MINUTES OF MEETING
ASSEMBLY SUBCOMMITTEE ON TAXATION
Sixty-seventh Session
June 7, 1993
The Assembly Subcommittee on Taxation was called to order by Chairman Robert E. Price at 6:15 p.m., June 7, 1993, in the gymnasium of the Hawthorne Middle School, Hawthorne, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda, Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Robert E. Price, Chairman
Mrs. Joan A. Lambert
Mr. Roy Neighbors
Mr. John B. Regan
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Dianne Laird, Committee Secretary
Linda D. Chandler-Law, Committee Secretary
Chuck Woodworth, Legislative Police
Leroy Jorgensen, Legislative Police
OTHERS PRESENT:
Donna Glazier
Terry Johnson, Chairman, Hawthorne Town Advisory Board
Jannine Huffy
Paula Berkley, Walker River Paiute Tribe
Linda Dow, teacher
Anita Collins, Chairman, Walker River Paiute Tribe
Joel Hedes, Schurz Elementary School teacher
Frances Hawkins, former legislator and school board member
Mary Koscinski, Mineral County school teacher
Gene Brown, taxpayer
Phil Treick, Mineral County High School teacher
Jean Conelly
Marlene Bunch, Mineral County Clerk Treasurer
Fidel Gomez, Deputy, Mineral County Commission
Tommy Cartwright, Mineral County employee
Richard Groy
Herman Staat, Chairman, Mineral County Board of County Commissioners
Richard Bryant, member, Mineral County School Board
Chairman Price thanked everyone for their attendance. Since 1975 this was the largest audience present at any legislative meeting he had attended. He appreciated the remarkable response to such short notice. He explained how the subcommittee had been decided upon and what measures had been taken to notify the citizens of Mineral County of the meeting.
The purpose of the meeting, Chairman Price, elaborated was to act in a town hall format as a subcommittee on various tax matters, including the situation relevant to the Schurz school. The subcommittee would take ideas from those who would testify back to the entire committee and the legislature. He introduced the members of the subcommittee.
Chairman Price recognized and welcomed Gaylyn Spriggs and Frances Hawkins, former legislators from Mineral County. He announced there were handouts available on various topics. Chairman Price explained the meeting format and asked those who wished to testify to please keep their remarks brief, to the point, and nonrepetitive.
Chairman Price called on Mr. Neighbors to make the opening remarks.
Mr. Neighbors stated he wanted to give a brief explanation of the committee introduction of AB 458, see EXHIBIT C attached, and succeeding actions taken by the committee. Historically, he commented, there was no question Schurz and, indeed, Mineral County needed new school facilities. He said he had had several significant doubts about the feasibility and impact of the original bill and could not support it. The potential negative fiscal impact to the state highway fund was $40 million over the next ten years. However, although he personally felt something had to be done about the schools in Mineral County, he did not feel the legislature should have to mandate it. He felt the citizens of Mineral County needed to be responsible for working out a plan to rectify the situation. He added he could not support the bill draft request (BDR S-2108 attached as EXHIBIT D) which had subsequently been proposed, either. He reviewed the bill draft and stated his main objection was the proposal mandated issuance of bonds without a vote. He said in the twenty years he had been involved with the legislative process, he had never seen such a mandate to raise property and sales tax rates for any county. He stated if such a bill was passed, it would set terrible precedent. He would be very surprised if a bill such as this made it out of the committee. He explained many counties had used an increase in sales tax to finance various projects and the county could certainly use those revenues for school projects, if they so decided by vote. He added the BDR had not been heard as yet and at this point was only a concept to be discussed.
Chairman Price explained several people had called to object to the meeting being scheduled on such short notice. However, he pointed out the committee had decided to use the subcommittee, open-town-meeting format to enable the committee to obtain information for further deliberation on various tax matters. He also mentioned the legislature was not subject to the notice provisions of the "open meeting law" because they did not meet regularly or year-round as most public bodies did. He explained this was the only day which could be arranged to have this meeting and the committee had decided to take its only opportunity to give the Mineral County residents the chance to be a part of the process. He expanded he was aware it was difficult for most citizens to make time to come to meetings which were scheduled in Carson City, even if they were held in the evening.
Chairman Price said he had spoken with the editor of the Independent-News, Jack McCloskey, when the meeting was set. Unfortunately, Mr. McCloskey had just put the newspaper to print and could not refer to it except in the editorial, which is attached as EXHIBIT E. He also noted he had contacted the superintendent of schools in Mineral County and the radio stations in Tonopah and Fallon to help with notification.
