MINUTES OF THE

      SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      June 23, 1993

 

 

 

The Senate Committee on Government Affairs was called to order by Chairman Ann O'Connell, at 2:30 p.m., on Wednesday, June 23, 1993, in Room 227 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda.  Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman

Senator Sue Lowden, Vice Chairman

Senator William J. Raggio

Senator Dean A. Rhoads

Senator Thomas J. Hickey

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

Senator Leonard V. Nevin

Senator Matthew Q. Callister

 

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

Senator Mike McGinness, Central Nevada Senatorial District

Assemblyman Douglas (Doug) A. Bache, Assembly District No. 11

Assemblywoman Gene Wines Segerblom, Assembly District No. 22

 

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Caren Jenkins, Senior Research Analyst

Ricka Benum, Committee Secretary

 

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Robert Gagnier, Lobbyist, State of Nevada Employees Association

Will Keating, Executive Officer, Public Employees Retirement System

John Callister, Assistant Controller, Office of the State

  Controller

David R. Thomas, State Risk Manager, Risk Management Division,

  Department of Administration

Kirby Burgess, Lobbyist, Clark County

Harvey Whittemore, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association

 

John Sande, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association

Mike Johaneson, Service Employees International Union

Jim Nadeau, Lieutenant, Washoe County Sheriff's Office

Ted Finneran, Laughlin Chamber of Commerce

Russell A. Field, Executive Director, Department of Minerals

Joe L. Johnson, Lobbyist, Sierra Club, Toiyabe Chapter

Helen Foley, Lobbyist

 

Chairman O'Connell opened the hearing to testimony on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 359.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 359:      Makes various changes regarding administration of program of deferred compensation for state employees.  (BDR 23-5)

 

Assemblyman Douglas (Doug) A. Bache, Assembly District No. 11, testified the measure would set out guidelines and regulations for the existing committee that oversees the deferred compensation program.  Mr. Bache indicated the need for operating procedures and a definitive makeup of the committee in the statutes.  Currently, the Governor appoints members to the committee and it is not necessary they be contributors to the compensation plan.  Mr. Bache explained this to be a particular point of objection from many of his constituents.

 

It was further explained by Mr. Bache, that Section 2 of A.B. 359 allows the Governor to set up a committee to administer the deferred compensation program.  The committee will consist of three members from state agencies, whose payrolls are administered by the Department of Personnel, one member, whose agency is not administered by the Department of Personnel (or the Department of Transportation) and one member who has retired from a state agency or the university system.  The section further provides for 4-year terms of the committee members and outlines the process for filling vacancies.

 

Section 3 stipulates that no money may be withdrawn or appropriated from the program, except, payment to participants (or their beneficiary), payments required to pay the necessary administrative cost of the program or as specifically authorized by federal law or regulation, or special act of the legislature.  Mr. Bache explained that language was included to protect the fund and to insure the tax exempt status of the fund.

 

Chairman O'Connell asked Mr. Bache the reasons for not using the committee already in place. 

 

Mr. Bache said his constituents are concerned the makeup of the committee should be people that participate in the deferred compensation plan.

 

The chairman also questioned why persons appointed to the committee are not required to have some expertise in investing.

 

Will Keating, Executive Officer, Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), responded to Chairman O'Connell's question.  He explained the deferred compensation program is operated similar to PERS, and that it serves some 4,000 state employees, and is in excess of $50 million. Mr. Keating pointed out that A.B. 359, on page 3, lines 11 through 13 requires that the committee obtain the advice of an independent consultant in regard to the investing the funds.  He stated further this is the normal procedure for these types of funds.

 

Chairman O'Connell expressed concern that the deferred compensation committee members may not understand the information they are given from an investment consultant.  She would like the assurance the people on the committee would be able to know if the information they received is accurate.  Also, she questioned the reason for comprising an entire new committee rather than achieving a mix by retaining some current members.

 

Mr. Bache stated this was done to accomplish the prerequisite

of requiring the members of the deferred compensation committee to be participants in the plan.  Also, the makeup of the current committee is not set up statutorily.

 

In Mr. Keating's opinion, there has not been significant problems with the deferred compensation program or the management of funds.  He stated as a point of information, it has only been in the last year, the existing committee has sought its own independent consultants.  Prior to that time, the investment officer from PERS provided some consulting assistance.  The bill was requested after concerns arose from the recommendations of the Governor's reorganization plan, which was to consolidate the deferred compensation program within the benefits committee.  Mr. Keating commented the deferred compensation committee needs to be structured to provide a maximum level of service to its participants.

 

Chairman O'Connell asked Mr. Keating if the 4,000 participants of the deferred compensation plan had been notified of the proposed changes.  Secondly, she asked if they are in agreement with the bill.

 

Mr. Keating stated he spoke to a group of 300 to 400 hundred participants and outlined the proposals in A.B. 359.  He indicated receiving a favorable response from that small portion of participants.

 

Robert Gagnier, Lobbyist, State of Nevada Employees Association, (SNEA) testified in support of A.B.359.  Mr. Gagnier stated SNEA was instrumental in the legislation that originally provided for the creation of the program.  He also served as the first chairman of the committee, although, as a non-state employee, he could not participate. 

 

Mr. Gagnier supports the structuring of the committee, and added presently there is no provision for limiting the number of committee members.  The size of the committee may be either increased or decreased.

 

John Callister, Assistant Controller, Office of the State Controller, questioned the need for the language on line 9 page 3 of A.B. 359, which relieves the committee members of liability when qualified counsel has been consulted.   According to Mr. Callister the committee members are considered public officers and therefore, are already exempt from liability. 

 

Mr. Callister stated the results of a survey sent to each participant, expressed strong support for lowering the administrative costs to maintain the program.  He indicated the retention of an investment counselor would not necessarily reduce liability, but would certainly increase the administrative costs.

 

Chairman O'Connell requested Mr. Callister provide amended language to Assemblyman Bache.

 

David R. Thomas, State Risk Manager, spoke in opposition to three specific sections of A.B. 359 on behalf of Department of Administration.   Mr. Thomas indicated concern with the language on page 1, lines 5 through 11.  He stated it would restrict the flexibility of the Governor in making appointments to the committee.

 

Secondly, Mr. Thomas opposes the language on lines 13 through 15, which would require all members to be participants in the plan.  He indicated the Governor feels this would serve to restrict his appointments.

 

Senator Hickey stated the purpose is to place some limitations on the appointments.  He saw this as a protection to the people who have chosen to utilize the program as a way to put money away for retirement years.

 

Mr. Thomas indicated the exact opposite reaction from the participants, than those described by Mr. Keating.  He stated an overwhelming response from participants indicated the deferred compensation program should be left as it is, with no major overhaul.

 

Senator Lowden requested clarification from Mr. Thomas on portions of his testimony, and to explain more on the specifics of the deferred compensation program. 

 

Mr. Keating disputed portions of the comments of Messrs. Callister and Thomas.

 

The hearing was closed on A.B. 359, and Chairman O'Connell opened the meeting to testimony on A.B. 644.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 644:      Expands authority of certain local governments to establish  parking facilities and spaces.  (BDR 20-1939)

 

Kirby Burgess, Lobbyist, Clark County, explained that A.B. 644 is enabling legislation that would allow the county to permit the Riverside Casino in Laughlin, to construct a parking facility on county owned property.  He said if the measure is passed it will allow for the private partnership and clear the way to ease the traffic congestion in the casino area Laughlin.

 

Mr. Burgess clarified for Chairman O'Connell that the law is specific as to public-private partnerships.  The only way the county may own a park and ride facility is, as is proposed in Laughlin, is if the space to be leased, is excess state employee parking space.

 

Ted Finneran, Laughlin Chamber of Commerce, informed the committee that the county wants to keep the county property for future use.  Mr. Finneran stated the county has a total of 60 acres in Laughlin.

It was pointed out that land is very scarce in Laughlin. 

 

Chairman O'Connell closed the hearing on A.B. 644 and moved to the next order of business, A.B. 706.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 706:      Authorizes formation of district to defray cost of improving airport.  (BDR 20-2090)

 

Assemblywoman Gene Wines Segerblom, Assembly District No. 22, testified that A.B. 706 was requested by the gaming community in Laughlin.  She explained the abundance of vehicle traffic has congested the small community, but, vehicles are the only method of bringing in the tourists that Laughlin needs.  The alternative suggestion proposed is to create a taxing district to improve the airport, which is large enough to accommodate large planeloads of tourists.  Mrs. Segerblom stated an amendment has been added, that she has not yet reviewed.

