MINUTES OF MEETING

      ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      February 12, 1993

 

 

 

The Assembly Committee on Education was called to order by Chairman Wendell P. Williams at 3:37 p.m., Friday, February 12, 1993, in Room 201/202 of the Cashman Field Center, Las Vegas, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda, Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Mr. Wendell P. Williams, Chairman

      Mrs. Vonne Chowning

      Mr. Tom Collins, Jr.

      Mr. Roy Neighbors

      Mr. Michael A. Schneider

      Mrs. Gene W. Segerblom

      Ms. Sandra Tiffany

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

      Mr. Ken Haller                (excused)

      Mrs. Marcia de Braga    (excused)

      Mr. William D. Gregory 

      Mr. James W. McGaughey

 

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Donald Williams, Research Analyst

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

      None

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

     

      Dr. Brian Cram, Clark County School District

      Dr. John Richardson, University Systems

      Sandy Curtis, Nevada State Education Association

      Bob Broniecki, Clark County Classroom Teachers Assoc.

      Judy Whitt, Clark County School Board

      Pat Bendorf, Nevada Parent Teachers Association

      Carolyne Edwards, Clark County School District

      Sue Dickenson-Smith, Clark County School District

      Ed Baycheck, Clark County School District

      Mary Kaplan, Clark County School District

 

      Kevin Connolly, Clark County School District

      Marzette Lewis

      Deborah Jackson

      Treopia Anderson

      Randy Oaks, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

      Frank Barker, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

      Richard McKee, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

      Thomas Pitaro, Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice

      Karen Winckler

      Lois Tarkanian, Clark County School Board

      Barbara Cegavske, Grassroots Committee

      Reverend Jesse Scott, Second Christian Church

      Allen Chandler, Clark County School District

 

Dr. Brian Cram, Superintendent of Schools, Clark County School District, referred to handouts for the committee describing the demographics and characteristics of youth currently entering schools in Clark County (Exhibit C, on file in the LCB Research Library).  Dr. Cram pointed out in 1950 there were approximately 18 workers to support individuals who retired; however, in the year 2038, there would be two workers for retirees.  Dr. Cram emphasized Clark County's resources were dedicated to the classroom as closely as possible and applying old solutions to new problems simply would no longer work. 

 

Dr. Cram remarked today's children were facing new challenges which had previously never been perceived.  Dr. Cram expressed concern regarding the money currently being spent on prison cells which was approximately six times what it cost on a daily basis to educate a child.  Dr. Cram summarized children currently in school had vast needs and required greater resources and attention.

 

Dr. John Richardson, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs at the University and Community System of Nevada, presented a report in conjunction with NRS 396.505 (Exhibit D, on file in the LCB Research Library).  Dr. Richardson explained the board of regents was required to prepare a comprehensive plan for the next four years to be presented biennially to the legislature.

 

Dr. Richardson referred to the planning schedule of the board of regents for the following four-year period.  Dr. Richardson alluded to page 21 showing Nevada as the fastest growing state in the west in terms of college enrollment.  Dr. Richardson mentioned page 24 displayed the projected enrollment to the year 2000 with an approximate enrollment of 56,000 full-time equivalent students.  On page 26, the chart indicated Nevada was anticipated to have the greatest growth in the number of high school graduates in the west from 1992/93 to 2001/02.  The chart on page 28 showed Nevada with only a 15.3 percent national average of individuals with a bachelor's degree or higher and was ranked 47th in the U.S.  Dr. Richardson concluded page 30 presented a chart establishing the increase in the growth of sponsored research activities relating to higher education.

 

Sandy Curtis, Vice President of the Nevada State Education Association, read verbatim from prepared testimony (Exhibit E).  Mrs. Curtis stated most educators have developed different strategies for presenting and evaluating the progress of today's students with the goal of graduating students who were problem solvers and cooperating adults.  Mrs. Curtis urged the committee to visit the schools, classrooms, and campuses of higher learning facilities in order to distinguish what was involved with being an educator in today's world.

 

Bob Broniecki, President of the Clark County Teachers Association, introduced two Las Vegas teachers who would present a perspective on what was occurring in Nevada's classrooms.  Mr. Broniecki referred to an advertisement which was placed in a local Clark County newspaper dealing with some of the problems of Nevada.  Mr. Broniecki remarked his office had received several calls from individuals who refuted the statistics of the ad stating Nevada was ranked first in teen suicides.  Mr. Broniecki emphasized the statistics were true and the citizens had a right to discover what was really occurring in the schools.

 

Sue Dickinson-Smith, teacher from Fay Herron Elementary School, informed the committee she, along with thousands of teachers, spent their own individual money on equipment, etc., to enhance the lives of students.  Mrs. Dickinson-Smith had personally purchased nine Apple computers, four printers, two copy machines, 100 puppets, a television and VCR, over 100 video tapes, hundreds of books, and eight book cases.  Mrs. Dickinson-Smith added she had purchased a calculator for each of her students, along with costumes for school plays.

 

Mrs. Dickinson-Smith emphasized her second-grade students would benefit from technology with the use of the computers and it was important to keep up with the changing needs of society.

 

Ed Baycheck, teacher from Western High School and Sunrise/Sunset School, defined the word teach, "To assist a person in learning how to do something; to train or accustom to some manual effort; to guide the studies; to learn; to gain knowledge or an understanding of or skill in by studying instruction or investigation; to fix in the mind."  Mr. Baycheck stressed there was a breakdown in the classroom unit and the trust between the teacher and the student had fallen apart.

 

Mr. Baycheck pointed out students in his classroom did not feel a high school education was a form of success.  Most students were convinced success was a job which paid for the insurance on the car they drove.  Mr. Baycheck emphasized most teachers were concerned students did not have long-term goals and had no respect for authority.  Many were unprepared to learn and had no motivation.  Good students were much fewer and further between.

 

Linds3y Jydstrup, Nevada State Education Association and the Education Support Association, stated there were thousands of dedicated men and women who worked with students in support positions and Mrs. Jydstrup introduced three such individuals.

 

Mary Kaplan, Office Manager at Ann T. Lynch Elementary School, read verbatim from prepared testimony (Exhibit F).  Mrs. Kaplan expressed concern over the lack of school nurses on campuses.  Mrs. Kaplan remarked many times the clerical staff was forced to attend to student health needs since school nurses might only be on campus one day per week.

 

Kevin Connolly, Offset Shop Supervisor for the Clark County School District, read verbatim from prepared testimony (Exhibit G).  Mr. Connolly emphasized his department produced a quality product at a minimum cost saving the district time and money which could go toward the classroom for the education of the students.

 

Everlean Sampson, Bus Driver for the Clark County School District, read verbatim from prepared testimony (Exhibit H).  Mrs. Sampson pointed out the dangerous circumstances and risks of driving a bus for the students in Clark County and urged the committee to support and continue funding education.

 

Carolyne Edwards, Legislative Representative, Clark County School District, introduced two Clark County school board members.

 

Judy Whitt, President of the Clark County Board of School Trustees, stated it was the board's responsibility to ensure there was excellence and equality in education; to seek sufficient resources, and to provide accountability to the legislature and the taxpayers of Nevada.

 

Mrs. Whitt indicated the mission of the Clark County School District as a national educational model was to acquire and apply all resources necessary to ensure full intellectual and character development of each individual as a responsible citizen.  The Clark County School District was committed to the following:  "Full funding of class size reduction; increasing the length of the school day or year; funding of mandated programs for special education students, thus freeing funds needed to support programs for at-risk populations including elementary counseling, second language programs, parent training and early childhood education; programs for work force preparation, including the expansion of the use of advanced technology in the classroom; and broad community participation and response to expansion, including developer participation and capital improvements necessitated by residential growth."  Mrs. Whitt concluded ignoring the commitments could necessitate far greater financial constraints.

 

Dr. Lois Tarkanian, Clark County School District Board of Trustees, commented on the benefits of class size reduction.  Dr. Tarkanian urged the committee to support increasing the length of the school day and school year.  Dr. Tarkanian referred to special education and acknowledged, due to the many mandates of the federal government, funding was necessary to avoid continually taking from the general fund.  Dr. Tarkanian concluded by emphasizing the importance of education at the elementary level and urged the committee's support.

 

Patricia Bendorf, Nevada State PTA, read verbatim from prepared testimony (Exhibit I).  Mrs. Bendorf referred to the top six priority items for the 1993 legislature which had been decided upon  during the 1992 PTA convention:  class size reduction; funding; school nurses; elementary school counselors; computer instruction; and health care.  Mrs. Bendorf acknowledged Nevada currently ranked 38th in the U.S. for health insurance for children.  Mrs. Bendorf concluded the Nevada PTA requested to be placed on record as opposing the proposed state reorganization plan placing the state department of education under the department of human resources.

 

Barbara Cegavske, Chairperson for the Nevada Education Legislation Grassroots Committee, read verbatim from prepared testimony (Exhibit J).  Mrs. Cegavske stated the committee's goal was to support legislation which would benefit education and to create awareness of programs necessary for educating Nevada's children.  Mrs. Cegavske concluded the grassroots committee supported the Clark County School District and Nevada State PTA's platform.

 

Chairman Williams announced the committee would hold another meeting in Las Vegas within the next two months in order to hear testimony from other interested parties.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 192 -     Requires board of trustees of school district to establish policy relating to arrest of pupil on school grounds during school hours.

 

Chairman Williams requested the current pupil arrest policy of the 17 school districts become part of the record (Exhibit K).

 

Thomas Pitaro, Nevada Attorney's for Criminal Justice and the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association, introduced his son Nikki Pitaro and Karen Winckler.

 

Karen Winckler, member of Nevada Attorney's for Criminal Justice and Nevada Trial Lawyers Association, introduced her daughter and two friends and spoke in support of the bill. 

 

Mr. Pitaro emphasized the lack of an arrest policy for minor children in classrooms was intolerable and could not be defended.  Mr. Pitaro referred to an incident which had recently occurred involving the arrest of a 10-year old student and the concern expressed by public comment.  Mr. Pitaro indicated a portion of the public had perceived the incident as a race issue; however, the issue relating to the bill was an issue of morality and how children were treated.  According to Mr. Pitaro, the response by the authorities from the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department relayed the message, "I can do whatever I want, wherever I want, whenever I want."  In his opinion, Mr. Pitaro felt the message was not a policy, but a travesty.  

 

Mr. Pitaro was concerned with the rationale of whether the child had been armed as a justification as to what happened, and he felt the justification was false.  Mr. Pitaro explained the action had been arranged for the child to be humiliated and frightened in front of his classmates and teacher.  Mr. Pitaro stressed the psychological terrorism by police agents on children of tender years was foreign to a democracy.

 

Mr. Pitaro commented according to the law, the arrest of the student in the classroom would have been illegal if it had happened to an adult; the protection for an adult was not there for the child.  Mr. Pitaro indicated the arrest and custody procedure of police officers was set forth under the Juvenile Act.  Mr. Pitaro referred to the proposed amendment to AB 192 which might solve the problem (Exhibit L).  Mr. Pitaro explained the current Juvenile Act stated, "A peace officer may take into custody any child who is found violating any law or ordinance."  Mr. Pitaro suggesting changing the language to, "A peace officer may take into custody, pursuant to the procedure that is set forth in NRS 171.124 et seq., any child who commits a delinquent act."  In addition, Mr. Pitaro suggested amending NRS 62.170 by adding a sentence under subsection 1, which would read, "No child shall be taken into custody in a school classroom unless there is an imminent threat of danger to himself or others."

 

Mr. Pitaro concluded by urging the committee to support the passage of AB 192 and the adoption of the amendment to NRS 62.170.

 

Mr. Collins referred to the amendment which was not in conjunction with the bill.  Mr. Pitaro explained in order for the bill to have force and effect in meaning, the procedure for the arrest for juveniles needed to be uniform throughout the State of Nevada, and the only way to make the procedure uniform was by amending NRS 62.170.

 

Chairman Williams questioned research staffer Mr. Williams to acknowledge if the bill and the amendment could be combined.  Mr.  Williams replied the amendment to NRS 62.170 would need to go before the Assembly Judiciary Committee.  Chairman Williams commented AB 192 could be given to the committee for future consideration in reference to committee introduction for the Judiciary Committee, or the Education Committee could pass the bill and rerefer it to Judiciary.

 

Kevin Williams, National Bar Association, expressed full support of AB 192.  Mr. Williams remarked what had occurred with the arrest of the 10-year old child could not happen in court.  A prisoner could not be brought before the individuals who would judge him in shackles and chains.  Secondly, the idea of terrorism to a person generated nothing but disrespect for the law, along with contempt.

 

Mr. Williams expressed concern for the terrorism and trauma the students in the classroom had experienced when their fellow classmate had been arrested.  Mr. Williams concluded by urging the passage of the bill.

 

Mrs. Chowning referred to the proposed amendment and determined the instance in question had been handled correctly due to the imminent threat of danger.  Mr. Pitaro replied the proposed amendment would address two issues:  one would establish the arrest procedure codified in NRS Chapter 171, the misdemeanor presence, the probable cause, and the warrant requirement as related to children; and the other would specifically deal with arrests in the classroom, unless there was imminent threat or danger to a student or others, no arrest should ever take place in a classroom setting.

 

Mr. Collins asked for clarification between the bill and the amendment to the statute.  Mr. Pitaro explained the bill would mandate the school district and the Metropolitan Police Department implement a uniform procedure.  However, in spite of the procedure, under NRS 62.170, the police officers would still have the statutory right to make an arrest anytime, anyplace, anywhere, unless the provision was changed.  Mr. Pitaro acknowledged a delinquent act was defined in the juvenile code as basically what would be a crime for an adult was considered a delinquent act for a child.

 

Chairman Williams referred to the amendment and indicated the committee would accept it for clarification for the future; however, AB 192 was the focus of the hearing.

 

Mr. Collins questioned if legally the legislature had the right to direct a law enforcement agency to change its laws according to a school district's policy.  Mr. Pitaro emphasized he "hoped" the legislative body could tell the police how they could act. 

 

Reverend Jesse Scott, Second Christian Church and President of the Las Vegas Branch of the NAACP, spoke in support of AB 192.  Reverend Scott urged the committee to use their authority and power to make changes which would reflect the will of the people. 

 

Reverend Scott stated he was in favor of providing the school districts with more money; however, the educators in such professions chose their field of their own volition and they should deal with the problems which might face them.  In his opinion, Reverend Scott felt there was an overwhelming need for more care and commitment for children.  Reverend Scott commented many of the professional educators were not living up to the potential of helping students and they should be held accountable. 

 

Captain Randy Oaks introduced Captain Frank Barker and Captain Richard McKee, all representing the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD).  Mr. Oaks pointed out if AB 192 was passed, it would not standardize school policies.  Mr. Oaks stated the LVMPD was highly opposed to any school district setting policy for the police department.

 

Mr. Oaks emphasized not one of the individuals who had previously testified was an informed witness regarding the incident of discussion.  Mr. Oaks indicated the police were the only ones who had the intimate details of the arrest, but the information was unable to be divulged to the public.

 

Mr. Oaks stated during the arrest the police were seriously concerned with the protection of all of the students in the classroom, including the victim.  Mr. Oaks maintained he had no knowledge of the proposed amendment to NRS 62.170 and would be unable to accurately testify for or against the amendment until the impact could be determined.

 

Mr. Oaks referred to the allegations made by Mr. Pitaro and clarified there were not three officers who entered the classroom and their guns were not displayed or unlatched.  Referring to the child being shackled and chained, Mr. Oaks explained the only restraint used was a pair of handcuffs.  Mr. Oaks alluded to the suggestion of juvenile arrests being handled in the same manner as adults; however, juveniles would be subjected to the other provisions of the law which applied to adult crimes.

 

Mr. Oaks emphasized an adult could be arrested under the same circumstance by a citizens arrest and there was a provision in the law.  Mr. Oaks maintained AB 192 was unnecessary and an over- reaction.  Mr. Oaks referred to an article titled, "Street Talk" which had appeared in Tuesday's Las Vegas Sun.  Six Las Vegans had been randomly interviewed by reporter Ken Jones, and five of the citizens had agreed with the actions of the police.

 

Chairman Williams questioned if the citizens who had been interviewed knew the facts of the arrest.  Mr. Oaks replied "no."  Chairman Williams pointed out if the testifiers during the hearing did not know the facts of the arrest, why should the opinion of the citizens in the newspaper article be considered.  Mr. Oaks admitted if everyone knew the circumstances of the information given to the officers, there probably would not be one individual who would challenge the actions of the officers.  Mr. Oaks emphasized even without the facts of the arrest, the citizens in the newspaper article still supported the actions of the officers.

 

Chairman Williams asked if Mr. Oaks' position was for the committee not to consider establishing policy, whether individually or uniformly by county, and let the police use their own discretion.  Mr. Oaks remarked, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."  Chairman Williams was concerned with the legislature waiting to consider laws only because a potentially dangerous instance had happened.

 

Chairman Williams referred to subsection 1 of the bill which stated, "The board of trustees in each school district, after consulting with school police officers of the school district, ...and the local law enforcement agencies that have jurisdiction over the school district, shall establish a policy for the procedures which must be followed by a peace officer in arresting a pupil on school grounds during school hours."  Chairman Williams asked if Mr. Oaks had a problem with the three entities determining a uniform policy.  Mr. Oaks responded the law required the school districts to consult with the police; however, the police did not have to agree, or vice versa.  Mr. Oaks suggested amending the language by adding the words, "By mutual agreement of the three entities" and the police would probably not oppose the bill.

 

Chairman Williams asked if the victim who had been threatened was in the classroom at the time of the arrest.  Mr. McKee responded, "no."  Chairman Williams questioned if the police currently had a policy in place in reference to the incident.  Mr. McKee replied the arrest policy was very extensive.  Chairman Williams referred to Exhibit M and questioned if 5/106.15, paragraph 3, was the current policy used by the police.  Mr. McKee acknowledged it was and emphasized the key words were, "Investigate crimes occurring off campus."   Mr. McKee pointed out the actual physical arrest of the 10-year old student had been made by a female officer.

 

Mrs. Segerblom questioned if the principal had been asked to remove the student from class, rather than an officer.  Mr. McKee responded a lengthy discussion had ensued between the principal and the police, and the decision was made by the police for the officer to retrieve the student.  Mr. McKee noted the principal was in agreement.

 

Chairman Williams asked if Mr. Oaks disagreed with establishing any type of policy with the school districts and if he wanted the full discretion for the police to institute such policy.

Mr. Oaks emphasized it would have to be something mutually agreeable to both the district and the police department.  In his opinion, Mr. Oaks did not feel a policy was necessary.

 

Mrs. Chowning remarked AB 192 would bring four school districts in compliance with the remaining thirteen by setting a regulation.  Mrs. Chowning questioned if the incident had occurred on a high school campus, would the school district police have had the authority to intervene.  Mr. Oaks replied by law they could.