Chairman Price called for testimony.
Donna Glazier spoke first in support of AB 458. She stated she had served on the school board and had worked extensively trying to obtain support for the failed school bond which would have provided schools for Schurz and Hawthorne. She felt the fuel tax bill would have provided a solution without costing the citizens of Mineral County any additional money on the property tax. She stated since the fuel tax seemed to be a lost issue, she would support the new idea in the BDR because the schools were desperately needed.
Chairman Price informally confirmed there were not sufficient votes to get the fuel tax bill out of the committee. He added, subsequent to the testimony in committee, it was the feeling of most of the members that the majority of the citizens of Mineral County were in opposition to the fuel tax. He would appreciate those who testified giving their opinion as to which avenue should be pursued.
Terry Johnson, Chairman of the Hawthorne Town Advisory Board, speaking on his own behalf, stated he also supported the Indian gas tax bill and knew it was not going to pass. He too, had problems with the provisions of the BDR; however, he had a bigger problem with the fact the children of the county did not have a decent school. He added, although he was not in favor of taxation without representation, he was in favor of finding some way to get better schools for the community. Part of the difficulties Hawthorne was having with poor economic growth was an insufficient school system which deterred companies from moving to the area. Chairman Price indicated there had already been bills passed this session which granted incentives to economic development.
Jannine Huffy spoke in support of the BDR. She said she felt Schurz had done a good job trying to gather support for some community supported measure which would provide the funds to build the needed school. She favored the BDR over the gas tax bill because there was no guaranty the gas taxes would go to support education and the schools. She thanked the audience for having been so respectful and their attention. She said the best way to get a new school for Hawthorne, where she taught, was to first get a new school for Schurz which was in desperate need.
Paula Berkley, representing the Walker River Paiute Tribe, stated, for those who had not been to the Schurz school, the school buildings had been built in 1934 and recommended for condemnation in 1970. She stated the construction included no rebar and there was significant cracking in the structure. Other difficulties with the school were its location, being proximate to the railroad tracks and within the floodplain of a seismicly active reservoir. The Walker River Paiute Tribe had been pursuing various plans to obtain funding for the school, but to no avail. The gas tax bill and the BDR being discussed were only two of those options. Ms. Berkley submitted a letter dated May 18, 1993, attached as EXHIBIT F, which was an historical perspective to the background on AB 458. She stated the federal government, through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) or otherwise, was no longer funding schools.
Ms. Berkley explained the advantage of the BDR concept was it affected both the sales tax and the property tax which spread the burden more broadly and equitably throughout the community. If some resolution was not found which would fund a school, the only alternative for the tribe was to litigate the case against the county, the school board, and the state as a last resort.
In response to previously made allegations, Ms. Berkley, explained the reason the tribe had not sought a second try at passage of the ballot question was the superintendent, bonding committee and others had indicated to the tribe they did not believe the measure would pass. The tribe saw no benefit in taking it to a vote again if there was no chance of success, therefore, the tribe began seeking alternatives.
Linda Dow, a teacher for 18 years, stated she was in support of any measure which would get a new school at Schurz. She stated funds for new schools had been needed for a long time. If people would turn out for school functions as they had for this meeting she felt there would be little difficulty in raising funds. After tonight she thought everyone in Hawthorne would understand the problems better. She explained she had come from an area far poorer than Mineral County; however, the schools she had attended there were far better than what the children of Mineral County were attending. If the residents would take the time to tour the schools and make themselves more aware, she felt passage of a bond issue to remedy the situation would be far more feasible.
Chairman Price elaborated the reason the legislature was becoming involved in what was perceived as a local-county problem was the Nevada Constitution had always required the state to make provisions for education. The legislature had direct responsibility to provide adequate and proper educational services, not only for primary and secondary schools but also at the university level. The state legislature had set up school districts in each county and the state was liable in the event litigation was brought due to a deficiency allowed by local school district policies.
Anita Collins, Chairman, Walker River Paiute Tribe, welcomed the members to Mineral County. She said she was pleased everyone was present because it gave her an opportunity to explain the history of the tribe. She said their tribe had lived in the area around Walker Lake for 26,000 years. Between the time the Spaniards first came into the area around 1776 and when the European settlement became entrenched around the middle of the nineteenth century, various governments had established dominance in the area, severely affecting the Indians' lifestyle and heritage. In the 1830's the Department of War established the reservation and the set-aside marker was still apparent in the corner of the Hawthorne cemetery. The reservation included all of Walker Lake. In 1849 the tribe had lost all its land and resources when it was placed under the Department of the Interior. The Department of the Interior did not recognize the tribe as people who inherently had rights to be dealt with, but the government assured the tribe it would be the trustee of the Indian people and resources forever.
Ms. Collins continued, due to the number of government employees which lived on the reservation, a school was built for the children of its employees in 1935. There was a Bureau of Indian Affairs agency located in Schurz and an Indian Health office. However, the Indian children were not educated on-site. From the early years of the twentieth century, the children of the tribe were sent away to a state boarding school at Stewart between sixth and twelfth grades. In 1944 Stewart was closed and the children returned to the reservation and were merged with the employees' children at the school which had been built at Schurz. Therefore, she concluded, the Schurz school was built as a public school, not as an Indian school.
In the early thirties, the state of Nevada took on responsibility of the tribes in Nevada by contracting with the federal government. In 1953 the tribes voted to return to federal jurisdiction because of the poor service provided by the state. She added members of the tribes had not become citizens of the United States until passage of an act of Congress in 1934. She stated although her people had been residents and citizens of this land for some 26,000 years, they had only been U. S. citizens for less than 60 years. She elaborated on their unique dual citizenship position and the demographic makeup of their population.
Ms. Collins stated if something was not done, either by passage of some form of legislation or coming to a workable solution with the community, the only alternative would be for the tribe to bring suit against the county. Ms. Collins' notes are attached as EXHIBIT G.
Ms. Collins summarized her position saying the school posed serious dangers to the children; the federal government no longer wanted any responsibility through the Bureau of Indian Affairs or otherwise; there were funds generated from the reservation in the form of in-lieu-of taxes; and, the children had a constitutional right to a safe school facility within their own community. She asked for support and directed the audience's attention to pictures which illustrated the condition of the school at Schurz, copies of which are attached as EXHIBIT H.
Ms. Collins discussed their position on the establishment of various businesses and the effect of the various tax exemptions which had been allowed. She also reviewed their efforts to find some way to provide a new school facility for Schurz.
Joel Hedes, a teacher at Schurz Elementary School for 16 years, spoke in support of the bill draft request, although it was not his first preference. He had supported both the bond measure and the fuel tax bill. He represented if the county commission and the local newspaper had supported the original bond measure and it had passed, the whole situation would have been resolved and less expensive for the county. He invited everyone to come to the school at Schurz and see the problems for themselves, first hand.
Chairman Price said opposing testimony would not be taken.
Frances Hawkins, former legislator and school board member, thanked the subcommittee for being in Mineral County and said there was a lot of history behind the issues being addressed. She stated she had been on the school board during the last bond issue attempt. Ms. Hawkins explained we were a nation which was governed by constitutional law, federal and state. She submitted a copy of the Constitution of the State of Nevada, Article 4, Section 20, attached as EXHIBIT I. She added the bill draft being discussed as well as the fuel tax bill were unconstitutional. Ms. Hawkins stated what was being discussed was Mineral County's business and the legislators were constitutionally precluded from passing any local or special law which regulated county or township business or which assessed or collected taxes from the counties or townships. Ms. Hawkins stated she would support the construction of a new school if a bond was passed; however, she did not believe the state had the right to tell the citizens of Mineral County they had to accept an additional tax assessment without a vote of the people. She elaborated her position and gave examples of similar instances which had shown to be unsuccessful. She stated there were other solutions available, which some people might not like, but they were possible.
Chairman Price replied to Ms. Hawkins comments. He stated different constitutional interpretations were always possible. He added the Legislative Counsel could differ with the Attorney General as to the constitutionality of an issue, and often did. Chairman Price cited, as to Article 4, Section 20 (EXHIBIT I), Gibson v. Mason, 5 Nev. 283 (1869),
"The section does not prevent a law authorizing a levy of special or local tax. Provisions of Nevada Article 4, Section 20, prohibiting local or special laws for the assessment and collection of taxes for state, county and township purposes does not prevent passage of laws authorizing or directing (which in this case it is) levy of special or local tax. Prohibition was intended to prohibit local or special laws regulating manner and mode of assessing and collecting taxes, and does not apply to legislation imposing or authorizing imposition of a tax."
He stated there had been several other similar decisions which indicated the legislature could proceed with this. He explained the bill draft would require the school district to advise the county to issue the bonds for school construction. Chairman Price also referred to Article 11, Sections 5 and 6, which are attached as EXHIBIT J.
Mr. Neighbors stated, with due respect to the Legislative Counsel, he believed neither the bill draft nor the fuel tax bill were constitutional. He noted two instances where the Legislative Counsel's decision had been overturned at the Supreme Court level.
Chairman Price stated whether or not they were constitutional it was important for everyone to begin to work together for the benefit of all parties involved.
Mary Koscinski, Mineral County school teacher, stated she was sympathetic to the Schurz school situation, but she felt it was the responsibility of the people of Mineral County to find a solution, not the legislature. She added she would like to see another attempt made at passage of a bond issue because she thought it might pass this time. She asked who had sponsored the bill draft.
Chairman Price explained the committee had requested the bill draft request. He then clarified how the rules applied to bill draft requests. After the first 100 days of the session, an individual sponsor could not request a bill draft: it had to come from a committee and bill had to be introduced through a committee. He did state, however, the idea for the bill draft had come from Ms. Berkley.
Ms. Koscinski thanked Chairman Price for the information. She said she hoped bringing these ideas before the residents of Mineral County would encourage them to join together and resolve the school problem, not just for Schurz but for all of Mineral County.
Gene Brown, Mineral County taxpayer, said he was totally against the tactics which had been used to attempt to get these bills passed. He felt the school bond committee had dropped the ball. He felt if the two communities worked together, they could pass a bond for both schools at the next election. He said he thought the $3.5 million price tag for a school to serve 120 students was very high.
Assemblyman Lambert stated testimony from Clark and Sullivan Contructors had been received in previous meetings which indicated the Schurz school could possibly be built, turn-key, for approximately $1.6 million. At that rate, perhaps, both schools could be built for approximately $3.5 million.
Phil Treick, Mineral County High School teacher, stated he had only been in the state for four years, but he had been an educator most of his life, teaching in South Dakota, Wyoming and Hawthorne, Nevada. He stated he had strongly supported the fuel tax bill and would support anything to improve the children's educational opportunities. He elaborated the children in Schurz desperately needed a new school facility. He felt it should be the school district's number one priority. Although he said it was difficult to know how much support would be given to another bond issue, he asked how many people in the audience would be in favor of supporting schools for Mineral County. (The majority of those present raised their hands.)
Mr. Treick stated he had been on the Mineral County Bond Committee for three years and he had seen nothing constructive accomplished. He stated it was time to act.
Mr. Treick informed everyone he was also on the Economic Development Committee for the county and when companies came to the area they looked at the school systems and their condition. In some cases the condition of the schools had been enough to discourage companies from relocating to the area. He concluded hard feelings could not be legislated away, but he felt the community had to do something positive to solve the problems with the Mineral County schools.
Jean Conelly asked what the taxpayers association was. Chairman Price explained the Nevada Taxpayers Association was an association, headquartered in Carson City and Las Vegas, which had members throughout the state. The association monitored matters throughout the state which affected either tax rates or tax policies. She believed the organization had members in every county and its membership was open to the public. The NTA's position was that it represented the citizens of the state.
Ms. Conelly stated the notice which had been circulated by the NTA and the Associated General Contractors had brought out most of those present. Assessing this type of tax on the citizens of Mineral County was taxation without representation. Although she, too, felt the schools were needed, she thought the solution was for the community to work hand-in-hand to benefit the children, not be mandated by the terms of the bill draft to comply with the wishes of the legislators.
Assemblyman Regan, District 19, stated those at the legislature had been unaware of the problems which existed in Mineral County schools until the Schurz situation had been brought to their attention. They had been told the bond issue had failed, the schools were in terrible condition and the likelihood of another bond issue passing was slim. He explained he had served with Mineral County's representative in 1989, Gaylyn Spriggs who also represented Lincoln County. He said it was the opinion of many of the legislative members, regardless of the need, many rural counties would not or could not pass bond issues. He elaborated Carole Vilardo, head of the NTA, had spent the past month trying to find monies, grant, gift or otherwise, to fund the Schurz and Mineral County schools. He stated he was listening to those in the audience contend they did not want to be taxed by the legislature, they could take care of the situation themselves; however, he asked, what happened to the bond issue the last time it was put before the voters. It failed.
Mr. Regan stated the committee had not come to Hawthorne to listen to all the complaints they had already heard. They had come to try to find out how to solve the critical problem. He said he had personally called an associate to try to borrow $2 million to address the solution. He added he had been working since seven o'clock in the morning and had been willing to come to try to work on a resolution, but was not willing to continue to listen to the same complaints about the legislators trying to do something unconstitutional, over and over. He wanted to work for something more: finding a way to resolve the predicament. The legislators present were just trying to help.
