MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Sixty-seventh Session
April 27, 1993
The Senate Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman William R. O'Donnell, at 1:30 p.m., on Tuesday, April 27, 1993, in Room 226 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Vice Chairman
Senator Mark A. James
Senator Leonard V. Nevin
Senator Lori L. Brown
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr. (Excused)
Senator Thomas J. Hickey (Excused)
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Bob Coffin, Clark County District 3
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Paul Mouritsen, Senior Research Analyst
Terri Jo Wittenberg, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Jerry Penn, Financial Secretary, National Association of Letter Carriers, Branch #2502, Las Vegas Post Office, United States Postal Service (USPS)
Tim Purcell, Customer Relations Coordinator, Las Vegas Post Office, United States Postal Service (USPS)
Elizabeth King, Assistant Chief, Driver's License Division, Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV)
Donna Varin, Chief, Driver's License Division, Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV)
Dorothy B. North, Chairman, Commission on Substance Abuse Education, Prevention, Enforcement and Treatment
Patricia R. Justice, Lobbyist, Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice
Kirby L. Burgess, Lobbyist, Clark County
Paul B. McGrath, Sheriff, Carson City Sheriff's Department, Lobbyist, Nevada Sheriff's & Chief's Association
James F. Nadeau, Lieutenant, Assistant Commander Incline Substation, Washoe County Sheriff's Office
Chairman O'Donnell drew attention to two bill draft requests (BDRs) requiring committee introduction. He passed out copies of the BDRs for review and proceeded to read each BDR by number and summary.
BDR 43-610:Requires off-highway motor vehicles to display identification decal issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety.
SENATOR NEVIN MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 43-610.
SENATOR BROWN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS HICKEY AND NEAL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
BDR 35-1970: Revise requirements for designation of highway as a scenic route.
SENATOR NEVIN MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 35-1970.
SENATOR JAMES SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS HICKEY AND NEAL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Chairman O'Donnell opened the hearing with Senate Bill (S.B.) 382.
S.B. 382: Exempts postal service vehicles from prohibition against parking near public or private driveway.
Senator Bob Coffin, Clark County District 3, testified in favor of S.B. 382. Senator Coffin said the bill would exempt the United States Postal Service (USPS) from provisions in the statutes which make it nearly impossible for them to comply with in the performance of their duties.
Senator Coffin said management of the USPS made it known to the letter carriers that if any damage or incident occurred and they were within the 5 foot boundary they would be held personally responsible even though the accident might not be their fault.
Chairman O'Donnell asked if they would be held personally responsible and have to pay for the damages out of their own pockets.
Senator Coffin said that was correct. He added, management philosophies can change within organizations and he was, in fact, told today that current postal management has decided not to do that. He added, the letter carriers had also asked if they could be exempted when parking in red zones and cross walks. He also said the United Parcel Service (UPS) had asked to be given some consideration in the drafting of the bill. He added, that just because this particular management has changed the policy, it does not make the problem go away.
Senator Jacobsen asked if any citations had been issued to a letter carrier.
Senator Coffin deferred the question to one of the letter carriers who was in the audience to testify.
Jerry Penn, Financial Secretary, National Association of Letter Carriers, Branch #2502, Las Vegas Post Office, United States Postal Service (USPS), spoke in support of S.B. 382. Mr. Penn said the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department had recently come to the post office to present a safety awareness program. It was during this program that they were made aware that if the letter carriers were parked within 5 feet of a driveway and an accident occurred, they would be held responsible, since it would be considered a "preventable accident," because the letter carrier would be in violation of the law.
Mr. Penn added, at that time, management was very adamant that the letter carriers would be held responsible. He said since that time, the post office has gone through some restructuring and the Las Vegas Post Office has new management which now wishes to see the law changed in order to protect their letter carriers.
