[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.