Chairman Price reiterated those present were there to try to find solutions with the help of the citizens of Mineral County. They had come with the hope of getting information and cooperation which would help and which could be taken back to the legislature. He said perhaps someone present tonight would come up with ideas which would be viable.
Marlene Bunch, Mineral County Clerk Treasurer, stated Mineral County funds were used to support the Schurz area. The gross revenue received from Schurz on the 25 taxable properties in the Schurz Township was $7,258.21, total. From those revenues $2,682.62 went to the state general fund. The Schurz Justice Court had generated $23,956. Therefore, the total county revenues had been $26,638.62. At the same time, the costs paid out for the Schurz Justice Court, constable, and fire department had been $45,885.98 which left a deficit of $19,247.36. Such deficit had been picked up by the Mineral County taxpayers.
Chairman Price asked if the deficit had taken into account the federal in-lieu-of tax payments. Ms. Bunch replied there was $265,000 in the federal contingency fund which represented 95% of the county's land. Less than 5% of the county land was taxable. She stated there had not been a breakdown of what portion of the in-lieu-of taxes were applicable to the reservation lands at Schurz, but she would provide those figures to the committee right away.
Ms. Bunch referred to NRS 392.015. She stated that section of the statute provided Indian children had the right to attend school in any county where their reservation was located. The reservation covered parts of Mineral, Churchill and Lyon counties. She added if a one-quarter percent sales tax was added to Mineral County to provide funds for construction of the Schurz school, it would be fair for that same increase to be effective in Churchill and Lyon counties also. The one-quarter percent sales tax would generate $67,000 in Mineral County, $209,000 in Lyon County and 373,000 in Churchill County. $649,000 could potentially be generated within the three counties. With those funds the school could be funded within 4 years. She also stated the residents of the reservation generally did not shop in Hawthorne, they shopped in Yerington and Fallon which were closer.
Ms. Bunch explained there were 11.2 miles of road in Schurz. Mineral County had been responsible for maintaining those roads and it had been a substantial amount. If the fuel bill had passed the fuel taxes generated would have been used for other than road maintenance and Mineral County would still have had to maintain those roads. She concluded saying people she had spoken with had complained repeatedly; they wanted to know why they should fund a school in Schurz when the Indians were not contributing to the funding for the school. She said the feeling was the Indians were saying, "Give me a school, give it to me this way, or else". She did not feel those were the proper tactics to accomplish the goal.
Ms. Bunch added, the school bond issue had lost by only 53 votes. Twenty-three Schurz residents voted against the bond issue. Out of the fifty-seven new registered voters in Schurz, thirty-eight failed to vote at all. Had all the voters in Schurz voted and voted in support of the school, the bond issue would have succeeded. She suggested the burden be shared equally and affect everyone.
Fidel Gomez, Deputy, Mineral County Commission, said he had only heard of the meeting the previous Thursday evening. He said although Schurz needed a school desperately, so did Hawthorne. He asked those present to look at the shabbiness of the school in which the meeting was being held. He said there was enough blame for everybody: the school board, the county commissioners the school officials, and the bonding committee. Nothing had been done. The school administrators had not informed the voters of exactly what had to be done or how much it would cost. He said the bonding committee should have worked on the measure and put it back on the ballot again, after it had failed. He added he did not understand why, if children were in danger, the school had not been closed. He said it was unfortunate the dictatorial tone had had to be taken as represented in the bill draft request. He concluded it would be beneficial to form a committee within the community, comprised of governmental officials, educators, representatives from the tribe and citizens to hammer out the problem and do the right thing.
Chairman Price mentioned the meeting had been scheduled for one hour and we had now been discussing the matter for two hours and it was his intention to try to wrap up the meeting within the next half hour.
Tommy Cartwright, Mineral County employee, speaking on his own behalf, said he felt there were solutions. He said most of the tribal members did not pay the same taxes as the rest of the residents of the county and if they wanted to start contributing more in taxes to the county, he would be willing to help them. He stated he had gone without a pay raise last year because the county was in financial trouble. He said he would not let the children go into the school building at Schurz. He would suggest the Schurz students be bussed to either Lyon or Churchill or other Mineral County schools until the Schurz school could be fixed.
Chairman Price reminded Mr. Cartwright, because reservations were federal trust lands, the federal government paid in-lieu-of taxes and yet no one had taken the trouble to find out just how much money those payments had generated for the county treasury.