Mr. Penn also spoke about the problem of parking in fire lanes. He said that almost all of the shopping centers have a fire lane around the entire complex and the letter carriers are in violation of the fire zone every day as they pick up and deliver mail there. He added, there are some neighborhoods in Las Vegas in which the whole street is lined with driveways which are less than 5 feet apart. He said there was little 2 foot sections of curb and anywhere they park on the street would be in violation of the current law. He stated they were also in support of UPS being included in the bill.
Chairman O'Donnell said this bill would not preclude the local governments from passing ordinances which would be more restrictive than this bill.
Senator Coffin said the statute would apply to the local governments.
Senator Brown said subsection 4 of the bill says the local authorities may have other restrictions.
Chairman O'Donnell said maybe the bill should be written a little bit differently.
Senator James said the local government will have the option to override this bill, even though they may not see the necessity do it.
Mr. Penn said he had contacted the local police and fire departments to see if they had any objection and these entities said they did not have any objections.
Senator Brown asked how long these mail carriers would be stopped at these red zones.
Mr. Penn said that normally, it takes them less than 60 seconds at each stop.
Tim Purcell, Customer Relations Coordinator, Las Vegas Post Office, United States Postal Service (USPS), stated he was in favor of S.B. 382. Mr. Purcell said he had been in charge of mail carriers for about 4 years. He said one of his carriers had been ticketed recently while parked in a red zone while emptying a mail drop box. He said the only other option for the carrier was to park several blocks away, which would not be practical.
Senator Brown asked if any other private delivery companies had expressed interest in being included in the bill.
Senator Coffin said he had anticipated others companies coming forward, but as yet, he had not be approached by any other company, except UPS.
Senator Nevin said the problem with that was, that there are two different sizes of vehicles. He added, the mail trucks are very quick, where the UPS truck may be parked for a much longer time in the red zones.
Senator Coffin said he would leave that question to the wisdom of the committee.
Chairman O'Donnell closed the hearing on S.B. 382 and opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 157.
A.B. 157: Makes various changes relating to driver's licenses and registration of motor vehicles.
Elizabeth King, Assistant Chief, Driver's License Division, Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV), spoke from prepared testimony (Exhibit C) with regard to A.B. 157.
Chairman O'Donnell asked why the state would not require proof of financial responsibility from a person who moved to Nevada and was required to submit proof of financial responsibility to their former state.
Ms. King said they would have to maintain that proof in the state where that action occurred.
Chairman O'Donnell asked what kind of jurisdiction Nevada would have to go back to the former state and ask them to apply the penalty if the person did not comply with the proof of financial responsibility requirement.
Ms. King said Nevada has reciprocal agreements with other states under the driver's license compact.
Senator Nevin said there could be a problem if the reciprocal agreement fell through at some point.
Donna Varin, Chief, Driver's License Division, Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV), spoke with regard to A.B. 157.
Senator Jacobsen asked if the insurance companies had expressed any concerns over the bill.
Ms. Varin said she had not been contacted by any insurance company and she did not think this bill would have any impact on the insurance industry.
Chairman O'Donnell closed the hearing on A.B. 157 and opened the hearing on A.B. 229.
A.B. 229: Expands and under certain circumstances makes mandatory provision regarding suspension of driver's license of juveniles who commit certain unlawful acts.
Dorothy B. North, Chairman, Commission on Substance Abuse Education, Prevention, Enforcement and Treatment, testified in favor of A.B 229. Ms. North said the bill was proposed by her commission at the suggestion of juvenile enforcement authorities as a mechanism to deter minors from repeat alcohol and drug offenses. Ms. North submitted letters (Exhibit D) from Robert W. Teuton.
Ms. North continued, many juveniles see themselves as suffering little, to almost no consequences for their illegal behavior, as long as they are minors. She said the current law has been in effect long enough to have some history and the problem seems to be that suspensions are only given by some judges, in some counties. She said that passing stronger legislation to make sure this step is taken on a second alcohol or drug related offense will send a clear message to the state's youth that the state is, indeed, serious about this problem.
Ms. North went through the bill, section, by section. She added, this type of legislation has been passed in other states and seems to be quite effective.
Senator James said the original intent of the bill was to extend to mandatory revocation for second time offenses to all offenders, not just juveniles. He asked Ms. North if she was aware of that original intent.
Ms. North said she was aware of that.
Senator James asked what justification there was in singling out the youthful drivers and having this mandatory suspension apply to them and not to everybody.
Ms. North said this bill was not just for drivers, but for any alcohol or drug-related offense.
Senator James asked why we should take away a 16 year old's license and not an adult's license if they commit the same offense.
Ms. North said currently there are no effective deterrents. She added, Nevada has the highest number of single parents in the United States and many of their kids are on their own most of the time.
Chairman O'Donnell said that driving is a privilege and not a right and that may be why Senator James has a problem with this.
Ms. North said alcohol is still, by far, the most frequently abused drug by kids around the country. She added, alcohol is also the drug which kills most of these kids.
Senator James said driving is a privilege for everybody, no matter what their age. He added, the constitution allows the law to single out groups as long as they are not some discrete minority. He asked, as a matter of legislative policy, should the legislature continue to single out the youthful offenders as being deserving of more of these mandatory penalties and sanctions in the area of alcohol and drug abuse. He asked if there was any statistical justification for that.
Ms. North said she felt there was statistical evidence and she would be happy to get that information for the committee.
Senator James stated many of Nevada's young people are law-abiding and are careful to abide by the rules.
Ms. North said the intent of the law was to see what could be done to keep some of these kids from becoming adult offenders. She added, some of these kids have pretty lengthy rap sheets by the age of 18.
Senator James said many of these kids who are getting in trouble do not care if they have a license or not.
Ms. North said that was probably true of some kids, but that the younger the offender, the more likely he is to care.
Senator Nevin said these kids do not care and think they are invincible and think nothing can happen to them. He said this was an "attitude adjustment" bill.
Chairman O'Donnell asked if the bill would be in concurrence with any other penalties or in lieu of any other penalties involved.
Ms. North said she did not think it would be in lieu of any other penalties involved.
Patricia R. Justice, Lobbyist, Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice, spoke with regard to A.B. 229. Ms. Justice said the bill would be in addition to any penalties involved. She said this bill does not supplant any of the other penalties.
Ms. Justice continued, in order to make the bill less ambiguous, the bill should read, "whenever any person under 18 years." She said the statute now cited in the bill refers to anyone under the age of 21. She added, the bill treats someone who sells cocaine the same as a juvenile who goes out and has a few beers and gets caught. She said these were two very different offenses and should be treated differently. She recommended the age be changed to 15 or 16. She said if a child does something wrong they need to be punished right away and this bill could delay the punishment for up to 2 years down the road.
Ms. North said she did not agree with Ms. Justices' recommendation to change the age. She said she felt that 14 was an appropriate age.
Senator Nevin said Ms. Justice's suggestions nearly called for a new bill. He added, that by letting the kids use alcohol and not drugs, the state is sending a message to them saying "it's okay to use alcohol, just don't use drugs."
Ms. Justice said the law always sees gradations in punishment and it is wrong for a person to commit any crime, but different sanctions are given for those crimes. She said that selling a controlled substance and getting drunk are not the same type of crime.
Senator James said if a 19 year old person is caught using alcohol they would not lose their license under this bill, but a person who is 17 and is caught drinking would automatically lose their license.
Ms. Justice said that was true, however, the 19 year old would have a misdemeanor on their record and would be subject to going to a correctional center for up to 6 months and a $1000 fine.
Kirby L. Burgess, Lobbyist, Clark County, testified on A.B. 229. Mr. Burgess said the juvenile court has the authority to provide supervision of the child in the juvenile system up to the age of 21.
Mr. Burgess said his agency was in support of this bill.
Chairman O'Donnell said when his daughter was 14 years old she did not express an interest in driving and therefore this bill would not have been a know deterrent to her then. He added, when she was about 15 1/2 years old she then started to show a real interest in driving and that is when this bill would start to become a real deterrent to these kids. He said maybe this bill should include some other type of punishment for those kids under 16 years old.
Ms. North said the original bill did use the age of 16 as the minimum age. She said the age was lowered at the request of Clark County Juvenile Court Services.
Ms. Justice said this would be a much better deterrent when the child is closer to actually getting their license.
Chairman O'Donnell closed the hearing on A.B. 229 and opened the hearing on A.B. 327.
A.B. 327: Requires certain fees for analysis is to be collected from certain defendants before or at same time that any fine is collected.
Paul B. McGrath, Sheriff, Carson City Sheriff's Department, Lobbyist, Nevada Sheriff's & Chief's Association, testified in favor of A.B. 327. Sheriff McGrath said this was an association sponsored-bill which relates to the lab services which are currently under contract by the state. He explained, the Governor's reorganization plan would defer the cost of the lab fees to the individual counties. He added, currently, the court may assess a fee of $60 for the lab fees and the bill would change the language to say the courts "shall" assess this $60 fee.
James F. Nadeau, Lieutenant, Assistant Commander Incline Substation, Washoe County Sheriff's Office, testified in favor of A.B. 327. Lieutenant Nadeau said that on page 2, line 2, the ending bracket should go behind "fund." He asked to have the existing language from lines 3 through line 17 left in the bill. He added, that the bracket at the end of section 5 needed to be deleted. Lieutenant Nadeau said he would provide a copy of the proposed amendment.
Chairman O'Donnell said he was not sure if lines 13 through 15 should be removed. He said this would take away the court's discretion in lowering or waiving the fee, if the defendant is determined to be unable to pay the fee.
Sheriff McGrath said using the number of driving under the influence (DUI) arrests in 1991, if the courts collected 40 percent of the total number of cases, that would generate approximately $159,000 which would take care of the shortfall. He added, currently in fiscal year 1991, there is $476,000 that is due both labs. He said the Governor's budget recommends $326,000.
Senator Nevin said "If the courts think they can keep the money they'll impose the fine. If they don't think they're going to get the money they will not impose the fine because they're not getting the money and they don't care." He also asked how this fee could be collected "before" the fine is collected.
Sheriff McGrath said the individual can pay the lab fees up front.
Lieutenant Nadeau said the changes on page 2 would also have to be made on page 3.
Chairman O'Donnell asked when the court would determine when the individual would pay the fee.
Lieutenant Nadeau said at the present, the current statute says, upon conviction, then the court can then impose that fee of $60.
Senator Jacobsen asked if the $60 covered all normal lab fees and if it would cover any extenuating circumstances.
Lieutenant Nadeau said the $60 is adequate for the labs to handle the necessary tests.
Ms. Justice said she was opposed to the bill. She added,
the bill would charge $60 for three different kinds of tests, blood, urine and breath. She said these tests do not all cost $60. She explained, if this is not a fine, but a reimbursement then there should be three different fees.
Ms. Justice explained the fee could be collected before the fine, because the very first money that would come in would be applied toward the $60 fee. She added, lines 13 and 14 should be left in. She explained that people should have the option to work off the fee, under community service, if they cannot afford the fee. She said she had no objection to her clients having to do community service to pay for the fee.
Senator Nevin said the problems lies in the fact that if these individuals do not pay their lab fees, then the taxpayers end up paying for them.
Ms. Justice said she did not think it was right to charge everyone the same fee. She added, there is something "noble" in performing public service, too.
Senator Brown asked who chooses which test is done.
Ms. Justice said the defendant gets to choose unless it is a second DUI. She added, the breath test is not allowed for drug testing.
Senator Brown asked if there was a "means test" for determining who would be able to perform community service in lieu of the fine. She asked if more than 60 percent of the individuals take the community service option.
Sheriff McGrath said if the person is arrested for a DUI, not only is the individual able to support their drinking habit, they are usually capable of paying the fines and the fees assessed by the court.
There being no further business before the committee, Chairman O'Donnell adjourned the meeting at 3:54 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Terri Jo Wittenberg,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Transportation
April 27, 1993
Page 1