MINUTES OF MEETING
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
Sixty-seventh Session
June 1, 1993
The Assembly Committee on Government Affairs was called to order by Chairman Val Z. Garner at 8:10 a.m. Tuesday, June 1, 1993, in Room 330 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Rick C. Bennett, Vice Chairman
Mrs. Kathy M. Augustine
Mr. Douglas A. Bache
Mrs. Marcia de Braga
Mr. Pete Ernaut
Mrs. Vivian L. Freeman
Mr. Lynn Hettrick
Mrs. Joan A. Lambert
Mr. James W. McGaughey
Mr. Roy Neighbors
Mrs. Gene W. Segerblom
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Mr. Val Z. Garner, Chairman, Excused
Mrs. Erin Kenny, Excused
Mr. Wendell P. Williams, Excused
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
None.
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mrs. Dana Bennett, Senior Research Analyst.
OTHERS PRESENT:
Mr. John Pappageorge, Clark County; Mr. David Parks, Regional Transportation Commission; Mr. Gene Miller, Assistant to Don Laughlin.
ASSEMBLY BILL 642 - Reduces number of appraisals that are required before sale of real or personal property of unincorporated town.
Assemblyman Roy Neighbors, Assembly District 36, testifying as a proponent of AB 642, indicated the unincorporated town of Tonopah had asked his help on the bill. He said often there were no competent real estate appraisers available in the rural areas, and when an effort would be made to have property owned by the town put on the tax rolls, the requirement to have three appraisals could outweigh the value of getting the property on the rolls. Mr. Neighbors noted this was permissive language as it called for one or more appraisers. Mr. Neighbors introduced and briefly reviewed a proposed amendment to AB 642 (Exhibit C).
Mr. McGaughey asked why the bill indicated property could be sold for 75 percent of the appraised value, he felt if there was an appraised value, it should be the market value.
Mr. Neighbors pointed out the original bill came from Tonopah and he was simply presenting it for them.
Mr. McGaughey said the amendment did not address that issue.
Further discussion ensued regarding the selling price of 75 percent of the appraised value.
There being no further testimony, Vice Chairman Bennett closed the hearing on AB 642.
ASSEMBLY BILL 644 - Expands authority of counties to establish parking facilities and spaces.
Mr. John Pappageorge, Clark County, testified in favor of AB 644 (Exhibit D).
Mrs. Lambert queried what a parking district was and how it would be financed.
Mr. Pappageorge replied parking districts could be financed in different ways, including a G.E.D. district; private money; (or by dues-paying members of several businessmen). He stated this bill was brought up as Mr. Laughlin wanted to build a parking garage facility on county property in Laughlin and would like Clark County to operate it.
Mr. McGaughey assumed in the metropolitan area strategically located lots would have security of some sort.
Mr. Pappageorge responded he could not answer that but he doubted security would be no less or greater than any other parking area.
Mr. McGaughey asked if the parking lot would be enclosed. Mr. Pappageorge indicated he thought it would be fenced.
Mr. Bache commented under the original language it appeared there was no ability to charge for parking spaces, but the new language had the capability to be able to charge for parking.
Mr. Pappageorge replied he was not aware of any intent to charge for parking. He indicated the ability was currently in place to be able to charge the public and he thought if it became an issue, employees could negotiate for free parking.
Mrs. Segerblom questioned if the county was willing to provide the transport service from the parking lot to the areas the employees needed to go.
Mr. Pappageorge indicated that service could be provided by a transit system or car pooling.
Mrs. Augustine stated she knew language in AB 644 was permissive but she did not feel a new parking facility needed to be constructed, mostly as people lived in such close proximity in the city. She did not feel people would be carpooling as the city was on a 24-hour cycle rather than eight to five, and she also felt the public transportation system was not doing a very good job.
Mr. Pappageorge felt there needed to be more evaluation of the public transportation system to determine its efficiency as it had added extra routes and improved in other respects. He indicated Mr. David Parks from the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) would be happy to answer questions.
Further discussion ensued.
Mr. David Parks, Regional Transportation Commission, testified in favor of AB 644 and offered a proposed amendment (Exhibit E).
Mrs. Lambert asked if the funding would come from mass transit.
Mr. Parks indicated there were a number of different funding scenarios feasible and proceeded to explain some of the possibilities.
Discussion continued regarding aspects of funding during the course of which Mr. Parks introduced a flyer from the RTC (Exhibit F).
Mrs. Augustine indicated the proposed amendment addressed a different chapter in NRS and it had not been posted to be heard. She wondered if Mr. Pappageorge had seen a copy of the amendment.
Mr. Parks replied he did not think so and he did not want to stall the existing AB 644 for the amendment. He felt the RTC had the capability to do that type of activity through NRS 377(a) but felt it would offer them flexibility by having it in NRS 273.
Mr. Pappageorge answered Mrs. Augustine he had not seen the amendment and did not know if he would oppose or agree with it. He indicated when he testified earlier he had not realized Mr. Gene Miller, Assistant to Don Laughlin, was present and should the committee have questions regarding the parking garage, Mr. Miller would be happy to answer them.
Mr. Gene Miller, Assistant to Don Laughlin, indicated he could only address the Laughlin portion of the bill. He stated about three years ago Mr. Laughlin had proposed to construct a parking lot at his own expense. The parking lot had been approved by the county commission and the Laughlin town board. Mr. Miller stressed Mr. Laughlin was going to build the lot, would pay for it, and security would be included.
Discussion between Mr. Miller and committee members followed regarding specifics of the parking lot in Laughlin.
There being no further testimony, Vice Chairman Bennett closed the hearing on AB 644.
ASSEMBLY CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 36 - Urges persons in charge of state buildings to display flag of National League of Families of American Prisoners and Missing in Southeast Asia.
Vice Chairman Bennett indicated an amendment on ACR 36 had been proposed (Exhibit G) and he asked Mr. Hettrick to review it.
Mr. Hettrick stated he had some concerns with the amendment, specifically the preamble which would amend the resolution, page 1, line 2, after "result of" insert "Korean Conflict, World War II and." Mr. Hettrick said the area of the bill which read "2,265 Americans...," would not include the loss sustained by the Korean Conflict and World War II.
Mr. Hettrick further felt the area which stated, "the flags be flown until such time as the governor publicly proclaims the fates of these Americans have been..." should have the word "appropriately resolved," as the current language seemed too absolute to him.
He was also concerned with the bottom of the amendment which stated, "ACR No. 36--Urges person..." but on page 1, line 24 of the bill it stated "to require that all..." and felt the language should be consistent.
Vice Chairman Bennett requested Mr. Hettrick to meet with Mr. Heller to resolve his areas of concern.
There being no further business to come before committee, the meeting was adjourned at 8:52 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
LINDA FEATHERINGILL
Committee Secretary
??
Assembly Committee on Government Affairs
June 1, 1993
Page: 1