The Committee on Elections, Procedures, and Ethics was called to order at 6:45 p.m., on Wednesday, May 5, 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:

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Assemblywoman Barbara Buckley, District 8

Assemblywoman Ellen Koivisto, District 14

Assemblyman Harry Mortenson, District 42

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

OTHERS PRESENT:

Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the hearing on A.C.R. 53, and called on the main sponsors, Assemblywoman Barbara Buckley, District 8, Assemblywoman Ellen Koivisto, District 14, and Frances Doherty, court master, Family Division, Second Judicial Court. She introduced for the record letters received from Honorable Robert Gaston, district court judge, Clark County, (Exhibit C) and Adrienne Cox, assistant director, Department of Family and Youth Services in Clark County (Exhibit D) in support of A.C.R. 53.

Assemblywoman Koivisto explained the resolution was a result of an Assembly bill heard in the Committee on Judiciary. After hearing testimony in judiciary, she realized children in counties had been in the system too long. Children did not have the same sense of time as an adult, and therefore, 6 months to them appeared as a lifetime. Nevada was the only state to have a bifurcated system for children placed in care of the state. Bifurcated means to be divided into two branches or parts. In the case of the children, it meant there were two steps or stages for a child to be placed within the state services. In the present situation, the Department of Family and Youth Services’ Child Protective Services Division conducted an investigation only when children were reported neglected or abused. Child Protective Services Division provided case management on maltreatment cases if children were living with parents or other family members. Children requiring foster homes or long-term relative placement were transferred to the custody of the state for placement and services. The transfer process resulted in information being lost and a resultant interruption in services to families. The delays in family reunification or permanent placement through termination of parental rights and adoption became an alternative solution to the problem of placement for children.

Assemblywoman Koivisto stated the Committee on Health and Human Services had passed a pilot program for Washoe County to determine the needs of abused and neglected children within the system. She felt the study had been needed for some time. Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if the study on

A.C.R. 53 would interfere with the pilot program just approved, and Assemblywoman Koivisto stated no. The pilot program would continue regardless of whether the study was passed. She felt the results of the study would work well with the pilot.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani recognized Assemblywoman Buckley, District 8, who spoke in support of A.C.R. 53. She felt the resolution was one of the most important ones for saving the lives of abused and neglected children, both physically and mentally. The system had failed the children in her opinion. Statistics showed children had been in three schools by the time they had been in the system for 6 months. Assemblywoman Buckley stressed agencies needed to know when to terminate parental timelines with the children, so the children could be adopted or be in foster care to ensure a stable environment. Those timelines needed to be shortened. The reunification was important for a child from the first day. If the parents went through counseling and knew where the problems were, then there would be no reason for the child or children to leave the home. She wanted the combination of systems to work well with the interests of everyone concerned and especially the children. She questioned the overall fiscal impact on counties if successful.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani recognized Frances Doherty, juvenile court master, Washoe County, Family Division, Second Judicial Court, who spoke in support of A.C.R. 53. She stated she appeared in court daily to oversee the placement of children in proper homes, and she wanted consistency and specific guidelines to go with federal and state regulations. Ms. Doherty voiced her opinion that the two systems could work together if current laws were reformed. She felt the system must place, protect, and be accountable to the children, and it needed someone to facilitate the overall process. Regardless of how the system was reformatted, the results could be emotional and traumatic to both the workers and the children. She felt children needed a permanent home, not a temporary home. The delays within the system had to do with federal funding and reasonable efforts. The system must comply with federal laws and most important of all saved the mental stability of a child rather than taking them out of one home and placing them into another home. She gave as an example a child who went into one home, got used to the stability of doing homework, rules, played baseball, and then was taken out of the home as the caseworker was no longer available. All of a sudden the court would state the children must be removed from home and taken somewhere else. The situation resulted in extreme trauma to a child.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked about the language on page 2 and were the people able to help from private sectors. Scott Wasserman, chief committee counsel, asked everyone to look at page 1, line 23, which stated the study would be created by the Legislative Commission as a subcommittee. Chairwoman Giunchigliani wanted to know what areas would be represented as she was concerned foster parents would be left out or the children themselves. She felt foster parents should be considered and the numbers needed to remain loose rather than too strict. Assemblywoman Buckley stated she wanted to make sure the people being consulted for the subcommittee were not paid or salaried people.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani called attention to S.C.R. 13, which had been distributed to all committee members. The resolution in question dealt with the study of foster care in the state, and it was possible the language from the resolution could be placed into A.C.R. 53. She did not feel two studies were needed.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani recognized May Shelton, director, Department of Social Services, Washoe County, who spoke in support of A.C.R. 53. She distributed a flow chart with the figures on the number of steps needed to place a child (Exhibit E). She explained current statutes required Child Protective Services be called in all cases. The blue section of the flow chart depicted the procedure for placement of children during the first phases. She was in favor of court appointed advocates to help with adoption laws and the safe families act.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani called on Stephen Shaw, administrator, Department of Family Services Division, in support of A.C.R. 53. His philosophy was adults designed the system, adults ran the system, and it hurt the children. He felt political issues were involved in the reformation of the system, such as pay increases, caseloads, and placement of children. He explained all administrators of the system agreed the system needed to be reformatted to help children be placed properly. The statistics were that for every child under 3, the child was moved on the average of 3.5 times in 6 months. Children over 3 were moved more than the 3.5 times.

