MINUTES OF THE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Sixty-seventh Session
June 21, 1993
The Assembly Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman Larry L. Spitler, at 1:15 p.m., on Monday, June 21, 1993, in Room 331 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Larry L. Spitler, Chairman
Mr. Val Z. Garner, Vice Chairman
Mr. Bernie Anderson
Mrs. Vonne Chowning
Mr. Tom Collins, Jr
Mr. William D. Gregory
Mr. Lynn Hettrick
Mr. James W. McGaughey
Mr. Louis A. Toomin
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Kerry Carroll-Davis, Senior Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau
OTHERS PRESENT:
Wayne Howle, Attorney General's Office
WORK SESSION
Chairman opened the meeting by asking for a request for approval of minutes for May 10, 1993, May 19, 1993, May 26, 1993 and June 2, 1993.
MR. GARNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE ABOVE MENTIONED MINUTES.
MR. TOOMIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Spitler stated a committee introduction had been requested for BDR 21-59, a resolution which urged Congress to allow states to set their own speed limits.
MR. HETTRICK MOVED FOR A COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 21-59.
MR. ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 151: Requires state environmental commission to adopt program to control emissions from motor vehicles in all counties.
MR. COLLINS MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 151.
MR. MCGAUGHEY SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. (MR. ANDERSON VOTED NO.)
ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 457: Allows person who is required to attend educational course for driving under influence of alcohol to attend any school approved by department of motor vehicles and public safety.
Mr. Garner remarked it was wrong for the Clark County judges to not recognize DUI schools licensed by the state. He felt the proposed amendment would have a minimal effect as it still enabled judges to only refer clients to the Clark County Municipal Court School and did not require judges to at least issue a list of other recognized DUI schools.
Chairman Spitler indicated Clark County did not make the decision to have judges refer clients to only their school, but instead, that decision had informally been made by the judges.
Answering a question from Mr. Anderson, Chairman Spitler stated the amendment required judges to accept a certification of completion from an accredited school. Mr. Anderson pointed out similar legislation had been before the judiciary committee dealing with DUI schools. He stated Judge Lehman's drug court program in Las Vegas stood out as "pride" of the state system. He voiced concern that funding might be inadequate for the drug court; however, he did note the amendment assessed fees that would be earmarked to subsidize the drug court.
Mr. McGaughey noted DMV licensed private DUI schools but did not monitor their progress and in fact, it was testified DMV had monitored the Clark County school only twice in 13 years as resources were not available for proper monitoring. He stated allowing an amendment which tagged additional fees for the drug court placed an additional burden on all clients referred to the schools. Mr. McGaughey commented people already had difficulty in paying the schools fees and private schools would not accept credit. He felt the court was full of fees and assessments which went unpaid with payment plans. Mr. McGaughey felt schools should absorb some of the cost in giving to the drug court.
Chairman Spitler noted the drug court had an assessment built into its fees. He stated the amendment incorporated into the bill the ability to keep the private schools in business because they were licensed by the state. Regarding monitoring of the schools, Chairman Spitler understood DMV's budget allocated funds which would enable DMV to do a much better job in monitoring the schools.
MR. GREGORY MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 457.
MR. COLLINS SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. (MR. ANDERSON, MR. MCGAUGHEY, AND MR. TOOMIN VOTED NO.)
ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 649: Makes various changes related to restrictions on speed of traffic.
MR. MCGAUGHEY MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 649.
MR. GARNER SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. (MR. HETTRICK VOTED NO.)
Chairman Spitler indicated the bills requested by Chad Dornsife of the National Motorists Association had a lot of public support and commended Mr. Dornsife's background in the subject.
Mr. Hettrick noted the biggest and basically only question raised by Mr. Dornsife's bill was whether or not federal funding would be lost by enactment of the requested measures. He stated although no proof was presented that federal sanctions would occur, Mr. Hettrick chose not to risk federal funding. He did note the bills requested by Mr. Dornsife received a tremendous amount of public support and were worthy ideas.
ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 665: Requires department of transportation to establish system of emergency telephones along most frequently traveled public highways.
Chairman Spitler noted the bill was introduced late in session; however, an amendment was introduced which he reviewed with the committee. He stated the amendment made the bill permissive, meaning the bill would only be implemented if funding was available. He stated the amendment also required the Department of General Services and Department of Transportation to conduct a feasibility study for placement of the emergency telephone system. Chairman Spitler reviewed criteria required for the study.
Mrs. Chowning expressed the importance of the bill and noted she was proud implementation of the much needed system would begin to take place.
Kerry Carroll, Senior Research Analyst, indicated a financial amount had not been estimated in regard to a pilot project or study; however, she stated she would request an estimated amount from DMV.
Chairman Spitler remarked the fiscal note revealed extensive research had been conducted in the area, and he noted the most critical information needed was the cost involved in a pilot program. He stated this would be completed before the final vote occurred on the floor.
A discussion ensued on financial concerns for funding the project.
Mr. Garner commented on his difficulty in supporting the bill so late in session as it seemed to him prioritizing was not done when it came to funding. As an example, he stated he had a bill which dealt with providing education programs for people who functioned at very low levels. Mr. Garner stated that bill was not funded and he did not feel comfortable supporting a bill to put telephones along a highway when money could not be provided to address problems of illiteracy.
Chairman Spitler agreed with Mr. Garner in looking at the big picture; however, he stated DMV had testified that the project would be eligible for highway fund money and not general fund money.
MRS. CHOWNING MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 665.
MR. COLLINS SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE.(MR. GARNER, MR. HETTRICK, MR. MCGAUGHEY AND MR. TOOMIN VOTED NO.)
* * * *
Chairman indicated, with the influx of bills and not enough time for proper posting, that the committee might consider suspending Rule 92 at the next meeting. He stated the reason for suspension of the rule was need at the end of session, monumental Senate bills were often referred to the committee and an adequate five day notice could not be posted.
With no further business, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 1:35 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Carolyn J. Harry
Committee Secretary
??
Assembly Committee on Transportation
June 21, 1993
Page 1