NEVADA LEGISLATURE
Sixty-ninth Session, 1997
----------
ASSEMBLY DAILY JOURNAL
------------
THE THIRTY-SECOND DAY
------------
Carson City (Thursday), February 20, 1997
Assembly called to order at 10:52 a.m.
Mr. Speaker presiding.
Roll called.
All present.
Prayer by the Chaplain, The Reverend Ken Haskins.
Our Heavenly Father, You are not a God of confusion, but of peace. Bless, therefore, this Assembly which works diligently to make life more peaceful and prosperous for all of the citizens of this great State of Nevada. In the Name of the beloved Savior we pray. Amen.
Pledge of allegiance to the Flag.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that further reading of the Journal be dispensed with, and the Speaker and Chief Clerk be authorized to make the necessary corrections and additions.
Motion carried.
MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES
Mr. Speaker appointed Assemblymen Carpenter and Berman to invite the Senate to meet in Joint Session with the Assembly to hear a message from United States Representative John Ensign.
Mr. Speaker appointed a Committee on Escort consisting of Assemblymen Braunlin and Tiffany to escort United States Representative James A. Gibbons to the Assembly Chamber.
The Committee on Escort in company with The Honorable James A. Gibbons, United States Representative for Nevada appeared before the bar of the Assembly.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
Mr. Speaker:
Your Committee on Commerce, to which was referred Assembly Bill No. 8, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass.
Richard Perkins,
Chairman
MESSAGES FROM THE SENATE
Senate Chamber, Carson City, February 19, 1997
To the Honorable the Assembly:
I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the Senate on this day passed Senate Bills Nos. 28, 45, 48, 57, 73.
Mary Jo Mongelli
Assistant Secretary of the Senate
INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING AND REFERENCE
By Assemblymen Evans, Anderson, Freeman, Goldwater, de Braga, Buckley, Sandoval, Segerblom, Herrera, Koivisto, Braunlin, Lambert, Manendo, Perkins, Giunchigliani, Krenzer, Arberry, Hettrick, Carpenter, Williams, Ohrenschall, Price, Dini, Humke, Chowning, Collins, Bache, Ernaut, Parks, Tiffany and Berman:
Assembly Bill No. 191--An Act relating to education; revising the provisions governing the program to provide pupils with the skills to make the transition from school to careers; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman Evans moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Judiciary:
Assembly Bill No. 192--An Act relating to actions for malpractice; requiring the deposition of certain persons before holding the conference for settlement required in medical and dental malpractice claims; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Anderson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Judiciary:
Assembly Bill No. 193--An Act relating to courts; clarifying the type of cases for which a fee must be paid to the clerk of the supreme court; increasing certain fees that the clerk of the supreme court may collect; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Anderson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Judiciary:
Assembly Bill No. 194--An Act relating to actions for malpractice; requiring certain actions for medical or dental malpractice to be submitted to mediation before they are submitted to a screening panel; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Anderson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
By Assemblymen Ohrenschall, Buckley, Bache, Perkins, Manendo, Close, Price, Arberry, Goldwater, Freeman, Chowning, Giunchigliani, Krenzer, Sandoval and Segerblom:
Assembly Bill No. 195--An Act relating to statutory liens; revising the provisions governing the enforcement of liens for unpaid rent against certain registered owners of recreational vehicles, mobile homes or manufactured homes; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman Ohrenschall moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Ways and Means:
Assembly Bill No. 196--An Act relating to education; authorizing the state board of education and a county school district, for purposes relating to the employment of personnel, to consider certain discharged and dismissed criminal proceedings concerning the illegal use of drugs or controlled substances; providing for the inspection of certain sealed records by the state board of education and a county school district; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Arberry moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 28.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 45.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 48.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 57.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 73.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that the Assembly recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Motion carried.
Assembly in recess at 11:03 a.m.
ASSEMBLY IN SESSION
At 11:05 a.m.
Mr. Speaker presiding.
Quorum present.
MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES
Assemblyman Arberry moved that the vote whereby Assembly Bill No. 196 was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means be rescinded.
Motion carried.
Assemblyman Arberry moved that Assembly Bill No. 196 be referred to the Concurrent Committees on Judiciary and Ways and Means.
Motion carried.
The Members of the Senate appeared before the bar of the Assembly.
Mr. Speaker invited the Members of the Senate to chairs in the Assembly.
IN JOINT SESSION
At 11:09 a.m.
President of the Senate presiding.
The Secretary of the Senate called the Senate roll.
All present except Senator Rawson, who was excused.
The Chief Clerk of the Assembly called the Assembly roll.
All present.
The President of the Senate appointed a Committee on Escort consisting of Senator O'Connell and Assemblyman Ernaut to wait upon Representative Ensign and escort him to the Assembly Chamber.
The Committee on Escort in company with The Honorable John Ensign, United States Representative for Nevada appeared before the bar of the Assembly.
The Committee on Escort escorted Representative Ensign to the rostrum.
The Speaker of the Assembly welcomed Representative Ensign and invited him to deliver his message.
Representative Ensign delivered his message as follows:
Message to the Legislature of Nevada
Sixty-Ninth Session, 1997
Thank you, Mr. President; Mr. Speaker; Senate Majority Leader Raggio; Senate Minority Leader Titus; Assembly Minority Leader Hettrick; all the Supreme Court Justices that are here; all the Constitutional Officers; and a special welcome to my colleague and the junior member of the Congressional delegation, Jim Gibbons.
I am pleased to be able to address you and all of those in the audience today as well.
Most of you don't know, especially up here in northern Nevada, some of my background. Some of my early stomping grounds when I was here in the fourth and fifth grades were right here in Carson City--in fact, right where we're standing. As a matter of fact, driving in here today, I drove by where my first job was. I think it was called the Lamplighter located off of Winnie Lane. I used to take the garbage out for the bar that we lived next door to on Winnie Lane. I have a lot of fond memories here in Carson City. I spent a few years in Reno, and then many years up at Lake Tahoe.
My family has been a Nevada family since 1906. My grandmother was born in Ely, Nevada; my grandfather was born--I think there were three houses at the time--in Dayton. I don't think that he, God rest his soul, would recognize Dayton as it exists today. My mom was born right here in Carson City. I will never forgive my mother for moving out of state. So I cannot truly call myself a native Nevadan even though my grandparents, my mother, and my children are all native Nevadans.
I was reading a newspaper article the other day, and it was about whether Congress had its continued resolve to devolve power back to the states without increased mandates that Washington sometimes likes to do.
Today, I want it to be absolutely clear, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that I am totally committed to the tenets founded in the Tenth Amendment; to bring back decisions, power, money, and everything that goes along with it, to chambers like this across the country, because I truly believe that we can solve problems here in our own state much better than Washington can solve them, and I am committed to that.
Two years ago, I spoke before this body and I talked about the real changes that were going to happen in the bastion of bureaucracy back in Washington, D.C. I talked about prohibiting the federal government from imposing unfunded mandates on the states and about the need to allow states and local governments the flexibility and resources to solve local problems.
Let's take welfare reform as an example. In what has been called the most sweeping social policy change in 60 years, the federal government was said to have ended welfare as we know it. We are not. We are allowing you to end welfare as we know it. We are just getting out of the way. Today, welfare rolls in Nevada are down 32 percent since the spring of 1995, and we're not done yet.
A lot of credit goes to a lot of different people: the booming Nevada economy; Governor Miller, and many of you in this room, especially State Senator Maurice Washington. These reductions will translate into significant savings for our state as the funding formulas--the block grants--were locked in at 1995 levels. Since our rolls are now down 32 percent from that level, you now have the flexibility, as well as the money, to look out and say, "Let's have a true welfare reform that talks about compassion and getting people from welfare into real jobs that make for a brighter future for them and their children."
Much has been made about the hardship cases on the welfare rolls. I've read many articles in the press about that. You now have the resources and the flexibility of a 20-percent exemption from the work requirement to handle any of the hardship cases. There truly are those who cannot work, so we gave that flexibility to you to handle it the best way Nevada knows how.
In addition, I realize that any block grant approach could be dangerous to such a fast-growing state, and to compensate for this I had included in the bill a growth formula. By the way, Nevada had already qualified for the growth formula before the law was actually penciled in. As soon as the law was penciled in, we qualified for that growth formula. It will help offset a lot of our sizable growth. We didn't do this alone. We did it working together with the governor and this legislature to develop a solution not mired down in politics. When we succeeded in devolving power to the states, we did it by listening to those of you who told us that you could do it better, and we did it by spending money smarter rather than just throwing more money at the problem.
Along with the population growth formula, Nevada has the ability to take advantage of another key provision in this welfare bill. The five states that are most successful in decreasing out-of-wedlock births without increasing abortions are eligible for $20 million each in additional funding. For the State of California, which spends billions of dollars on their welfare programs, $20 million is not a lot of money. But to the State of Nevada, if we could qualify for the $20 million, that would be a 50-percent increase in our welfare funding, so it is worth the interest of the people and of you to design innovative programs to decrease the out-of-wedlock births. Not only will we be doing a service for all of those people and those children that are unfortunately born out-of-wedlock, but we will also be doing our state a service with an additional $20 million.
In America, we must not only look at individual welfare reform; we must also look at the whole corporate welfare state. Many provisions written into our federal tax code and trade laws don't benefit small businesses. They benefit the multinational mega-conglomerate corporations. For example, when we passed the Freedom to Farm Act which phases out all the farm subsidies over seven years, those farm subsidies were not going to the small family farmers. Those farm subsidies were going to several large, mega-national corporations. They were intended to help the family farmers, but that is not where they ended up. We have just begun to scratch the surface in the area of corporate welfare. We will continue to look for other ways to slash subsidies and loopholes for big business without calling everything under the sun "corporate welfare." There are legitimate business expenses that a lot of people are calling corporate welfare, and we don't want to include those. However, there are subsidies out there that we do need to eliminate at the federal level.
I mentioned before that I have more faith in Nevadans to solve our problems than I do in the federal government. My faith in state and local government to find solutions is not the only reason for my fight to return power and money to Nevada. The other reason is that the more the federal government spends, the more economic damage it can do to our state.
Let me explain. Simply stated, Nevada ranks 15th in the amount of money per person that we send back to Washington. We rank 45th on the amount of money we receive back per person from Washington. If your stockbroker delivered this kind of return on your money, I don't know if you would keep that stockbroker employed too long; I certainly wouldn't. That's why I've been fighting to limit Washington's spending and get some of our money back here in the state. We, as Nevadans, must understand that this is happening and work together to continue to reduce Washington influence.
I want to talk about the balanced budget for a moment. It is critical that we balance the budget in Washington. A balanced federal budget, aside from being the right thing to do, will have a positive effect on each and every American. In order to get our fiscal affairs in order, we must focus on reducing what Washington spends rather than on increasing taxes on middle-class Americans. If we continue as is at the federal level, perhaps in the year 2020 or 2025, tax rates on average middle-class Americans will have to be set at 80 percent. Think about that. Think about what it was 30 years ago and how little of your dollar actually got spent on local, state, and federal taxes. Are we going to tell our children that we don't have enough fiscal discipline and that we want them to pay 80 percent tax rates in the future?
There are some economic benefits to balancing the budget as well. Interest rates will drop by two percent. What does that mean? In real terms, it means a savings--and economists agree on these--$37,000 on the average middle-class home in America, over $2,000 on the average student loan, and $1,800 over five years on the average car loan. Folks, these are real dollars for real people we're talking about. This is real money in Americans' pockets to help them do better and make better decisions for their own families.