 

Senator Rhoads asked if the airport is located across the state line in Arizona.

 

Harvey Whittemore, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association, responded that Senator Rhoads is correct.  Mr. Whittemore explained the proposed amended language was designed to remove the requirement that an additional tax be imposed.  However, it allows that the existing tax be used to provide certain purposes associated with the airport in the district.   Mr. Whittemore explained the amendment was worded to apply only to counties with a population of 400,000 or more, or just Clark County.  Further, he explained the amendment is faulty in that the sections 5 through 9, which impose the additional tax, were not deleted.

 

Chairman O'Connell asked Mrs. Segerblom if she is in agreement to the amendment explained by Mr. Whittemore.  Mrs. Segerblom indicated yes and deferred to Mr. Whittemore to expound on the convention authority's position on funding.

 

Mr. Whittemore said it is his understanding, this would be handled in the method of a grant request.  This would ensure that the funds would not be on an allocated basis, but that excess funds could be used when deemed necessary.

 

General discussion ensued and it was concluded by the committee that much of the areas of concern need to be worked out at the local level.

 

Mr. Whittemore commented the language is permissive.  It allows that if the convention authority finds the money, works out the details subject to the public participation on both sides of the state line, the formation of a district, may come to be.   A.B. 706 just allows for the opportunity to attempt to create the district.

 

John Sande, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association, concurred with the comments of Mr. Whittemore.

 

The chairman closed the testimony on A.B. 706 and opened the hearing on A.B. 703.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 703:      Limits certain types  of surveillance of public employees at place of employment. 

                  (BDR 20-1939)

 

Mike Johaneson, Service Employees International Union, explained the language contained in the bill is specific and narrowly focused to address instances of electronic surveillance in the work place.  Mr. Johaneson continued, A.B. 703 provides that public employers may not use electronic devises to observe employees.  He cited the only exceptions would be a court order for electronic surveillance, or, when employees are made aware the surveillance is occurring.  Mr. Johaneson commented that the bill is not intended to thwart actions of investigation that serve to curtail illegal activities.

 

Chairman O'Connell questioned the difference between this measure and the bill passed out of the senate.

 

SENATE BILL (S.B.) 447:Prohibits under certain circumstances surveillance on grounds of public school or state facility or on campus of University of Nevada System.  (BDR 34-1668)

 

Mr. Johaneson indicated that A.B. 706 does address some of the same concerns as the senate bill, but the assembly bill was being pushed in case the senate bill did not pass the other house.

 

Senator Rhoads clarified this does not include any kind of security surveillance cameras.

 

Jim Nadeau, Lieutenant, Washoe County Sheriff's Office, testified the bill may put unintentional restrictions on law enforcement agencies.  Lieutenant Nadeau is concerned the bill is not worded  clearly enough to not restrict surveillance of illegal activities.

 

Lieutenant Nadeau testified he worked out the language on S.B. 447 and indicated the measure was carefully crafted not to be restrictive or inhibitive to law enforcement agencies.

 

Mr. Gagnier does not oppose A.B. 706.  He agreed with Mr. Johaneson that it does closely parallel the senate bill.  Mr. Gagnier stated if given a choice, between A.B. 706 and S.B. 447, he would support the senate bill.

 

The hearing was closed on A.B. 706, and Chairman O'Connell requested testimony on Senate Concurrent Resolution (S.C.R.) 49.

 

 

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 49:      Urges all parties involved in proposed mining operation at Robinson Mining District to cooperate concerning completion of Environmental Impact Statement.  (BDR 21-2148)

 

Senator Mike McGinness, Central Nevada Senatorial District, explained the unemployed residents of Ely have been anxiously awaiting the opening of the Magma mining project.  The operation will employ approximately 500 people with an estimated annual payroll of $20 million over a 16-year period.  Senator McGinness reminded the committee of the financial plight of the residents of White Pine County and noted the economic boost the opening of the project will provide.  He said the residents are discouraged, explaining that the environmental protests have delayed the completion of the impact statement, further adding to the community's financial frustrations.

 

 

Senator McGinness urged the committee's support for the resolution. He saw this as a way to let the people of eastern Nevada know the legislature is doing everything possible to help the area regain its productivity.

 

Russell A. Field, Executive Director, Department of Minerals, indicated a realistic time period of 1 year, to achieve the environmental statement to open the Magma operation.

 

Joe L. Johnson, Lobbyist, Sierra Club, Toiyabe Chapter, testified as a statement of policy, the Sierra Club is not opposed to the proposed mining operation.  Mr. Johnson explained the basis for the protests filed were environmental concerns that needed to be addressed.  However, he indicated, the overall plan of the project is good.  The Sierra Club does not intend to delay the opening of the project and is willing to work expeditiously to resolve the issues in the protest filed.

 

Senator Rhoads questioned the makeup of the Mineral Policy Center.  He indicated he was not familiar with the group.

 

Mr. Field explained the Mineral Policy Center, was developed approximately 4 years ago, and is based in Washington, District of Columbia (D.C.)  He indicated the primary purpose of the center is to reform or repeal the 1872 mining law.   Mr. Field expressed his own interest and involvement of the issues surrounding the reform of the 1872 mining law.

 

Chairman O'Connell closed the hearing on S.C.R. 49 and Senator Raggio requested discussion of S.C.R  5.

 

 

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 5:      Directs Department of Data Processing to conduct study of feasibility of consolidating state centers for data processing.  (BDR R-645)

 

Senator Raggio explained the measure is being held at his request. Continuing, he indicated it has now been determined under the reorganization plan, there will be a separate Department of Information Services, and many of the functions of data processing will be retained by other departments.  The decision of the money committees is that the study should be conducted by the Department of Information Services, excluding the university system, to determine the feasibility of consolidating the functions of the various information centers. 

 

Senator Raggio submitted proposed amended language (Exhibit C), expressed his agreement and urged the support of the committee.  He pointed out the language would authorize a study by the Department of Information Services and those findings would be reported to the Interim Finance Committee on a semiannual basis.

 

      SENATOR RAGGIO MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.C.R. 5 WITH THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE CONTAINED IN EXHIBIT C.

 

      SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS HICKEY, NEVIN AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

      * * * * *

 

 

Chairman O'Connell brought up S.B. 285 as the next order of business. 

 

 

SENATE BILL 285:  Requires executive branch of state government to prepare assessment of takings implications on private property for certain governmental actions.  (BDR 18-1062)

 

      SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO RESCIND THE PREVIOUS ACTION TO AMEND

      AND DO PASS S.B. 285.

 

      SENATOR RAGGIO SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS HICKEY, NEVIN AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

 

      * * * * *

 

 

      SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE S.B. 285.

 

      SENATOR LOWDEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION CARRIED.   (SENATORS HICKEY, NEVIN AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

      * * * * *

 

 

Chairman O'Connell produced Bill Draft Request (BDR) R-1943 to be  considered for committee introduction.

 

 

 

BILL DRAFT REQUEST R-1943:    Urges President of the United States not to use surplus in Social Security to reduce national debt and limit budget deficit.  (BDR R-1943)

 

      SENATOR RAGGIO MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF

      BDR R-1943.

 

      SENATOR LOWDEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS HICKEY, NEVIN AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

      * * * * *

 

The chairman requested a motion to concur with Amendment No. 745 of S.B. 49.

 

SENATE BILL 49:   Revises procedure for payment of claim from state treasury made pursuant to legislative appropriation or authorization.  (BDR 31-961)

 

      SENATOR RAGGIO MOVED TO CONCUR WITH AMENDMENT NO. 745

      TO S.B. 49.

 

      SENATOR LOWDEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS HICKEY, NEVIN AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

 

      * * * * *

 

The final order of business brought for discussion was A.B. 411.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 411:      Provides for creation of pedestrian malls in certain larger cities .  (BDR 21-861)

 

Helen Foley, Lobbyist, indicated A.B. 411 is the follow-up measure requested for the original bill funding the Fremont Street Experience.

 

      SENATOR RAGGIO MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 411.

 

      SENATOR LOWDEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS HICKEY, NEVIN AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

      * * * * *

 

 

Chairman O'Connell adjourned the meeting at 4:45 p.m.

 

 

 

 

                        RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

                                                        

                        Ricka Benum,

                        Committee Secretary

 

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

 

                                

Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman

 

 

DATE:                           

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senate Committee on Government Affairs

June 23, 1993

Page 1