MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION Sixty-eighth Session April 11, 1995 The Senate Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman William R. O'Donnell, at 1:40 p.m., on Tuesday, April 11, 1995, in Room 226 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman Senator Maurice Washington, Vice Chairman Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen Senator Jon C. Porter Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr. Senator Raymond C. Shaffer Senator O. C. Lee STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don O. Williams, Chief Principal Research Analyst Diane Rea, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Jan Christopherson, Administrative Services Officer II, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) Pam Miller, Associated General Contractors Nevada Chapter (AGC) Wayne R. Teglia, Assistant Director, Administration, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) John Crawford, Chief Right of Way Agent, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) Senator O'Donnell opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 296. SENATE BILL 296: Revises provisions relating to invitations to bid on certain projects for highways. (BDR 35-858) Senator O'Donnell stated this bill is from the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). Jan Christopherson, Administrative Services Officer II, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), testified that this bill is a "housekeeping bill." NDOT would like to remove the "certified mailing" of the list of qualified bidders that the department has on file. NDOT anticipates a savings of approximately $20,000 per mailing. She said NDOT has a Contractor Bulletin (Exhibit C) that is mailed to approximately 1500 contractors, as well as being published in two newspapers. The formal contracts are treated the same as informal contracts. Senator O'Donnell asked if she had spoken with the industry regarding this change. Ms. Christopherson replied, that NDOT will only be reducing the certified mailing to a short listing of qualified bidders. Senator Jacobsen asked if a contractor has any other way of knowing that a bid is opened? Ms. Christopherson replied that NDOT does mail a contractor bulletin to approximately 1500 contractors, suppliers and subcontractors; that goes out the same day as the publications in the newspapers. The plans and specifications are posted in the district offices throughout the state. Senator Porter asked how many mailings are done in a year? Ms. Christopherson replied that last year NDOT did seven informal contracts. The cost is $24,000 certified mail versus $2500 for each mailing. Senator Porter asked how many years NDOT has done certified mailing? Ms. Christopherson replied that the law has been in effect since 1967 or 1969. Senator Porter asked if she knows of any other agencies that certifies their mailings? Ms. Christopherson replied that she is not aware of any. Senator Shaffer asked if NDOT usually deals with the same contractors? Ms. Christopherson replied that every advertisement NDOT produces, is sent to everyone. Walk-in customers are added to the mailing list as they come into the department. Senator Neal asked what would be used instead of certified mail? Ms. Christopherson replied that NDOT has a file copy that verifies who each notice is sent to for each advertising. This helps verify and update addresses for the next mailing. Senator Neal asked if the notice is sent on request or off a listing? Ms. Christopherson replied that the notice is sent based upon NDOT's listing, as well as to anyone who calls in. Senator Neal asked how big a bid package is? Ms. Christopherson replied that a contractor has to be prequalified with the department in order to bid. Currently there are approximately 268 prequalified contractors. Anyone can receive a non-bid set of plans and specifications, if they call and request them. Everybody is on the list of 1500. She said NDOT keeps a list of contractors who get the notice automatically. The advertisement in the newspaper is for those who are not currently on the listing. Senator Neal asked if a contractor submits a bid package, do they have to register mail that to NDOT? Ms. Christopherson replied that NDOT has to register mail the contractors bulletin, but the contractors do not have to register their package with their bid to NDOT. Pam Miller, Associated General Contractors Nevada Chapter (AGC), stated that she is in agreement with the department. Senator O'Donnell closed the hearing on S.B. 296. Senator O'Donnell opened the work session on S.B. 48. SENATE BILL 48: Revises provisions relating to fees charged by department of transportation for operation of oversize or overweight vehicles. (BDR 43-828) Wayne Teglia, Assistant Director, Administration, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), testified Don O. Williams, Chief Principal Research Analyst, has put together a summary sheet (Exhibit D) that describes what occurred in the original hearing. The department presented their suggestions (Exhibit E). He presented two ideas of weights over 80,000 pounds, at 40,000 increments; and a revenue under the two ideas (Exhibit F). He said that NDOT is trying to differentiate what they charge for a 1-million-pound load and a 150,000-pound load. At the present, they are all $15. The Federal Highway Administration (FHA) has asked all states to consider factors other than administrative costs in determining their fees. Senator Porter asked if NDOT is trying to set the fees to offset administrative costs? Mr. Teglia stated that the $15 being collected now, covers the administrative cost. That is all that NDOT is recovering at this time. Senator O'Donnell asked if the administration has supported the increase in fees? Or is this just coming from NDOT? Mr. Teglia replied this is a department bill and was approved for printing under the administration's package of bills. They are not lending active support. They are just allowing NDOT to try to recover these costs. Senator Lee asked why does the trucking industry have to have a permit? Is it only to cause the trucking industry to pay $15 per permit? Is that a justification for the permit? NDOT gets nothing for the permit. Is the permit's purpose to regulate the industry hour wise? Mr. Teglia said the over-dimensional permits are used to regulate these loads. They have to have traffic control, etc. There is no additional money to be put into the Highway Fund. The state is not recovering any other costs. Senator Jacobsen asked if there is any breakdown on the other costs? Mr. Teglia replied that NDOT does not get into the super loads until they are dealing with the loads being brought in by the mining industry and the power companies. There is no breakdown at this time. SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE S.B. 48. SENATOR PORTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS NEAL AND LEE VOTED NO.) * * * * * Mr. Teglia asked for some direction. Senator Neal asked what the proposal is for dealing with the heavy trucks? Is the state going to allow them to break the roads up and the citizens have to pay for that? Senator O'Donnell stated, "You have a situation where you are going to charge a vehicle that is going to be charged for the construction of a roadway. What do you think they are going to do the next time the bid rolls around, for the construction of the roadway? They are going to cost allocate the extra cost that it is going to take to move that piece of machinery from point A to point B on the highway, and that is going to be included in the bid. What is going to happen is that the money that is going into the Highway Fund is going to come right back out of the Highway Fund." Ms. Miller commented that what is needed is a discussion as to whether or not the State of Nevada needs weight-distance. The department cannot say that, " In this instance they want to do a sliding scale where the weight and length of miles pay for it, when the rest of the system says that we pay for it by fuel and registration." The department should make it one way for all vehicles. She said that she feels Nevada should have weight-distance because the heavier vehicles should pay more money. Currently, the 80,000 pound rig only pays $1360 in registration. Senator Neal stated that he feels that it is irresponsible for anyone to come into the committee and say things are not happening to the highways due to the weight limits. Ms. Miller stated that she agreed with Senator Neal. She disagrees with the methodology of the bill. Mr. Teglia stated that the bill should not be tied to construction projects. A lot of the trucks originate out-of- state. Almost all of the super loads come from out-of-state. Senator O'Donnell encouraged Mr. Teglia to work with the industry and come up with a reasonable fee. Senator Porter stated that his notes from the January 31 meeting show that Mr. Teglia was going to meet with the industry. Mr. Teglia stated that he has met with one construction company; and has sent the proposals to the industry. He has not been able to get together with the AGC, the motor transport, and the Nevada Taxpayers Association. He said he sent the proposal to them over 2-weeks ago, but has not been able to meet with them as of this time. Senator Neal stated that he will go to the floor of the Senate and make a record in the journal on this issue. The public needs to know that the potholes are created by the trucks and they cannot get an increase in fees to talk care of the situation. Senator O'Donnell stated that he has been in support of the weight-distance. The bills are on the Assembly side. The subcommittee voted down the weight-distance. Ms. Miller stated that both the Las Vegas Chapter of AGC and the Nevada Chapter of AGC support a weight-distance form of taxation for heavy vehicles. Senator Jacobsen stated that he does not feel all the blame can be put on trucks. There are a lot of elements that affect the roads. Even the road mix that is applied has been inferior. He said that the rural areas cannot survive without trucks. Most over-heavy weights do not travel at an excessive speed. Everyone is subject to the conditions and the taxing. Senator Porter asked for an explanation of weight-distance. Senator O'Donnell explained that it is a formula by which the state taxes the trucks; based upon the weight that they carry, instead of a flat fee. The out-of-state trucks that do not travel very much in the state, still pay the $1300 fee for registering their truck. There is a disparity between the trucks whether carrying 1,000 or 10,000 pounds. Senator Porter asked how many sessions weight-distance equality has been talked about? Senator O'Donnell replied at least four. Senator Porter asked why it is being tabled all the time? Senator O'Donnell replied that during the Sixty-seventh Session, the NDOT had a department head that was really for weight- distance. The committee chairman took a vote, but it did not get sent to the Legislature. Senator Porter asked if since there has been no success of equality using the weight-distance, if the attempt is to make up the difference with this bill? Senator O'Donnell stated that department head left around November of last year and he does not know what Tom Stephens' [Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) position is on the weight-distance. Mr. Teglia stated that he is not committed to a position on the weight-distance. Senator Porter stated that the committee should look at the whole package; not just one set of trucks. Senator Washington asked if there is a bill in the Assembly that has been drafted for weight-distance. Mr. Williams stated that he understands there is a bill draft request (BDR), but he does not know who is holding it. Senator Washington stated that he is missing out on a lot of information. He would like to see the whole picture instead of piecing it together. Senator O'Donnell closed the work session on S.B. 48. Senator O'Donnell opened the work session on S.B. 189. SENATE BILL 189: Revises provisions relating to disposal of certain property acquired by department of transportation. (BDR 35-829) Senator O'Donnell disclosed for the committee's information that he is a licensed real estate broker under NRS (Nevada Revised Statutes) 645. He made the promise to the committee that he will never participate in the listing or the sale; or any of his employees in this particular measure. Senator O'Donnell submitted the amendment to the bill (Exhibit G) with change (Exhibit H). He asked if the department had any comments. John Crawford, Chief Right of Way Agent, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), stated that the department feels that this is workable. He recommends adoption of this version. Senator Shaffer said he is curious about a multiple listing? Mr. Crawford stated that the word "listing" is not important. "Written Agreement" is something for the department; instead of an oral agreement, they enter into a written agreement. Part of that agreement will say the realtor will list it, or it will be a multiple listing. Senator O'Donnell stated that "multiple listing" puts the listing on a computer. Mr. Crawford stated, "This would not prevent us from doing that even if we just say written agreement. The terms of the agreement ..." Senator O'Donnell said that there are real estate agents under NRS 645 that are not members of the "multiple." The exposure would be limited. Senator Shaffer stated that he thinks it should be exposed to as many possible buyers as possible. SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 189 SENATOR LEE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * Senator O'Donnell asked if any member of the committee has any concerns of S.B. 296 or wishes to hold the bill for any reason. SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 296. SENATOR WASHINGTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * Senator O'Donnell introduced BDR 43-676 (Exhibit I). BDR 43-676: Prohibiting defacement, destruction or alteration of identification number of part of motor vehicle. SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO INTRODUCE BDR 43-676. SENATOR WASHINGTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * Senator O'Donnell introduced BDR 43-567 from the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS) (Exhibit J). BDR 43-567: Revises provisions relating to licensing and registration of certain vehicles. After the committee questioned the purpose of the BDR, they voted to introduce. SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO INTRODUCE BDR 43-567. SENATOR LEE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * Senator O'Donnell adjourned the meeting at 2:25 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Diane C. Rea, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Transportation April 11, 1995 Page