Some people say that a balanced budget amendment is not needed. We seem to agree that we need to enact a balanced budget, but agreeing on how we get there--therein lies the problem. Our country has not had a balanced budget since 1969, and because of that, every child born in 1997 will have to pay $200,000 in their lifetime just to pay the interest on the national debt. Think about that--$200,000 just to pay the interest. They get nothing for that. They get no roads; no education; no Medicare; no Social Security; no national defense. That's just their share of the interest on the national debt because people in Washington have not had the discipline to live within the money constraints that Americans send them every year.
There are two main reasons people give for not enacting a balanced budget amendment. The first is that we don't need a balanced budget amendment; we just need to enact a balanced budget. The second is that the balanced budget amendment would be a threat to Social Security.
Let me start with the first argument. As an example to show you how I think we need to force this fiscal discipline on Washington, we only have to look at the President's latest budget. While I applaud the President for bringing a balanced budget to the table, the problem is most of the savings are in the years 2001 and 2002. He will be out of office, and because we enacted term limits on committee chairs, those committee chairs will also be gone from their current posts. That means all new people will be in office. Do we really expect them to make the difficult choices without the fiscal discipline that is required with a balanced budget? I think not.
The second argument states that using a balanced budget amendment is going to be a threat to Social Security. We have had what is called a "unified budget" for as long as I can remember. Any member of Congress who was there last time or in the Congress before that has voted for using Social Security trust funds to fund the government. We've been using it all along. In the President's current budget, he proposes doing the same thing. The people who are suggesting that Social Security would be hurt, need to tell us where we are going to get the $350 billion in additional cuts that are going to be necessary if we exempt Social Security and take it completely out of the budget process. It is ironic that these are the same people, if you look at their careers, who have voted for most of the spending increases in Washington. I think it is time for a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. It is just one of the steps necessary.
Let me now turn to Medicare. Medicare is one of the most important issues facing our country. It is going bankrupt. Everybody agrees it is going bankrupt by the year 2001, maybe even a little earlier than that. This is according to the President's own trustees on Medicare. It is absolutely time to quit playing politics with Medicare.
The last election is behind us. There's a new attitude in Washington about bipartisanship. Medicare is going to be the true key test to bipartisanship. We are ready to join the President. He needs to show leadership on this. He has brought one proposal to the table so far. It's a good start, but we need to save Medicare for the 37 million seniors and disabled people that are currently dependent upon it. We can't just do it from a numbers game.
I believe strongly that our current Medicare system, as well as the rest of our health care system, is really a "sick care system." If somebody gets sick, we pay doctors and all the providers. We pay to fix them, but we won't pay to keep them healthy. That is why I think it should be called a "sick care system."
I co-authored a bill this year with a Democrat, Carol Maloney, from New York, that will provide annual mammograms for women over the age of 65. The bill is needed because as a woman ages, her chances of contracting breast cancer increase. Yet when she turns 65, Medicare only pays for mammograms every two years. This is called prevention. This is called keeping people healthier. There are other proposals, as a matter of fact, including the President's proposal, that states we're going to teach diabetics how to stay healthier and we're going to pay for prevention to keep them healthier. A large percentage of the total Medicare dollars spent today are on diabetes and diabetes-related diseases. If we can keep people healthier and out of the hospital, not only is it better for the people themselves, but in the long run, it is better for the taxpayer; it is better for the federal budget; and it is better for all the things government does that are good.
I believe strongly we need to continue to look for better ways of doing things in Washington and here in Carson City as well as in the local governments around the country.
