The Committee on Elections, Procedures, and Ethics was called to order at 5:35 p.m., on Wednesday, April 21, 1999. Chairwoman Chris Giunchigliani presided in Room 3138 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All Exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Ms. Chris Giunchigliani, Chairwoman

Mr. Bob Price, Vice Chairman

Mr. Bob Beers

Ms. Sheila Leslie

Ms. Kathy McClain

Ms. Sandra Tiffany

Ms. Kathy Von Tobel

COMMITTEE MEMBERS EXCUSED:

Mr. Joseph Dini

Mr. Richard Perkins

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Assemblywoman Vivian Freeman, District 24

Assemblyman P. M. Neighbors, District 36

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

OTHERS PRESENT:

Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the hearing on A.C.R. 36 and called on the main sponsor, Assemblywoman Freeman.

Assemblywoman Freeman explained A.C.R. 36 dealt with rural area health care. The biggest problem in rural areas had been transportation and the need for doctors and nurses. She stated an interim study needed to be done to determine which services were needed for citizens. Large hospitals were working with rural areas and were trying to determine what services were available. She felt there was a need to recruit doctors and keep rural hospitals functioning. Sometimes the rural areas had not been able to pay as much as larger cities did for doctors. The development of programs for all rural areas was essential if people were to receive proper health care. She questioned whether the rural areas needed emergency care, helicopter services, or some other service essential for that particular community. The town of Elko had sold its hospital, which had made a hardship on the community.

Discussion began among the committee members about language interpretations of the bill and the circumstances of the counties. Assemblywoman Von Tobel noted the town of Mesquite had lost its hospital, and her concern was some of the smaller areas had not been included when the bill was drafted. She noted on page 1, line 1, there were 15 counties listed in the bill rather than the actual 17 counties within the state. She suggested an amendment to include all counties. Assemblywoman McClain suggested the language be changed to "medically under-served areas" rather than 15 counties.

Assemblywoman Tiffany commented there needed to be an interim study done on health care, including long-term care. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated she had sponsored a bill in the 1997 session for an interim study on long-term care, but the standing Committee on Health Care ran out of time to adequately study the issue. Assemblywoman Tiffany wanted to know who made the decision on who would serve on an interim study committee. Assemblywoman Freeman responded the speaker and majority leader made that decision.

Assemblywoman Freeman stated there would be three Senators and three assemblypeople. She stated it might be a good idea to add two more members to the committee. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated that might be a problem and referred the issue to Scott Wasserman, chief committee counsel. He said if the committee was to add two members to the interim study committee, a statute would need to be changed. Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked about adding an amendment to the bill before it was passed in the Senate. Mr. Wasserman stated a bill would have to be amended or introduced to add another person.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.C.R. 36 with no action taken by the committee. She opened the hearing on A.C.R. 11 and called on the main sponsor, Assemblywoman Freeman.

Assemblywoman Freeman felt the State of Nevada needed an accurate study for mental health care. She noted the suicide rate for teenagers was high due to the lack of care available in all areas. The legislature reviewed all mental health needs 10 years ago. In the 1997 session, legislators studied a very narrow portion in the area of commitment. She felt the issue had not been examined in 10 years and was very necessary.

Assemblywoman Leslie stated she thought the bill might be a little premature, as a comprehensive study needed to be done on mental health. She questioned why the bill referenced inmates in jail or prison. She felt they received very little or no adequate care for mental illness. Chairwoman Giunchigliani felt only mentioning suicide for teenagers was not appropriate language. She pointed out that senior citizens in Nevada were at an extremely high rate of suicide. The committee suggested deleting teenagers and leaving the language generic.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.C.R. 11 with no action taken by the committee. She opened the hearing on A.C.R. 35 and called on John Hines, member, People Organized for Psych Panel Reform, whose organization requested the bill.

Mr. Hines distributed a handout showing the examples of information written by a doctor or a member of the panel when an inmate attended a mandatory psychiatric panel for determining eligibility for parole (Exhibit C). Those questions and comments included accountability, antecedents, victim empathy, consolidation, and risk factors (prior offenses, alcohol or drug abuse, and other offenses). According to Mr. Hines, the majority of inmates who attended those sessions were not certified to be released, even if the time remaining on their sentence was short. He gave as an example an inmate who had 42 days to complete his sentence and the panel would not certify him for parole. Kansas and Nevada were the only two states remaining who had a psychiatric panel for inmates. In Nevada Revised Statute 213.1214, prisoners were required to be certified by a panel before being released on parole, and recertification of the inmate was required if the prisoner was returned to custody. He felt the panel did not have the proper qualified individuals on it.

Pat Hines, representing Nevada Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants (Nevada CURE), distributed a handout showing why Nevada Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants were concerned with the prison system (Exhibit D). She stated reforms needed to be done for the psychiatric panels and noted that members could be appointed by officials of the prison and did not have to be licensed psychiatrists. Included within Exhibit D were recommendations for residential treatment programs, which included the admissions criteria for treatment; the psychosexual evaluation on each inmate to determine whether they would be candidates for therapy and to detect signs of a potential return to behavior patterns associated with sexual aggression.

Ms. Hines stated once an inmate had been admitted into a residential program, additional assessment techniques were employed to gain information about specific aspects of the individuals’ mental and psychiatric functions. Those techniques included:

• Attitudes toward women;
• Autobiography;
• Beck depression inventory;
• Burt rape myth acceptance scale;
• Buss-Durkee hostility inventory;
• Clarke sexual history questionnaire;
• Cognitive distortions scale;
• Fear of negative evaluation scale;
• Interpersonal reactivity scale;
• Meherabian and Epstein empathy scale;
• Million clinical multiaxial inventory;
• Multiphasic sex inventory;
• Novaco anger scale;
• Relapse fantasies;
• Rotter locus of control scale;
• Self-monitoring;
• Situational competency test;
• Social avoidance and distress scale;
• Spielberger state-trait anxiety scale;
• Spielberger state-trait anger scale;
• Wechsler audit intelligent scale-revised; and
• Wilson sex fantasy questionnaire.

Ms. Hines felt if a board was to be continued, it needed to be certified and contain trained unbiased members.

Discussion began among several committee members. Chairwoman Giunchigliani suggested the behavior modification note whether an inmate could be rehabilitated. Assemblywoman McClain suggested an audit rather than an interim study. Ms. Hines stated she was unfamiliar with an audit and was concerned about cost. Assemblywoman McClain stated the audit could be done on performance of the panel. Ms. Hines explained the psychiatric panel came under the prison system. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated if the information was gathered via an audit, then a bill could be drafted next session from the results of that audit. Mr. Hines wanted to know if the public could be included in an audit. Chairwoman Giunchigliani responded audits were done internally by staff, but public comment could be written into the audit.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.C.R. 35 with no action taken by the committee. She stated she would entertain a motion for the approval of the minutes for March 22, March 24, March 31, and the floor minutes of April 9, 1999.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Jodie Van Wyhe,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, Chairwoman

DATE: