[4:34:50] what's happening in the

[4:34:51] community and the impact of the

[4:34:53] services we're offering in

[4:34:54] addition to pick count

[4:34:57] we usehMIs data and we use

[4:34:59] outreach data and so we can see

[4:35:02] in our HMIS data that our

[4:35:05] system capacity in beds has

[4:35:07] really expanded substantially

[4:35:09] since 2016 we went from5,000

[4:35:13] beds in 2016 to over 90 in 2020

[4:35:14] um6

[4:35:18] we've also seen households

[4:35:19] served grow substantially since

[4:35:23] 2018 we've seen an82% increase

[4:35:24] in the number of households we

[4:35:27] serve. we went from serving8,841

[4:35:31] to in 2025 serving16,101

[4:35:33] households indicating broader

[4:35:35] system reach and identification

[4:35:36] of need for people in the

[4:35:36] community

[4:35:38] averageverage length of

[4:35:39] homelessness has improved

[4:35:41] meaningfully from176 days in

[4:35:45] 2020 to105 days in 2024

[4:35:46] suggesting faster movement

[4:35:48] through the system once

[4:35:51] enrolled in our services also we

[4:35:53] saw the return rate remaining

[4:35:55] very low the return rate to

[4:35:57] homelessness roughly about11%

[4:35:58] and that's been holding steady

[4:35:59] year over year.

[4:36:02] exits to permanent housing

[4:36:04] have fallen and that is a a

[4:36:06] really big area of focus to us

[4:36:07] creating an exit pathways for

[4:36:08] people once they do enter our

[4:36:09] system.

[4:36:13] as we look at the programs

[4:36:15] funded by AB309 I also just want

[4:36:16] to note that we have really

[4:36:18] tried to create a broad

[4:36:19] continuum of services connected

[4:36:21] services that people can

[4:36:23] navigate through our

[4:36:24] portfolio of resources at Clark

[4:36:26] County Socialervices so I just

[4:36:28] want to also highlight a

[4:36:31] service that's outside of AB301

[4:36:33] AB309 and that's our the

[4:36:34] eviction diversion program in

[4:36:34] the community.

[4:36:37] and we think getting upstream

[4:36:39] and prevention is very important

[4:36:41] and we know that this program

[4:36:43] has had an impact from fiscal

[4:36:46] year 2023 to fiscal year 2024 we

[4:36:48] saw a 10 cent decrease in

[4:36:51] evictions and from 24 to 25 we

[4:36:54] saw a5% decrease and so keeping

[4:36:56] people in their homes and

[4:36:56] communities in the first place

[4:36:57] is a very important strategy.

[4:37:00] going on to slide five

[4:37:07] we have a transitional and rapid

[4:37:08] rehousing in the community

[4:37:11] transitional housing is

[4:37:13] housing and supportive services

[4:37:15] for people for up to 24 months

[4:37:17] is to move people to permanent

[4:37:20] housing and it is focused on

[4:37:21] treatment services and also

[4:37:24] readiness for housing and we

[4:37:25] have 25 projects in the

[4:37:28] community with a total of728

[4:37:30] beds those are not all funded

[4:37:32] by AB309 with a lot of our

[4:37:33] programs we use braided funding

[4:37:37] we also have rapid rehousing

[4:37:38] which is a more expeditious

[4:37:39] movement toward permanent

[4:37:42] housing it's a shorter term

[4:37:44] program that provides short term

[4:37:45] rental assistance and case

[4:37:47] management services in the

[4:37:49] community we have40

[4:37:51] projects1,872 beds and again not

[4:37:52] all funded by AB309.

[4:37:55] and then permanent support of

[4:37:57] housing is a term that you hear

[4:37:59] a lot in our work and it

[4:38:00] combines affordable rental

[4:38:02] housing with volunteering and

[4:38:04] flexible support services

[4:38:05] typically for individuals and

[4:38:07] families facing chronic

[4:38:09] homelessness or really high

[4:38:11] acuity in terms of behaviors and

[4:38:12] barriers

[4:38:17] carere teams are really

[4:38:19] important component of our

[4:38:21] service continuum they provide

[4:38:23] coordinated outreach and case

[4:38:25] management they can also at

[4:38:27] times include law enforcement

[4:38:28] behavioral health and crisis

[4:38:31] stabilization specialists

[4:38:32] it's a very personcented style

[4:38:34] of outreach and case management

[4:38:37] and it was a 9.7 million

[4:38:41] investment it is a 9.79.7

[4:38:43] million investment in Fy27.

[4:38:44] we served se

[4:38:48] 900 individuals in Fy26. we

[4:38:50] currently have6 Clark County

[4:38:52] care teams and they all have a

[4:38:54] little bit of a different focus

[4:38:56] in terms of the target

[4:38:57] population they serve and the

[4:38:59] goals that they're trying to

[4:39:00] reach and outcomes are're trying

[4:39:01] to reach with those target

[4:39:02] populations.

[4:39:07] hospital to home is a

[4:39:08] program that we're really proud

[4:39:12] of in the community and Fy26

[4:39:15] they served700 individuals

[4:39:18] it's a program that helps older

[4:39:19] adults and individuals with

[4:39:21] chronic illness, memory loss or

[4:39:23] disabilities transition safely

[4:39:25] from a hospital or rehab bed

[4:39:27] back to their homes and the

[4:39:29] program works directly with

[4:39:30] their caregivers and community

[4:39:32] partners to do three primary

[4:39:33] things ensure continu

[4:39:36] ity of care, reduce stress on

[4:39:37] the individual and their

[4:39:39] caregivers and also improved

[4:39:41] health outcomes the program

[4:39:43] offers care coordination, crisis

[4:39:44] intervention respite coaching

[4:39:47] resource navigation a very low

[4:39:50] readmission rate it's below1.2%

[4:39:51] for people who are able to

[4:39:52] access this

[4:39:58] Cris stabilizationentcSC it's a

[4:40:02] ive million dollar investment

[4:40:05] for Fy27. it provides behavioral

[4:40:07] mental health services designed

[4:40:09] to deescalate or stabilize

[4:40:11] the behavioral health crisis

[4:40:13] when appropriate avoid admission

[4:40:14] to another inpatient mental

[4:40:15] health facility or hospital

[4:40:17] and also connects patients with

[4:40:20] providers for ongoing care.

[4:40:24] date the program has served3,310

[4:40:26] individuals it's about 15

[4:40:28] individuals a day that are

[4:40:28] accessing the crisis

[4:40:30] stabilizationent provides

[4:40:31] comprehensive assessment they

[4:40:33] develop a treatment plan they do

[4:40:36] trauma informed care it's a

[4:40:38] recovery orientation meaning

[4:40:40] that it's not designed for

[4:40:43] episodic recurring admissions

[4:40:44] they really tried to get people

[4:40:45] into a recovery

[4:40:46] s t re am that's longer term

[4:40:53] heat mitigation1.2 million

[4:40:54] allocation for fy 27

[4:40:57] throughout the valley we have44

[4:41:01] cooling stations we also

[4:41:03] in some of those cooling

[4:41:05] stations,5 of them allow for

[4:41:09] pets and so activation used

[4:41:11] to just be when the national

[4:41:13] weatheratherervice issued a heat

[4:41:15] warning we worked with the

[4:41:17] coroner's office to really look

[4:41:19] at what temperatures people

[4:41:20] began to exhibit heat related

[4:41:22] stress and symptoms we also

[4:41:24] looked at what temperatures

[4:41:24] people were dying

[4:41:28] and determined that around105

[4:41:30] degrees is when people really

[4:41:32] start to get in trouble and so

[4:41:34] we lowered the activation to105

[4:41:34] degrees which has resulted

[4:41:38] in many more days of the cooling

[4:41:40] stations being activated so

[4:41:42] between March19th and August

[4:41:44] 21st of this year the cooling

[4:41:46] stations have been activated60

[4:41:48] days and they're obviously

[4:41:48] activated today.

[4:41:52] and for the record Kevin

[4:41:54] Schiller county manager, I just

[4:41:55] wanted to add two points on this

[4:41:56] slide

[4:41:59] has he talked about hospital

[4:42:01] to home one of the key

[4:42:03] components of that as you guys

[4:42:04] entered the session and you're

[4:42:06] dealing with revenue and budgets

[4:42:08] that was really created

[4:42:09] around the fact that we would

[4:42:11] have people staying in longterm

[4:42:13] hospitalization stays based on

[4:42:15] the ability to not have either

[4:42:17] adult daycare, homeme

[4:42:19] improvements and or caregiving

[4:42:21] around that case management so

[4:42:23] the cost of medicaid the

[4:42:24] uncovered costs all of those

[4:42:25] pieces really has had a dramatic

[4:42:29] impact in terms of that

[4:42:30] population and then the other

[4:42:32] one I wanted to highlight for

[4:42:34] Charneal cause the last time

[4:42:36] I was before you we had talked

[4:42:37] about kind of the

[4:42:41] disproportionate placement

[4:42:43] and or interaction in the

[4:42:44] homeless category related to

[4:42:46] African Americanan population

[4:42:48] and one of the things that I

[4:42:50] wanted to andjamie can expand

[4:42:52] on this but the disproportionate

[4:42:54] percentage I think is somewhere

[4:42:55] around47% when

[4:42:57] you look at the population

[4:43:00] when we're tracking our services

[4:43:01] in terms of who we're intaking

[4:43:02] and who we're providing those

[4:43:06] services to it's about47% or

[4:43:07] close somewhere in that range so

[4:43:09] we are trying to kind of monitor

[4:43:12] that I think the other piece

[4:43:13] when you start getting into the

[4:43:15] homelessness discussion

[4:43:18] obviously the issue of serving

[4:43:19] every single person and looking

[4:43:21] at your capacity marks is

[4:43:25] obviously a key issue any of

[4:43:26] these programs and then I was

[4:43:26] just gonna highlight campus

[4:43:27] for

[4:43:30] hope the other pieces that are

[4:43:31] coming online you're going to

[4:43:32] have additional inventory

[4:43:35] so to speak in terms of capacity

[4:43:37] and so when you look at some of

[4:43:38] these numbers that Mr. Soreren

[4:43:40] is highlighting related to say

[4:43:41] noncongregate care and

[4:43:42] transitional housing in those

[4:43:44] pieces that program is really

[4:43:45] going to be kind of a tier two

[4:43:47] level program so they've come in

[4:43:48] through our system and then move

[4:43:51] into that that's gonna also free

[4:43:52] up and I'm just using simple

[4:43:55] math 900 different beds that we

[4:43:56] currently have in that structure

[4:43:58] so it will continue to move

[4:43:58] forward but I did want to

[4:43:59] highlight those two.

[4:44:01] go ahead Jamie thanks Kevin

[4:44:02] just

[4:44:05] to expound a bit on black and

[4:44:07] Africaneran individuals and how

[4:44:11] they were recorded in the

[4:44:14] 2026 pick count42.7% of the

[4:44:16] people experiencing homelessness

[4:44:18] were categorized as black

[4:44:18] or Africaner

[4:44:23] and the disproportionate

[4:44:25] overrepresentation is

[4:44:27] substantial because that

[4:44:29] community represents about4% of

[4:44:30] the total population of Clark

[4:44:30] County.

[4:44:34] but in our service array it's a

[4:44:35] community that's also served and

[4:44:39] so they represent39% of ours

[4:44:41] street outreach for unsheltered

[4:44:44] people they represent4047% of

[4:44:47] our crisis services47% of our

[4:44:49] coordinated entry throughout the

[4:44:52] valley and also48% of those who

[4:44:53] are in permanent supportive

[4:44:54] housing.

[4:45:00] to continue on with heat

[4:45:01] mitigation, I just want to also

[4:45:03] highlight, you know oftentimes

[4:45:04] people experiencing homelessness

[4:45:04] aren't able to get to our

[4:45:05] cooling stations.

[4:45:09] and so we have been trying to

[4:45:11] think of ways to get people out

[4:45:13] to them where they are and so

[4:45:14] we did an interlocal with the

[4:45:15] southernnevada health district

[4:45:17] to create a street medicine

[4:45:19] team, a big part of their work

[4:45:22] from May through September is

[4:45:24] heat mitigation and so

[4:45:25] through their services they're

[4:45:27] going out to people in the

[4:45:28] community who are experiencing

[4:45:30] homelessness homelessness

[4:45:32] they're doing preventative

[4:45:34] and primary care but they're

[4:45:34] doing vitals and triage wound

[4:45:39] burn cu water electrolyte

[4:45:41] packets sunscreen flip flops

[4:45:43] umbrellas cooling towels shoes

[4:45:45] and if necessary depending on

[4:45:47] the condition that someone is in

[4:45:49] they can administerivV's out in

[4:45:50] the field for hydration.

[4:45:55] and we are hoping to kind of

[4:45:57] continue down that path and

[4:45:58] think of ways to get people out

[4:46:01] to the community where people

[4:46:03] are during the summer months

[4:46:05] I also want to highlight pets

[4:46:07] we have a contract with the

[4:46:09] Nevada Homeless alliance for the

[4:46:11] pets assistance programme as

[4:46:13] we know there's a number of

[4:46:15] people experiencing homelessness

[4:46:18] who do not want to go into

[4:46:20] shelter because there's a lot

[4:46:20] of shelters that won't accept

[4:46:21] their pet.

[4:46:25] and so we wanted to be able to

[4:46:26] address that and remove that as

[4:46:28] a barrier for people and so

[4:46:32] the program can provide pet

[4:46:34] deposit assistance it can

[4:46:36] provide pet rent assistance, pet

[4:46:37] medical assistance,

[4:46:39] vaccinations, microchipping spay

[4:46:42] neuter emergency shelter and

[4:46:42] then also pet supply assistance.

[4:46:51] chairnero I'm gonna give umjamie

[4:46:52] just a minute to catch his

[4:46:53] breath and I wanted to just

[4:46:55] check in with you and see if you

[4:46:57] would prefer to stop we've

[4:47:00] divided this into categories

[4:47:03] underapB we still say AB309

[4:47:05] so that is the homelessness that

[4:47:06] we have funded so if you prefer

[4:47:08] if you we can stop for questions

[4:47:09] if you'd like there are some

[4:47:11] additional slides it's kind of

[4:47:13] all related so we have our next

[4:47:14] slides are talking about the

[4:47:16] workforce things that we have

[4:47:16] funded which

[4:47:19] are helping this population and

[4:47:21] then we have some outcomes in a

[4:47:22] later slide, but I wanted to see

[4:47:23] if you wanted to stop there

[4:47:24] chair and if there were

[4:47:25] questions thank you for that I

[4:47:28] think we can open up for

[4:47:28] questions. are there any

[4:47:29] questions

[4:47:32] no questions

[4:47:36] so let's just start here

[4:47:39] so under377D

[4:47:45] although it's reference10377d130

[4:47:46] list

[4:47:51] the programs so are you guys not

[4:47:52] doing anything in adult

[4:47:57] Sureneal this is Joannajacobs

[4:47:59] for the record I I will let

[4:48:02] umjamie we want to go into the

[4:48:04] workforce slide we can talk to

[4:48:06] you about some of this is multi

[4:48:08] layered as I noted so if you

[4:48:10] want to go to the next slide we

[4:48:12] can talk about what is funding

[4:48:13] kind of our adult programming

[4:48:14] well let me ask the two parts

[4:48:19] then because in in377D130 it's

[4:48:20] adult ed and then you guys

[4:48:21] also have an

[4:48:25] incentives for recruitment or

[4:48:27] retention of licensed teachers

[4:48:28] for high vacancy schools within

[4:48:28] CcSd.

[4:48:33] Cherneal Joannajacob for the

[4:48:36] record no that is there is there

[4:48:37] are categories in there we

[4:48:39] prioritized some of the

[4:48:41] categories in the presentation

[4:48:44] today so that is on category F

[4:48:46] and that is not currently a

[4:48:48] category that has been funded

[4:48:48] ever

[4:48:52] to my knowledge joannajacobs for

[4:48:53] the record to my knowledge

[4:48:56] chairneal when this legislation

[4:48:59] was originally passed we were in

[4:49:00] discussion with the school

[4:49:03] district but no that was not

[4:49:04] funded ever. OK good to know.

[4:49:06] I was hoping that

[4:49:07] OK.

[4:49:09] go to the next one

[4:49:13] oh yeah

[4:49:14] that be like ding

[4:49:17] continue

[4:49:31] So let me ask this before you

[4:49:33] guys go into the slide on the

[4:49:36] adult ed so also in your page

[4:49:36] you listed

[4:49:41] the 27 million it's not 27

[4:49:43] million but4 million for

[4:49:45] culinary wasn't there wasn't

[4:49:47] there money expended

[4:49:50] after 2019 where you helped

[4:49:50] build a building?

[4:49:57] er ne al Joannajacobs for the

[4:50:00] record I am going to have to if

[4:50:01] you give me one minute I'm gonna

[4:50:03] go back into I have all the

[4:50:04] reports we've done since this

[4:50:05] has happened and I'll I'll go

[4:50:07] back and look and see if there

[4:50:09] was funding for the building out

[4:50:12] of this funding stream the

[4:50:13] program that we've highlighted

[4:50:15] in our slides has been a program

[4:50:18] that's a as partnership where

[4:50:19] Clark County is paying the

[4:50:21] through this funding tuition for

[4:50:23] clients of social service to go

[4:50:24] into the culinary

[4:50:26] academy I'll let director

[4:50:28] sorenson if you want to hear

[4:50:29] about that and then I'll go back

[4:50:33] and I will if I can verify that

[4:50:34] and so I can answer your

[4:50:36] question for the record

[4:50:37] Kevinschiller county manager you

[4:50:40] are correct we we funded a

[4:50:42] building related to culinary at

[4:50:45] the onset of the passage of that

[4:50:46] funding. I don't have the amount

[4:50:47] in hand but I can get it for

[4:50:49] you. yeah cuz I thought I was

[4:50:50] also listed as one of the

[4:50:54] could be funded in the list

[4:50:57] and I think I think the larger

[4:50:59] question was since this is s

[4:51:01] sales tax money right I don't

[4:51:03] have anything against culinary.

[4:51:05] why are we in particular only

[4:51:07] focused on one particular group

[4:51:09] and we're using tax dollars

[4:51:10] twice

[4:51:11] to do an effort

[4:51:15] through that through the sales

[4:51:16] tax

[4:51:20] when no one other group is

[4:51:20] spelled out and placed

[4:51:24] as a union group

[4:51:25] in the

[4:51:34] was that a question that you

[4:51:37] would like me to address I

[4:51:41] I will tell you that

[4:51:44] the point that you're trying to

[4:51:46] make is that there that was a

[4:51:49] broad category the cullon that

[4:51:50] we did initial conversations

[4:51:52] with the culinary and so that

[4:51:53] one is the one that has been

[4:51:56] funded we could certainly

[4:51:57] take that back toclark County.

[4:51:58] that feedback

[4:52:12] jamie Sorenson the

[4:52:17] culinary academy the first of

[4:52:19] all the the 4 million is broken

[4:52:21] up between the culinary academy

[4:52:23] and the betterment programme

[4:52:25] so it's an allocation that goes

[4:52:26] to

[4:52:27] to both but

[4:52:31] culinary academy is designed to

[4:52:32] serve unemployed and

[4:52:33] underemployed lark County

[4:52:35] residents from the lowest income

[4:52:38] zip codes60% of the students are

[4:52:42] female77% Hispanic or Africaner

[4:52:45] um61% were actually from the

[4:52:47] lowest income zip codes the

[4:52:49] funding provided transforms the

[4:52:51] culinary academy from a training

[4:52:53] program into a full support

[4:52:55] system that provides case

[4:52:57] management, career services

[4:52:58] wrapparound services

[4:53:02] and ESl literary supports

[4:53:05] it can provide support services

[4:53:07] that are pretty comprehensive

[4:53:08] things like childcare

[4:53:10] transportation work attire work

[4:53:11] cards health cards and testing

[4:53:13] alcohol awareness cards and

[4:53:15] testing fees on site meals at

[4:53:16] less than the per diem hairir

[4:53:17] care for interviews, interview

[4:53:19] clothes hygiene products laundry

[4:53:21] detergents so it really creates

[4:53:23] a wrapparound model to eliminate

[4:53:25] barriers for people since 2021

[4:53:27] the culinary academy has

[4:53:28] assessed

[4:53:32] 3600 students and they have

[4:53:35] had1300 graduates of the

[4:53:39] graduates that were AB3098 of

[4:53:41] the students that were AB309

[4:53:45] there's a85% graduation rate

[4:53:47] of that85% graduation rate in

[4:53:49] 9tycent of them were employed

[4:53:53] and of that 90%75% of them were

[4:53:55] employed in union hotels and

[4:53:56] they have very high retention in

[4:53:57] their employment.

[4:54:01] and we know that this is

[4:54:02] important because removing those

[4:54:04] practical barriers really

[4:54:06] leads to completion of the

[4:54:07] program ultimately employment

[4:54:09] and retention it stabilizes

[4:54:11] families and it also strengthens

[4:54:13] the hospitality workforce

[4:54:14] pipeline and the culinary

[4:54:16] academy has agreements with many

[4:54:18] of the resorts as an

[4:54:18] employment pipe pipeline.

[4:54:22] we also know that this

[4:54:24] program leads to less reliance

[4:54:26] on public assistance and greater

[4:54:27] personal wellbeing for the

[4:54:28] students that graduate and get

[4:54:28] employed.

[4:54:32] the bettermentgra with US

[4:54:35] vets that again is a very

[4:54:37] work focused and so it's a

[4:54:38] collaborative bridge housing

[4:54:39] employment and training

[4:54:41] programme it's aimed at helping

[4:54:43] people transition out of

[4:54:44] homelessness and they try to get

[4:54:45] them into permanent homeless

[4:54:47] homelessness within 90 days the

[4:54:49] average days that people are

[4:54:53] in the program is actually67

[4:54:56] they have a60% success rate

[4:54:57] they can provide security

[4:54:58] deposit first and last month's

[4:54:59] rent rental application

[4:55:03] fees but it is really very

[4:55:04] much workforce focused

[4:55:04] program.

[4:55:10] going on to slide seven

[4:55:13] we wanted to highlight that

[4:55:16] we really strongly believe that

[4:55:19] AB309 investment is impactful in

[4:55:20] the community to individuals

[4:55:22] families households in the

[4:55:25] community and that is just

[4:55:27] a funding source that has

[4:55:28] been working for Clark County

[4:55:31] I talked about some of our

[4:55:33] programs but I also want to

[4:55:35] highlight a few of them the

[4:55:39] navigation center in 2024

[4:55:41] received a national county

[4:55:42] national association of

[4:55:44] countuntiesco Achievement award

[4:55:46] for recognition of innovative

[4:55:49] county government programs

[4:55:51] the US vets Bettermentgrame also

[4:55:54] in 2024 received a national

[4:55:57] neochiement award for innovation

[4:55:58] the hospital to home

[4:56:01] me program received the cashman

[4:56:03] Good government award from the

[4:56:06] Nevada Taxpayers association. it

[4:56:07] honors government entities who

[4:56:09] put workplace experience

[4:56:11] together with ingenuity to

[4:56:13] make citizen services work

[4:56:14] better, faster and cheaper.

[4:56:17] a couple of other programs that

[4:56:19] are linked to these continuums

[4:56:20] because we are very focused

[4:56:22] on quality and having an impact

[4:56:24] and creating a meaningful

[4:56:26] continuum at our social services

[4:56:28] department I want to highlight

[4:56:29] two important programs that also

[4:56:31] received awards our healthalthy

[4:56:33] together mobilebile Dental and

[4:56:36] optical clinic received a

[4:56:39] national Nnico award in 2025 and

[4:56:41] the eviction diversion program

[4:56:42] that I referenced earlier

[4:56:44] received a national Nnico award

[4:56:44] in 2026.

[4:56:49] I do want to highlight the

[4:56:50] collaboration that occurs in

[4:56:51] this work in the community

[4:56:52] through the continuum of care of

[4:56:55] the CC it's really charged with

[4:56:57] coordinating funding for

[4:56:59] services and housing to assist

[4:57:00] individuals and families in

[4:57:03] experiencing homelessness it

[4:57:05] promotes really a communitywide

[4:57:06] commitment to the goal of ending

[4:57:07] homelessness a very

[4:57:09] collaborative process with

[4:57:11] representation from most of the

[4:57:14] agencies touching

[4:57:14] homelessness services in the

[4:57:15] community

[4:57:19] as you may know Hu puts out a

[4:57:21] notice of uhho is funding

[4:57:25] opportunity and the ClC is

[4:57:26] really responsible with that

[4:57:27] submission but Clark County

[4:57:30] socialcialervices is what's

[4:57:30] called the collaborative

[4:57:31] applicants so we write it

[4:57:33] we've used a lot of technical

[4:57:34] assistance the community came

[4:57:36] together to put really together

[4:57:39] a a really innovative

[4:57:41] application this year and it was

[4:57:42] due August twenty6, but a

[4:57:45] federal judge has halted the

[4:57:46] process because

[4:57:49] of two reasons that HU acted

[4:57:51] illegally by creating a1.3

[4:57:54] billion funding set aside for

[4:57:55] temporary housing and treatment

[4:57:56] programs without following

[4:57:59] proper procedures and also had

[4:58:00] failed to use the mandatory

[4:58:01] notice and comment process

[4:58:03] before making major policy

[4:58:05] shifts and so that nofo

[4:58:07] funding opportunity is on hold

[4:58:08] and HU has not announced a

[4:58:11] timeline or released a new

[4:58:12] what's considered compliant

[4:58:15] notice of funding opportunity I

[4:58:16] want to talk a little bit about

[4:58:18] our federal funding because we

[4:58:19] are somewhat constrained in the

[4:58:21] community based on a few

[4:58:22] executive presidential executive

[4:58:23] orders

[4:58:25] the save and executive

[4:58:29] order14218 ending taxpayer

[4:58:33] subsidization of open borders

[4:58:34] it's also personal

[4:58:34] responsibility and work

[4:58:37] reconciliation Act of1996urwara

[4:58:41] is the typical name that you

[4:58:43] hear for it it defines

[4:58:45] qualified immigrants and it

[4:58:47] establishes that federal public

[4:58:49] benefit cannot be provided to

[4:58:51] anyone who is not a qualified

[4:58:52] immigrant qualified immigrant

[4:58:55] excludes temporary protected

[4:58:57] status DAA recipients

[4:58:59] individuals granted employment

[4:59:01] authorization

[4:59:03] and individuals with non

[4:59:04] immigrant visas and undocumented

[4:59:05] citizens.

[4:59:09] in our services when we're

[4:59:10] working with everybody in the

[4:59:12] community if we come across

[4:59:13] somebody who doesn't have a

[4:59:15] birth certificate a passport or

[4:59:18] documentation we are required to

[4:59:20] run them through the systemic

[4:59:21] alien verification for

[4:59:23] entitlement programme or the

[4:59:26] save program and then we will

[4:59:27] learn if they are eligible for

[4:59:31] services with federal funding

[4:59:33] also the multiple executive

[4:59:35] order orders targeting

[4:59:36] diversity, equity and inclusion

[4:59:39] or DI affirmative action and

[4:59:41] disparate impact liability

[4:59:43] require grant recipients to

[4:59:45] eliminate raceconscious

[4:59:47] practices race preferences and

[4:59:48] DEI programs.

[4:59:51] and so there are many people

[4:59:52] that we are able to serve in the

[4:59:53] community because of AB309.

[4:59:57] and there are programs that are

[4:59:58] federally funded that we cannot

[4:59:59] accept people into

[5:00:00] unfortunately and there are

[5:00:02] people who are vulnerable and

[5:00:04] are in need in this community

[5:00:06] they have families and so

[5:00:07] this is really important funding

[5:00:08] for in particular at this time.

[5:00:18] your joannajacob for the record

[5:00:20] I will stop again there our

[5:00:22] next slide is going to move on

[5:00:24] to a different category in the

[5:00:25] bill and that's the truancy

[5:00:27] programming, but I'll stop again

[5:00:29] chair at your discretion to see

[5:00:31] if there are any questions on

[5:00:32] this information that we just

[5:00:32] presented

[5:00:35] you can just

[5:00:42] Joannajacobs for the record

[5:00:45] again we'll sub out director

[5:00:46] Sorerenson and we'll bring Jill

[5:00:47] Moreno to the table she's our

[5:00:49] director of clinical services

[5:00:51] and community services our

[5:00:53] newest Clark County

[5:00:55] department and she's going to

[5:00:57] talk about what we have done

[5:00:58] with truancy through the years

[5:00:58] and where we are heading next.

[5:01:04] thank you chair member of the

[5:01:05] committees again my name is

[5:01:08] Jill Morano and I serve as the

[5:01:09] director of Clark County's

[5:01:10] clinical andunervices

[5:01:13] I just have a couple of

[5:01:15] slides here on what we have done

[5:01:17] in clinical and community

[5:01:19] services with our EB309 funds

[5:01:21] our biggest program is our

[5:01:24] truancy truancy intervention

[5:01:26] programme often referred to

[5:01:28] in the community as teapop or

[5:01:29] truancy prevention outreach

[5:01:30] programme

[5:01:31] and

[5:01:35] it's been a really you know it's

[5:01:37] exciting couple of years for us

[5:01:39] in the truancy in in our

[5:01:41] truancy work we provide a

[5:01:44] range of services that are you

[5:01:45] know really all customized to

[5:01:46] each of the families that we

[5:01:48] serve so not every family gets

[5:01:51] the exact same set of services

[5:01:53] but over the last two school

[5:01:55] years we've really worked

[5:01:56] closely and really tried to

[5:01:57] enhance our relationship with

[5:01:59] the clark County school district

[5:02:01] to refine our referral process

[5:02:02] and ensure that we really are

[5:02:02] reaching

[5:02:05] the right population. the

[5:02:07] school district has also been

[5:02:08] been really clear in the last

[5:02:09] couple of years that they want

[5:02:12] their individual schools to also

[5:02:14] engage in truancy and chronic

[5:02:17] absenteeism efforts and have

[5:02:19] made some good efforts at

[5:02:21] clarifying their role versus our

[5:02:24] role and so how we what we've

[5:02:25] really worked on in the last

[5:02:28] couple of years is clarifying

[5:02:29] that we do in thetru and world

[5:02:31] what is called the tier two and

[5:02:32] tier three interventions

[5:02:34] whereas the schools will focus

[5:02:35] on the tier one interventions

[5:02:37] which are typically the earlier

[5:02:39] interventions. So it's tier one

[5:02:41] intervention would be things

[5:02:43] like emails and phone calls to

[5:02:44] parents sending attendance

[5:02:46] letters making an attendance

[5:02:48] contract with a student and

[5:02:50] then making referrals internally

[5:02:51] to school counselors and social

[5:02:53] workers when those types of

[5:02:56] interventions don't work the

[5:02:57] school district refers those

[5:03:01] cases to us to also attempt a

[5:03:02] more intensive interventions and

[5:03:04] so at that tier two level the

[5:03:05] kinds of things that we are

[5:03:08] doing in our truancy program

[5:03:10] is completing home visits going

[5:03:13] to schools to visit students

[5:03:14] completing a needs assessment

[5:03:16] case plannings various

[5:03:18] referrals to community providers

[5:03:21] and so what we've seen with

[5:03:23] those tier two interventions is

[5:03:26] that we had about6200 youth that

[5:03:29] were referred to us last year

[5:03:33] and almost 2800 families that we

[5:03:37] reached of those62 se79 did

[5:03:38] engage in services so it's about

[5:03:41] a44% rate of families engaging

[5:03:43] engaging with us that's a number

[5:03:45] we would like to see higher but

[5:03:46] for a voluntary service they're

[5:03:48] pretty pleased to be able to get

[5:03:49] to get that high

[5:03:53] of a number. The other really

[5:03:55] exciting thing that we saw was

[5:03:56] and we we tracked attendance

[5:03:59] outcomes at30,60,90 and120 days

[5:04:01] Our our sweet spot seems to be

[5:04:05] the60 day number 94% of all

[5:04:07] the families that we that we

[5:04:09] intervened with had improved

[5:04:11] school attendance at that60 day

[5:04:13] mark the families are averaging

[5:04:17] about 23 more days of school in

[5:04:18] the60 days post our intervention

[5:04:19] as compared to

[5:04:22] before our intervention that

[5:04:25] does trail off a little bit

[5:04:28] as you get closer to the1212

[5:04:31] days last year we noted

[5:04:34] that71% of the families still

[5:04:37] had improved attendance a120

[5:04:39] days after our intervention so

[5:04:41] big improvement from the year

[5:04:44] before when it was about53% so

[5:04:46] really excited to see that

[5:04:48] the changes that we have put in

[5:04:48] place in the last couple of

[5:04:49] years

[5:04:53] seemed to be resulting in

[5:04:55] meaningful outcomes for the kids

[5:04:56] and families that we're serving

[5:05:02] I can the next thing I wanted to

[5:05:03] talk about maybe moves a little

[5:05:06] bit away from teapop but it's

[5:05:07] really about some of the the

[5:05:09] bigger shifts that we're trying

[5:05:11] to make within the county as as

[5:05:13] we mentioned we created a new

[5:05:14] department clinical and

[5:05:16] community services the idea

[5:05:17] behind this department was to

[5:05:19] streamline and consolidate the

[5:05:21] mental behavioral health

[5:05:22] services in the early

[5:05:25] intervention and prevention

[5:05:26] programs on both the juvenile

[5:05:28] justice and child welfare

[5:05:28] sides of the house with the

[5:05:32] idea being that there's a lot of

[5:05:33] kids being served in both

[5:05:36] systems and so it just made

[5:05:37] sense that you have the same

[5:05:39] clinician working with you or

[5:05:41] the same access to services to

[5:05:44] prevent further entry into

[5:05:46] either one of the systems and so

[5:05:48] in in creating that new

[5:05:49] department the other thing that

[5:05:51] we are doing is combining our

[5:05:54] teapop services with our

[5:05:55] harbors which are our juvenile

[5:05:57] assessment center that you may

[5:05:58] be familiar with on the juvenile

[5:05:58] delinquency side of the house

[5:06:01] the the harbors have been

[5:06:03] around for several years they

[5:06:05] always have operated very

[5:06:06] separately from our truancy

[5:06:10] program when we look at this the

[5:06:11] families and the students being

[5:06:14] served through the harbors72% of

[5:06:15] those youth also have an

[5:06:18] attendance problem and so it

[5:06:20] just made sense to really make

[5:06:23] sure that all of the services

[5:06:25] that we're providing on either

[5:06:27] side of the house are available

[5:06:28] to both to both. it

[5:06:28] eliminates the need for families

[5:06:31] to be cross referred from one

[5:06:34] program to another and makes

[5:06:35] sure that every student that's

[5:06:37] coming lets as an example maybe

[5:06:39] in anger management class it's

[5:06:40] available to you whether you're

[5:06:41] a teapop student or a Harva

[5:06:43] student. so we're in the process

[5:06:47] this year of of making that

[5:06:49] merge and we're you know

[5:06:50] looking at these is more like a

[5:06:51] community connection center or

[5:06:53] community support center where

[5:06:55] it's really we're we're trying

[5:06:56] to implement the one door

[5:06:58] approach where no matter what

[5:06:59] your what you walk in

[5:07:02] to us needing as a family we're

[5:07:04] able to make sure that you that

[5:07:06] you get that and we're really

[5:07:07] trying to increase the services

[5:07:09] that we're providing in the

[5:07:11] building as opposed to it being

[5:07:13] more of a referralbased program

[5:07:15] so we're very excited about the

[5:07:17] about how we're growing with

[5:07:21] teapop and how we are able to

[5:07:23] increase the services we we view

[5:07:24] ourselves as being able to

[5:07:25] increase the services to more

[5:07:26] folks in need in the

[5:07:26] community

[5:07:31] so if we want to go to the next

[5:07:33] slide

[5:07:37] the other the other really

[5:07:38] significant program that we're

[5:07:39] working on creating is building

[5:07:41] out our differential response

[5:07:42] programifferential response is a

[5:07:45] child welfare intervention it is

[5:07:47] an informal voluntary response

[5:07:50] for cases where safety

[5:07:51] concerns have not been

[5:07:53] identified but there is a risk

[5:07:55] of maltreatment that's been

[5:07:57] identified what we have noticed

[5:08:00] particularly in some of our

[5:08:02] our lower level of child welfare

[5:08:04] cases is that they are very

[5:08:04] typically related to education

[5:08:06] al neglect and housing and

[5:08:09] homeless service needs housing

[5:08:10] and homeless instability that is

[5:08:12] creating some sort of safety

[5:08:13] concern for the child and so

[5:08:16] what what the goal is in

[5:08:17] building out this differential

[5:08:19] response program is to be able

[5:08:21] to informally serve those

[5:08:23] families before they meet the

[5:08:25] threshold of needing a child

[5:08:27] welfare intervention based on

[5:08:29] what we have been looking at

[5:08:31] we've estimate being able to

[5:08:34] serve somewhere between01200

[5:08:34] families a

[5:08:36] year through this model which

[5:08:37] are

[5:08:40] cases that are currently being

[5:08:42] upcoded if you will to a child

[5:08:44] welfare response when it's maybe

[5:08:45] not necessary because of the

[5:08:47] lower level prevention servicece

[5:08:49] isn't available so we're we're

[5:08:51] looking at this as an

[5:08:53] opportunity to not only be

[5:08:54] able to relieve

[5:08:59] some of thecPS investigators in

[5:09:01] their workload but also in

[5:09:03] allowing them more time to focus

[5:09:05] on the higher need cases but

[5:09:07] also being able to more

[5:09:08] informally and maybe a more

[5:09:10] comfortable environment serve

[5:09:13] families when it's really

[5:09:14] more of a voluntary service that

[5:09:14] doesn't have

[5:09:18] the bere or pressure that

[5:09:19] knowing you have a child open

[5:09:21] child welfare investigation can

[5:09:23] bring so that is one we're

[5:09:25] planning on our goal is to have

[5:09:26] that program up and running

[5:09:27] by december of this year.

[5:09:34] I don't know if there are any

[5:09:38] particular questions at this

[5:09:43] we'll keep going I

[5:09:47] we only have two more slides

[5:09:49] chairneal and so I'll just go

[5:09:50] over these really quickly. This

[5:09:53] is the another category under

[5:09:55] the statute is early childhood

[5:09:58] education and prek you know I

[5:10:00] think you heard it's been some

[5:10:01] we have so much intersection

[5:10:02] between the systems

[5:10:05] sometimes hard to divide up into

[5:10:07] categories but this is one that

[5:10:09] we've been doing since 22 since

[5:10:11] the since the early days of this

[5:10:14] funding that we have supported a

[5:10:16] facility in the historic west

[5:10:18] side of Las Vegas we helped

[5:10:19] initially with capital

[5:10:22] investment that allowed the

[5:10:25] rainbowreams Learning academy to

[5:10:27] to basically expand and so now

[5:10:29] the ongoing funding that we have

[5:10:31] been doing every year since then

[5:10:32] has been to support the

[5:10:32] operation of

[5:10:36] this facility they serve

[5:10:38] families and their goal is to

[5:10:40] serve families with incomes

[5:10:42] below 200% of the federal

[5:10:43] poverty level and this has been

[5:10:45] something that has been

[5:10:47] consistent every year that

[5:10:49] this has helped to support this

[5:10:52] particular facility in an

[5:10:55] area that really needed it at

[5:10:56] that time

[5:10:58] I will go to our final slide

[5:11:03] which we added in this is

[5:11:05] something that we invested in

[5:11:06] I don't know how many of the

[5:11:07] committee members are familiar

[5:11:09] with our microbusiness park

[5:11:11] it's been something that we've

[5:11:13] been working on for multiple

[5:11:14] years it's been supported

[5:11:15] through multiple streams of

[5:11:17] funding began with a

[5:11:19] congressional appropriation many

[5:11:21] years ago but it's very exciting

[5:11:23] because it's actually coming to

[5:11:25] it's actually happening now

[5:11:27] we had a groundbreaking last

[5:11:28] year and we are actively

[5:11:31] really this is going to be

[5:11:33] something that can debut very

[5:11:37] shortly we contributed AB309

[5:11:38] funding to the housing

[5:11:39] component of this the

[5:11:41] microbusiness park is a mixed

[5:11:45] use development and it is

[5:11:47] going to layer in housing and

[5:11:49] commercial operations and retail

[5:11:52] all in one facility so this

[5:11:53] is something when we were

[5:11:55] reporting on what how this

[5:11:56] funding has been used then that

[5:11:57] was layered in through our

[5:11:58] community housing office

[5:12:01] to support the development of

[5:12:05] se6 affordable units and that's

[5:12:06] targeting households between50

[5:12:09] and80% of the AMI I will leave

[5:12:11] it at that OK and that's the

[5:12:14] that's our last slide and we

[5:12:15] will stand for questions chair

[5:12:16] now.

[5:12:18] members any

[5:12:21] assemblywoman anderson

[5:12:25] thank you thank you for a very

[5:12:28] detailed information but very

[5:12:28] important programs

[5:12:31] I'm reluctant to ask this

[5:12:33] question for a few reasons the

[5:12:34] most important being the safety

[5:12:35] of our students are the most

[5:12:36] important thing.

[5:12:39] when it comes to the the prior

[5:12:41] presentation it there was

[5:12:42] information stated that

[5:12:44] there had to be verification

[5:12:45] that the individuals that were

[5:12:48] participating were actual

[5:12:49] citizens and or were here

[5:12:50] legally.

[5:12:53] when it comes to the truant

[5:12:54] students is that same

[5:12:56] requirement present or is this

[5:12:57] because it's under a partnership

[5:12:59] with Clark County School

[5:13:00] District is is considered to be

[5:13:01] a different

[5:13:06] jill Moreno for the record and

[5:13:07] chair through you to the

[5:13:10] assemblywoman no because it's

[5:13:11] EB309 funds they're not

[5:13:12] restricted in that way.

[5:13:16] I'll just add umerneal

[5:13:17] assemblyman Anderson I think

[5:13:19] that was the point those are

[5:13:20] national changes that are

[5:13:21] happening across this nation and

[5:13:23] that's the importance of the

[5:13:25] local funding and that we can

[5:13:27] serve families and director

[5:13:29] Sorenson talked about kind of

[5:13:30] layering and braiding the

[5:13:31] funding that is our approach

[5:13:32] currently.

[5:13:35] thank you so much and and I

[5:13:37] would also like to just say how

[5:13:38] much I

[5:13:39] appreciatedrectorharrenson's

[5:13:41] passion and obvious care for

[5:13:43] people and the concerns that

[5:13:45] were not stated that I think all

[5:13:46] of us are thinking of which is

[5:13:48] the fact that many individuals

[5:13:49] could be trafficked pretty

[5:13:51] easily without our being able to

[5:13:53] help protect them so thank you

[5:13:55] very much for for bringing that

[5:13:56] information forward and for

[5:13:57] making sure that we are aware of

[5:14:00] the changes at the federal

[5:14:00] government. thank you chairir.

[5:14:03] thank you for that so I just

[5:14:05] have two questions and then we

[5:14:06] can close out this presentation

[5:14:07] so when you guys were talking

[5:14:09] about adult education maybe I

[5:14:11] missed how much are you spending

[5:14:12] on adult edd program?

[5:14:19] Sureneal I am going back to the

[5:14:21] slide real quick I don't cause I

[5:14:23] don't know the numbers offhand

[5:14:24] but director Sorerenson will

[5:14:25] come in

[5:14:27] I think this was on the form

[5:14:32] for the culinary academy and

[5:14:33] the betterment program the

[5:14:36] allocation is4 million I

[5:14:37] don't have the specific

[5:14:39] breakdown between the program

[5:14:40] and my notes at this point it's

[5:14:42] on the betterment programme is

[5:14:45] that is that is that countywide

[5:14:46] or is that just culinary

[5:14:50] the bettertment program is

[5:14:52] countywide and so the people

[5:14:54] that are admitted into that

[5:14:55] program have to go through the

[5:14:56] coordinated entry system.

[5:14:59] and and I guess the thing is

[5:15:00] that you know what I'm trying to

[5:15:01] figure out is you know the

[5:15:05] because it's not a total of 4

[5:15:07] million. it must be split. how

[5:15:08] much is the betterment?

[5:15:09] Is it half? Is it 2 million?

[5:15:15] I believe the betterment is

[5:15:17] the program that receives a

[5:15:19] higher portion of the funding

[5:15:20] I'm sorry I don't have that

[5:15:22] information in my notes but

[5:15:23] we can certainly get back to you

[5:15:24] with that breakdown.

[5:15:26] are you guys receiving any other

[5:15:28] additional funding for adult edd

[5:15:28] or is this the sole

[5:15:32] money that you're receiving for

[5:15:33] adult education.

[5:15:42] Ijamie Sorenson I I think in

[5:15:44] most of our programs whether it

[5:15:47] be extended foster care are

[5:15:49] congregate are noncongregate

[5:15:50] shelters

[5:15:53] our outreach programs there

[5:15:55] is typically a training

[5:15:58] workforce development built into

[5:16:01] all of those programs and so

[5:16:03] there are some federal funds

[5:16:04] applied to those programs as

[5:16:07] well we are trying to position

[5:16:09] people to be in permanent

[5:16:12] housing in some shape or form

[5:16:13] for them to do that they have to

[5:16:15] be either tied to a benefit

[5:16:16] program that supports them or

[5:16:18] they need to be able to generate

[5:16:19] an income and so it's one of the

[5:16:20] pillars of

[5:16:23] kind of the services that we run

[5:16:26] across most of our system so

[5:16:26] you're using you're getting some

[5:16:27] we owe money.

[5:16:27] in short

[5:16:29] no

[5:16:35] chairneal Joannajacob for the

[5:16:38] record I think I think I'd

[5:16:40] like to go back and because

[5:16:42] that's there's a broad number of

[5:16:43] category of funding so when you

[5:16:45] ask if we're receiving any other

[5:16:47] funding I think I wanna go

[5:16:49] back and run that through our

[5:16:51] budget office to find identify

[5:16:54] any other funding sources or

[5:16:55] it's or if it's due to a

[5:16:57] partnership with another

[5:16:59] organization in the community

[5:17:00] we don't we do not have that

[5:17:02] answer for you today so you know

[5:17:02] I keep asking

[5:17:05] about309 money right? I think

[5:17:07] since it came into existence but

[5:17:09] what I'm so since you're going

[5:17:10] to ask a budget of questions

[5:17:11] this is what I want to know

[5:17:13] right because there seems to be

[5:17:14] a duplication so the state

[5:17:17] are allocation for 2526.

[5:17:20] was roughly19 million that we

[5:17:21] gave for adult education.

[5:17:25] so if you're running through the

[5:17:27] combined entry system

[5:17:31] why do you need to be expending

[5:17:33] dollars for something that it's

[5:17:35] already a state allocated fund

[5:17:37] that is going to adult ed that

[5:17:38] is probably dropping into

[5:17:43] the adult edd system that isn't

[5:17:44] that is in Clark County or

[5:17:46] affiliated with CcSd that's the

[5:17:46] thing so if you can

[5:17:49] get that answered because I

[5:17:51] really want to know that I also

[5:17:52] want to know when you're saying

[5:17:54] on truancy that you're going and

[5:17:55] you're like oh you know we went

[5:17:57] and look for kids then then what

[5:17:59] isccSd doing right because they

[5:18:02] brought backccSd reconnect right

[5:18:03] which they just did but under

[5:18:04] the prior superintendent

[5:18:08] I think it wasn'tjarra it was

[5:18:11] the one before that they had

[5:18:13] did the same thing right sos so

[5:18:14] it wasn't new they're just like

[5:18:16] ok soccSd is going to do the

[5:18:19] work of finding kids and looking

[5:18:21] for them in their house and

[5:18:23] saying hey you should come back

[5:18:24] to school today.

[5:18:24] why are we duplicating

[5:18:28] the effort and why are we

[5:18:30] spending sales tax dollars that

[5:18:31] could probably be used towards

[5:18:33] something else. that's the first

[5:18:34] question and you don't have to

[5:18:35] answer it now because we're you

[5:18:37] know we're running out of time

[5:18:39] but I mean legit you guys have

[5:18:41] the sales tax money and you have

[5:18:45] a list of things that I'm like

[5:18:46] I'm not sure if it's something

[5:18:47] you should be doing or if

[5:18:49] there's other money associated

[5:18:51] with that task. you understand

[5:18:52] what I'm saying? and the reason

[5:18:54] probably why I'm harping on this

[5:18:55] is because on one end right we

[5:18:56] have RTc

[5:18:58] it's a still affiliated with the

[5:18:59] county it's part of the county

[5:19:01] it's a political subdivision

[5:19:02] within the county, correct?

[5:19:05] what is RTc to you guys?

[5:19:10] Cheneal it's notsegasneal I

[5:19:11] think I want I should know

[5:19:13] that I should know that Cherneal

[5:19:16] they are I want to say

[5:19:17] affiliated I think there are

[5:19:20] designated multi I think they're

[5:19:22] the planning organization for

[5:19:25] Clark County but what is their

[5:19:28] relationship to us I should I

[5:19:30] guess I would say whether they

[5:19:33] are part I wouldn't say that

[5:19:34] they are separate agency

[5:19:35] thanclark County. they cover

[5:19:36] Clark County as

[5:19:40] the county I'll see if if the

[5:19:41] countyman would like to add

[5:19:42] anything'll just simplify it

[5:19:43] because another member has a

[5:19:45] question there are a series of

[5:19:47] things that you guys are

[5:19:48] spending money on whether or not

[5:19:50] you say you know homelessness

[5:19:52] you know I get it but if there's

[5:19:54] other money that's already being

[5:19:54] used.

[5:19:58] from other sources why are we

[5:19:58] duplicating?

[5:20:01] this sales tax money when there

[5:20:02] are other needs in the county

[5:20:08] that need to be addressed and

[5:20:11] I know that there are

[5:20:12] commissioners who go to this

[5:20:13] fund

[5:20:15] not then be like hey is there

[5:20:16] any309 money can I use it for

[5:20:18] blah blah right

[5:20:19] and

[5:20:23] and I've always called it you

[5:20:25] know some negative term but

[5:20:28] ultimately if if there is

[5:20:31] already money going towards a

[5:20:32] particular thing such as

[5:20:35] whatccSd is supposed to be doing

[5:20:36] with their money

[5:20:39] then why are we duplicating and

[5:20:41] overacting in a space that they

[5:20:42] are supposed to be working in.

[5:20:46] and I feel like that needs to be

[5:20:47] dealt with because if there's if

[5:20:50] if we're if if RTc and and you

[5:20:52] can say like ORTc isn't a part

[5:20:54] of our life but if Rtc is saying

[5:20:55] hey you know we may not be able

[5:20:59] to give rides after 228 or 2029

[5:21:01] but then there's a conversation

[5:21:03] hey don't touch the309 money

[5:21:05] right? don't even it's80 million

[5:21:08] dollars and at no point have we

[5:21:10] ever had a conversation about

[5:21:12] should we reorganize the statute

[5:21:13] from 2019

[5:21:18] and recateegorize what we should

[5:21:19] be using it for because that's

[5:21:20] really what my goal is which is

[5:21:23] is it really you know you can

[5:21:25] keep homelessness in. I'm not

[5:21:26] sure if truancy should be in

[5:21:27] there right and if this is set

[5:21:29] up to pay for the harbor we

[5:21:31] probably need a whole another

[5:21:32] conversation on juvenile justice

[5:21:32] money

[5:21:33] but

[5:21:37] if there are duplicate services

[5:21:38] that are the responsibility of

[5:21:41] some other group that is getting

[5:21:43] taxpayer money why are we

[5:21:44] overlaying it with some sub

[5:21:45] effort that they actually should

[5:21:46] be doing.

[5:21:49] and just reorganize go back in

[5:21:51] and I want you to really think

[5:21:52] about this. go back in and

[5:21:56] change377d present a bill or I

[5:21:58] present it for you and say hey

[5:21:59] this is the new category because

[5:22:00] you know I already tried that

[5:22:02] right and you guys were like oh

[5:22:03] don't touch my money and I was

[5:22:04] just like I'm not sure it is

[5:22:05] your money it's taxpayer money.

[5:22:09] for the record, Kevinchiller

[5:22:10] county manager to

[5:22:14] somewhat directly answer your

[5:22:15] question and I think I'll I'll

[5:22:16] reference back to the initial

[5:22:17] slides so

[5:22:19] I showed you the bar graph where

[5:22:21] the expenditures are exceeding

[5:22:23] the revenues. OK so by default

[5:22:25] there's going to be a triage at

[5:22:27] some point related to those

[5:22:29] services and related to who

[5:22:30] we're serving so to your point

[5:22:31] on your question of duplication,

[5:22:33] I won't argue with you a second

[5:22:35] about the duplication of

[5:22:36] services if there's funding

[5:22:36] coming in

[5:22:39] and we're duplicating that

[5:22:41] service we should be able to

[5:22:43] give you that answer. The only

[5:22:45] caution I have for you is when

[5:22:46] we triage those services and you

[5:22:48] look at this as a collective

[5:22:50] service continuum there are

[5:22:51] there are waterfall effects and

[5:22:53] domino effects tied to different

[5:22:55] components so I think we're

[5:22:57] happy to come back to you with

[5:22:59] exactly what our generated

[5:23:01] funding revenues look like in

[5:23:02] those specific categories so you

[5:23:03] can see where those dollars are

[5:23:05] being generated from or passing

[5:23:06] through to us or not passing

[5:23:07] through to us

[5:23:09] and also the programmatic

[5:23:10] relationship between the

[5:23:10] entities

[5:23:13] so I'm just gonna to use truancy

[5:23:15] as the example we can look at

[5:23:17] that and we can tell you what

[5:23:18] lane is the school district in

[5:23:20] what lane were we in? I know on

[5:23:22] the initial drafting of teapop

[5:23:24] and when that initially started

[5:23:25] there was a coordinated effort

[5:23:27] between whose efforts were doing

[5:23:29] what in those categories but I'm

[5:23:31] certainly happy to do that

[5:23:32] because if we have to triage

[5:23:33] services we don't want to be

[5:23:35] duplicating dollars anyway so

[5:23:36] happy to put that on the record.

[5:23:42] assemblyman toil oh who

[5:23:43] similarly onemosca

[5:23:47] thank you so much chair and

[5:23:48] thank you I'm sorry if I missed

[5:23:49] it you know here in east Las

[5:23:50] Vegas of course homelessness is

[5:23:51] the number one issue that we

[5:23:53] hear about and I know of all

[5:23:55] your efforts and keeping us

[5:23:57] updatedunhaven here right here

[5:23:59] on the east side I think it's

[5:24:01] going well because it's perman s

[5:24:03] permanent supportive housing can

[5:24:04] you talk about what is the

[5:24:06] funding structure that is being

[5:24:08] used that allows folks to stay

[5:24:08] there ongoing

[5:24:11] and what we need to do to

[5:24:13] increase it or where is that

[5:24:14] coming from so we could

[5:24:14] duplicate it

[5:24:18] Joannajacob for the record we

[5:24:22] just I believe Chaneal the

[5:24:23] assemblyman must got cut out

[5:24:24] just as she was telling us the

[5:24:26] name of the location that she

[5:24:27] was asking about so could I ask

[5:24:29] if assemblyman masca could

[5:24:31] you repeat that just so we can

[5:24:32] we can answer your question

[5:24:34] at sunhaven at the one right

[5:24:34] here

[5:24:35] the ovation one

[5:24:38] ovation

[5:24:40] the the sunhaven

[5:24:44] yes joannajacobs for the

[5:24:47] record I think ovation ovation

[5:24:50] partnership is funded through I

[5:24:52] believe and I will want to go

[5:24:55] back and confirm but the

[5:24:57] ovation is a partner of our

[5:24:59] community housing office and the

[5:25:02] funding source is a is our

[5:25:04] community land trust programs

[5:25:05] that runs through our director

[5:25:07] Dagney Stapleton. the funding

[5:25:10] source originally on that bucket

[5:25:10] of money was

[5:25:13] funding it was actuallyARS A

[5:25:15] funding because our loss due to

[5:25:18] covid exceeded like we were able

[5:25:20] to file under the treasury rules

[5:25:22] at that time for revenue loss

[5:25:24] for our community and then we

[5:25:26] put it into Clark County we've

[5:25:26] trans

[5:25:29] we were able to move it into

[5:25:31] Clark County general Fund and

[5:25:33] with that funding we were able

[5:25:34] to because a lot of other

[5:25:36] entities took it for their

[5:25:37] general fund we were able to

[5:25:39] move that into the funding that

[5:25:40] set up our community housing

[5:25:42] office and set up our community

[5:25:45] land trust and and a lot of

[5:25:46] programs are funded through that

[5:25:47] office and with that funding

[5:25:49] source I see countyman it wants

[5:25:53] to add an additional note for

[5:25:54] the record Kevin Scher county

[5:25:55] manager just to give you a

[5:25:56] direct answer

[5:25:59] joanna's explanation is correct.

[5:26:01] we freed up dollars that

[5:26:03] we're able to invest into our

[5:26:06] community housing fund but that

[5:26:07] program and other programs where

[5:26:09] we've been able to stand up that

[5:26:10] housing has all been lasagna

[5:26:12] layered so in some instances it

[5:26:13] may involve state housing funds

[5:26:15] that you all are approving and

[5:26:17] those come in to us we may we we

[5:26:20] basically layer that funding so

[5:26:21] we can get more projects on the

[5:26:22] street of similar fashion.

[5:26:31] OK well that closes it out

[5:26:33] thank you guys for coming with

[5:26:34] the presentation we'll

[5:26:34] definitely talk offline

[5:26:39] we will now close this

[5:26:40] presentation on

[5:26:42] close presentation numbers

[5:26:46] and then we'll move to number 9

[5:26:50] and then after that work session

[5:26:58] we need to try to do Mr Nakamoto

[5:27:00] after the property tax we need

[5:27:02] to try to do work session and

[5:27:04] then with folks are not here we

[5:27:04] can do the year to date

[5:27:05] collection.

[5:27:19] OK so just to give a little

[5:27:20] background even though you guys

[5:27:21] are like why are we doing

[5:27:23] property tax last hour anyway

[5:27:29] in 2022 we did this presentation

[5:27:31] the reason why I was bringing it

[5:27:32] back because there was

[5:27:35] conversation politically about

[5:27:36] oh we should bring back a

[5:27:37] property tax study and I'm just

[5:27:40] like no we shouldn't

[5:27:42] that the questions that are

[5:27:44] being asked and answered were

[5:27:47] already in the 2022 record so we

[5:27:49] are now putting it back into the

[5:27:51] record for 2026 so the new sets

[5:27:53] of legislators can like have

[5:27:55] this information in the toolkit

[5:27:57] and say oh well this is this

[5:28:00] will be option A through h

[5:28:01] whether or not it's feasible or

[5:28:03] not feasible is the political

[5:28:05] decision but ultimately to

[5:28:06] prevent another bill coming

[5:28:08] through the legislature saying

[5:28:09] oh we should do a study no we

[5:28:12] already have the answerjeremy

[5:28:14] aguero did a study like I think

[5:28:17] 2015 then there was another one

[5:28:20] later we did want we did a whole

[5:28:22] analysis and so I'm putting it

[5:28:23] back on the record for that

[5:28:24] reason. We should not spend

[5:28:25] another hot dime OK?

[5:28:29] or six pennies on another

[5:28:31] property tax study because we

[5:28:32] know what the answer is we just

[5:28:34] don't politically want to do any

[5:28:36] of these solutions so that's

[5:28:37] where it is that's why we're

[5:28:39] doing this presentation it's

[5:28:41] purely educational we don't you

[5:28:43] can ask questions you cannot ask

[5:28:46] questions but I know that for

[5:28:47] the future you can't be like it

[5:28:49] doesn't exist it will be in the

[5:28:51] record for the future. Thank you

[5:28:52] Mr Nakamoto. you go.

[5:28:55] thank you madam chairirmi

[5:28:57] Nakamoto with fiscal analysis

[5:28:58] division for the record did you

[5:28:59] just do my presentation for me

[5:29:08] no

[5:29:11] no she did not thank you

[5:29:14] madam chair all of the

[5:29:16] members and they are on the

[5:29:18] the committee's page our website

[5:29:20] for this meeting have a stack of

[5:29:22] documents that we put together

[5:29:24] this started as a fairly simple

[5:29:26] request from the chair to go

[5:29:28] through some scenarios on

[5:29:30] changes to property tax or

[5:29:31] potential changes to property

[5:29:34] tax and as time went on it kind

[5:29:35] of grew I

[5:29:38] don't plan on going through all

[5:29:39] I think it's53 pages that I put

[5:29:42] together because nobody has time

[5:29:42] or patience to listen to me that

[5:29:43] long

[5:29:46] but I do want to spend a little

[5:29:48] bit of time walking through

[5:29:49] everything just to kind of set

[5:29:52] the stage and so what I have

[5:29:54] up on the screen now and it has

[5:29:56] shown up it's table one and this

[5:29:58] is the the fir the good place to

[5:30:00] start and basically this lays

[5:30:02] out line by line how property

[5:30:04] tax works in the state of Nevada

[5:30:04] we have

[5:30:09] to put it kindly a rather

[5:30:12] complicated system as it relates

[5:30:14] to property tax. of many

[5:30:16] states do something relating to

[5:30:19] the market value or cash value

[5:30:21] of of property and that's how

[5:30:23] you base the property tax on

[5:30:25] you apply a rate to that cash

[5:30:27] value. how that grows or what

[5:30:29] goes into that it can vary from

[5:30:31] state to state umnevada though

[5:30:35] does not do a full cash value on

[5:30:36] the property they

[5:30:38] have a we have a different

[5:30:40] system here and so this table

[5:30:43] table one is walking through

[5:30:44] using three different fiscal

[5:30:46] years for an actual single

[5:30:48] family owner occupied home that

[5:30:50] is located in the city of Reno

[5:30:52] and I know this because it's my

[5:30:54] house and I figured this was the

[5:30:55] easiest way to explain it. I

[5:30:57] will go to the assessor's

[5:30:58] website in fact, I had to

[5:31:00] contact the assessor to get some

[5:31:02] information but I'm walking

[5:31:03] through step by step how the

[5:31:05] assessment of property tax on my

[5:31:06] house works.

[5:31:10] and so one what I basically

[5:31:12] started with is how the first

[5:31:14] thing you actually have to start

[5:31:15] with is determining the value of

[5:31:18] the house and so I I mentioned

[5:31:20] in other states thator I think

[5:31:21] is a good example. You use the

[5:31:23] market value or the full cash

[5:31:26] value of the property to

[5:31:27] determine what the property tax

[5:31:30] is. Nevada we do that but only

[5:31:32] for the land. so the land that

[5:31:34] the property or that your parcel

[5:31:35] that you own that your house or

[5:31:36] whatever improvement

[5:31:39] that you have that sits on is

[5:31:41] based on the full cash value and

[5:31:45] so in Nrs361227 subsection

[5:31:47] one paragraph a it's it lays out

[5:31:50] full cash value and if it's an

[5:31:52] improved parcel it is for the

[5:31:54] use to which it's being put if

[5:31:56] it is a vacant parcel, it is the

[5:31:58] highest and best use that could

[5:32:00] be used so if it's

[5:32:02] agricultural land it is assessed

[5:32:04] as agricultural use for my house

[5:32:05] it is a single family parcel so

[5:32:09] it is a is based as such at

[5:32:11] its full cash value that is what

[5:32:14] it would sell for and so the

[5:32:15] what the assessor has to

[5:32:17] determine is what is known as

[5:32:19] the taxable value of the parcel.

[5:32:21] so you can see in line one the

[5:32:24] the values that were given to my

[5:32:27] parcel based on the the full

[5:32:29] cash value for fy s 2025 through

[5:32:30] Fy2027.

[5:32:35] on line three you can see

[5:32:37] something noted as improvements

[5:32:39] less depreciation and this is

[5:32:42] where property tax deviates in

[5:32:44] Nevada compared to other states

[5:32:46] rather than you know having your

[5:32:49] improvements assessed at the

[5:32:50] full cash value or the market

[5:32:52] value of the improvement. it

[5:32:54] is based on replacement cost

[5:32:56] that is what it would cost to

[5:32:59] build a similar structure based

[5:33:00] on whatever is part

[5:33:04] of that house, so my house is a

[5:33:07] split level, it has 3 bedrooms,3

[5:33:09] bathrooms, all kinds of

[5:33:10] things that actually has a roof

[5:33:11] a detached garage

[5:33:14] anything that a house would

[5:33:17] have there is a manual that gets

[5:33:18] used by each of the county

[5:33:20] assessors it's the marshall and

[5:33:22] Swift cost handbook and this

[5:33:24] book goes through and and talks

[5:33:26] about for any feature that your

[5:33:28] house may have based on what is

[5:33:29] there and what the quality is of

[5:33:32] it what it would cost to build

[5:33:35] something comparable right now

[5:33:38] and so that is what the assessor

[5:33:40] is determined to or is required

[5:33:41] to do for each parcel in their

[5:33:42] count

[5:33:45] y all across the state of

[5:33:47] Nevada. then what they are

[5:33:49] supposed to do is reduce that

[5:33:52] amount by depreciation in

[5:33:55] that in subsexual or par

[5:33:58] subsection b or paragraph B of

[5:34:00] subsection one of NRS361.227.

[5:34:02] they reduced the replacement

[5:34:05] costs of the improvements by1.5%

[5:34:08] per year up to5y years based on

[5:34:10] the age of the house. My house

[5:34:11] was built in1966

[5:34:16] so it it we are past 50 years so

[5:34:18] my house is fully depreciated

[5:34:22] under this law. so75% or1.5%

[5:34:25] times 50 years75% of the value

[5:34:27] of the replacement costs the

[5:34:29] improvements is taken off in

[5:34:30] terms of

[5:34:33] determining the taxable value of

[5:34:37] my parcel so you can see in line

[5:34:39] five that's the replacement cost

[5:34:40] that was determined by the

[5:34:43] county assessor in linene seven

[5:34:45] you can see the75% depreciation

[5:34:47] factor because my house is60

[5:34:50] years old and then you

[5:34:52] multiply the linene five by

[5:34:54] linenese and that is the full

[5:34:55] depreciation is linene eight

[5:34:59] and so then linene five minus

[5:35:02] line8 is what you get for the

[5:35:03] improvements less depreciation

[5:35:04] on line3.

[5:35:08] and so when the taxable value of

[5:35:09] the parcel is determined

[5:35:14] before and after depreciation

[5:35:16] that's what you see on linenes11

[5:35:18] and line 13 and so it's linene

[5:35:20] 13 that really matters for

[5:35:22] determining the property tax

[5:35:24] bill because depreciation is

[5:35:26] factored out. So when you add

[5:35:29] lines one and three you get line

[5:35:31] 13 and that is ultimately the

[5:35:34] value to which the taxable value

[5:35:36] to which the property tax would

[5:35:38] apply. Property tax however is

[5:35:40] not based on taxable value in

[5:35:40] Nevada it is based on

[5:35:45] assessed value and NrS361.225

[5:35:47] says that your assessed value

[5:35:51] is35% of your taxable value. so

[5:35:55] then when you take line 13 the

[5:35:56] total taxable value after

[5:35:59] depreciation multiply it by35%.

[5:36:01] you get the amounts on line 15

[5:36:03] which is the assessed value to

[5:36:05] which the tax rate would apply

[5:36:09] in the city of Reno the tax

[5:36:10] or the tax rate is3 dollars

[5:36:14] 66 cents per $100 of assessed

[5:36:16] value. this is the statutory

[5:36:18] maxim. the statutory maximum is

[5:36:21] actually3 dollars64 cents per

[5:36:24] $100 of assessed value unless a

[5:36:26] higher amount is approved by law

[5:36:27] and the legislature has done

[5:36:29] that there is an additional 2

[5:36:31] cents that's levied in all17

[5:36:33] counties on every parcel that

[5:36:35] goes to pay state bonds and and

[5:36:37] the legislature approves this in

[5:36:39] the capitalpitalroment bill that

[5:36:40] is passed at the end of each

[5:36:41] legislative s

[5:36:44] es sion so this makes the de

[5:36:44] facto maximum

[5:36:48] property tax rate3 dollars66

[5:36:50] cents per $100 of assessed value

[5:36:51] and that is the rate that

[5:36:54] applies to my house and so in

[5:36:56] the statute and this is how it

[5:36:58] would apply for a new parcel you

[5:37:00] take the assessed value

[5:37:02] multiply it by the3 dollars66

[5:37:04] cents for whatever your tax rate

[5:37:06] is and then divide it by100 and

[5:37:08] then what comes out of that is

[5:37:10] what the tax should be and that

[5:37:12] will actually shows up on line

[5:37:13] 22 here if you do that

[5:37:14] calculation in Fy

[5:37:19] 2027 my bill would be3327

[5:37:20] dollars

[5:37:23] but back in the 2005 session and

[5:37:26] starting in Fy2007 we have

[5:37:28] abatements on tax on property

[5:37:31] taxes that say depending on the

[5:37:33] type of property that you have

[5:37:35] your tax bill can only go up by

[5:37:39] a certain amount and so what

[5:37:41] that percentage is depends on

[5:37:43] the type of property it is for a

[5:37:44] single family owner occupied

[5:37:45] home

[5:37:48] in in this case this house is my

[5:37:50] single family owner occupied

[5:37:52] home. it is my only residence in

[5:37:53] the state of Nevada unless you

[5:37:54] count my office during a

[5:37:55] legislative session

[5:37:59] but I I don't own that one. I

[5:38:00] actually do own this parcel. it

[5:38:03] is my family's only home in

[5:38:05] Nevada and we have made that

[5:38:08] attestation to the Washoe

[5:38:10] County assessor and therefore I

[5:38:11] am eligible for an abatement

[5:38:14] that says that my tax bill can

[5:38:17] only go up by3% above what the

[5:38:21] prior year's tax bill was unless

[5:38:22] there's some sort of improvement

[5:38:24] that's made to my property in

[5:38:24] which case that comes on at the

[5:38:25] full value.

[5:38:29] that3% cap also applies to

[5:38:32] eligible residential rental

[5:38:35] properties. so if you or anybody

[5:38:37] is renting out a house and the

[5:38:39] rent that you charge to your

[5:38:41] tenants is at or below the fair

[5:38:43] market rents for that local e

[5:38:45] as established by the department

[5:38:46] of Housing and Urban Development

[5:38:46] you also are of

[5:38:51] eligible for the3% cap so your

[5:38:53] tax can only go up by3% over the

[5:38:55] prior year. Any other property

[5:38:57] whether it's residential or

[5:38:59] commercial if you don't qualify

[5:39:00] for either one of those, you are

[5:39:02] eligible for what is known as

[5:39:03] the alternative abatement cap

[5:39:06] that's in Nrs361.4722 and

[5:39:10] it is listed there on line 20.

[5:39:14] Your tax bill can go up by

[5:39:17] anywhere between0 and8% from the

[5:39:19] previous year and that is based

[5:39:20] on the statutory formula in that

[5:39:23] section that looks at the 10

[5:39:26] year average change in assessed

[5:39:28] value in that county twice the

[5:39:29] change in the consumer price

[5:39:31] index or rate of inflation for

[5:39:33] the previous calendar year

[5:39:34] and it takes the higher one of

[5:39:36] those two but it has to be

[5:39:37] between0 and8%. so

[5:39:40] in Washoe County right now that

[5:39:44] cap is8% and so because that

[5:39:47] cap of8% is actually higher than

[5:39:49] the three cent cap I'm eligible

[5:39:52] for the lower cap of3%. If

[5:39:55] that8% happened to fall below3%,

[5:39:58] every parcel would be eligible

[5:39:59] for that and so there are fiscal

[5:40:02] years going back in the

[5:40:03] middle of last decade where that

[5:40:06] alternative cap was at0.2% in

[5:40:07] many counties including Washoe

[5:40:12] every parcel got the.2% and

[5:40:14] so there was legislation that

[5:40:16] was attempted to try and address

[5:40:17] that that did not go anywhere

[5:40:19] that would have said that

[5:40:21] instead of being between0 and8%

[5:40:23] that cap would have been

[5:40:26] between3% and8%. so in the

[5:40:27] instances where you're inflation

[5:40:31] rate was below1.5% or that

[5:40:32] tenyear moving average of

[5:40:35] assessed value was less

[5:40:37] than3% then everybody's tax bill

[5:40:42] could have gone up by only3%.

[5:40:45] but the the instances where that

[5:40:46] legislation was passed it did

[5:40:47] not go anywhere

[5:40:50] so because I am eligible for

[5:40:54] the3% tax cap I'm not paying

[5:40:58] that full3019 dollars in Fy25 or

[5:41:01] the3,327 dollars in fy 27. I'm

[5:41:05] only paying3% higher than what I

[5:41:07] did in the previous year. So for

[5:41:11] example in Fy2026 I paid1,714

[5:41:12] dollars you can see that

[5:41:14] actually went up by30cent and

[5:41:16] it's because I had357 dollars

[5:41:17] worth of new improve

[5:41:19] ment s added that got put on at

[5:41:21] full value because it wasn't on

[5:41:23] the roll in the previous year

[5:41:25] but in Fy2027 my bill could only

[5:41:27] go up by3%. So instead of paying

[5:41:33] the3,327 dollars. I paid1766

[5:41:37] dollars. That1561 dollars that's

[5:41:39] listed in line 26. that was the

[5:41:40] amount of my abatement that's

[5:41:42] the amount of tax that I did not

[5:41:45] have to pay and so that's where

[5:41:46] the double edged sword is for me

[5:41:47] as a taxpayer

[5:41:49] that's good. I'm paying less

[5:41:51] than I would have absent the

[5:41:53] abatements but then there's the

[5:41:55] side of local governments who

[5:41:57] depend on and other entities who

[5:41:59] depend on this revenue. This is

[5:42:00] revenue that they're not going

[5:42:02] to receive and so this is the

[5:42:04] delicate balance I um, knowing

[5:42:07] all of you on this committee,

[5:42:08] some of you are going to be

[5:42:09] happier with one result than the

[5:42:11] other. I and I'm not saying one

[5:42:14] of those is better or not

[5:42:15] because I'm nonpartisan staff

[5:42:16] and it's up to you to make that

[5:42:17] decision of a

[5:42:19] as the the value judgment of

[5:42:21] what you would prefer taxpayers

[5:42:23] paying less or local governments

[5:42:25] or government entities having

[5:42:28] more revenue but this is the

[5:42:30] reality and how property taxes

[5:42:32] work in this state. so when

[5:42:34] you then get to the bottom line

[5:42:35] you start looking at effective

[5:42:37] tax rates and the one I think I

[5:42:39] want to focus on, um, is

[5:42:41] linene31, the last line. the

[5:42:43] effective tax rate per100

[5:42:45] dollars of tax of taxable

[5:42:46] value before depreciation so

[5:42:50] the taxable value of the

[5:42:53] property it doesn't necessarily

[5:42:55] equal the full cash value but it

[5:42:56] can't exceed the full cash

[5:42:59] value. if you have if the

[5:43:01] accounting assessor comes in and

[5:43:02] says the replacement cost of

[5:43:04] your structure is x and the full

[5:43:07] cash value of the land is why.

[5:43:08] but you go to them and say hey

[5:43:11] my my house based on the market

[5:43:13] value is worth less than the sum

[5:43:14] of that you can actually appeal

[5:43:16] that and they would have to

[5:43:16] reduce your taxable value down

[5:43:20] to be at the cash value. but

[5:43:21] if you think about it in those

[5:43:24] terms for every100 dollars of

[5:43:25] taxable value and we'll save for

[5:43:27] argument's sake that my taxable

[5:43:28] value was equal to my fair

[5:43:33] market value. I am paying31%

[5:43:36] of the taxable value of my house

[5:43:38] in terms of property tax. Again

[5:43:39] whether this is a good number or

[5:43:42] a bad number is that's a value

[5:43:43] judgment for all of you to make

[5:43:45] but it is the the number that I

[5:43:46] pay in terms of property tax

[5:43:49] as the chair noted this is a

[5:43:50] presentation that we've made

[5:43:52] previously but it's not a

[5:43:54] presentation we make a lot

[5:43:56] because property tax is not a

[5:43:58] significant revenue source for

[5:44:01] the state. We get most property

[5:44:02] tax revenue that flows into the

[5:44:04] state coffers through the state

[5:44:05] education fund. The75 cent

[5:44:07] property tax rate for school

[5:44:08] districts that's imposed in

[5:44:10] all17 counties makes up about a

[5:44:12] quarter of the state education

[5:44:14] fund but in terms of state

[5:44:16] revenue it's not a big amount

[5:44:17] for the local

[5:44:19] governments though it is either

[5:44:20] their firstst or their second

[5:44:22] largest, soclark countunty for

[5:44:25] example in Fy2025 for their

[5:44:27] total revenue property tax was

[5:44:28] just under 21%. It was their

[5:44:31] second biggest after the C tax

[5:44:33] or consolidated tax

[5:44:34] distribution

[5:44:37] so it is a significant revenue

[5:44:40] source for a lot of local

[5:44:41] governments not necessarily for

[5:44:43] the state but when you actually

[5:44:44] look at the whole numbers it is

[5:44:45] the second largest revenue

[5:44:48] source for all state and

[5:44:50] local governments again though

[5:44:53] primarily local governments so I

[5:44:54] wanted to go through this table

[5:44:56] just to set the stage of this is

[5:44:58] how it works and and this is

[5:45:01] what property tax looks like. So

[5:45:02] I'll I'll spend a little bit of

[5:45:04] time going through the remainder

[5:45:04] of the tables just to give

[5:45:08] some context and and and show

[5:45:09] what is there but I'm going to

[5:45:11] spend most of my time going

[5:45:13] through alternative scenarios

[5:45:14] that the chair asked us to put

[5:45:16] together to show if there is a

[5:45:20] desire to increase revenue or

[5:45:23] to gain something from property

[5:45:24] tax that isn't there now.

[5:45:26] these are the way things that

[5:45:27] you have to think about and

[5:45:29] these are some options that you

[5:45:31] have and again as nonpartisan

[5:45:32] staff I'm not saying that any of

[5:45:34] the options are good or better

[5:45:34] than the others

[5:45:38] I'm again providing

[5:45:39] information I don't support or

[5:45:42] oppose any of them. it is just

[5:45:45] the information. So table one a

[5:45:47] is two pages that go through and

[5:45:49] again this is my house and this

[5:45:51] is the historical calculation of

[5:45:53] the property tax on my house

[5:45:55] going back to fiscal year 2000

[5:45:58] and why I went back that far is

[5:46:02] especially in the first seven

[5:46:03] years that are shown on the on

[5:46:07] this table Fy2000 through Fy2006

[5:46:09] this is before the effect of the

[5:46:10] partial abatements and so you

[5:46:13] can see the land and the

[5:46:16] improvements were assessed you

[5:46:17] got a taxable value after

[5:46:19] depreciation but then when

[5:46:21] you start going in and looking

[5:46:25] at line 22 and 24 the tax due

[5:46:27] and the before and after partial

[5:46:28] abatements obviouslybviously

[5:46:28] before Fy20

[5:46:31] 7 those numbers were the same

[5:46:33] because there were no abatements

[5:46:35] but you can see when you start

[5:46:37] looking at the actual tax that

[5:46:38] was paid

[5:46:42] for my house because it was

[5:46:44] still being depreciated and the

[5:46:46] the value was not going up so

[5:46:49] strongly my tax bill or my

[5:46:51] house's tax bill actually fell

[5:46:53] and fy 2006 and then jumped up a

[5:46:55] little bit in the two

[5:46:56] previous or the the previous and

[5:46:58] the subsequent fiscal years this

[5:47:01] is not necessarily the case for

[5:47:03] a lot of parcels that were in

[5:47:05] the state at the time and so

[5:47:07] when I get to some other

[5:47:08] information that showed kind of

[5:47:08] what was going on. It gives a

[5:47:11] little bit of history and

[5:47:13] context as to why the

[5:47:14] legislature decided during the

[5:47:16] 2005 session to put these

[5:47:18] abatements into place because by

[5:47:21] and large there were parcels

[5:47:23] that were having double digit

[5:47:25] growth and so it wouldn't have

[5:47:27] been a shock in Fy2005 or

[5:47:30] Fy2006. and even in in 2007 if

[5:47:32] the abatements hadn't been put

[5:47:33] in that people's property tax

[5:47:36] bill would have bills might have

[5:47:38] increased by1015,20,25,30% or

[5:47:39] more

[5:47:42] and so the legislature tasks

[5:47:44] themselves with addressing this

[5:47:47] issue. so that's really what

[5:47:48] table one a is about is just

[5:47:50] showing my house and the

[5:47:51] progression of the values

[5:47:52] throughout time.

[5:47:57] table two I'm not going to spend

[5:47:58] a lot of time going through all

[5:48:02] 23 pages of table two but this

[5:48:03] is going through through all 17

[5:48:06] counties and the tax taxing

[5:48:07] entities within these counties

[5:48:09] and showing what the total

[5:48:11] combined property tax rate would

[5:48:14] be and so the easy way for me to

[5:48:16] explain this is I'll point out

[5:48:17] Churchill County as a good

[5:48:20] example on on page one of table

[5:48:22] wo. they have a total of three

[5:48:22] tax districts and you can

[5:48:26] see that they all have different

[5:48:28] tax rates the city of Fallon has

[5:48:30] its combined property tax rate

[5:48:33] at the maximum3 dollars66 cents

[5:48:34] when you get outside of the c

[5:48:36] city of Allen there are two

[5:48:37] taxing districts in

[5:48:39] unincorporated Churchill County

[5:48:41] that have lower rates and they

[5:48:42] have a difference of three cents

[5:48:43] in between them.

[5:48:46] so what is behind this summary

[5:48:47] table and it's the first four

[5:48:49] pages that go through all 17

[5:48:51] counties well starting on

[5:48:52] page five there are individual

[5:48:55] tables that show the components

[5:48:57] of the property tax rates for

[5:48:59] every single district within

[5:49:01] that county. And so I will go to

[5:49:04] table 2b on page ix of this

[5:49:07] particular section and this

[5:49:09] shows each of those three tax

[5:49:11] districts in Churchill County

[5:49:12] and has each of the rates that

[5:49:13] make up that

[5:49:16] combined rate broken out so you

[5:49:17] can see there's a state rate

[5:49:20] of17 cents that's used to pay

[5:49:22] for state debt capital

[5:49:24] improvements and other projects

[5:49:27] there is a dollar30 school

[5:49:28] district rate which makes up

[5:49:30] it's the75 cent rate that I

[5:49:31] previously mentioned that goes

[5:49:33] to the state education fund and

[5:49:35] then there's a55 cent rate that

[5:49:37] is imposed in Churchill County

[5:49:39] for the school district's debt

[5:49:41] and and school district

[5:49:42] districts are allowed to do

[5:49:42] that. the county's rate is

[5:49:47] 12829 so just under or just over

[5:49:49] dollar 28 per100 dollars of

[5:49:51] assessed value goes to

[5:49:53] uhhurchill County and then for

[5:49:56] the city and town and we put

[5:49:58] this there because many counties

[5:49:59] have multiple cities or towns

[5:50:01] and rather than listing them all

[5:50:03] out we have on a lot of these

[5:50:06] just one combined so for that

[5:50:09] district tax district100 in the

[5:50:11] city of Fallon that's se $9.71

[5:50:12] that's the city of Fallon's

[5:50:12] operating

[5:50:15] and debt rates if they have them

[5:50:16] that they use for their own

[5:50:20] purposes and then there's an e

[5:50:21] cent rate that goes to the

[5:50:23] Churchill County mosquito

[5:50:25] abatement district and then two

[5:50:28] of the three rates or two of

[5:50:30] these three tax districts impose

[5:50:31] a three cent rate for the carson

[5:50:33] water subbconservancy district

[5:50:35] so that is the explanation for

[5:50:37] why one of those Churchill

[5:50:39] County rates is3 cents lower is

[5:50:41] because tax district300 does not

[5:50:43] impose that three cent rate and

[5:50:45] so when you add all of those

[5:50:46] together on each of the lines

[5:50:47] that's how the combined property

[5:50:48] tax

[5:50:51] rate works and so it's all of

[5:50:53] the pieces put together and then

[5:50:55] when you add all of those up

[5:50:57] they cannot exceed3 dollars66

[5:51:00] cents per $100 of assessed value

[5:51:03] in most instances and I won't

[5:51:04] get too much into the details of

[5:51:06] the exceptions to that but they

[5:51:08] are actually spelled out or many

[5:51:09] of them are spelled out in

[5:51:12] table6. so that's table two

[5:51:17] a or 2 through 2cu I believe

[5:51:19] there's one a sheet like that

[5:51:22] for all17 counties that you can

[5:51:22] go through and and look at

[5:51:25] So I had mentioned the partial

[5:51:27] abatements and the the cap

[5:51:29] factors that apply and so

[5:51:31] table3a is kind of hard to look

[5:51:33] at. so I'm actually going to

[5:51:36] move on to table3B and so I

[5:51:39] mentioned that the the cap

[5:51:42] for the abatements is based on a

[5:51:43] statutory formula and especially

[5:51:46] that alternative cap that takes

[5:51:47] into account the tenyear

[5:51:49] assessed value moving average

[5:51:51] growth rate twice the change in

[5:51:52] the consumer price index

[5:51:52] somewhere

[5:51:57] between0 and8%. and so for

[5:51:59] each county the department of

[5:52:01] taxation each year will do this

[5:52:03] calculation and then they

[5:52:05] establish what the caps are for

[5:52:09] all17 counties so in table3b it

[5:52:11] goes through back to fy 2006 and

[5:52:14] shows what the single family cap

[5:52:16] either for residential or the

[5:52:18] eligible rentals and that

[5:52:19] alternative cap is for each

[5:52:21] county for each fiscal year and

[5:52:22] in most instances you can see

[5:52:22] especially

[5:52:26] on this page that the the

[5:52:28] single family cap was at3% and

[5:52:29] then you had the alternative

[5:52:32] cap somewhere higher than that

[5:52:34] when you get though to Fy

[5:52:39] 2017 though so on page three of

[5:52:42] table3b so this last line

[5:52:43] here you can see a lot of the

[5:52:45] numbers fell below that and this

[5:52:47] is the fiscal year that I was

[5:52:49] referring to where inflation was

[5:52:51] very low. in fact the

[5:52:54] calculation was 2 times thecPI

[5:52:57] was0.2% and so in a lot of

[5:52:59] instances you can see that

[5:53:02] the assessed value was above

[5:53:04] that. so for example in Elko

[5:53:06] County the the 10 year moving

[5:53:07] average in assessed value

[5:53:10] was6.4%. so their alternative

[5:53:13] cap was the6.4% because it's the

[5:53:15] higher of those two numbers and

[5:53:16] then the the partial

[5:53:19] abatement for single families

[5:53:20] owner occupied in the eligible

[5:53:23] rentals was3%. but go down to

[5:53:24] Washoe County though and you can

[5:53:26] see that there 10 year moving

[5:53:26] average of obsessed value is

[5:53:27] flat.

[5:53:30] and so the higher of those two

[5:53:32] numbers is the0.2%. so that

[5:53:35] alternative cap was0.2% but

[5:53:37] again because that number was

[5:53:41] lower than3% every property

[5:53:44] went to the.2% again something

[5:53:48] good for your property owners

[5:53:49] if that's the way you want to

[5:53:51] look at it. but again if you

[5:53:53] are looking at on the side of

[5:53:54] trying to fund government

[5:53:56] services maybe not so much so

[5:53:57] but this

[5:53:59] is going through and all the way

[5:54:01] to Fy2027 if you go to the last

[5:54:03] page the current fiscal year's

[5:54:06] caps for each of the 17 counties

[5:54:07] are listed as well as how that

[5:54:08] was determined

[5:54:10] this is information we get

[5:54:11] from the department of taxation.

[5:54:13] I do want to thank them for

[5:54:15] their assistance, as well as

[5:54:17] my staff up in Carson City

[5:54:18] who spent a lot of time looking

[5:54:19] through all of this stuff.

[5:54:22] so this gets us to the meat of

[5:54:24] the presentation and what the

[5:54:25] chair asked us to put together

[5:54:29] and so what I did in tables4a

[5:54:30] through for

[5:54:33] J or K I'm not sure which one at

[5:54:35] this point is go through and

[5:54:36] put together a number of

[5:54:38] scenarios taking my house

[5:54:42] starting inFy2027 because

[5:54:43] that's the most recent

[5:54:45] assessment growing the value of

[5:54:48] the land by5% per year

[5:54:49] growing the replacement cost of

[5:54:51] the improvements by 2% per

[5:54:53] fiscal year and then running a

[5:54:54] different a bunch of different

[5:54:54] scenarios that

[5:54:58] to show what property tax would

[5:55:01] look like. And so table4A on

[5:55:03] this page that's up on the

[5:55:04] screen is the baseline scenario

[5:55:06] so I'm assuming that the partial

[5:55:08] abatement cap that that applies

[5:55:09] to my house is going to stay

[5:55:12] at3% all the way out to Fy2039.

[5:55:14] it is an eligible singlefamily

[5:55:16] residence that should apply for

[5:55:17] that cap. I just set the

[5:55:19] alternative cap at8% it could

[5:55:21] be lower than that but as long

[5:55:23] as it's above 3% then my cap is

[5:55:24] 3%. and so this shows basically

[5:55:25] what

[5:55:28] my tax bill is going to look

[5:55:30] like growing it by3% per year

[5:55:31] under the existing law.

[5:55:36] and so the num the various

[5:55:37] scenarios that I put together,

[5:55:39] most of them are going to

[5:55:44] affect the abatement cap because

[5:55:45] there are a number of different

[5:55:47] things that you could have done

[5:55:51] in a previous time to raise

[5:55:53] property taxes the obvious one

[5:55:54] would be to increase your

[5:55:57] property tax rate. the

[5:55:57] partial abatements when they

[5:55:58] were put into place back in

[5:56:00] assembly bill489 and Senate

[5:56:03] Bill509 of 2005 session were

[5:56:05] intentionally designed to not

[5:56:09] it wasn't as simple as oh you

[5:56:11] can raise your rate and you'll

[5:56:12] get more revenue because the

[5:56:15] thought was if you allowed

[5:56:16] people to do that all of a

[5:56:18] sudden every single local

[5:56:18] government would try to raise

[5:56:21] their rate and try to steal some

[5:56:22] portion of that revenue knowing

[5:56:24] your tax bill could only go up

[5:56:27] by a certain percentage so

[5:56:29] realistically the only way that

[5:56:30] you can

[5:56:34] raise revenue it there are

[5:56:36] several things that you can do

[5:56:37] but the abatements are really

[5:56:39] the limiter. So if you wanted to

[5:56:40] raise a rate you could do that

[5:56:42] but you'd have to make sure that

[5:56:43] that new rate was somehow

[5:56:44] outside of the partial

[5:56:46] abatements. Otherwise

[5:56:47] realistically you can put your

[5:56:48] rate at whatever you want. taxx

[5:56:50] bill is only going to go up by3%

[5:56:52] or whatever that percentage is.

[5:56:54] And in my instance it would only

[5:56:56] be3%. So starting with this

[5:56:58] baseline, I started running a

[5:56:58] bunch of different scenarios

[5:57:02] so looking at where my tax

[5:57:04] bill is exam for example in

[5:57:07] the baseline scenario in Fy2039

[5:57:09] the last year. So after the

[5:57:10] partial abatement I would

[5:57:11] after the partial abatement and

[5:57:14] Fy2039 my tax bill would be

[5:57:18] $2,518 for that fiscal year. so

[5:57:20] in table4b this is the first

[5:57:23] scenario that we had and so in I

[5:57:24] I made all of these changes in

[5:57:27] Fy2029 because realistically if

[5:57:28] the legislature were going to do

[5:57:28] anything that's probably

[5:57:31] in the 2seth session that's

[5:57:33] probably the first fiscal year

[5:57:35] that you could actually put this

[5:57:39] into place. so in Fy229

[5:57:41] instead of having that cap at3%

[5:57:44] it is at4% and so I that flowed

[5:57:46] through and so my tax bill

[5:57:47] instead of growing by3% starting

[5:57:51] in Fy2029 would grow by4% and so

[5:57:52] my tax bill by the time you got

[5:57:56] out to Fy2039 would be $2800. so

[5:57:58] just under $300 more

[5:58:01] by adding that1% each year

[5:58:02] going on.

[5:58:05] and so I did I repeated this for

[5:58:07] a number of other scenarios

[5:58:10] table4C takes it from3% to5%.

[5:58:13] And so in Fy2039 myb go would be

[5:58:14] about just over3100 dollars

[5:58:20] in table4D it is now up to6%

[5:58:21] rather than3% and so you could

[5:58:23] see that it's about3450 dollars

[5:58:28] and then in table4e I equalize

[5:58:29] them and now all of the caps are

[5:58:33] at8% and so my bill then goes

[5:58:36] to about4,200 dollars. so this

[5:58:39] is actually the point. you in

[5:58:40] terms of the

[5:58:45] abatement as a percentage of my

[5:58:46] tax bill each time you increment

[5:58:49] that, the percentage goes down.

[5:58:51] this is the first scenario out

[5:58:53] of all of them were the actual

[5:58:55] abated tax revenue starts

[5:58:57] decreasing that starts happening

[5:58:58] at about7% where you could

[5:59:01] actually see the revenues going

[5:59:03] down and this is just unique to

[5:59:05] my scenario realistically what

[5:59:06] would have to happen to get more

[5:59:09] revenue out of any parcel is

[5:59:10] that the change in the taxable

[5:59:11] value and the assessed value

[5:59:12] would have

[5:59:13] to be less than the abatement

[5:59:15] amount otherwise you're just

[5:59:17] gonna keep creating more

[5:59:19] abatements but this is the first

[5:59:20] scenario where you can actually

[5:59:23] see that number in line 26 going

[5:59:25] down and so then the next

[5:59:27] scenario is one that gets a

[5:59:28] little more drastic in terms of

[5:59:30] the effects this is the effect

[5:59:32] where you just get rid of the

[5:59:34] partial abatements you rip off

[5:59:35] the band aid and you're done in

[5:59:36] Fy2029.

[5:59:39] and so you can see I I've

[5:59:42] cleared out linenes19 through

[5:59:43] 21 but then you can see what

[5:59:45] happens if you just took the

[5:59:47] assessed value, multiplied it by

[5:59:49] the tax rate for my parcel in

[5:59:53] Fy2029 my tax bill would almost

[5:59:55] double. it would go up by 97.1%.

[5:59:58] and so this is realistically the

[5:59:59] effect of the abatements is you

[6:00:01] have kept the property tax bills

[6:00:06] quite low for a lot of people to

[6:00:08] get rid of that this is your end

[6:00:10] result again not saying that

[6:00:10] this isn't necessarily a

[6:00:15] the viability or reality of this

[6:00:18] option but this is the result at

[6:00:19] least as it pertains to my house

[6:00:23] so moving on then from this

[6:00:25] scenario there is an alternate

[6:00:29] scenario6 where the3% cap is

[6:00:32] maintained but a 25 cent rate is

[6:00:34] applied outside of the partial

[6:00:37] abatements in that year only. So

[6:00:39] under AB489 actually more

[6:00:40] specifically under Senate

[6:00:43] Bill509 of the2005 session there

[6:00:45] was a provision that said that

[6:00:49] any new tax that was imposed by

[6:00:50] the legislature or as a result

[6:00:50] of

[6:00:53] a legislative mandate on or

[6:00:56] after April8,2005 was outside of

[6:00:58] the partial abatements entirely

[6:00:59] that you paid the full rate

[6:01:03] as it stood unless the

[6:01:06] legislature said otherwise. so

[6:01:07] one of the options that you

[6:01:10] could do is make sure if you did

[6:01:11] impose a new radar or if a new

[6:01:13] rate were imposed to keep it

[6:01:15] outside of the abatements in

[6:01:17] that first year and then put it

[6:01:19] back inside the abatements so

[6:01:21] that rate would grow by the

[6:01:22] abatement amount whether it's3

[6:01:24] or8 or whatever the percentage

[6:01:26] is so in that instance my you

[6:01:29] can see that my tax bill or the

[6:01:30] tax rate would go from3 dollars

[6:01:33] 66 cents to3 dollars 91 cents

[6:01:37] and then treating that rate as

[6:01:38] you're paying the full value of

[6:01:40] it my tax bill instead of going

[6:01:44] up by the3% would go up by16.9%

[6:01:47] in Fy2029. and then when you

[6:01:49] tuck it back in the entire tax

[6:01:52] bill grows by3%. so it it is a

[6:01:54] way that you if you wanted to

[6:01:56] generate revenue in the short

[6:01:58] term that would grow steadily in

[6:01:59] the longer term that is an

[6:02:00] option that could be

[6:02:03] consideredgain not saying that

[6:02:05] it is a good or bad option but

[6:02:06] it is an option.

[6:02:10] so in table4h this is taking the

[6:02:12] two previous scenarios of you

[6:02:13] get rid of the abatements and

[6:02:16] you attach this rate of of 25

[6:02:18] cents and just let it go as it

[6:02:20] does. so you can see again the

[6:02:22] rate is3 dollars 91 cents in

[6:02:25] table4h but without

[6:02:26] abatements and putting the full

[6:02:28] value of everything instead of

[6:02:31] going up by 97% my tax bill more

[6:02:33] than doubles by it goes up by

[6:02:35] 10.5% and then would

[6:02:40] grow by3.83.94% going forward

[6:02:42] because that's how my assessed

[6:02:43] value would grow after

[6:02:45] depreciation in the scenario

[6:02:47] that I've sat here.able for i

[6:02:50] is

[6:02:54] a a scenario that was put

[6:02:55] together based on some previous

[6:02:58] proposals that were put forward

[6:03:03] most notably during I believe

[6:03:04] the 2020

[6:03:07] 3 legislative session where

[6:03:09] assembly member Anderson brought

[6:03:11] assembly joint resolution one

[6:03:13] which would have proposed to

[6:03:15] amend the Nevada constitution to

[6:03:18] reset depreciation depreciation

[6:03:20] and the partial abatements when

[6:03:22] a property is sold. so this

[6:03:24] is one that couldn't happen in

[6:03:26] Fy2029 because it requires

[6:03:27] constitutional amendment and it

[6:03:29] couldn't take effect in all

[6:03:30] likelihood that quickly but

[6:03:34] to put it out there I ran the

[6:03:36] scenario on my house and if you

[6:03:38] reset the depreciation and

[6:03:39] partial abatements upon the sale

[6:03:42] of the property in Fy2029 my

[6:03:44] tax bill quadruples or more than

[6:03:46] quadruples it would go up

[6:03:51] by327.9%.gain this is a scenario

[6:03:53] that would have only occurred

[6:03:55] when a property is sold but

[6:03:57] when a property is sold and

[6:03:59] especially on older properties

[6:04:00] you could have potentially have

[6:04:01] fairly dras

[6:04:03] tic effects as it shows

[6:04:06] here.gain not a value judgment

[6:04:08] of anything other than showing

[6:04:11] that this is the effect of of

[6:04:13] what would have happened on my

[6:04:15] house if I were to sell it and

[6:04:17] this is the property tax bill

[6:04:20] that my knew or the new owners

[6:04:21] of my home if they still would

[6:04:22] want it after our basement

[6:04:25] flooded yesterday would would

[6:04:26] be paying

[6:04:29] and so then on the last page is

[6:04:31] tables4J and4k which is

[6:04:33] basically a comparison of all of

[6:04:35] these scenarios so you can see

[6:04:37] the bottom line of the taxes

[6:04:39] that would be due4J is showing

[6:04:41] what the annual tax would be and

[6:04:43] then4k is showing what the

[6:04:45] difference is so you can see

[6:04:47] that ranges from a difference

[6:04:51] of1234 dollars over 10 years by

[6:04:54] changing it from3% to4% to

[6:04:55] alternate scenario eight or if

[6:04:56] you did the reset upon sale

[6:04:59] it would be just over63,000

[6:05:01] dollars in additional taxes over

[6:05:03] that 10 year period. This is the

[6:05:05] meat of what the chair

[6:05:06] asked for these are the

[6:05:08] scenarios that were put

[6:05:09] together. there are all kinds of

[6:05:11] other scenarios that could be

[6:05:12] run relating to property tax but

[6:05:14] again I would note that

[6:05:17] realistically what is the one

[6:05:18] lever that you have to

[6:05:23] pull in order to actually gain

[6:05:24] revenue unless you're going to

[6:05:26] do something outside of the

[6:05:27] partial abatements it it really

[6:05:29] has to do with the abatements

[6:05:31] because the abatements limit the

[6:05:32] amount of taxes that can be paid

[6:05:34] which in turn limits the amount

[6:05:36] of revenue that is received by

[6:05:37] the affected government who

[6:05:38] imposes

[6:05:43] so then in table5

[6:05:46] there are a number of statistics

[6:05:48] that we've put together relating

[6:05:51] to the property tax in

[6:05:53] Nevada and this is all

[6:05:54] information from the department

[6:05:56] of taxation and again I want to

[6:05:58] thank Jeff Mitchell and his

[6:05:59] staff for helping with this

[6:06:01] so this is information on the

[6:06:03] total number of parcels the

[6:06:05] total assessed value how that

[6:06:07] changes from year to year the

[6:06:09] taxes due before and after the

[6:06:11] abatements and then the

[6:06:13] cumulative amount in the last

[6:06:14] column in table ive is when you

[6:06:16] start adding them up the total

[6:06:19] estimated abated revenue for

[6:06:21] each fiscal year that is the end

[6:06:24] result is how much tax was not

[6:06:26] paidgain depending on your point

[6:06:28] of view is this is a a good

[6:06:31] thing for taxpayers or not maybe

[6:06:33] not so good of a thing for local

[6:06:35] governments depending on which

[6:06:37] side of that spectrum you fall.

[6:06:39] so after that there are four

[6:06:40] charts that I put together that

[6:06:43] kind of graphically display some

[6:06:44] of these statistics

[6:06:46] because some people will

[6:06:50] be more in tune with seeing a

[6:06:51] chart than they would be in

[6:06:53] seeing the numbers so5 a chart5

[6:06:55] a is the the number of parcels

[6:06:57] and you could see that there's

[6:06:59] been a fairly steady growth in

[6:07:00] the number of parcels that are

[6:07:01] subject to property tax in

[6:07:03] Nevada especially after the

[6:07:05] great recession it really

[6:07:07] flattened out and the even in a

[6:07:08] few years after the great

[6:07:09] recession, it fell off a little

[6:07:12] bit due to just a slowdown in

[6:07:14] new construction was the primary

[6:07:16] cause for that in chart5D

[6:07:21] or tri5B you can see the

[6:07:22] estimated tax due before and

[6:07:24] after abatements and so up to

[6:07:26] Fy2006 those lines are the same

[6:07:28] because there were no abatements

[6:07:31] and then in Fy2007 you had

[6:07:32] abatements and this is one of

[6:07:34] the charts that I think shows

[6:07:35] one of the reasons why the

[6:07:37] legislature tackled abatements

[6:07:39] in the first place because if

[6:07:41] the abatements had not been put

[6:07:43] into place you would have had

[6:07:44] the blue line and that's the

[6:07:44] amount of taxes that would have

[6:07:46] been paid in some instances

[6:07:46] again people

[6:07:49] would have been paying had

[6:07:50] double digit increases30% or

[6:07:51] more in their tax bill in a

[6:07:54] single year. The tax

[6:07:55] actually paid after the

[6:07:57] abatements not so much. And so

[6:07:59] that was kind of the function of

[6:08:01] the abatements. but then when

[6:08:02] you and this chart you can

[6:08:04] see one of the other things that

[6:08:05] the abatements did is

[6:08:10] it not only limited the growth

[6:08:13] of property taxes in the the

[6:08:17] boom period it also was a

[6:08:18] stabilizer for local government

[6:08:20] revenue during the great

[6:08:23] recession because of a lag in

[6:08:26] the assessed value and what

[6:08:28] ultimately was happening in the

[6:08:29] early parts of the Great

[6:08:30] Recession is assessed values

[6:08:31] were falling

[6:08:35] the val the market value or the

[6:08:37] market for real estate was

[6:08:39] crashing but in a lot of

[6:08:40] instances

[6:08:43] the reductions in assessed value

[6:08:45] that were being seen were still

[6:08:49] causing abatement so that it was

[6:08:50] falling but it was not falling

[6:08:51] enough to the point where you

[6:08:55] would have actually paid less so

[6:08:57] what ended up happening for a

[6:08:59] lot of people in the first few,

[6:09:00] couple of years at least of

[6:09:02] the Great Recession is their

[6:09:05] home values were decreasing but

[6:09:07] even at that decreased level

[6:09:08] there were still abatements that

[6:09:10] were being caused because their

[6:09:11] tax bill still couldn't go up by

[6:09:13] more than3%. So a lot of people

[6:09:14] saw their tax bill still

[6:09:15] increasing but they were still

[6:09:16] paying less

[6:09:19] than they would have if they had

[6:09:20] been paying based on their

[6:09:22] assessed value because it hadn't

[6:09:24] fallen enough for their tax

[6:09:25] bills to fall and in some

[6:09:27] instances there were

[6:09:31] people who still continued to

[6:09:33] pay3% all the way through

[6:09:34] because their assessed values

[6:09:36] never fell below the point where

[6:09:37] they would have been paying less

[6:09:40] but it cca it ended up

[6:09:41] causing

[6:09:44] in some instances revenue to

[6:09:46] stabilize not completely

[6:09:48] because you could see that there

[6:09:49] was still a giant dip in

[6:09:52] revenues but it caused things

[6:09:53] to fall less than they might

[6:09:54] have

[6:09:59] Chart5C is taking those annual

[6:10:01] and cumulative abatement

[6:10:02] amounts. uh, and you can see

[6:10:04] that gap growing over time to

[6:10:07] it's over18 billion dollars over

[6:10:09] time but you can see that amount

[6:10:12] of abatements per fiscal year

[6:10:14] has stayed fairly stable um,

[6:10:16] between1 billion dollars and 2

[6:10:17] billion in

[6:10:21] abated revenue that is not

[6:10:23] paid every year. Um, that amount

[6:10:24] over the last couple of fiscal

[6:10:25] years is falling a little bit

[6:10:27] and I think in a lot of

[6:10:29] instances it's because assessed

[6:10:31] values are not growing as fast

[6:10:33] as the tax bill so that gap is

[6:10:34] is

[6:10:39] and then in chart5D this one is

[6:10:41] messy but we like messy charts

[6:10:43] in the fiscal analysis division.

[6:10:45] this puts together the change

[6:10:47] in assessed value with the

[6:10:49] change in taxes due before and

[6:10:51] after abatements and so it

[6:10:52] really wouldn't surprise you to

[6:10:54] see that the change in assessed

[6:10:55] value and the change in the tax

[6:10:57] due before abatements they

[6:10:58] should move fairly close to each

[6:11:00] other. it's the one that is

[6:11:01] the variable here is the change

[6:11:04] in the tax due after abatement

[6:11:05] and so in the fiscal years where

[6:11:09] the change in the tax due after

[6:11:11] the abatement so when your taxes

[6:11:12] after abatement are growing

[6:11:13] faster than the assessed value

[6:11:15] or the the change in the tax

[6:11:17] due before the abatements those

[6:11:19] are the times where your

[6:11:21] assessed value is dropping and

[6:11:23] so you may actually have your

[6:11:24] revenues growing faster because

[6:11:26] of the abatements then they

[6:11:28] would have otherwise and so you

[6:11:30] see this especially in the

[6:11:32] aftermath of the great recession

[6:11:34] and even a little bit right now

[6:11:35] where you can see that that

[6:11:36] purple line which represents the

[6:11:37] change in the tax due after

[6:11:41] abatement is is less or is

[6:11:43] greater than these changes in

[6:11:44] assessed value or the change in

[6:11:46] the tax that would have been

[6:11:46] due before the payments

[6:11:50] and so then lastly in table six

[6:11:54] this is and

[6:11:58] I this would not be my one of my

[6:11:59] presentations on taxes without

[6:12:03] some history as I have been

[6:12:05] wont to do for this entire

[6:12:07] interim. this is a table of some

[6:12:09] key legislative and

[6:12:10] constitutional history relating

[6:12:12] to the property tax. I'm not

[6:12:13] going to spend a lot of time on

[6:12:15] this. In fact, I'm really not

[6:12:16] going to spend any time on it

[6:12:18] other than pointing it out, but

[6:12:19] I went through and pulled out

[6:12:21] some key provisions so going all

[6:12:22] the way back to the original

[6:12:24] constitution in1864 and it

[6:12:24] basically

[6:12:28] sets the stage for how we've

[6:12:30] gotten to the property tax

[6:12:34] system that we have now

[6:12:38] including how we got to35% of

[6:12:38] the

[6:12:43] taxable value for assessed value

[6:12:45] why we have depreciation on

[6:12:46] improvements and not land and

[6:12:47] things like that and that's an

[6:12:49] iterative process that we

[6:12:51] went through and this goes all

[6:12:53] the way through to 2023 was the

[6:12:54] the biggest significant

[6:12:59] we outlined it in this so

[6:13:00] again madam chairir, I want to

[6:13:01] thank the department of taxation

[6:13:03] and my staff for all of their

[6:13:05] help with this and I know this

[6:13:07] is a lot of information and I am

[6:13:09] open to any questions that I am

[6:13:10] able to answer thank you.

[6:13:12] thank you for your

[6:13:13] presentation.embers do you have

[6:13:14] any questions?

[6:13:21] thank you so much and again

[6:13:23] thank you very much not only for

[6:13:24] recognizing that I brought a

[6:13:25] bill forward and continue to

[6:13:27] feel that we do have some issues

[6:13:29] but also for making it very

[6:13:31] clear that it's the counties

[6:13:33] that are in the cities that are

[6:13:35] being hit harder than the than

[6:13:38] the status when it comes to the

[6:13:39] current property tax structure

[6:13:40] because it is

[6:13:43] again the property tax funds

[6:13:46] it's number 2 you you you said I

[6:13:47] think for the most cities

[6:13:50] counties is that correct for

[6:13:51] thank you assembly member

[6:13:53] Anderson Michael Nakamoto with

[6:13:55] the fiscal analysis division for

[6:13:56] the record it's either number

[6:13:59] 1 or2 in in a lot of

[6:14:00] instances it's consolidated

[6:14:03] tax that's number one and then

[6:14:05] followed by property tax but

[6:14:07] in some instances it may be

[6:14:08] property tax that's number one

[6:14:09] but it is a significant portion

[6:14:13] and especially for local

[6:14:15] governments for the state

[6:14:17] again it's the state education

[6:14:19] fund that is primarily affected

[6:14:21] for us and then our debt

[6:14:23] rates to a lesser extent but

[6:14:24] you're absolutely correct. this

[6:14:26] is primarily local governments

[6:14:27] that are affected. I really

[6:14:28] appreciate that clarification

[6:14:30] and then my second question

[6:14:32] again this is great information

[6:14:34] really appreciate it want to

[6:14:35] make sure it's it's very clear,

[6:14:38] I do appreciate all of it.

[6:14:39] does the county however get to

[6:14:40] make a decision

[6:14:42] when there is a

[6:14:44] I'm not sure exactly what it's

[6:14:45] called like if someone were a

[6:14:47] veteran and so they don't have

[6:14:49] to pay the the same amount of

[6:14:52] property taxes or there's a a a

[6:14:54] cut of how much property taxes

[6:14:56] they have to pay based upon

[6:14:58] extenuating circumstances is

[6:15:00] that a county decision or is

[6:15:00] that a state law decision?

[6:15:03] thank you assembly member

[6:15:05] andersonmi Nakamoto with fiscal

[6:15:07] analysis division for the record

[6:15:09] there are a number of exemptions

[6:15:12] that are listed in statute from

[6:15:15] the property tax in most of

[6:15:18] those instances there has to be

[6:15:19] some sort of condition that is

[6:15:21] met, um, for example, you have

[6:15:23] to be an eligible veteran.

[6:15:26] you have to be a veteran who

[6:15:28] is disabled you're a

[6:15:30] charitable institution education

[6:15:31] whatever it is you have

[6:15:35] to meet some sort of of

[6:15:36] criteria that

[6:15:40] exists the state of Nevada and

[6:15:41] it's something that I actually

[6:15:43] meant to put in the the table of

[6:15:46] legislative history back in

[6:15:49] the1973 session the

[6:15:50] legislature created a

[6:15:54] property tax rebate system for

[6:15:57] eligible senior citizens so

[6:15:59] if you met certain criteria

[6:16:01] related to your income related

[6:16:03] to the value of your property

[6:16:05] and so on and and age being one

[6:16:07] of them because this was

[6:16:09] designed for senior citizens you

[6:16:11] could apply for a rebate of some

[6:16:14] of your property tax bill. This

[6:16:15] was actually a a program that

[6:16:17] was funded through state money.

[6:16:19] we didn't actually take money

[6:16:20] back from the local governments

[6:16:20] they were held harmless

[6:16:25] and it was a way to provide some

[6:16:28] sort of property tax relief to

[6:16:31] people who had fixed incomes who

[6:16:33] may may have had difficulty

[6:16:35] paying their property tax bills.

[6:16:37] This was a casualty of the great

[6:16:39] recession the program went

[6:16:42] away it was very briefly revived

[6:16:44] in the 201f session I believe it

[6:16:47] lasted for one fiscal year and

[6:16:49] then it has not been brought

[6:16:50] brought back since but in

[6:16:51] terms of

[6:16:54] things that aren't an exemption

[6:16:56] like the ones that I had

[6:16:58] mentioned previously assembly

[6:16:59] member anderson that's the only

[6:17:01] one that's coming to to my

[6:17:03] mind off the top of my headhes

[6:17:05] there are some local governments

[6:17:07] who may have some sort of things

[6:17:08] that they're doing at the local

[6:17:09] level. I'm not aware of any of

[6:17:11] them but I can't say with any

[6:17:13] certainty that they are or not

[6:17:15] and thank you chair thank you

[6:17:16] for this much time because it

[6:17:18] has been brought to my attention

[6:17:20] from a county and also from a

[6:17:21] city that there's

[6:17:23] some exemptions that were

[6:17:24] awarded

[6:17:29] and let's just say19992001 they

[6:17:30] continues to be with the

[6:17:31] property.

[6:17:31] it is sold

[6:17:35] 2 or three times but those

[6:17:36] exemptions continue to be with

[6:17:37] the property so I'm trying to

[6:17:39] figure out if that's part of

[6:17:41] this law or not and so thank you

[6:17:43] so much but that is outside of

[6:17:45] this presentation so I do

[6:17:46] appreciate this time and thank

[6:17:48] you for all that information to

[6:17:50] answer your comment though

[6:17:52] assembly member Andersonmi

[6:17:55] Nakamoto for the record I

[6:17:56] would have to go back and look

[6:17:58] at some of those specific

[6:17:59] exemptions because a lot of

[6:18:01] those may apply to the parcel

[6:18:02] depending on

[6:18:05] some function of what that

[6:18:07] parcel is being used for or some

[6:18:09] condition that applies if there

[6:18:12] is some change in the ownership

[6:18:15] or the use that would trigger a

[6:18:16] change to that that's what would

[6:18:18] trigger that but unless there is

[6:18:19] some sort of trigger that that

[6:18:22] would make it ineligible it

[6:18:24] would ordinarily stay eligible

[6:18:28] for that exemption or or the

[6:18:30] reduction in property. but

[6:18:31] that is I think going to be

[6:18:33] dependent on what the exemption

[6:18:35] or the reduction is one of the

[6:18:37] other things that I will note

[6:18:39] and this goes back to the the

[6:18:41] legislation that you previously

[6:18:43] had brought on the reset of

[6:18:45] the abatements the abatements

[6:18:47] are not specific to the taxpayer

[6:18:49] they're specific to the property

[6:18:51] as well. So if you sell a house

[6:18:54] yours and you let's say I

[6:18:55] bought a new house

[6:18:58] I would pay my tax bill

[6:18:59] assuming it's single family

[6:19:01] owner occupied and not my office

[6:19:03] it would my tax bill would be

[6:19:07] 3 % higher than the previous

[6:19:08] year what the previous owner

[6:19:10] paid so the tho those abatements

[6:19:12] stay with the property

[6:19:12] they're not specific to the

[6:19:13] taxpayer.

[6:19:19] thank you for your presentation

[6:19:22] so with that we'll close that

[6:19:23] presentation cause the only

[6:19:25] thing I can see is that you know

[6:19:27] I should take property tax out

[6:19:29] of any future abatement for

[6:19:30] economic development and put it

[6:19:30] back in the pot

[6:19:33] but anyway that's for another

[6:19:38] day so let's move to cause I

[6:19:39] need to move to the work session

[6:19:40] and then we'll come back to the

[6:19:43] year to date so let's move to

[6:19:44] agenda item number10 and do the

[6:19:45] work session

[6:19:50] believe madam chair the work

[6:19:51] sessions agenda item111

[6:19:54] yeah11

[6:19:58] and and madam Chairmi

[6:20:00] Nakamoto for the record I am up

[6:20:00] here as

[6:20:04] to answer any questions and

[6:20:06] to be a phone or friend if

[6:20:07] necessary haley Owens up in

[6:20:09] carson City will be managing the

[6:20:12] work session up from there so

[6:20:13] Miss Owens I'm going to turn it

[6:20:16] over to you for staff summary

[6:20:16] of item a one.

[6:20:21] you for the record Haley Owens

[6:20:22] deputy fiscal analyst with the

[6:20:24] fiscal analysis division

[6:20:25] before jumping to item A one I

[6:20:26] do have a little bit of

[6:20:28] boilerplate language to read

[6:20:30] a reminder before I go through

[6:20:31] the work session document as

[6:20:33] nonpartisan legislative staff we

[6:20:34] as staff to this committee do

[6:20:36] neither support nor oppose any

[6:20:38] proposal or recommendation that

[6:20:39] comes before the legislature and

[6:20:40] this committee.

[6:20:43] the work session document can be

[6:20:44] accessed online as an exhibit on

[6:20:45] the joint interim standing

[6:20:47] Committee on revenue meetinget

[6:20:48] page on the legislature's

[6:20:50] website and committee members

[6:20:52] are also in possession of paper

[6:20:52] copies of the work session

[6:20:53] document.

[6:20:55] the purpose of the work session

[6:20:56] document is to assist the

[6:20:58] committee in deciding which

[6:21:00] legislative measures and actions

[6:21:01] it will request for

[6:21:03] consideration during the 2027

[6:21:04] legislative session

[6:21:09] pursuant to NrS218d.160, the

[6:21:10] committee is limited to10

[6:21:12] legislative measures which

[6:21:13] includes both bill draft

[6:21:15] requests and requests for the

[6:21:16] drafting of resolutions.

[6:21:19] today's work session includes8

[6:21:21] items for consideration the

[6:21:22] items consist of recommendations

[6:21:24] submitted by the chair or

[6:21:26] committee members and that the

[6:21:26] chair wishes to bring forward

[6:21:27] for consideration

[6:21:30] the members of the committee do

[6:21:31] not have to support or oppose

[6:21:32] the recommendations in the work

[6:21:34] session document the document

[6:21:36] organizes the recommendations

[6:21:37] such that committee members can

[6:21:39] review them and decide whether

[6:21:41] they wish to accept, reject,

[6:21:43] modify or take no action on

[6:21:44] them. so with that I will begin

[6:21:46] with the first item on the work

[6:21:46] session document

[6:21:49] the first item for consideration

[6:21:51] before the committee is item A

[6:21:52] one concerning economic

[6:21:54] development and tax incentives.

[6:21:56] The proposal is to request the

[6:21:58] drafting of a bill to repeal the

[6:22:02] provisions of nrs360.754

[6:22:03] allowing for the partial

[6:22:04] abatement of certain taxes

[6:22:06] imposed on new or expanded data

[6:22:08] centers and to enact a

[6:22:10] moratorium on the creation or

[6:22:12] expansion of any data centers in

[6:22:12] the state.

[6:22:15] this recommendation is proposed

[6:22:16] by senator neal chair of this

[6:22:16] committee.

[6:22:22] thank you Missowwens members are

[6:22:23] there any questions on a one?

[6:22:28] so similar remember cole

[6:22:34] thank you so much chair madam

[6:22:35] chairir I want to ask

[6:22:37] specifically about the abatement

[6:22:38] discretion piece because I think

[6:22:41] it's relative context for the

[6:22:42] recommendation since I'm new

[6:22:43] to this committee and revenue

[6:22:45] discussions generally I just

[6:22:46] would appreciate the the

[6:22:48] assistance here as I

[6:22:50] understand it during the 2025

[6:22:52] regular session your committee

[6:22:55] considered SB461 which would

[6:22:56] have given the boardard of

[6:22:57] Economic Development discretion

[6:22:59] to limit, reduce or deny

[6:23:00] abatements for projects based on

[6:23:00] water

[6:23:03] use environmental impact and

[6:23:05] other factors that bill never

[6:23:07] came up for committee votes and

[6:23:08] did not move forward but a few

[6:23:10] months later that same kind of

[6:23:11] discretionary authority letting

[6:23:14] the board deny reduce or

[6:23:15] condition an abatement when s

[6:23:17] when the full amount is not in

[6:23:18] the state's best interest pass

[6:23:21] the senate as part of AB594

[6:23:22] unanimously 21 to 0 and was

[6:23:22] signed into law.

[6:23:24] so

[6:23:25] I guess my question is the

[6:23:27] legislature already gave the

[6:23:29] board a case by case tool less

[6:23:31] than a year ago and I'm trying

[6:23:32] to understand why the

[6:23:33] discretionary review

[6:23:35] that currently exists is not

[6:23:37] sufficient and a full moratorium

[6:23:39] is the better path instead so

[6:23:41] thank you for that question so

[6:23:43] you have not been a member of

[6:23:46] this committee but we did have a

[6:23:48] very specific conversation with

[6:23:49] goed and Mr Burns in this

[6:23:51] committee I don't know a couple

[6:23:53] months ago where I asked the

[6:23:56] direct question on what we were

[6:23:59] doing around that provision in

[6:24:01] law that basically said they

[6:24:03] needed to look at water usage

[6:24:05] which is permissive language

[6:24:08] and that I also asked what was

[6:24:11] considered within the abatement

[6:24:12] and what was

[6:24:14] the data centers specifically

[6:24:14] abating

[6:24:17] and in that conversation and in

[6:24:19] that record he specifically

[6:24:20] stated that the personal

[6:24:23] property that was being

[6:24:25] abated is the actual

[6:24:31] I guess GPU or the data center

[6:24:34] component itself that goes into

[6:24:37] the facility so which opened

[6:24:38] the door to the question of

[6:24:40] we're abating the actual thing

[6:24:42] that they're making profit on

[6:24:43] right? so that was brought up in

[6:24:45] that committee hearing that we

[6:24:48] had had where we had goed come

[6:24:49] in and do a discussion around

[6:24:50] the abatement.

[6:24:51] so

[6:24:55] this particular item a one is

[6:24:56] because when if you've been

[6:24:57] paying attention to the news

[6:24:58] number one these are

[6:25:02] billionaire investments

[6:25:06] and there is no actual need for

[6:25:09] them to continue to have a

[6:25:12] partial abatement of taxes for a

[6:25:12] data center that they can afford

[6:25:15] to pay for themselves number one

[6:25:19] to the moratorium has the focus

[6:25:21] to create a number one a pause

[6:25:23] on the creation of expansion of

[6:25:26] data centers we are in a

[6:25:28] particular state in Nevada or

[6:25:29] was put on the record that we

[6:25:32] are currently66 in the state of

[6:25:35] Nevada we have 22 that were in

[6:25:37] potential contract or could

[6:25:39] come online right? we've had

[6:25:41] consistent conversations across

[6:25:44] the state of Nevada from Boulder

[6:25:45] City toye County

[6:25:49] talking about actually in

[6:25:51] henderson too talking about

[6:25:53] moratoriums and talking about

[6:25:55] putting a pause until we could

[6:25:58] examine number one the impact

[6:25:59] around natural resources right?

[6:26:03] waterter although information

[6:26:04] was put in the record

[6:26:09] saying that certain data centers

[6:26:11] have adapted different qualities

[6:26:14] where they are using less

[6:26:15] water that is not all right if

[6:26:16] you

[6:26:18] are familiar with the growth and

[6:26:19] infrastructure hearing that

[6:26:21] happened when Howard assemblyman

[6:26:23] Howard Watts was the chair where

[6:26:25] there was information put out

[6:26:27] there around legacy data centers

[6:26:28] and how much water usage they

[6:26:31] are actually using it was

[6:26:32] significant and substantial.

[6:26:35] wa ter is not something we can

[6:26:36] get back.

[6:26:38] it is not something that we can

[6:26:40] recreate. It is also popping up

[6:26:42] as a constant conversation now

[6:26:43] that the new allocation on the

[6:26:47] Colorado river is71% less than

[6:26:49] the allocation that we currently

[6:26:51] had in the Colorado river. I

[6:26:53] think it's time to start having

[6:26:55] a conversation about how we're

[6:26:56] number one going to protect

[6:26:59] Nevada resources. there is also

[6:27:00] data and information that's been

[6:27:01] put out in various different

[6:27:04] circumstances where even on the

[6:27:05] electricity side it is not

[6:27:08] just electricity but it is

[6:27:09] electricity and water because

[6:27:11] there is some water usage

[6:27:12] associated with electricity

[6:27:16] I think placing a moratorium

[6:27:17] and trying to slow down

[6:27:19] the impact

[6:27:24] to nevada to nevada citizens is

[6:27:24] not only appropriate but needed.

[6:27:28] if you look across the

[6:27:32] landscape of this country we

[6:27:34] are not the only state that is

[6:27:37] considering or has put on an

[6:27:38] agenda a moratorium. it is not

[6:27:39] new

[6:27:42] it is a conversation where the

[6:27:45] hyper scale data centers that

[6:27:47] are being produced as size of

[6:27:48] football fields are

[6:27:53] something worth a discussion not

[6:27:54] only for you know what has been

[6:27:55] various remarks around what's

[6:28:01] potential pollution also I

[6:28:03] have at some point and it's not

[6:28:05] the total point that I've

[6:28:07] depended on but I have reviewed

[6:28:09] the DrI study which was

[6:28:11] challenged by the data centers

[6:28:13] to say oh you know that wasn't

[6:28:14] necessarily good research and I

[6:28:17] and I rebuffed that comment

[6:28:18] because I was just like if if

[6:28:19] we're at the stage where we're

[6:28:20] now trying to say that a

[6:28:23] publicly funded research

[6:28:24] institution in the state of

[6:28:25] Nevada is putting out bad

[6:28:28] research therefore I take issue

[6:28:31] right with that multiple times

[6:28:33] cuz I had several comments

[6:28:35] after I had that meeting saying

[6:28:37] that DrI study you know there

[6:28:39] wasn't the best study they

[6:28:40] didn't do a lot of the you know

[6:28:42] appropriate information and I

[6:28:43] was like so now we're downing

[6:28:44] the scientists who actually

[6:28:45] earned a degree

[6:28:48] and have successfully been

[6:28:50] the research institute in the in

[6:28:50] the state

[6:28:52] so I as a chair

[6:28:56] and putting this forward because

[6:28:59] Ii want a pause and I believe

[6:29:01] it's inappropriate because of

[6:29:03] the political sentiment that's

[6:29:05] been going on and the research

[6:29:06] that's been going on

[6:29:09] I'm not adding any anymore to

[6:29:11] that because I've been very

[6:29:12] careful about putting certain

[6:29:14] things on the record just

[6:29:17] because I'm not trying to

[6:29:19] give the data centers and

[6:29:20] edge upp

[6:29:22] on what I think is my

[6:29:23] potential research and

[6:29:26] commentary that might be used

[6:29:26] for the legislative session

[6:29:29] I have actually been asked

[6:29:34] what have I read and I was

[6:29:35] just like why should I share

[6:29:38] every single research document

[6:29:40] that I've read when literally

[6:29:40] you can google it

[6:29:44] so every piece of information

[6:29:45] that's out there on data centers

[6:29:48] is publicly available

[6:29:51] negative positive or otherwise.

[6:29:53] I know people feel that you know

[6:29:55] AI has been a positive but it's

[6:29:58] also has some negative and the

[6:30:00] data centers that are producing

[6:30:02] this technology I think we need

[6:30:04] to put a pause and we need to

[6:30:06] have a conversation around what

[6:30:07] is best for Nevada.

[6:30:10] are our natural resources being

[6:30:10] impacted

[6:30:13] I think the issue that's

[6:30:16] happened at rick is a is a

[6:30:18] big mental note I think the

[6:30:19] issue that's happened at Boulder

[6:30:22] City where data centers put

[6:30:23] on federal land completely

[6:30:25] ignoring what the Boulder

[6:30:26] cityity chose or what they

[6:30:26] wanted to do

[6:30:29] it's also something that we need

[6:30:31] to be examining because as a

[6:30:32] state we need to be centered

[6:30:33] around

[6:30:38] what is best and good for the

[6:30:39] survival

[6:30:40] of our people

[6:30:44] and on my final statement will

[6:30:46] be that the statement that I've

[6:30:49] made publicly is to allow one

[6:30:53] business client in this state to

[6:30:55] use all of the resources or

[6:30:59] maximize the use of natural

[6:31:00] resources such as water and to

[6:31:03] leave nothing in spa in in the

[6:31:05] space for another business

[6:31:06] client it's actually not

[6:31:07] economic development it actually

[6:31:09] is the reverse of economic

[6:31:11] development because I think the

[6:31:12] question that we should be

[6:31:13] asking

[6:31:14] ourselves is if the next client

[6:31:17] comes and they need water right

[6:31:19] and let's say that there that

[6:31:21] you know we're wrong on this

[6:31:24] water allocation on what they

[6:31:25] claim their water allocation is

[6:31:28] and it actually is in excess of

[6:31:29] what we're able to identify.

[6:31:33] then what does that tell us that

[6:31:35] the next business client that

[6:31:36] comes to the state of Nevada

[6:31:37] should have available to them

[6:31:40] should their actions to come in

[6:31:42] and diversify the economic

[6:31:44] status of Nevada be different

[6:31:45] because now all of a sudden

[6:31:46] we're saying there is no water

[6:31:50] there's no more water in the

[6:31:52] Colorado river for us to get and

[6:31:53] therefore changing thy dynamic

[6:31:56] and I think for myself these are

[6:31:59] my opinions that we are

[6:32:00] moving in a direction that we

[6:32:03] need to put a pause and think

[6:32:05] clearly about the generation

[6:32:06] that comes behind us the

[6:32:08] generation that will be the eth

[6:32:10] generation that comes behind us

[6:32:12] and making sure that we have

[6:32:13] enough resources to sustain

[6:32:16] Nevada and Nevadans and so that

[6:32:16] is my

[6:32:17] opinion and those are my

[6:32:18] comments

[6:32:20] I don't know if that helps you

[6:32:25] thank you and that was a very

[6:32:26] robust answer and I appreciate

[6:32:28] that very much and and your

[6:32:30] passion for the issues if I

[6:32:33] may just a quick followup

[6:32:35] regarding specifically the goed

[6:32:37] piece I think what I heard you

[6:32:38] say is that it's permissive

[6:32:40] language is essentially what was

[6:32:41] passed and that your concern is

[6:32:44] is that goed can but is not

[6:32:46] necessarily mandating those

[6:32:48] reductions in abatements based

[6:32:50] on the issues that we just

[6:32:52] discussed yes so we had a full

[6:32:52] conversation

[6:32:54] or

[6:32:57] I won't say it was pretty full

[6:32:58] with a director Burns on

[6:33:04] whether or not we were actively

[6:33:06] using that provision in law.

[6:33:09] to make sure that

[6:33:12] the

[6:33:17] provision on water impact was

[6:33:19] being mitigated by goed. I know

[6:33:21] one of my direct questions and

[6:33:22] it I don't know if our minutes

[6:33:24] are available was if that was

[6:33:26] the case then how was it that

[6:33:28] legacy centers were

[6:33:29] grandfathered in to continue to

[6:33:31] use the level of water that they

[6:33:33] were using because if that was

[6:33:35] the case the statute should have

[6:33:36] prevented the grandfathering in

[6:33:40] of that water usage and then

[6:33:42] there was a pivot in the

[6:33:44] conversation where director

[6:33:45] Bynes said you should ask the

[6:33:47] southern Nevada water Authority

[6:33:49] how they were grandfathered in

[6:33:50] and then the conversation end

[6:33:53] Thank you I appreciate that nu

[6:33:59] Butembliment packard

[6:34:00] hatchet

[6:34:04] thank you madam chairir yessy

[6:34:05] and patchett and I'm way newer

[6:34:08] than assembly member cole so

[6:34:08] bear with me

[6:34:13] given that you know my

[6:34:15] question is really surrounded by

[6:34:16] kind of the topic of the day

[6:34:18] earlier on in the day regarding

[6:34:19] the kind of federalism the

[6:34:22] concept of local control and so

[6:34:24] you're listed off at several

[6:34:25] issues that you have with data

[6:34:27] centers and you know I'm not

[6:34:28] here to debate whether or not

[6:34:29] those are valid or or otherwise

[6:34:30] however

[6:34:33] currently the the undernevada

[6:34:36] law there's broad authority

[6:34:39] given to to cities and counties

[6:34:40] to

[6:34:42] regulate and and

[6:34:47] really enforce land use and

[6:34:48] development within their

[6:34:48] jurisdictions

[6:34:53] that being the case what problem

[6:34:54] outside of those listed and it

[6:34:55] can be handled by a local

[6:34:57] jurisdiction would be solved by

[6:35:00] having a statewide moratorium

[6:35:00] imposed

[6:35:06] so let me try to figure out the

[6:35:07] first part. so the first part

[6:35:09] you're saying that the cities

[6:35:12] or counties have direct control

[6:35:14] over their land usage so

[6:35:16] therefore are you saying the

[6:35:16] state has no role to dictate?

[6:35:19] no what'm what I'm saying is

[6:35:21] under state law currently local

[6:35:23] jurisdictions or local

[6:35:25] governments do have broad

[6:35:27] authority to regulate the land

[6:35:28] use and development within their

[6:35:29] jurisdictions

[6:35:32] we have a case currently where a

[6:35:34] moratorium been imposed by a

[6:35:36] municipality that being the city

[6:35:36] of henderson

[6:35:38] to address some of the issues

[6:35:39] that you've raised

[6:35:43] right so outside of the

[6:35:45] issues that you've raised what

[6:35:47] what problem would a statewide

[6:35:50] mor moratorium resolve versus

[6:35:51] what a local jurisdiction can

[6:35:53] can basically handle on their

[6:35:54] own

[6:35:56] so thank you for the question so

[6:35:59] so first I thought Henderson put

[6:36:01] it on the agenda but it didn't

[6:36:03] pass so maybe I'm ri wrong about

[6:36:05] that but I thought they put it

[6:36:06] up and then it they didn't move

[6:36:07] forward and they decided to do

[6:36:10] some local reg and have a

[6:36:10] conversationny county

[6:36:12] is the only one that actually

[6:36:13] has done the moratorium

[6:36:17] so what I think would is

[6:36:19] appropriate right is because

[6:36:21] number one a local governments

[6:36:23] and cities are still creatures

[6:36:25] of the state. I don't believe we

[6:36:27] relinquished control over

[6:36:29] whether or not what a city and a

[6:36:31] county and what the state can

[6:36:34] tell a city or county to do so

[6:36:35] in this case right

[6:36:38] it is the state acting on behalf

[6:36:40] because of the spotty you know

[6:36:43] movement between you know the

[6:36:45] henderson council that took

[6:36:47] it up Nny County I believe took

[6:36:49] it up twice ending with a

[6:36:51] moratorium boulder cityity

[6:36:53] wanting to do something that the

[6:36:56] state is is stepping in because

[6:36:57] under you know just believing

[6:36:59] for public policy purposes and

[6:37:03] using our power to number one

[6:37:04] police data centers too

[6:37:07] go and try to make sure that

[6:37:10] there are legitimate concerns

[6:37:14] and conflicts that are being

[6:37:15] mitigated at the state level in

[6:37:18] one shot right? so when the

[6:37:19] state steps in it kind of sets

[6:37:21] the standard of what will be

[6:37:22] right rather than what

[6:37:26] are have been the local fights

[6:37:29] or one offs I think this is

[6:37:32] an issue that has been lifted up

[6:37:33] enough in terms of public

[6:37:36] opinion in terms of issues

[6:37:39] related to water resources in

[6:37:40] terms of issues related to the

[6:37:42] se1% reduction on the Colorado

[6:37:43] River

[6:37:46] that the state should take a

[6:37:48] good look there's also been very

[6:37:49] distinct conversations around

[6:37:52] when they've talked about the

[6:37:55] water usage and the NDA's that

[6:37:58] are now following the water

[6:38:01] usage that is put within the

[6:38:05] I guess the I don't know if it's

[6:38:06] the state and local contracts

[6:38:08] which is just not here but other

[6:38:11] places where a nondisclosure is

[6:38:12] being put up for the allocation

[6:38:13] so what's been a common theme

[6:38:16] nationally has been that they'll

[6:38:19] go in put in their agenda item

[6:38:20] they'll say what their

[6:38:22] allocation they think their

[6:38:23] allocation is going to be or

[6:38:24] what they believe that their

[6:38:27] usage is going to be and then

[6:38:29] when when there's an NDA

[6:38:31] associated with the actual usage

[6:38:32] at the end

[6:38:35] and then there is a foyer

[6:38:36] request that is then denied

[6:38:36] right

[6:38:40] and so so you could really

[6:38:42] ascertain did you say you're

[6:38:45] gonna use325,000 gallons of

[6:38:47] water and then was the end

[6:38:49] result450,000 gallons of water.

[6:38:51] there's been a constant

[6:38:53] discussion nationally on whether

[6:38:55] or not you know different states

[6:38:56] could get that information

[6:38:58] achieve that information we

[6:38:59] don't want that to happen in

[6:39:03] Nevada. we also don't want a

[6:39:04] situation where we don't have

[6:39:06] any kind of say or control if

[6:39:07] you've looked

[6:39:11] inor I believe it's inor where

[6:39:14] they have they've gotten

[6:39:19] water rights then they sued over

[6:39:22] when the when the city

[6:39:23] basically was saying you've used

[6:39:25] too much right and then they're

[6:39:27] suing to continue to use it.

[6:39:29] we're not in a position to be

[6:39:32] sued and then for somebody to

[6:39:33] say I would like to get more of

[6:39:34] the water allocation that we do

[6:39:35] not have.

[6:39:38] and so at some point I really

[6:39:38] feel that

[6:39:41] in fairness and balance we

[6:39:43] should be having a conversation

[6:39:45] about what are the needs of the

[6:39:47] 3 million Nevadans in the state

[6:39:50] in terms of water and the impact

[6:39:51] of the data centers and what

[6:39:53] they are having on this

[6:39:55] particular issue of the water

[6:39:56] allocation.

[6:39:58] the second another point I'll

[6:39:59] make is that when I was sitting

[6:40:00] with the southernnevada water

[6:40:02] authoruthority I said well let's

[6:40:03] say

[6:40:07] are the grandfather legacy

[6:40:08] centers planning on reducing

[6:40:09] their allocation of water which

[6:40:11] is substantial if you go back

[6:40:12] and look at the growth and

[6:40:13] infrastructure record and what

[6:40:15] was said to me was like well

[6:40:16] yeah they are planning on

[6:40:21] changing their water usage

[6:40:22] but they're going to do it

[6:40:22] over10 years.

[6:40:22] well

[6:40:27] 10 years from now we could be in

[6:40:28] a totally different water

[6:40:28] situation

[6:40:32] so why did first of all that

[6:40:34] gave an alarm for me that

[6:40:36] someone would get10 years to

[6:40:38] continue to use that amount of

[6:40:41] water with no change knowing

[6:40:44] that we're not only in a drought

[6:40:47] but we're actually experiencing

[6:40:49] not enough water that is

[6:40:51] actually sustainable to even

[6:40:53] potentially on the third intake

[6:40:55] to keep the dam moving so I'm

[6:40:57] moving on this because I believe

[6:40:58] it's in the best public policy

[6:41:02] interests of3 million Nevadans

[6:41:03] to have a conversation about

[6:41:06] water to have a conversation

[6:41:08] about electricity to have a

[6:41:09] conversation about

[6:41:11] future generations and what they

[6:41:14] should actually have the benefit

[6:41:16] and the use of which is water

[6:41:18] coming through their pipes in

[6:41:19] nevada.

[6:41:24] Thank you madam Chair I

[6:41:26] appreciate the the response and

[6:41:27] just clarification for my

[6:41:28] understanding and

[6:41:31] I did misspeak and apologize for

[6:41:32] that thanks for correcting the

[6:41:33] record that it wasn't the city

[6:41:34] of henderson. I was aware there

[6:41:37] was a municipality but obviously

[6:41:38] misspoken. I apologize for

[6:41:40] that.gain thank you for the

[6:41:41] response and no further

[6:41:42] questions thank you

[6:41:45] does anybody else have any

[6:41:46] comments?

[6:41:51] OK so I know this is this is a

[6:41:52] contentious item. I mean

[6:41:54] everybody you know we're all

[6:41:55] freely elected members you vote

[6:41:56] your conscience do what you got

[6:41:57] to do.

[6:41:59] right so I will entertain a

[6:42:01] motion for the bill to be

[6:42:04] drafted which is a one on data

[6:42:05] centers.

[6:42:05] do you have a

[6:42:12] are you my so so but first from

[6:42:14] senator Deatete of a second from

[6:42:16] assembly men to silva is there

[6:42:17] any discussion on the motion?

[6:42:21] so I have a comment from senator

[6:42:23] Deatete are there other comments

[6:42:24] yes from assembly member Cole

[6:42:29] so senator Deatio thank you

[6:42:31] madam thank you madam chair just

[6:42:32] wanted to make a few comments on

[6:42:33] the record of course before this

[6:42:34] vote

[6:42:37] obviously I think throughout

[6:42:39] this interim I think our

[6:42:40] constituents have asked us

[6:42:41] repeatedly to tackle this issue

[6:42:43] and so I commend your leadership

[6:42:45] in at least trying to solve and

[6:42:46] address it

[6:42:49] I think in the conversations

[6:42:51] that we've had both offline

[6:42:54] and and in this committee I

[6:42:56] mean it's clear that there's

[6:42:56] this infrastructure is growing

[6:42:57] this is becoming a national

[6:43:00] trend within our country the

[6:43:02] need for compu the need for

[6:43:04] compute and the race for

[6:43:06] artificial intelligence is

[6:43:08] becoming more prevalent. how I

[6:43:10] you know at the same time I

[6:43:11] for one am very worried about

[6:43:14] the about foreign influence

[6:43:15] and the conversion and expansion

[6:43:16] of foreign owned assets

[6:43:18] that utilize our natural

[6:43:20] resources there have been cases

[6:43:23] here in Nevada that have used

[6:43:25] or have converted crypto

[6:43:26] mining facilities now to become

[6:43:29] data centers and so I think

[6:43:31] that there are obviously cases

[6:43:33] in companies including Switch

[6:43:34] andensorwave that are leading

[6:43:37] the way in how we can really

[6:43:38] make this a really a better

[6:43:41] efficient ecosystem and so my

[6:43:42] only comment is that for anyone

[6:43:44] that's watching all I would

[6:43:45] ask is that within the next

[6:43:46] couple of months

[6:43:47] for the industry partners

[6:43:50] to work alongside the

[6:43:51] legislators both on this

[6:43:54] committee and and beyond just

[6:43:55] because I think there could

[6:43:57] be a balance to protect

[6:43:59] consumers and both from a

[6:44:01] natural resources side both from

[6:44:03] the worker protections and

[6:44:04] making sure that right pairs

[6:44:05] don't have to subsidize

[6:44:07] especially given the

[6:44:09] increasing funds that are in in

[6:44:12] this moment so nonetheless I

[6:44:13] will be supporting today's

[6:44:14] measure and again thank you

[6:44:16] for your leadership given the

[6:44:17] national conversation that's

[6:44:18] happening around this

[6:44:18] conversation. you

[6:44:19] for that assembly memberm call

[6:44:25] thank you madam chairir. so I

[6:44:27] am unfortunately not able to

[6:44:28] support a moratorium on data

[6:44:30] center development or repealing

[6:44:34] NrS360.754 outright nevada's to

[6:44:35] me is positioned right now to

[6:44:37] win the lottery in one of the

[6:44:38] largest drivers of economic

[6:44:39] growth in the world

[6:44:41] and instead support a well

[6:44:43] crafted legislation piece of

[6:44:44] legislation directing local

[6:44:45] jurisdictions to negotiate

[6:44:47] development agreements and

[6:44:48] continuing the existing

[6:44:51] subsidies as long as we hold

[6:44:52] them to the highest standards on

[6:44:53] water conservation and grid

[6:44:55] buildout so these costs never

[6:44:57] land on repairs the governor's

[6:44:59] office has landed on that same

[6:45:01] side having signed the ratepayer

[6:45:03] protection pledge if a company

[6:45:04] wants to build here it brings

[6:45:05] its own power and water

[6:45:08] solutions the pucCN's ruleleine

[6:45:08] already requires large loads to

[6:45:09] fund their own

[6:45:11] infrastructure and this

[6:45:14] technology keeps improving and

[6:45:15] then at least in the southern

[6:45:16] Nevada area we have the S andWA

[6:45:17] moratorium on evaporative

[6:45:20] cooling which solves in large

[6:45:20] part the water issue

[6:45:23] and it's not just the

[6:45:24] governor's office it's also the

[6:45:26] Nevada state AfL CIO that

[6:45:27] unanimously just passed a

[6:45:29] resolution last week on data

[6:45:31] centers and I'll be honest as a

[6:45:32] Republican it isn't every day

[6:45:33] that I get to stand next to AFL

[6:45:36] CIO on an issue but the

[6:45:37] resolution asks for the same

[6:45:39] things no cost shifting under

[6:45:41] ratepayers community benefit

[6:45:42] agreements, water efficient

[6:45:43] technology suited to our desert

[6:45:46] climate so when laborbour in the

[6:45:47] governor's office agree on the

[6:45:49] guardrails that tells me we're

[6:45:50] closer to the right answer than

[6:45:50] a moratorium allows.

[6:45:53] Ne that already has strong

[6:45:55] statutory guard guardrails wage

[6:45:57] floors capital thresholds

[6:45:59] resident hiring rules and

[6:46:01] clawbacks. I'd rather modern

[6:46:02] modernize that framework and

[6:46:03] then shut the door on an

[6:46:05] industry already supporting tens

[6:46:07] of thousands of Nevada jobs and

[6:46:08] creating real revenue streams

[6:46:10] for our local jurisdictions. I

[6:46:11] would instead ask the committee

[6:46:13] to consider legislation along

[6:46:14] these lines instead of a

[6:46:14] moratorium

[6:46:18] thank you for that are there any

[6:46:19] additional comments from members

[6:46:26] OK uming none all in favor to

[6:46:28] say ii

[6:46:31] all opposed say nay

[6:46:35] so I have two nay which is

[6:46:37] assembly member cole and

[6:46:39] assembly member Patchett saying

[6:46:40] it right

[6:46:45] so the motion carries with

[6:46:46] the majority of the members

[6:46:48] thank you we will move to the

[6:46:51] next item which is and turn

[6:46:54] it over to a s a staff member

[6:46:56] Owens on summary of item A2.

[6:47:01] thank you chairir Haley Owens

[6:47:02] for the record. The second item

[6:47:03] in the work session document for

[6:47:05] consideration before the

[6:47:07] committee is item A2. the

[6:47:09] recommendation is to request the

[6:47:11] drafting of a bill to expand the

[6:47:15] provisions ofnrs360.753 which

[6:47:16] allows for the partial

[6:47:17] abatements of certain taxes

[6:47:19] imposed on aircraft components

[6:47:21] of aircraft and other personal

[6:47:22] property used for certain

[6:47:25] purposes related to aircraft to

[6:47:26] allow for the partial abatement

[6:47:27] of certain taxes imposed on

[6:47:28] certain eligible aerospace

[6:47:28] businesses.

[6:47:31] this recommendation is proposed

[6:47:33] by senator Donotte, member of

[6:47:34] this committee.

[6:47:41] thank you are there any

[6:47:42] questions on a

[6:47:47] Yeah you could senatorinate

[6:47:50] thank you madam chair just

[6:47:51] wanted to provide some context

[6:47:53] for this bill draft Nevada

[6:47:55] currently has in our existing

[6:47:56] statutes for some of the

[6:47:57] committee members we already

[6:47:58] have an aviation abatement

[6:48:00] program through the

[6:48:02] presentations that we've had

[6:48:03] over the interim it seems that

[6:48:04] this has been an underutilized

[6:48:06] asset and so what I'm seeking

[6:48:07] through this bill draft

[6:48:09] thanks to our chairs perhaps

[6:48:11] revising the definition of who

[6:48:14] qualifies most of the NrS

[6:48:15] definitions right now are

[6:48:16] specifically to components

[6:48:17] dealing with aircrafts and so

[6:48:18] all I'm seeking to do

[6:48:20] is to include aerospace or

[6:48:23] aeronautic components so that

[6:48:24] other companies that are already

[6:48:25] preexisting here can take use of

[6:48:28] it or if the committee

[6:48:30] decides later on to sunset it

[6:48:31] then that can also be an option

[6:48:32] but this would be the vehicle

[6:48:33] for us to start looking at it

[6:48:34] for the legislative session.

[6:48:38] OK. thank you for that. So after

[6:48:39] that explanation are there any

[6:48:40] questions or everybody's good as

[6:48:43] assembly member Anderson chair

[6:48:45] thank you so much for that that

[6:48:47] comment as well because I as

[6:48:49] some people know I have issues

[6:48:51] with abatements however the

[6:48:52] information that you just

[6:48:53] provided that there is also the

[6:48:54] possibility of

[6:48:56] pulling it back helped me out a

[6:48:57] lot with this, especially since

[6:48:59] this is only the drafting of the

[6:49:01] bill so I will support it this

[6:49:03] time but I just I really

[6:49:04] appreciate both our conversation

[6:49:06] last night and then also the

[6:49:06] clarification on the record

[6:49:07] today.

[6:49:08] thank you chairir.

[6:49:11] thank you for that right so

[6:49:14] entertain emotion on a 2 to be

[6:49:15] drafted

[6:49:17] so I have a first from

[6:49:19] assemblyman to silva

[6:49:24] second from senatorannyatete

[6:49:25] is there any discussion on the

[6:49:25] motion?

[6:49:27] seeing no discussion on the

[6:49:31] motion all in favor say aye aye

[6:49:32] any of all opposed say nay

[6:49:35] seeing no opposition the motion

[6:49:36] carries

[6:49:39] and it will be drafted a2

[6:49:42] will be drafted thank you. now

[6:49:44] we will move to the next item

[6:49:45] which is Miss Owens can you

[6:49:48] give a staff summary of item A3.