I want to now turn my attention to taxes because I believe that our current tax code is unfair. It picks winners and losers in business. People make business decisions based on arcane tax code and tax laws, not necessarily according to whether it is a good business practice. We have such things in our tax code as a marriage penalty. We penalize you if you get married. We have such things as a death tax, known as the estate tax. You get up in the morning and you get in your car. Of course, you've paid the gasoline tax, you've paid your road taxes, you've paid your property taxes. You go to work, and, of course, you pay your payroll taxes, and you pay your Social Security taxes and you pay your Medicare taxes. If you get through all of that, and some of the other fees and taxes along the way--you get down to the end of the day and you decide to go home--and if you happen to be somebody who enjoys some of the simpler pleasures in life like maybe a Budweiser at the end of the day, you now pay 42 cents out of every dollar for beer that you drink. At the end of your life, if you happen to have accumulated a little money that you want to leave to your kids, they slap you with a 55-percent death tax. Our tax system needs to be changed. It needs to be changed in a way that simplifies it, makes it fair, and makes America more competitive in the global economy.
The 104th Congress governed smarter by deregulating the telecommunications industry thereby creating millions of jobs over the next 10 years in America; by allowing workers to take their health insurance with them when they change jobs without the fear of denial due to preexisting conditions; by giving small businesses tax relief and even some expanded pension and health care options; and by reintroducing personal responsibility to individual behavior by encouraging work rather than welfare.
As a member of the 105th Congress, I will again fight to balance the budget, save the Medicare program from bankruptcy, and work in a bipartisan manner with the rest of our state delegation to make sure that Nevada does not end up being the nuclear dump site for the rest of the country. And, by the way, as you are attempting to tackle campaign finance reform, we will also attempt to bridle the beast of campaign finance reform at the federal level. It will be a very difficult process.
Let me now turn to some state initiatives. Infrastructure is a big issue at the state and local levels this year, but the federal government does have a role. Our infrastructure needs have never been greater, as the fastest-growing state in the nation. Besides fighting for our fair share of highway tax dollars, called ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act), Senator Bryan and I have introduced a bill. We introduced it in the last session of Congress. We now have the entire Nevada delegation in agreement on it. It's called the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act. On the House side, we affectionately call it the Ensign/Bryan Lands Bill. I allow Senator Bryan to call it the Bryan/Ensign Land Bill on the Senate side. This was done in a bipartisan fashion. It's an excellent piece of legislation and it will help pay for some of the desperately needed water infrastructure in southern Nevada. I believe this is the type of legislation that came together with developers, environmentalists, and local governments, the federal government, state government, and everyone coming together with better, smarter governmental solutions to some of our problems. We need to continue to use that as a model.
I would like to commend the governor and every member here today for your support of a state veterans' home in Nevada. We are one of the few states without a veterans' home, and we have the highest population of veterans of any state in the Union. We surpassed Florida last year with the highest percentage of veterans. This project is absolutely critical to those Nevadans who have proudly worn the uniform in the United States Armed Forces, and I urge quick passage of the bill at the state level.
Let me turn briefly to education, because education is such a critical issue. It can get partisan at times. It shouldn't be partisan. What we should be doing is thinking of the kids and the future of our great country.
I attended George Whittell, which at that time was grades 7 through 12, up at Zephyr Cove. George Whittell School was one of the best educations I can possibly even tell you about. One of the reasons that it was, and I can compare this to the schools in southern Nevada, is because it concentrated so heavily on the basics--reading, writing, and arithmetic. Everything else became easy. I believe very, very strongly in technology, but until our schools start teaching the basics again at an early age and introducing discipline, we will never have the finest schools in the world.
Another item in educational reform is the concept of character education in our public schools. During most of our history, character education--or the teaching of core values--was considered just as important as intellectual knowledge. I think most of us would agree that character education has been taken out of our schools, especially our public schools. I was reading an article in the Wall Street Journal which detailed the positive and dramatic results that character education had on some inner city schools, both in student behavior and academic performance. Let me just read a little bit from this article.
- The Allen Elementary School, an inner city school in Dayton, Ohio, with 60 percent of its students coming from single-parent homes and 70 percent from families on welfare, was a near disaster in 1989. Allen was ranked 28th out of Dayton's 33 elementary schools in test scores, and teachers couldn't teach because of disciplinary problems. The principal implemented a comprehensive character education program. Five years later Allen was number one in test scores without any increased funding and its behavior problems had improved dramatically.
They had other examples in this article. What I found the most fascinating was that it was submitted by a nonprofit character educational partnership. Board members included Barbara Bush and the Reverend Jesse Jackson. If those two people can come together on educational reform, can't we, as Republicans and Democrats, realize the importance of teaching core values in our schools and start doing it so Nevada schools become the best in the entire United States?
Let me close by quoting Elie Wiesel, the Romanian writer and Holocaust survivor who once said, "I've looked for answers in many ways--religious, political, humanistic, in different places. I have come to believe there is only one response, the moral response. Whatever we do must be measured in moral terms."
So easily spoken, yet often so difficult to practice.
I remain totally committed to continuing to return money, power and influence to all of you. This is morally right for our future as a nation and becomes simply a matter of political will. I'm enthusiastic about this session of the legislature and what you're doing here. I want to commit my efforts to joining with you in having this be a bipartisan, let's just say nonpartisan, session of this Legislature and session of Congress where we start serving our parties best by serving our state and our country first.
God bless you. Thank you for allowing me to be here.
Senator Adler moved that the Senate and Assembly in Joint Session extend a vote of thanks to Representative Ensign for his instructional message.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Committee on Escort escorted Representative Ensign to the bar of the Assembly.
Assemblywoman Lambert moved that the Joint Session be dissolved.
Motion carried unanimously.
Joint Session dissolved at 11:43 a.m.
Mr. Speaker announced that if there were no objections, the Assembly would recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Assembly in recess at 11:44 a.m.
ASSEMBLY IN SESSION
At 11:54 a.m.
Mr. Speaker presiding.
Quorum present.
MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES
Assemblyman Bache moved that Assembly Bill No. 65 be taken from the General File and placed on the Chief Clerk's desk.
Motion carried.
GENERAL FILE AND THIRD READING
Assembly Bill No. 4.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Assemblyman Close.
Roll call on Assembly Bill No. 4:
Yeas--42.
Nays--None.
Assembly Bill No. 4 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. Speaker declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Senate.
Assembly Bill No. 17.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Assemblywoman Buckley.
Roll call on Assembly Bill No. 17:
Yeas--42.
Nays--None.
Assembly Bill No. 17 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. Speaker declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Senate.
Assembly Bill No. 101.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Assemblymen Koivisto, Gustavson, Ernaut, Carpenter and Anderson.
Roll call on Assembly Bill No. 101:
Yeas--42.
Nays--None.
Assembly Bill No. 101 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. Speaker declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Senate.
Assembly Bill No. 124.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Assemblyman Parks.
Roll call on Assembly Bill No. 124:
Yeas--42.
Nays--None.
Assembly Bill No. 124 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. Speaker declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Senate.
GUESTS EXTENDED PRIVILEGE OF ASSEMBLY FLOOR
On request of Assemblyman Anderson, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Sharry Springmeyer Summers.
On request of Assemblyman Goldwater, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Desiree Leal.
On request of Assemblywoman Koivisto, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Marieta Siqueira.
On request of Assemblyman Manendo, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Adriana Carnales and Mary Henderson.
On request of Assemblyman Perkins, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Robert Groesbeck.
On request of Assemblyman Sandoval, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Mireia Cirera.
On request of Assemblywoman Segerblom, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Robert Kenneston.
Assemblyman Perkins moved that the Assembly adjourn until Monday, February 24, 1997 at 11 a.m.
Motion carried.
Assembly adjourned at 12:16 p.m.
Approved: Joseph E. Dini, Jr.
Speaker of the Assembly
Attest: Linda B. Alden
Chief Clerk of the Assembly