MaryEllen White, program specialist, Division of Child Family Services, was in support of A.C.R. 53, and voiced the same opinions as the previous people who testified. Mr. Shaw stated he felt there was a need for a study to accomplish the system changes.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.C.R. 53 with no action taken by the committee. She opened the hearing on A.C.R. 55 and called on the main sponsor, Assemblyman Mortenson.

Assemblyman Mortenson explained people should have the same amount of time and equal opportunities to testify in committees. A.C.R. 55 had been originally introduced as A.B. 369 and then changed to a resolution. He stated with the passage of the resolution, it would not make prolonged meetings, as it would give everyone equal time. The legislature was excluded as it was not public body.

Assemblyman Price stated years ago the public did not have the option of speaking in a hearing, so he thought the process had come a long way.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani wanted to know if the public had voiced an opinion about a preferred meeting time. She also asked if the original testimony on the bill had included anyone who represented a committee where there was a conflict. Assemblyman Mortenson stated the public preferred nighttime meetings rather than daytime. Assemblywoman McClain wanted to know what time the public preferred. She emphasized certain councils and committees would meet late at night and be there all night if there were no guidelines. Assemblyman Mortenson did not know. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated a legislator could not demand good chairmanship by law. Assemblywoman McClain suggested all public comments be heard at the end of the hearing on the bill or resolution.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.C.R. 55. She opened the hearing on S.B. 531, and called on Scott Wasserman to testify.

Mr. Wasserman distributed a handout (Exhibit F) explaining the bill was introduced in the Senate Committee on Government Affairs on behalf of the Legislative Commission. The bill amended the definition of population found in the preliminary chapter of Nevada Revised Statutes. Population was currently defined as the number of people in a specified area as determined by the last decennial census conducted by the Bureau of the Census and reported by the Secretary of Commerce to the governor. Without the bill, the population counts changed upon the reporting of the census by the Secretary of Commerce to the governor. The Legislative Commission would then have to review several hundred statutes in the Nevada Revised Statutes that contained a reference to population before reporting the census to ensure various references to population included cities and counties after the new census was reported.

Mr. Wasserman explained in the past, the Legislative Commission had relied upon the estimated population provided by the Nevada State Demographer’s Office. The actual counts had varied from those estimates so a statute was unintentionally applied to a city or county. Some distinctions were so close that a number could not be determined before the reporting of the census to ensure the statute applied only to the intended city or county.

Continuing, Mr. Wasserman stated with the approval of S.B. 531, the Legislative Commission would be able to review the several hundred statutes making reference to population after the census was reported. The necessary changes before the tabulation of population would become effective for the purposes of those sections.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated the bill would adjust and address the population issues and would be available for future legislation. Assemblyman Price commented that if the population issue affected certain areas of the Nevada Revised Statutes, it might be considered special legislation. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated the motion for S.B. 531 would be held until a work session was scheduled for the bill. She asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on S.B. 531 with no action taken by the committee.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated she would entertain a motion for the language of A.B. 42 to be introduced as a resolution study. A.B. 42 dealt with an interim study for juveniles.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated she would entertain a motion on A.C.R. 55.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani explained A.C.R. 53 would be discussed during a work session. She asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, she adjourned the meeting at 7:40 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Jodie Van Wyhe,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, Chairwoman

DATE: