MINUTES OF MEETING
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Sixty-seventh Session
January 22, 1993
The Assembly Committee on Judiciary was called to order by Chairman Robert M. Sader at 8:11 a.m. on Friday, January 22, 1993, in Room 332 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda, Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Robert M. Sader, Chairman
Mr. Gene T. Porter, Vice Chairman
Mr. Bernie Anderson
Mr John C. Bonaventura
Mr. John C. Carpenter
Mr. Tom Collins, Jr.
Mr. James A. Gibbons
Mr. William D. Gregory
Mr. William A. Petrak
Mr. John B. Regan
Ms. Stephanie Smith
Mr. Louis A. Toomin
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Mr. Ken L. Haller Absent/Excused
Mr. Scott Scherer Absent/Excused
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Ms. Denice Miller, Research Analyst
OTHERS PRESENT:
See attached guest list (Exhibit B)
After the secretary called the roll, Mr. Sader began hearing testimony on AB 7.
ASSEMBLY BILL 7 -
Eliminates requirement that person be 60 years of age or older to be eligible to have public guardian appointed.
Ms. Cynthia Pyzel of the Department of Health and Mental Retardation came forward to testify on AB 7. Ms. Pyzel stated the Department of Health and Mental Retardation had proposed AB 7 in an effort to formalize the present ability of the Public Guardian to act in the best interests of the mentally retarded primarily in Washoe and Clark counties but also throughout the state. Apparently, the proposed language of AB 7 had created some problems with the Public Guardian's office. Ms. Pyzel requested AB 7 be taken off the calendar until the problems in language had been worked out.
Mr. Sader took AB 7 off the calendar and requested it not be heard again until there was some agreement made by state officials on the language. Mr. Sader related AB 7 raised the issue of unfunded mandates.
There being no further testimony, Mr. Sader terminated the hearing on AB 7.
ASSEMBLY BILL 5 -
Requires consideration of offender's obligation to pay child support for purposes of presentence investigation and granting probation.
Ms. Kay Zunino, Chief of the Child Support Enforcement Program and Mr. John Slansky, Chief of the Department of Parole and Probation came forward to testify as requesting agencies in support of AB 5. Ms. Zunino supplied the committee with written testimony (Exhibit C) of Fourth Judicial District Judge Thomas Stringfield requesting the two agencies to work together to ensure that persons on probation pay and stay current in their child support obligation. Judge Stringfield further suggested the requirement be codified to emphasize the importance of fulfilling a child support obligation. Judge Stringfield followed up the conference call with a letter (Exhibit D) suggesting two amendments to Chapter 176 of NRS. Ms. Zunino stressed when initially the bill draft was submitted it was suggested the language be as Judge Stringfield had recommended. The language of the second section of the bill, however, was not as Judge Stringfield had advised, and through an oversight, Ms. Zunino had not brought it to the attention of the bill drafter.
After some discussion, Ms. Zunino and Mr. Slansky supported a modification of AB 5 to make the language less restrictive. Mr. Sader expressed, "We can establish the true intent of the bill, as it relates to section 2, is to create a mandate that when a person is on probation, that person must remain current in his or her child support obligation. Is that correct?" Mr. Slansky agreed with Mr. Sader's statement. A short discussion followed.
Mr. George McNally, President of Nevada Trial Lawyers' Association came forward to testify also on behalf of AB 5. Mr. McNally said he believed the proposed amendments being discussed would answer his questions and relieve his concerns.
Mr. Sader suggested language on page 2 lines 31 through 34 be replaced by, "The District Court Judge shall consider as a condition of probation the payment of any arrearages in child support obligations and the payment of future child support obligations." Mr. Sader asked Ms. Zunino, Mr. Slansky and Mr. McNally if the proposed amended language was acceptable and they all concurred. There being no further testimony Mr. Sader closed the hearing on AB 5.
ASSEMBLYMAN ANDERSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS AB 5.
ASSEMBLYMAN REGAN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT.
ASSEMBLY BILL 6
Establishes right of way of vehicles at intersection where traffic-control signal is not functioning.
Mr. Sader called Mr. Brian Hutchins, Chief of the Transportation Division of the Attorney's General's Office, to testify in support of AB 6. Mr. P.D. Kaiser, Chief Traffic Engineer of the Department of Transportation assisted in Mr. Hutchins' presentation. Mr. Hutchins told the committee his division provided counsel to the Department of Transportation and the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety. AB 6 was requested by the Department of Transportation and the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety. Mr. Hutchins conveyed the need for AB 6 in clarifying the law in the occurrence of malfunctioning traffic control signals concerning amending NRS 484.315. Mr. Hutchins described the confusion sometimes occurring at intersections where traffic signals were not operating. He told the committee Nevada law was not really clear on this point. Mr. Hutchins distributed copies of NRS sections 484.315, 484.317, 484.319 and 484.321 which related to intersections and rights-of-way (Exhibit E). Mr. Hutchins pointed out under NRS 484.315 subsection 1, usually the first in time was the first in right if this could be determined, or in the second subparagraph if arriving at the same time the vehicle on the left yielded to the vehicle on the right.
Attention was also drawn to subsection 4 and certain contradictions having to do with control devices. At intersections which had malfunctioning traffic control signals Mr. Hutchins believed there was a need to make the law clear. For safety purposes he suggested the intersection be treated as one requiring everyone to stop as if a stop sign had been erected at each entrance.
After extensive discussion and hypothetical situations posed by members of the committee, as well as Mr. Hutchins and Mr. Kaiser, Mr. Sader suggested an amendment on line 13, deleting "two or more vehicles," and inserting, "when a vehicle enters an intersection" and then to change the noun/verb agreement throughout the text on the first page indicating "one" vehicle. Mr. Sader's second suggested amendment would be to substitute the word "inoperative" in place of "not functioning."
Mr. Carpenter inquired, "After making a stop each driver should proceed cautiously. It looks to me like you are telling them both to go and collide." Mr. Sader then suggested the language, "The driver will proceed cautiously yielding to vehicles which have previously completed a stop."
There being no further testimony on AB 6 Mr. Sader closed the hearing.
ASSEMBLYMAN BONAVENTURA MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS AB 6.
ASSEMBLYMAN SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT.
There being no further business to come before committee, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
CHANDRA PENDERLAND
Committee Secretary
??
Assembly Committee on Judiciary
January 22, 1993
Page: 1