 

Chairman Williams asked if Mr. Oaks agreed with the idea of student arrests being performed in administrative offices and not in the view of uninterested parties.  Mr. Oaks agreed but stated there were always exigent circumstances which should be considered.

 

Frank Barker, Detective Bureau of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, assured the committee agreements could be reached with the school district which would be acceptable by both parties to cover "most" situations.

 

Chairman Williams questioned if the LVMPD would consider working out an agreement with the school district during the current legislative session.  Mr. Barker replied it was possible.

 

Mr. McKee mentioned Exhibit M and clarified the policy had been derived two years prior in cooperation with the school district.

 

Mr. Neighbors referred to line 3, "...the board of trustees" and line 5, "...shall establish a policy" and indicated there was not ample room for play if an agreement was reached, due to undetermined situations which might occur.  Mr. Neighbors was concerned there might be 17 different policies for the 17 school districts. 

 

Mr. McKee pointed out in Clark County, it would not only be the LVMPD which would be involved; in addition, there was the North Las Vegas, Boulder City, Henderson and Mesquite Police Departments.

 

Mr. Oaks concluded no information had been brought before the committee indicating the need for a policy other than the one incident which had been discussed.  Chairman Williams again expounded it was not necessary to wait for someone to die or something to happen before legislation was enacted.

 

Marzette Lewis, parent, spoke in support of the bill.  Mrs. Lewis stated she was outraged by Mr. Oaks' statement of no one except the three individuals who previously testified knowing what really occurred during the arrest.  Mrs. Lewis explained she spent ten days at Lunt Elementary School inquiring about what had really occurred.  In her opinion, Mrs. Lewis felt the school and the police were both at fault and the protection of all the students had been jeopardized.

 

Deborah Jackson, parent, emphasized the seriousness of the issue and urged support of AB 192.  In her opinion, Mrs. Jackson thought the LVMPD already had enough control and the school districts should be involved in setting a uniform policy.  Mrs. Jackson was concerned with certain police officers not using discretion regarding instances involving ethnic groups.

 

Mrs. Jackson discussed an incident involving six caucasian males who were high school students accused of the brutal murder of a fellow classmate.  Mrs. Jackson pointed out the police had not gone directly into the classroom to remove the students, but arrested them after they were taken to the office. 

 

Mrs. Jackson maintained the school districts would not propose a policy which would infringe on the rights of the police department.

 

Mr. Collins was concerned if the bill passed, it might not be enforced.

 

Treopia Anderson, parent, spoke in support of the bill; however, she clarified it left a considerable amount of leeway for the police department. 

 

Mrs. Anderson explained there was nothing in the guidelines of policy in the school manual to advise parents their children might be arrested on alleged allegations.  In her opinion, Mrs. Anderson felt the schools had a responsibility to all children's welfare regarding any incidents involving the police department.

 

Mrs. Anderson concluded by urging the committee to pass AB 192 and listening to the desires of the people who put the legislators in office. 

 

Mr. Collins clarified if the bill was passed, there was still the statute which would allow the police to enter a classroom and arrest a child.

        

Chairman Williams questioned the Clark County School District policy and asked if the parents were contacted, would the student be held until the parents arrived before an arrest could be made. 

 

Mrs. Edwards responded according to policy and procedure, the principals were to inform parents on every issue involving a child. 

 

Allen Chandler, Clark County School District Administrator, stated if a youngster was arrested, the policy did not require the principal notifying the parent "prior" to an arrest.  The parent would be contacted in order to inform him his child might not arrive home at the normal expected time.

 

Chairman Williams announced the bill would be heard again in Carson City at a later date.

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:22 p.m.

 

                                    RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

 

 

 

                                                               

                                    Marilyn Cole

                                    Committee Secretary

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assembly Committee on Education

Date:  February 12, 1993, 1993

Page: 1

 

 

 

Assembly Committee on Education

Date:  February 12, 1993

Page:  2