MINUTES OF MEETING

      ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      June 18, 1993

 

 

 

The Assembly Committee on Government Affairs was called to order by Chairman Val Z. Garner at 8:08 a.m., Friday, June 18, 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. Val Z. Garner, Chairman

      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. Erin Kenny

      Mrs. Joan A. Lambert

      Mr. James W. McGaughey

      Mr. Roy Neighbors

      Mrs. Gene W. Segerblom

      Mr. Wendell P. Williams

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

      None

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

      Ernie Adler, Capitol Senatorial District

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Dana Bennett, Research Analyst

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

      Carole Vilardo/NV Taxpayers Ass'n.

      Gaylyn Spriggs/representing herself

      Bonnie James/Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce

     Mary Santina/Retail Association of NV   

      Lucille Lusk/NV Coalition of Concerned Citizens

      Mike Wilden, Deputy Administrator/Welfare Division

      Peter Krueger/NV Petroleum Marketing Association

      Pat Horgan/Commercial Hardware

      Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President/NV Farm Bureau

      Ray Bacon/NV Manufacturer's Association

      Mark Dawson/UCCSN

      Jim Eardley/UCCSN

      Dorothy Gallagher/Board of Regents

      Mike Turnipseed/State Engineer

      Jim Richardson/NV Faculty Alliance

      Paula Berkley/Washoe Tribe and Walker River Paiute Tribe

      Brian Wallace, Chairman/Washoe Tribe

      Rod James/State Historic Preservation Officer

      Bob Hadfield/NV Association of Counties

      Tom Grady/NV League of Cities

 

SENATE BILL 231:  Makes various changes relating to encouragement of new industry in Nevada.

 

Ernie Adler/Capitol Senatorial District, walked the committee through SB 231 section by section. Discussion by committee members is submitted as Exhibit C.

 

SENATE BILL 370:  Makes various changes relating to Administrative Procedure Act.

 

Carole Vilardo/NV Taxpayers Association, offered remarks from Senator Ann O'Connell in support of SB 370. She also explained the major points on the sections of the bill. A packet was then distributed to committee members and elaborated upon by Ms. Vilardo (Exhibit D) entitled "Taxtopics."

 

Ms. Vilardo noted there were three objections raised in the Senate to SB 370:

           

      l) From the Welfare Division: Because of their procedure they agreed they would adopt what was required in NRS 233B and NRS 422 (one of the reasons for the reprint).

 

      2) Objection raised by the Dept. of Environmental Protection in being able to deal with something not addressed in the law where they were not given proper authority.

 

      3) The University System opposed the bill saying they should not be included because they considered themselves to be a fourth branch of government. Also, the State Water Engineer stated he had a problem with some of the cases.

 

Gaylyn Spriggs, representing herself, urged passage of SB 370 and asserted it would take care of problems associated with regulatory process.

 

Bonnie James/Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, also declared support of SB 370 and SJR 23 and urged passage of same.

 

Mr. McGaughey, in disgust, commented the Legislative Commission, of which he was a member, received regulations only the night before the Legislative Commission meeting, thereby preventing adequate review of bills before voting on them. "So," he added, "changes were in order."

 

Mary Santina/Retail Association of Nevada, in support of SB 370, emphasized it was their position all forums conducting business of the public should be open to the scrutiny of the public. She added good government should be addressed in a "can do" type of

atmosphere as business could lend a lot of resources in the regulatory process to make sure the legislative intent was carried forward and that business also was not damaged in the process.

 

Lucille Lusk/NV Coalition of Concerned Citizens, speaking in support of SB 370 stated, "Openness builds trust, and trust is badly needed between the people and government."  She noted problems occurred when legislative decision making disappeared into unelected bodies, agencies where people felt they had no access. She added there were a number of provisions in the bill assuring the people they would be given adequate information so they would know what was being done in the regulatory process.

 

Ms. Lusk asked the committee to consider one addition in Section 8: To include the number of persons who appeared representing the public sector, i.e., government agencies, government employee groups and grant recipients; and also the number representing the private sector.

 

Mike Wilden, Deputy Administrator/Welfare Division, spoke in support of SB 370. His written testimony is submitted as

Exhibit E.

 

Peter Krueger/NV Petroleum Marketers Association, agreed SB 370 was an agency accountability bill which protected the rights of small business. He urged committee support.