Mr. Cartwright said the proposed bill was to help the Indians but he also asked what the Indians needed to do to help themselves. He said he would help them, but he did not intend to help anyone who did not help themselves.
Richard Groy thanked the committee for coming to talk to the residents of Mineral County. He said since the reservation at Schurz was federal property, he believed the Bureau of Indian Affairs and, perhaps Lyon and Churchill counties, should be a part of the process to replace the school. He finalized his comments by saying he affirmed the school needed to be built, but he thought the committee should have let Mineral County try to handle the situation on its own.
Herman Staat, Chairman of the Mineral County Board of County Commissioners, stated he had worked for passage of the bond for the schools in Schurz and Hawthorne. He wanted to see the people of the community sit down together and work out their differences and plan to compile the facts and figures which would make the solution clear and enable a bond issue to pass. He said unfortunately, there had been a lot of hurtful talk and it was time everyone worked to heal that situation.
Chairman Price gave those in the audience information on how to contact their legislators and get information on what was occurring in Carson City. Mr. Neighbors also gave his direct number.
Assemblyman Neighbors thanked the audience for being responsible and respectful. He explained why, as Mineral County's elected representative, he was against the fuel bill. It affected far more than Mineral County and would have cost many areas of the state significant losses in highway fuel taxes and highway funds: Its statewide cost would have been far more significant than its benefit to the Mineral County area. It was bad tax policy. He said he hoped the citizens who lived on the reservation would agree to put monies into the fund to rebuild the school as a "good faith" effort. He also revealed he had proposed another bill before the Ways and Means committee which would have provided state funds for construction of the school. However, with the no new tax policy of Governor Miller, he did not feel he could rally enough support to get the bill passed. He also suggested, if no other remedy could be found, bussing might be an additional option. Or, he suggested, the school at Schurz could be closed and existing schools could be utilized for split-day class utilization.
Mr. Neighbors also explained there had been a bill introduced relative to the taxable status of possessory interests which, if passed, would generate funds for the counties from business which had operations for profit on government or federal lands. He stated the bill would allow for taxing the value of the lease rather than the value of the land. Mr. Neighbors said it looked as though that bill might pass. If it did pass, it would increase Mineral County's tax base and tax revenues considerably. He recognized the federal government had challenged existing law, this bill would hopefully correct the law's shortcoming.
Chairman Price also noted a new bill dealing with the SCCRT (fair share) issue could potentially have a negative impact financially on the smaller counties such as Mineral. The bill was introduced by the Senate and was the "1993 Fair Share Bill". He stated several members of the committee would be working to ameliorate the negative effects of it. Although the bill was supported by NACO, he was not sure everyone was currently aware of the possible negative impacts on the smaller counties.
Richard Bryant, Mineral County School Board member, stated many interesting issues had been discussed. He asked what the school board was to do if a student was hurt as a direct result of the structural deficiencies of the building. He was concerned now the board had been told the Schurz school building had been condemned. He said he felt they had been put in a quandary. He asked what the board was to do. Chairman Price told Mr. Bryant, whether anyone liked it or not they were liable and had been continually, pursuant to the Constitution provisions which were adopted in 1869. In the event a lawsuit was brought as a result of a child being harmed the school district, the county and the State of Nevada would all be responsible. The State of Nevada would, of course, argue the first responsibility would lie with the Mineral County School District.
Mr. Bryant stated the board was being opened up to a charge of negligence by the committee having revealed the condemnation of the school to it. He stated he felt they were being forced to face the situation. He stated the Hawthorne school had been built in 1954 and was also in great need of repair, as well as the high school. All the schools in Mineral County were in need of repair or replacement and the district was in a real crisis. Even recognizing the crisis, he said, the repair or replacement of the schools had to be with a vote of the citizens of the county. He stated the district had refused to float a separate bond for the Schurz school because they did not believe it would succeed.
Mr. Bryant said the community needed trust and cooperation between the county residents. He said resentment had grown up in the community and it needed to be addressed from both sides. He said sometimes just a little effort could make a significant difference. He said if the county was going to succeed, he felt the Indian residents would have to stop insisting on their status as a separate sovereign nation and begin working toward making themselves a part of the Mineral County community. He said everyone had a history, but it was important not to live in the past. He challenged the Indian community to meet the other Mineral County residents half way, in order for all to be benefitted.
Chairman Price thanked everyone for their attendance and attention.
There being no further business to come before committee, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
LINDA CHANDLER LAW
Committee Secretary
??
Assembly Committee on Taxation
Monday
June 7, 1993
Page: 1