[6:49:51] Thank you Chair Haley Owens for

[6:49:52] the record

[6:49:54] the third item in the work

[6:49:55] session document is a

[6:49:57] recommendation to request the

[6:50:00] drafting of a bill to revise the

[6:50:01] total amount of transferable tax

[6:50:04] credits for affordable housing

[6:50:04] authorized pursuant to

[6:50:07] subsection one paragraph B of

[6:50:11] Nrs360.868 from40 million

[6:50:14] dollars to80 million dollars.

[6:50:15] The recommendation is based on

[6:50:16] the overview of thefoable

[6:50:18] housing tax credit programme

[6:50:19] given by the nevada housing

[6:50:20] division at the committee

[6:50:21] meeting on July8,2026.

[6:50:29] thank you for that so are

[6:50:30] there any questions on

[6:50:32] the housing tax credits

[6:50:37] so I just want to add on the

[6:50:39] record cause I believe Mr

[6:50:40] Nakamoto it had expired this

[6:50:41] past session or was going to

[6:50:42] expire.

[6:50:46] madam Chair Michael Nakamera

[6:50:48] with fiscal analysis division

[6:50:50] for the record based on the

[6:50:51] information that we have

[6:50:52] received from the housing

[6:50:54] division and what they presented

[6:50:56] at that meeting back in July

[6:50:58] they anticipate that they will

[6:51:01] be awarding the remainder of the

[6:51:03] credits from that original40

[6:51:04] million dollars time

[6:51:07] in the next either this

[6:51:10] fiscal year or in in the next

[6:51:11] year or two

[6:51:15] thank you for that and so I mean

[6:51:16] every this is I mean we're doing

[6:51:17] the housing tax credit and

[6:51:19] increasing it because housing is

[6:51:22] one of the top major issues the

[6:51:25] housing tax credit not only

[6:51:26] is doing the multifamily housing

[6:51:29] as you know this past

[6:51:30] legislative session the

[6:51:31] legislature and the governor

[6:51:35] moved to do also single family

[6:51:37] residencies and so it's very

[6:51:39] important to continue doing this

[6:51:41] program what we talked about

[6:51:43] which will be the goal of any

[6:51:45] future legislature is that after

[6:51:48] the tax credits fall off in

[6:51:50] other programs then we'll be

[6:51:52] able to hopefully add into the

[6:51:55] housing tax credit program to

[6:51:56] continue to build housing

[6:52:00] across Nevada which is a very

[6:52:02] important and lofty goal that we

[6:52:03] would like to continue and so

[6:52:04] with that

[6:52:07] I will entertain a motion

[6:52:11] to have a three drafted

[6:52:14] so have a first from assemblyman

[6:52:15] de Silva I have a second from

[6:52:18] Senator Deatete are there any

[6:52:19] discussion on the motion?

[6:52:21] seeing no discussion on the

[6:52:23] motion all in favor say aye

[6:52:26] all of pope is there any

[6:52:26] opposition sayy nay

[6:52:29] seeing no opposition the motion

[6:52:32] carries thank you we will now

[6:52:34] move to the next item which is

[6:52:37] staff summary item A3 so Miss

[6:52:38] Owens you're up

[6:52:42] thank you chairir Haley Owens

[6:52:44] for the record and I will be

[6:52:44] moving on to the fourth a three

[6:52:48] correct thank you chair

[6:52:51] the fourth item in the work

[6:52:52] session document and the final

[6:52:53] item under the economic

[6:52:55] development and tax incentives

[6:52:57] heading is item A4 the

[6:52:59] recommendation is to request the

[6:53:00] drafting of a bill to encourage

[6:53:01] and promote economic development

[6:53:03] in counties whose population is

[6:53:07] less than700,000 beyond what is

[6:53:08] already available under current

[6:53:08] law.

[6:53:11] the proposed bill may include

[6:53:12] specific items relating to the

[6:53:13] expansion of housing

[6:53:15] availability and affordability,

[6:53:17] particularly in rural areas of

[6:53:19] the state as well as other

[6:53:20] topics relating to economic

[6:53:21] development in these counties at

[6:53:22] the discretion of the chair.

[6:53:25] this recommendation is based on

[6:53:27] information presented during the

[6:53:28] May13,2026 committee meeting.

[6:53:35] thank you for that so just to

[6:53:36] give a little bit of further

[6:53:39] background we on May132026 we

[6:53:41] had several rural counties

[6:53:43] come and present to this body

[6:53:47] around their economic

[6:53:50] development needs it is I am

[6:53:55] focused on trying to figure

[6:53:57] out how to create number one

[6:53:59] remove the barriers to create

[6:54:02] moderate economies in rural

[6:54:04] counties that can sustain

[6:54:05] that so that we can have

[6:54:09] a statewide economic development

[6:54:13] that will serve the needs of

[6:54:15] as we heard earlier lifting all

[6:54:19] boats because we have

[6:54:21] typically focused on our larger

[6:54:24] counties and I feel that we

[6:54:27] needed to do a some pivoting to

[6:54:29] focus on some of our smaller

[6:54:32] rural counties that are want

[6:54:33] to do some more economic

[6:54:35] development and try to think

[6:54:36] through what is the

[6:54:38] proper framework in order to

[6:54:38] establish

[6:54:42] giving them more of a leg up

[6:54:45] and a different focus than just

[6:54:46] focusing on one of our larger

[6:54:47] counties such as Clark and

[6:54:48] washoe.

[6:54:50] so with that I will

[6:54:54] entertain emotion to draft a for

[6:54:59] so have a first from assemblyman

[6:55:01] to silva second from senator

[6:55:03] Deatete as there any discussion

[6:55:04] on the motion?

[6:55:06] Si member cole

[6:55:10] thank you chair. I very much

[6:55:11] appreciate this bill I actually

[6:55:13] brought some things semisimilar

[6:55:15] to it last session and it didn't

[6:55:17] go anywhere dies and dies in

[6:55:19] ways and means right but I

[6:55:21] would be happy to work with you

[6:55:22] on this if you would be willing

[6:55:24] and and would love assistance

[6:55:24] thank you

[6:55:28] yeah that's thank you for

[6:55:30] that of offer. I'm a domineering

[6:55:32] personality or can you handle it

[6:55:33] no I'm sorry

[6:55:37] ok no all right

[6:55:42] with that all in favor sayi.

[6:55:44] any oppo opposition

[6:55:49] oh from mascca so seeing no

[6:55:51] opposition the motion carries to

[6:55:52] draft a for

[6:55:57] thank you so now we will move to

[6:55:58] be

[6:56:01] this is B5 Miss Owens.

[6:56:05] thank you chairirhaleyowwens for

[6:56:06] the record. The fifth item in

[6:56:07] the work session document is

[6:56:09] item B5 under the excise tax

[6:56:11] policy heading the the

[6:56:13] recommendation is to request the

[6:56:15] drafting of a bill to expand the

[6:56:17] tax on live entertainment and

[6:56:19] posts pursuant to chapter368a of

[6:56:21] the Nevadarevised statutes to

[6:56:23] include the resale other than an

[6:56:25] occasional sale of admission to

[6:56:26] a live entertainment event by a

[6:56:27] reseller.

[6:56:29] this recommendation is proposed

[6:56:31] by senator Neal, chair of this

[6:56:33] committee, based on discussion

[6:56:34] of the live entertainment tax at

[6:56:35] the committee meeting on

[6:56:36] February11,2026.

[6:56:39] the proposed recommendation is

[6:56:40] similar to the provisions of

[6:56:43] senate bill444 of the2023

[6:56:44] legislative session and Senate

[6:56:46] Bill431 of the2025 legislative

[6:56:47] session.

[6:56:51] thank you for that and so for

[6:56:53] members that are not familiar

[6:56:56] with this I've I've well

[6:56:57] there's been several iterations

[6:57:01] so this is not taxing the sports

[6:57:03] team so you can throw that out

[6:57:05] this is actually the resale

[6:57:07] market of tickets which we know

[6:57:09] is actively happening if you

[6:57:13] guys are familiar uhicketmaster

[6:57:14] was

[6:57:17] sued because they were also

[6:57:19] playing the the regular

[6:57:21] market and the secondary market

[6:57:25] and selling tickets the way

[6:57:27] that this provision would work

[6:57:29] is that it's a tax on the delta

[6:57:31] so just to give an example so if

[6:57:32] the ticket is100

[6:57:35] and then it is resold for400,

[6:57:38] the taxes on the delta which is

[6:57:40] the300 dollars difference

[6:57:41] between the100 dollars that the

[6:57:44] original ticket was sold and the

[6:57:47] secondary market which then

[6:57:49] sells it in the provision in the

[6:57:51] bill that we had before because

[6:57:52] this may come up we did deal

[6:57:55] with the gaming provisions

[6:57:57] because for a long time gaming

[6:58:00] has had a ticket sales and you

[6:58:01] know the people who come on the

[6:58:02] street and like would you like

[6:58:05] do a ticket to just circle Sole

[6:58:07] or whatever so we dealt with

[6:58:09] that in the provisions of the

[6:58:11] bill so that we would not be

[6:58:14] impacting that market. I also in

[6:58:17] the 2025 bill I had would had

[6:58:19] put in their portion because at

[6:58:20] the time we were trying to

[6:58:22] figure out how to pay for a

[6:58:24] public transit or at least allow

[6:58:26] a portion of the money to go to

[6:58:28] public transit also a portion of

[6:58:28] LET goes for the arts

[6:58:32] they currently have had an

[6:58:35] allocation that goes to the arts

[6:58:36] community for a really long time

[6:58:38] so just want to give that

[6:58:38] background

[6:58:42] if there were any questions on

[6:58:45] you know what this could be or

[6:58:47] what this may be in a bill draft

[6:58:48] form.

[6:58:49] are there any questions

[6:58:56] OK so I would

[6:58:59] entertain a motion for the bill

[6:59:02] to be drafted for B5 on

[6:59:05] so have a first from assembly

[6:59:07] men to silva second from Senator

[6:59:09] Deatete is there any discussion

[6:59:10] on the motion?

[6:59:13] seeing no discussion on the

[6:59:15] motion all in favor say aye

[6:59:17] any opposition

[6:59:21] so I have two in opposition

[6:59:23] assembly member cole and

[6:59:24] assembly member Patchettha

[6:59:27] you're gonna have that like all

[6:59:30] session I mean like pronounce

[6:59:33] all syllables right so the

[6:59:35] motion carries with the majority

[6:59:37] thank you we will move to the

[6:59:39] next item which is staff summary

[6:59:40] B6

[6:59:42] staff member Owens

[6:59:45] thank you chairir Haley Owens

[6:59:48] for the record. The6th item for

[6:59:49] consideration before the

[6:59:50] committee is item B6. The

[6:59:52] recommendation is to request the

[6:59:54] drafting of a bill providing for

[6:59:56] the imposition administration

[6:59:58] collection and enforcement of

[6:59:59] attacks on certain digital

[7:00:01] products electronically

[7:00:02] transferred to a purchaser

[7:00:03] including certain digital

[7:00:04] subscriptions in similar

[7:00:04] services.

[7:00:07] this recommendation is proposed

[7:00:09] by Senator Neal, chair of this

[7:00:10] committee based on the

[7:00:12] discussion of the taxation of

[7:00:13] digital goods at the committee

[7:00:16] meeting on April1,2026. The

[7:00:17] proposed recommendation is

[7:00:18] similar to the provisions of

[7:00:20] senate bill392 of the2025

[7:00:21] legislative session.

[7:00:26] thank you for that Miss Owens so

[7:00:28] just backdrop I've been had this

[7:00:31] bill since 2019. actually my

[7:00:33] first time doing it was at the

[7:00:34] same time I was doing

[7:00:36] marketplace facilitator trying

[7:00:39] to bring in amazon which

[7:00:40] folks weren't ready for the

[7:00:41] digital goods conversation in

[7:00:43] 2019 but thank god they were

[7:00:44] ready for marketplace

[7:00:46] facilitator because it passed

[7:00:48] and it saved us when covid

[7:00:48] hit

[7:00:53] so this particular piece is a

[7:00:56] modernization of sales tax we've

[7:00:57] had a series of conversations

[7:01:00] with streamline which issuda

[7:01:03] and how we're trying to move

[7:01:06] our sales tax base into the

[7:01:07] current century

[7:01:12] products have changed you are no

[7:01:13] longer as we've done

[7:01:15] presentations assembly member

[7:01:18] Anderson and I in 25 session

[7:01:19] you're no longer if you could be

[7:01:23] right buying DVDs but if

[7:01:26] you are thank you but if

[7:01:27] you're not and you're streaming

[7:01:29] and you're downloading then that

[7:01:31] is now the new form so most

[7:01:33] things are happening either in a

[7:01:34] digital format. there's a

[7:01:36] digital good that is being

[7:01:38] produced in multiple ways and at

[7:01:39] the same time as

[7:01:41] that digital market came in we

[7:01:44] also lost the durable good that

[7:01:46] used to be the companion so when

[7:01:48] you bought the VHS tape there

[7:01:49] used to be the VCR that went

[7:01:51] along with it so that was that

[7:01:53] is an example of the durable

[7:01:55] good it'd be the same thing for

[7:01:58] the people who may not be as old

[7:02:02] as me and Mr Nakamoto but you

[7:02:03] you you went out and bought your

[7:02:06] walklkman which was a durable

[7:02:07] good and then you put the

[7:02:08] cassette in there

[7:02:11] and now you are no longer

[7:02:13] purchasing those items and so

[7:02:14] ultimately you now are

[7:02:16] downloading whatever your music

[7:02:18] is on Pandora Spotify or

[7:02:20] whatever your form is in order

[7:02:22] that you get your wonderful

[7:02:23] music or you're on YouTube

[7:02:24] musiciv them money.

[7:02:24] so

[7:02:28] at the end of the day we are

[7:02:30] trying to modernize our sales

[7:02:32] tax statute behaviors change

[7:02:34] consumer behavior has changed

[7:02:37] this bill will include

[7:02:42] subscriptions I there's this

[7:02:43] new thing going on called book

[7:02:47] talks if you for some reason

[7:02:48] nobody's on these things but

[7:02:49] there's a million apps where you

[7:02:52] can download stories and pay

[7:02:54] literally by chapter and I would

[7:02:57] say your chapter may be pages or

[7:02:59] it might be6 minutes but they're

[7:03:03] gonna get $9.99 or10 dollars 99

[7:03:05] cents per chapter or six minutes

[7:03:07] of your life and then hook you

[7:03:08] to either a

[7:03:10] $99 subscription so you can

[7:03:13] finish a book rather than you

[7:03:14] just being able to go to barnes

[7:03:17] and noble, pay 2499 and walk out

[7:03:18] with all the chapters you would

[7:03:21] like to read for the 2499

[7:03:23] bargain price so the market has

[7:03:24] changed

[7:03:26] so with that

[7:03:29] I'll take a much or is there any

[7:03:30] discussion on digital goods?

[7:03:35] OK so with that I'll entertain

[7:03:37] emotion for B6 to be drafted

[7:03:40] but first from assemblyman to

[7:03:42] silva second from senator

[7:03:43] Deatete any discussion on the

[7:03:44] motion?

[7:03:47] seeing no discussion all in

[7:03:49] favor to say aye aye any

[7:03:50] opposition say nay

[7:03:51] so I have both

[7:03:56] assembly member cole and

[7:03:58] assembly member Patchett no one

[7:03:59] digital goods thank you

[7:04:03] it's not my first rodeo of nose.

[7:04:07] right so motion carries to draft

[7:04:11] B6 thank you we will now move to

[7:04:12] be7 Miss Owens

[7:04:15] thank you chairir Haley Owens

[7:04:17] for the record. The7th item in

[7:04:19] the work session document

[7:04:20] still under the excise tax

[7:04:21] policy heading is item B7

[7:04:25] the recommendation is to request

[7:04:27] the drafting of a bill to revise

[7:04:28] the tax on other tobacco

[7:04:30] products located in chapter370

[7:04:32] of the Nevadarevised statutes.

[7:04:34] The proposed changes may include

[7:04:34] one or more of the following

[7:04:38] a revising the structure of the

[7:04:40] tax to impose it at the retail

[7:04:41] level rather than the wholesale

[7:04:42] level

[7:04:45] b clarifying the definition of

[7:04:48] other tobacco product to include

[7:04:49] certain tobacco products not

[7:04:51] currently included in the tax

[7:04:52] base see increasing the tax rate

[7:04:57] and any other relevant changes

[7:04:58] to this tax as determined by the

[7:04:59] chair of the committee.

[7:05:01] this recommendation is proposed

[7:05:03] by senator neal, chair of this

[7:05:05] committee based on discussion of

[7:05:06] tobacco taxes at the committee

[7:05:07] meeting on July8,2026.

[7:05:12] thank you for that Miss Owens.

[7:05:14] so just a little backdrop for

[7:05:15] the members that were not here

[7:05:18] you had saw some of the

[7:05:20] public comment this morning we

[7:05:21] had a presentation from the

[7:05:24] tobacco coalition which wanted

[7:05:25] to and they're still asking for

[7:05:28] that to double the tobacco rate

[7:05:29] tobacco tax

[7:05:33] we also had a presentation for

[7:05:35] Sakamoto after that presentation

[7:05:38] from the tobacco coalition that

[7:05:40] the increasing of that rate

[7:05:43] would ultimately then cause a

[7:05:44] decrease we're currently in a

[7:05:46] decrease because the prevention

[7:05:48] efforts are working right so if

[7:05:50] we increase it we would run into

[7:05:52] the same problem. so the

[7:05:53] question that I you know I

[7:05:55] internally posed was you know

[7:05:56] unless we're getting ready to

[7:05:58] solve the problem in the next

[7:05:59] three years the increase would

[7:06:00] not actually

[7:06:03] solve the issue so having the3

[7:06:06] dollars pack of cigarettes

[7:06:09] wouldn't actually although it'll

[7:06:11] give you money in the short term

[7:06:13] we started to look at OTP and

[7:06:15] try to examine whether or not

[7:06:19] OTP is a better option this bill

[7:06:22] is one of the ones that you know

[7:06:23] we just have to think through

[7:06:25] what makes sense and how we're

[7:06:26] going to figure out the revenue.

[7:06:27] one of the other things that I

[7:06:29] tasked which is the other

[7:06:34] staff with on this one is

[7:06:36] because tobacco is also a

[7:06:39] part of thecta distribution is

[7:06:41] to determine if there would be

[7:06:44] any effect if OTP was I

[7:06:45] believe added to the first tier

[7:06:48] or second tier of the tobacco

[7:06:50] is a lot of things we have to

[7:06:51] consider but we don't have time

[7:06:53] to consider it during the

[7:06:54] interim and so

[7:06:57] you know we're just gonna try to

[7:06:58] work through it and figure out

[7:06:59] what the tobacco coalition what

[7:07:01] would be the best thing that we

[7:07:04] can do but doubling the tax is

[7:07:07] just not sustainable so with

[7:07:09] that members are there any

[7:07:10] questions on B7.

[7:07:13] seeing no questions I will

[7:07:15] entertain a motion for B7 to be

[7:07:20] have a first from assemblyman to

[7:07:22] silva second from Senator

[7:07:24] Deatete is there any discussion

[7:07:25] on the motion assembly memberm

[7:07:26] cole

[7:07:29] thank you chair. I don't

[7:07:31] necessarily object to the

[7:07:33] general framework but I would

[7:07:35] ask that as the bill is drafted

[7:07:36] we include a discount or reduced

[7:07:39] rate for the products that FdaA

[7:07:41] has designated as modified risks

[7:07:43] tobacco products they have

[7:07:44] gone through rigorous federal

[7:07:46] review establishing that they

[7:07:48] pose less risk than combustible

[7:07:50] tobacco and our tax policies

[7:07:51] should reflect that distinction

[7:07:53] so I would ask with chair's

[7:07:55] permission that that be

[7:07:56] included in the final draft

[7:08:00] so thank you for that and I mean

[7:08:01] I just have to ask this clarify

[7:08:03] clarifying question are you

[7:08:04] talking about like Philip Morris

[7:08:05] because they they presented to

[7:08:07] us I believe in what's that

[7:08:08] interim

[7:08:08] 20

[7:08:09] or

[7:08:12] is that where is that the same

[7:08:13] product so it's any product

[7:08:15] that the fdaA would would

[7:08:18] establish as reading or meeting

[7:08:19] their rigorous requirements

[7:08:21] right and I don't know exactly

[7:08:23] what company out there have gone

[7:08:24] through that process or are in

[7:08:25] the process of doing it again

[7:08:27] it's you know it takes years and

[7:08:28] years and years so I don't know

[7:08:29] that list.

[7:08:32] all right is there are there is

[7:08:32] there any other discussion on

[7:08:33] the motion?

[7:08:37] seeing none all in favor to say

[7:08:38] aye

[7:08:43] any opposition B7 so I have a

[7:08:44] nay from assembly member

[7:08:44] Patchett.

[7:08:49] ok so the assembly memberber

[7:08:50] cole you voted for it

[7:08:54] so the motion carries and

[7:09:01] B7 will be drafted thank you

[7:09:02] and now we have

[7:09:04] the a

[7:09:06] amm I doing CA

[7:09:10] yeah technically I am doing CA I

[7:09:11] need to docA assembly member

[7:09:15] and the staffowwens do you wanna

[7:09:17] or do you want me to explain my

[7:09:18] life on C8.

[7:09:23] chair I can I can read the text

[7:09:24] and and you can expand if that

[7:09:24] works for you.

[7:09:30] ho ul d I go ahead

[7:09:35] I I can't see the camera's not

[7:09:37] zoomed in I'm'll I'll go ahead

[7:09:39] and begin reading thank you

[7:09:40] chairir Haley Owens for the

[7:09:42] record the eth and final item in

[7:09:43] the work session document is

[7:09:45] item C8. The recommendation is

[7:09:46] to request the drafting of a

[7:09:48] bill providing for various

[7:09:49] changes to one or more taxes

[7:09:51] imposed under Title3I of

[7:09:53] thenevada revised statutes. The

[7:09:55] bill may make changes to the

[7:09:57] rates, tax base or exemptions

[7:09:58] for one or more of these taxes

[7:09:59] rec this recommendation is

[7:10:00] proposed by Senator Neal, chair

[7:10:01] of this committee.

[7:10:07] thank you for that so this

[7:10:09] was more of a catch all because

[7:10:10] we have some

[7:10:13] as you know we've had some

[7:10:14] presentations today

[7:10:18] we just want to leave room to

[7:10:21] potentially do some other tax

[7:10:23] policy anditle ir2 pretty much

[7:10:25] covers majority of the chapters

[7:10:29] but I did want to have a

[7:10:31] discussion with Mister Nakamoto

[7:10:32] because I don't know if that

[7:10:33] would end up being I didn't want

[7:10:35] it to be, but did you get a

[7:10:36] opinion on whether or not I

[7:10:36] would be able to add

[7:10:39] a title is ititle41?

[7:10:44] madam chairirminouner with

[7:10:45] fiscal analysis division for the

[7:10:47] record I am still waiting for a

[7:10:50] response from legal counsel

[7:10:50] on that

[7:10:51] so

[7:10:57] so Id I need to probably create

[7:10:58] a9 then

[7:11:03] OK so all right so let me take

[7:11:04] the motion on

[7:11:06] is are there any questions on

[7:11:07] C8?

[7:11:15] ok so I will entertain motion

[7:11:18] to draft a potential policy on

[7:11:20] C8 which is like a catch all for

[7:11:21] some other things that we may

[7:11:22] need to get to so moved

[7:11:25] so have a first from assemblyman

[7:11:26] to silva second from senator

[7:11:27] Diatete any discussion on the

[7:11:28] motion

[7:11:29] assembly member call

[7:11:34] thank you madam chairir I

[7:11:35] just want slag a concern that I

[7:11:37] have with this recommendation as

[7:11:38] written and and amended

[7:11:41] so this request just seems very

[7:11:43] broad to me with unspecified

[7:11:44] changes to rates tax base

[7:11:46] exemptions across all of Title3I

[7:11:50] and possibly41 and clearly

[7:11:51] the the goal is to raise taxes

[7:11:53] on taxpayers so fort that reason

[7:11:55] I will be a no but I also just

[7:11:57] want to make a a a note on the

[7:11:58] record and it's probably going

[7:11:59] to make me seem really naive and

[7:12:01] and silly as a as a freshman

[7:12:03] legislator but I came into this

[7:12:06] interim process expecting that

[7:12:07] the committee's purpose it is

[7:12:08] not just this committee it's all

[7:12:09] the committees that have've

[7:12:11] sat in thus far but I expected

[7:12:13] the committee purpose to to use

[7:12:15] the 9 or10 months between

[7:12:17] sessions to work through bill

[7:12:18] draft requests carefully and so

[7:12:19] that by the time we reach the120

[7:12:21] day regular session the next

[7:12:23] year that we're advancing really

[7:12:25] well considered legislation

[7:12:26] rather than starting from

[7:12:28] scratch right because we don't

[7:12:29] have enough time in120 days but

[7:12:31] this request is very open ended

[7:12:33] and it doesn't it doesn't feel

[7:12:35] like it reflects that process

[7:12:38] and that just disheartens me I

[7:12:38] guess from a transparency

[7:12:39] perspect

[7:12:41] ive with with our

[7:12:45] constituents so to me and and

[7:12:47] I know this is a a really far

[7:12:48] reach for asking a committee to

[7:12:49] do this but I would love to see

[7:12:51] more specificity about the

[7:12:52] problem we're trying to solve

[7:12:53] and then you know the wall

[7:12:55] articulated request so that I

[7:12:57] can confidently vote something

[7:12:58] out of committee but thank you.