 

Mr. Pat Horgan/Commercial Hardware, indicated if some of the provisions inclusive in SB 370 had been in place, he would not have had to introduce AB 544. He asked the committee to seriously consider the bill.

 

Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President/NV Farm Bureau, in favor of SB 370's passage, said including those changes and additional governmental entities in the Administrative Procedures Act made for solid moves forward for good government.

His testimony is included as Exhibit F.

 

Ray Bacon/NV Manufacturer's Association, stated his organization supported both SB 370 and SJR 23.

 

Mark Dawson, Chancellor of the University and Community College System of NV, stated their opposition to SB 370 was the inclusion of the University and Community College System in the bill. He noted the System's exemption should remain, and urged the committee to amend SB 370 by deleting the brackets on lines 6 and 7 of Page 1; and in addition, Section 16 and 18 on Page 9 also should be deleted. Mr. Dawson maintained to comply with the onerous and time consuming procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act would be a burden and hinderance on the ability of the Board to conduct the business in a efficient and timely manner. See Exhibit G for Mr. Dawson's complete testimony.

 

Jim Eardley, Vice Chairman/Board of Regents, affirmed he was not against SB 370 but against the University and the Community College System being lumped into the bill. He emphasized they were not a state agency but an elected body representing the people of the state of Nevada with the responsibility to administer the University constitutionally. He noted their strong set of rules and regulations were primarily directed in helping students get through. He added, "Don't throw regulations on us that we will fight to the end. We are on the board to help students, not to be intimidated by a legislative body or anybody else."

 

Dorothy Gallagher/Board of Regents, reiterated the fact they were doing the best they could for the people of the state and expressed concern at the adversarial relationship being brought about between the Legislature and the Board of Regents.

 

Mrs. Segerblom empathized with Ms. Gallaher's statement. She said when one is elected to a job and responsible to the public, the Legislature should not interfere, and concluded they should not be mentioned in the bill.

 

Mike Turnipseed/State Engineer, testifying against SB 370, distributed a copy of a memo to Senator Mark James (Exhibit H), dated June 11, when amendments to other legislation were being considered that would have put the department under the Administrative Procedures Act either in total or in part. The exhibit explained the impracticability for the state engineer to comply with the Administrative Procedures Act in total.

 

Responding to Mr. Garner's inquiry as to a fiscal impact if his agency had to adhere to the Administrative Procedures Act, Mr. Turnipseed estimated if he had to hold a hearing on every contested case, he would need five additional hearing officers and two additional Attorney General assistants, which in monetary terms would be a total of $460,000 per year.

 

Mr. Turnipseed stated he did not oppose the Administrative Procedures Act for those agencies where it applied, but simply asked the brackets be removed on line 14 of the first reprint of the bill.

 

Answering a question posed by Mrs. Freeman, Mr. Turnipseed indicated there was an amendment to SB 230 in the Senate that would put him under the Administrative Procedures Act in the limited situation for adopting rules of practice for hearings. A further amendment, he indicated, on AB 314 (on Senate side now) would put him under the Administrative Procedures Act for appeals.

 

Jim Richardson, representing NV Faculty Alliance, said he hoped the negative publicity associated with the system in the past one or two years would not force unnecessary activities upon them as procedures already in place were certainly adequate. Also, indicating the governor's budget would leave them with 472 people short, he said trying to figure out how to work under the Administrative Procedures Act would cause great confusion in a system already in extreme duress. He noted if they were being funded at the level approved last year, the budget would have $57 million more for higher education than it did. He urged the committee, on behalf of the faculty, to renew the exemption already in place.

 

In the absence of Nevada Press Association representatives, Exhibit I was submitted representing their views.

 

Mr. Garner closed the hearing on SB 370.

 

      ********

 

 

SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 23:   Proposes to amend Nevada constitution to authorize specifically legislative review of administrative regulations.

 

      MRS. AUGUSTINE MOVED DO PASS ON SJR 23.

 

      MRS. LAMBERT SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      MOTION CARRIED WITH MR. WILLIAMS ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE       VOTE.

 

      ********

 

SENATE BILL 408:  Revises provisions concerning certain unlawful acts relating to Indian burial sites.

 

Paula Berkley/Washoe Tribe and Walker River Paiute Tribe, asked Mr. Brian Wallace to address SB 408.