[7:13:02] thank you for that commentary

[7:13:05] so basically when we talked

[7:13:07] about several different topics

[7:13:09] over the past few months there's

[7:13:10] just still some open ended

[7:13:12] issues that

[7:13:16] I I I just don't know where

[7:13:17] we're going we might go but

[7:13:19] maybe the business community

[7:13:21] says absolutely not. but at the

[7:13:23] end of the day I needed to make

[7:13:25] room because we were looking at

[7:13:28] increased rates on certain

[7:13:30] categories that hadn't been

[7:13:30] touched in 15 years.

[7:13:34] which I started off the

[7:13:36] conversation at the beginning of

[7:13:37] the all of the interim meetings

[7:13:40] saying that you know we're on a

[7:13:40] modernization

[7:13:44] we're also looking to look at

[7:13:46] updates so I'll give you one

[7:13:48] example where this probably is

[7:13:51] going to be inclusive so if you

[7:13:53] well you weren't so it during

[7:13:56] the legislative session we had a

[7:13:56] meeting a ways after darkrk.

[7:14:00] and in that meeting ways after

[7:14:01] dark

[7:14:03] which happened on the assembly

[7:14:05] side there was a document

[7:14:08] produced by Mr Nakamoto in all

[7:14:10] of its glory that listed veryy

[7:14:15] nuanced pieces that could

[7:14:16] be changed that were not big

[7:14:18] ticket changes but they were

[7:14:20] small changes in various

[7:14:21] categories but you know whether

[7:14:23] or not it was like a small

[7:14:24] exemption

[7:14:26] that probably could be

[7:14:27] removed that would generate

[7:14:30] revenue or make that particular

[7:14:33] tax perform better and so what I

[7:14:35] told him was that I'm looking to

[7:14:36] see what are some of the small

[7:14:38] changes that we could do that

[7:14:40] would then be a combined effort

[7:14:43] without big ticket wholesale

[7:14:46] changes such as like changing

[7:14:47] the MBT so

[7:14:50] looking at all of those things

[7:14:51] that were already produced that

[7:14:53] we had a hearing on in 25

[7:14:56] where there were small items

[7:14:58] that they just make the

[7:15:01] performance of the existing tax

[7:15:04] better and that this was one of

[7:15:07] the areas in C8 that I asked

[7:15:09] them to examine and look at

[7:15:11] right? It's also a document that

[7:15:13] I've been carrying around

[7:15:15] like a bag lady like in my

[7:15:17] backpack because it was such a

[7:15:19] thorough document that just

[7:15:21] kind of explored each and

[7:15:23] everyta that well not all I

[7:15:24] would say

[7:15:27] majority that we put forth and

[7:15:28] had these little small changes

[7:15:29] that could be made but in

[7:15:31] combination they would make a

[7:15:35] difference to the efficiency of

[7:15:36] attacks so this was really what

[7:15:39] I was getting at in C8 so

[7:15:44] if that helps fine if it doesn't

[7:15:47] that's fine too but it would be

[7:15:49] I would be hard pressed to spell

[7:15:51] all of those things out

[7:15:54] a document exists maybe you know

[7:15:58] I mean technically if you want

[7:15:59] to see it I'm sure

[7:16:02] Mister Nakamoto could share a

[7:16:04] copy or mail it to your house if

[7:16:05] you just have it for the

[7:16:07] presence of mind for 2027 if

[7:16:08] any of those taxes pop up

[7:16:11] but that's what I was looking at

[7:16:15] so if that helps the record

[7:16:17] I've always been a revenue chair

[7:16:19] but I'm also not you know

[7:16:24] I mean you might think the data

[7:16:25] moratorium was crazy but the

[7:16:27] thing is I don't actually just

[7:16:28] go out of my way to just you

[7:16:29] know

[7:16:32] sucker punch businesses right

[7:16:35] with taxes I typically have the

[7:16:37] conversation and say this is

[7:16:38] what I'm doing love it hate it

[7:16:41] but here it is right? I actually

[7:16:43] don't pull any punches and there

[7:16:44] wouldn't be a single business

[7:16:47] person that would tell you that

[7:16:49] I have randomly shown up and

[7:16:50] said you know what you didn't

[7:16:52] know what was coming cause I

[7:16:53] usually say you're gonna hate

[7:16:54] this I'm doing it.

[7:16:57] hatete it hate it hate it later

[7:16:59] hate it on the record but this

[7:17:00] is happening it's probably

[7:17:00] getting a hearing

[7:17:04] so but I'm always transparent

[7:17:07] on any business tax and I

[7:17:08] talked to the business community

[7:17:09] and I tell them exactly what I'm

[7:17:12] gonna do right? even if they're

[7:17:14] just like I hate this and I know

[7:17:16] some people who hate LET but

[7:17:16] that's ok right?

[7:17:19] part of it's part of the

[7:17:21] conversation at the end of the

[7:17:22] day we need to raise revenue in

[7:17:22] the state.

[7:17:25] we are potentially facing seven

[7:17:27] billion dollars hit

[7:17:30] just because of the big

[7:17:31] beautiful act.

[7:17:34] which is disturbing over 10

[7:17:36] years,7 billion over the 10

[7:17:37] years so we have a couple of

[7:17:38] options

[7:17:41] we could reduce benefits right

[7:17:43] we can reduce the eligible

[7:17:46] population for medicaid and all

[7:17:47] of a sudden change the

[7:17:49] trajectory of all of the work

[7:17:50] that we've done for 20 years in

[7:17:52] order to make sure people are

[7:17:55] eligible and I know for me one

[7:17:57] of the major things that we just

[7:17:59] got on board was July1,2026 was

[7:18:00] to pay for adult dental

[7:18:03] and why that matters and why I

[7:18:04] would never want to pull that

[7:18:07] back is's because grown people

[7:18:10] from age 21 to64 rather than

[7:18:11] being able to afford to pay

[7:18:12] cavities we're getting their

[7:18:13] teeth pulled

[7:18:16] when really it should have been

[7:18:17] the act of getting a cavity

[7:18:19] taken care of and that has been

[7:18:21] a consistent behavior that I've

[7:18:23] been watching since 2023 and

[7:18:24] that would be an expanded

[7:18:26] benefit that came that the state

[7:18:26] is now paying for

[7:18:31] but because the big beautiful

[7:18:34] act has shifted cost onto the

[7:18:36] states in a potential and it's

[7:18:39] not even really potential7

[7:18:41] billion over 10 years we need to

[7:18:43] have a conversation whether or

[7:18:45] not it's small or large on how

[7:18:47] to bring revenue into the state.

[7:18:49] I believe we had13 bargaining

[7:18:52] units that came the end of 2025

[7:18:52] session

[7:18:56] we were not able to fund those

[7:18:58] bargaining units in the state as

[7:19:01] state employees. We were have to

[7:19:03] continue to do oneoffs in the

[7:19:05] state just to fund social

[7:19:07] services we could not continue

[7:19:10] to do behavior as oneshots when

[7:19:11] we know that we need to fund

[7:19:13] activities people and services

[7:19:14] long term.

[7:19:17] we have never successfully

[7:19:20] funded mental health since we

[7:19:20] have been a body

[7:19:22] and so with that

[7:19:26] I am like I take risks every

[7:19:28] single session to bring revenue

[7:19:29] forward and people either hate

[7:19:31] it, love it don't want to do it

[7:19:34] it's fine but my job is to

[7:19:35] always put the revenue forward

[7:19:37] and say there is a possibility

[7:19:39] if you want to fund this issue

[7:19:41] if you want to fund these10

[7:19:43] issues at least have the revenue

[7:19:45] on the table and I've also

[7:19:47] mentioned multiple times to

[7:19:49] folks that you know if there was

[7:19:51] local government revenue that I

[7:19:52] was also focused on

[7:19:55] actual reduction of government

[7:19:57] waste and foolishness that is

[7:19:58] used with taxpayer money

[7:20:01] so I just want to put that on

[7:20:03] the record that I am probably

[7:20:04] one of the most transparent

[7:20:08] people whether or not folks like

[7:20:10] it love it I still do it but I

[7:20:12] tell you how I tell you why and

[7:20:13] I tell you when.

[7:20:16] and so if there's any lobbyists

[7:20:18] that is different he needs to

[7:20:18] come tell me to my face

[7:20:20] and so because it would not be

[7:20:21] true

[7:20:24] so I just want to put that

[7:20:26] out there so I'm sorry that

[7:20:28] you're disenheartened that we

[7:20:29] would put something like this C8

[7:20:33] on on on the record but we're

[7:20:34] running out of time and the only

[7:20:36] thing we have is the cannabis

[7:20:38] study and that might also fall

[7:20:40] into this if the cannabis study

[7:20:42] comes back telling us that we

[7:20:44] need to do something different

[7:20:45] in the cannabis

[7:20:49] regulatory framework around the

[7:20:50] taxes and so

[7:20:52] I'll just stop there

[7:20:58] not the add a com not the

[7:20:59] assemblyman assemblywoman

[7:21:02] anderson thank you and and I I

[7:21:03] appreciate what you just said

[7:21:06] and also I want to bring up how

[7:21:08] important it is also not only

[7:21:10] I I appreciate actually the way

[7:21:12] this is worded at this time

[7:21:13] because there are so many

[7:21:15] different things and I

[7:21:15] understand where somebody's like

[7:21:17] well we should have this time to

[7:21:19] do it but the reality is we

[7:21:20] have120 day session.

[7:21:24] Our role as assembly members is

[7:21:25] to talk with our constituents as

[7:21:27] much as possible and to get that

[7:21:29] information there the role of

[7:21:30] the committee is to hear

[7:21:32] information so that way when we

[7:21:35] are in session we have some more

[7:21:36] background knowledge.

[7:21:38] but the other thing is and this

[7:21:40] is personal for me because my

[7:21:43] school's impacted with it we

[7:21:44] cannot always plan for financial

[7:21:45] emergencies.

[7:21:49] we cannot plan for a fire that

[7:21:51] is decimating my community at

[7:21:52] this time.

[7:21:55] and we need to plan for that

[7:21:56] budget as well and so I

[7:21:58] appreciate this information

[7:22:00] because we cannot always plan

[7:22:04] on emergencies as what was just

[7:22:04] stated by the chair

[7:22:08] there are too many things going

[7:22:10] on we have a broken economic

[7:22:11] system this is a way to start to

[7:22:12] to solve it

[7:22:15] and I I know I will not get a

[7:22:17] chance to say that this at the

[7:22:18] end but I do want to put on the

[7:22:20] record how much I appreciate all

[7:22:22] of our first responders who have

[7:22:23] fought the fires in both

[7:22:25] northern Nevada, southern

[7:22:27] Nevada, as well as those fires

[7:22:28] that are occurring right now in

[7:22:30] other areas of our state so this

[7:22:32] is something that matters to all

[7:22:33] of us and we don't we cannot

[7:22:34] plan for it

[7:22:34] thank you chair

[7:22:35] all right

[7:22:42] OK so we will I will entertain

[7:22:44] emotion on C8. I think I did

[7:22:44] already.

[7:22:48] so I did so all in favor to say

[7:22:49] aye

[7:22:53] so drop two names yes

[7:22:56] so assembly member cole and

[7:22:57] assembly member Patchett nay

[7:23:02] motion carries thank you I

[7:23:04] do want to mention something on

[7:23:05] digital goods for the local

[7:23:07] governments that are listening

[7:23:10] was it 21 or 23 version which

[7:23:11] one

[7:23:12] they had the excise

[7:23:15] so there's going to be the

[7:23:18] excise tax that's in there that

[7:23:21] also goes toce so that's the one

[7:23:22] you should pay attention to it's

[7:23:24] just going to be a wider base

[7:23:26] more I'm trying to add more into

[7:23:27] the base of it

[7:23:31] to see if we capture all the new

[7:23:33] stuff that's going on so thank

[7:23:34] you for everybody that killed it

[7:23:36] for every session from 2019 to

[7:23:38] now because the products

[7:23:40] wouldn't be out there for me to

[7:23:41] say you're in

[7:23:42] I appreciate it

[7:23:45] madam chairir yeah

[7:23:48] ummi Nakamoto with fiscal

[7:23:49] analysis division for the record

[7:23:51] in response to your previous

[7:23:54] question about changes to

[7:23:56] Title41 relating to gaming I did

[7:23:59] get work back from legal

[7:24:01] that they advised that it would

[7:24:03] probably be advisable to do

[7:24:06] that as a separate BDr so if

[7:24:07] that is the will, your will

[7:24:11] we could consider that as C9

[7:24:13] which would be the request of

[7:24:14] a drafting of a bill

[7:24:16] that would provide to various

[7:24:19] changes for the tax the

[7:24:21] taxes or fees or regulation

[7:24:24] under Title41 since I think a

[7:24:26] lot of the discussion today on

[7:24:27] prediction markets may be more

[7:24:30] regulatory in nature but that

[7:24:34] I think would be based on

[7:24:36] your previous comments and

[7:24:38] the direction that that one

[7:24:39] would go

[7:24:42] on so members this may not

[7:24:42] happen but this would be a vote

[7:24:49] to draft potentially draft C9

[7:24:50] so if

[7:24:54] the nevada wins it lawsuit in

[7:24:57] the prediction markets being

[7:24:59] able to tax prediction

[7:25:02] markets bring them under

[7:25:05] uhitle41 which is the gaming

[7:25:07] chapter. that's what C9 would

[7:25:10] do I don't think we should

[7:25:11] leave that revenue on the table

[7:25:15] if it if there is a pathway

[7:25:17] for us to get it I think we

[7:25:18] should definitely do it.

[7:25:20] so that's what that would be

[7:25:22] and so I'm sure that's once

[7:25:24] again controversial but

[7:25:28] it's there are there any

[7:25:29] questions on C9 but that's

[7:25:30] ultimately what it would be

[7:25:30] dealing with.

[7:25:34] so seeing no questions that will

[7:25:35] entertain a motion to draft

[7:25:39] C9itle41 for potential

[7:25:43] prediction market revenue if we

[7:25:44] were to win a lawsuit

[7:25:47] to regulate it all right so I

[7:25:49] have a first from assembly

[7:25:51] assemblywoman anderson second

[7:25:57] Second worship come from here so

[7:26:00] senator Deatete's second any

[7:26:00] discussion on the motion?

[7:26:03] seeing no discussion at all in

[7:26:04] favor say i

[7:26:06] i

[7:26:07] any opposed

[7:26:11] so a ane from assembly member

[7:26:15] poll and assembly member

[7:26:17] Patchett the motion carries

[7:26:19] thank you and now assembly

[7:26:20] member anderson

[7:26:22] you had just a general comment

[7:26:27] OK no that's fine then thank you

[7:26:28] so much for allowing me to sit

[7:26:31] in right for whoever it was so

[7:26:32] we're going to go for we're

[7:26:33] going to open up for public

[7:26:35] comment so we're gender item

[7:26:36] number12 which is opening up for

[7:26:38] public comment. Is there anyone

[7:26:38] here for public comment?

[7:26:55] Go ahead

[7:26:59] good afternoon chairrry members

[7:27:00] of the committee my name is

[7:27:01] Cassie Charles here on behalf of

[7:27:02] the American Federation of State

[7:27:05] County municipal employees also

[7:27:06] known as afsE. I genuinely want

[7:27:07] to thank the work of this

[7:27:09] hardworking committee. I know

[7:27:10] that there is a lot of work to

[7:27:12] do here especially in regards

[7:27:13] to our public services and

[7:27:15] funding our our contracts and I

[7:27:16] greatly appreciate every

[7:27:17] conversation we have in this

[7:27:19] committee and the intentions of

[7:27:21] this committee and exactly all

[7:27:22] of the work that we are doing

[7:27:25] here to support our community

[7:27:26] recently at the

[7:27:29] convention for asks me

[7:27:31] last week the governing body

[7:27:33] representing1.4 million Asme

[7:27:35] workers recently ratified a

[7:27:36] resolution prioritizing

[7:27:41] prioritizing families over

[7:27:42] corporations and I do believe

[7:27:43] that that is what this good

[7:27:44] committee that this good

[7:27:45] committee is doing. thank you so

[7:27:46] much for your work.

[7:27:53] Good evening chair and

[7:27:54] committee. my name is

[7:27:55] Sabrinaettrell. I am here today

[7:27:56] on behalf of the Nevada Primary

[7:27:57] Care association the association

[7:27:58] represents the state's

[7:27:59] federallyqualified health

[7:28:01] centers or FQHCs our members

[7:28:04] cared for nearly136,000 divans

[7:28:05] last year including more

[7:28:07] than38,000 uninsured patients

[7:28:08] and almost48,000 who are covered

[7:28:09] by medicaid

[7:28:11] Nevada's FQHCs are bracing for

[7:28:12] an increase in the number of

[7:28:14] uninsured patients due to work

[7:28:15] requirements imposed by HR one

[7:28:19] are cost per patient was1948

[7:28:21] dollars in 2025. we

[7:28:23] collected1765 for medicaid

[7:28:26] patient and only $216 per

[7:28:27] uninsured patient that's a

[7:28:29] deficit of about1,700 dollars

[7:28:30] for every patient who becomes

[7:28:31] uninsured.

[7:28:33] One way the legislature could

[7:28:34] support the expected burden on

[7:28:36] FQHCs is to exempt them from

[7:28:39] property tax. At least5 states

[7:28:40] currently have this exemption.

[7:28:41] Nevada already exempts as Mister

[7:28:43] Nakamoto went through charitable

[7:28:44] foundations, property leased

[7:28:47] tonshi fraternity sororities

[7:28:48] special nonprofits and volunteer

[7:28:49] fire departments

[7:28:51] if this exemption were available

[7:28:53] for FQHC own properties as well

[7:28:55] as leased properties this would

[7:28:57] save about723,000 dollars

[7:28:59] statewide that could be directly

[7:29:00] put into patient care. this

[7:29:02] would allow the fQHCs to serve

[7:29:04] by our estimate about375

[7:29:04] additional uninsured patients

[7:29:08] so thank you madam chairir for

[7:29:09] bringing up HR one it's on top

[7:29:11] of our mind and NVPCA really

[7:29:12] looks forward to connecting to

[7:29:13] discuss that impact further.

[7:29:17] Thank you Chairneal and members

[7:29:19] of the committee for your

[7:29:20] commitment today to modernizing

[7:29:21] a tax base that can provide

[7:29:23] first class services from

[7:29:26] firefighters educators and other

[7:29:28] Nevaddans who live and die by

[7:29:29] the choices that are state

[7:29:32] budget makes we look forward to

[7:29:32] supporting you and your efforts

[7:29:34] to modernize the tax base and I

[7:29:35] trust Andrewclark

[7:29:36] Battleborngress for the record

[7:29:37] thank you.

[7:29:40] it's

[7:29:41] it's

[7:29:43] public comment up north high

[7:29:45] go ahead

[7:29:49] thank you chair Neel and

[7:29:50] vicechair backcus lay

[7:29:51] Mitchellory County

[7:29:52] commissioner

[7:29:54] appreciate the conversation

[7:29:56] around around data centers and

[7:29:58] as far as water goes I've

[7:30:00] expressed my concerns to DrI

[7:30:02] directly about the methodology

[7:30:03] one of my assignments is a

[7:30:05] trustee for the public utility

[7:30:06] that provides water and

[7:30:08] wastewater services to many of

[7:30:10] these facilities and we have an

[7:30:12] open offer repeated several

[7:30:13] times over the last year to meet

[7:30:16] with to allow their researchers

[7:30:17] to meet with our technical staff

[7:30:18] to acquire more accurate and

[7:30:20] localized data on actual water

[7:30:21] usage and we're we're looking

[7:30:24] forward to engaging further on

[7:30:26] that to make sure that it truly

[7:30:27] reflects what's happening on the

[7:30:29] ground overall Story County

[7:30:31] favors a modernization approach

[7:30:33] to abatements more similar to

[7:30:34] the approach outlined by

[7:30:36] assembly member Cole which is

[7:30:37] why we are introducing a bill to

[7:30:38] do exactly that as a local

[7:30:40] jurisdiction that really

[7:30:42] supports the largest number of

[7:30:44] abatements in the state. I spent

[7:30:45] some time yesterday with some

[7:30:46] reps from our IW local and I

[7:30:47] just want to summarize a few of

[7:30:49] the things that they shared in

[7:30:51] relation to the impact of data

[7:30:52] center construction

[7:30:54] according to our building

[7:30:55] struction Trades co up here they

[7:30:57] estimate8 to10,000 union trade

[7:30:59] workers daily are working in

[7:31:00] thetajarino inndustrial Center

[7:31:02] as evidenced by the horrible

[7:31:02] traffic and

[7:31:06] most of those are working on

[7:31:06] data center projects

[7:31:07] specifically

[7:31:10] 4000 electricians union

[7:31:12] electricians are working in the

[7:31:14] region and80% of those are

[7:31:14] working on data center projects

[7:31:19] the typical pay with substantial

[7:31:21] overtime that is that is

[7:31:23] normal for a data center project

[7:31:24] at the journey level is coming

[7:31:27] in about170,000 dollars a year

[7:31:28] plus benefits plummbers and

[7:31:29] pipeitters are coming in at

[7:31:32] almost180,000 dollars according

[7:31:32] to their estimates

[7:31:34] we have about1,000

[7:31:35] electricians from southern

[7:31:36] Nevada currently working on

[7:31:37] projects up here

[7:31:39] now the apprenticeship program

[7:31:41] normally runs about150

[7:31:43] apprentices they're currently

[7:31:45] above500 and they said they're

[7:31:47] on their way to1200 and they

[7:31:49] only take on those apprentices

[7:31:50] if they see the the path for

[7:31:51] them to complete that

[7:31:53] apprenticeship and that's what

[7:31:54] they're seeing with this

[7:31:55] development. one of the things

[7:31:57] that's really unique about these

[7:31:58] developments is they're long

[7:31:59] duration each building may only

[7:32:02] take18 to 24 months to build but

[7:32:03] a campus built out typically

[7:32:05] lasts7 to10 years some in some

[7:32:07] cases 20 years and that provides

[7:32:08] a unique opportunity for the

[7:32:10] construction trades it gives

[7:32:12] them stability and longevity it

[7:32:13] allows them to really settle

[7:32:15] into the communities which is

[7:32:19] pretty unique for for the

[7:32:20] construction industry and the

[7:32:21] last thing that we would want to

[7:32:22] see is this prosperity grind to

[7:32:24] a halt. There was some

[7:32:25] discussion of revenue at the end

[7:32:27] the latest groundbreaking that

[7:32:28] we had announced that they were

[7:32:30] spending10 billion dollars to

[7:32:31] build the two buildings that

[7:32:32] they they were breaking ground

[7:32:33] on that would take 1000

[7:32:35] construction jobs and 230

[7:32:37] permanent jobs averaging six

[7:32:38] figures in

[7:32:38] compensation

[7:32:41] the tenants were then going

[7:32:43] to bring in30 billion dollars

[7:32:45] worth of equipment that alone

[7:32:47] even with abatements in place

[7:32:49] accounts for hundreds of

[7:32:50] millions in sales tax to the

[7:32:51] general fund and so

[7:32:54] that's just one of the projects

[7:32:56] a large one to be sure of

[7:32:58] probably half dozen that we have

[7:33:00] happening in our countyway we

[7:33:01] look forward to engaging to find

[7:33:03] the right path forward to make

[7:33:04] sure that our citizens are

[7:33:06] protected but that this kind

[7:33:08] of prosperity for our workers

[7:33:09] does not end thank you

[7:33:15] Hello Will adler for the record

[7:33:16] with silver state government

[7:33:17] relations I mostly wanted to

[7:33:19] ditto assembly one aththa

[7:33:21] Anderson up there, but

[7:33:23] overall I've watched this

[7:33:24] committee throughout the year

[7:33:25] and I do agree that the

[7:33:27] knowledge shared and sort of the

[7:33:29] depth and the breadth of of of

[7:33:31] revenue policy is not known

[7:33:33] enough in in the legislature or

[7:33:35] innevada as a whole so I just

[7:33:36] want to say thank you for the

[7:33:37] discussions today and and how

[7:33:39] deep you guys went and I look

[7:33:40] forward to these discussions

[7:33:42] continuing in in the 2027

[7:33:42] legislature and

[7:33:45] again thank you to all our first

[7:33:46] responders and those who are

[7:33:47] doing their work up in

[7:33:48] northernnevada thank you guys

[7:33:49] for the committee have a good

[7:33:50] one.

[7:33:52] thank you

[7:33:53] so

[7:33:58] broadcast anyone on the

[7:33:58] phone line?

[7:34:02] care the public line is open and

[7:34:03] working we have no cos at this

[7:34:04] time

[7:34:09] you for that right so members

[7:34:10] I'm sure you're grateful for

[7:34:13] this we are adjourning for the

[7:34:15] day have safe travels home.

Joint Interim Standing Committee on Revenue

Agenda

Transcript