 

Brian Wallace, Chairman/Washoe Tribe, explained the mission of SB 408 was basically to protect graves and burial sites of their relatives and ancestors lying in areas under state jurisdiction. He added they had been working closely not only with state but with federal authorities to try to provide protections for American Indians to enjoy the benefits of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

 

Mr. Wallace further explained, they had been working very hard to protect their areas of significance, particularly religious significance of the Washoe people in the Tahoe Basin. Although their reservation lands had been very much diminished, they still strongly projected their interest and belief that they were still the guardians of the Tahoe area. As a result they had become strong advocates for the protection of the heritage of the region. He quoted a statement which applied, he said, to the non-Indian community as well as to the Indian: "A society that cannot remember its past and honor it, is imperiled of losing it."

 

Mr. Garner declared there would be no further testimony on SB 408. Responding to his inquiry as to the fiscal note, Ms. Berkley clarified the fiscal portion related to the fact should fines be incurred, the monies would go to historic preservation.

So it would not be a cost, but a gain to the General Fund.

 

Rod James, State Historic Preservation Officer, stated the archaeological community was in concurrence with the bill.

 

Ms. Berkley gave an explanation of Section 2 of SB 408 in response to Mrs. Augustine's questioning the absence of the penalty of a gross misdemeanor.

 

      MR. HETTRICK MOVED DO PASS ON SB 408.

 

      MRS. FREEMAN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      MOTION CARRIED WITH ASSEMBLYMEN WILLIAMS AND LAMBERT ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.

 

      ********

 

     

SENATE BILL 174:  Makes various changes to provisions governing meetings of public bodies.

 

Bob Hadfield/NV Association of Counties, noted when SB 174 first came to their attention they were unaware of the change from the current three day noticing for meetings to five days.  All members, he indicated, were notified and all 17 counties had serious problems with the change. It would make it impossible for county government to function as they could not continue an item from one week to another since it could not be put on the agenda. Instead of making them more responsive to the citizens, he emphasized it made them less responsive. In summary, Mr. Hadfield said, "We believe we will be less user friendly if it's changed to four or five days."

 

Tom Grady/Nevada League of Cities, reiterated comments from Mr. Hadfield and read excerpts from letters received from cities indicating lack of complaints concerning agendas not being received three days ahead of meetings. Letters from Winnemucca and Henderson (Exhibits J and K respectively) are attached.

 

Mr. Grady distributed a suggested amendment to SB 174 (Exhibit L) from Mr. Hank Etchemendy/NV Association of school boards, who was unable to appear. Testimony from Ande Engleman/Nevada Press Association, is also submitted as Exhibit M.

 

      ********

 

Returning to SB 231, Mr. Garner thought action should be taken on it. After a show of hands, Mr. Garner declared since only two members voted to exclude Clark County, there was an appetite to leave the bill as it was with a letter specifying the intent.

For the benefit of new legislators, Mrs. Garner explained the legislative intent was Nevada Power would not have to participate if they did not want to.

 

      MR. ERNAUT MOVED DO PASS ON SB 231.

 

      MRS. LAMBERT SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      MR. MCGAUGHEY MOVED TO AMEND SB 231 TO INCLUDE A LETTER OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT TO BE ENTERED INTO THE COMMITTEE'S RECORD AND ALSO TO BE ENTERED ON THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR ON THE DATE THE BILL IS VOTED UPON.

     

      MR. BACHE SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

Mrs. Augustine said she would be voting against the bill as Nevada Power has real concerns which had not been considered.

 

Mr. Bennett also indicated he would not be voting for the amendment as he felt a letter of intent was unnecessary; Mrs. Lambert also opposed the letter of intent, stating it was not good public policy; Mr. Garner asked for a voice vote as to whether to include the letter of intent. It was voted down.

 

Back to the main motion to pass SB 231:

 

      MOTION CARRIED WITH MRS. AUGUSTINE VOTING NO.

 

      ********

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 11:Authorizes certain additional boards of trustees to request tax on residential construction.

 

Mr. Garner withdrew AB 11 stating there was no need for the bill. He indicated it would be rereferred back to committee.

 

There being no further business to come before committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 a.m.

 

      RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

                             

      CHRISTINE SHAW

      Committee Secretary

 

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assembly Committee on Government Affairs

June 18, 1993

Page: 1