The Senate Committee on Government Affairs was called to order by Chairman Ann O'Connell, at 11:00 a.m., on Friday, March 5, 1999, in Room 2149 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman

Senator William J. Raggio, Vice Chairman

Senator William R. O’Donnell

Senator Jon C. Porter

Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.

Senator Dina Titus

Senator Terry Care

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Northern Nevada Senatorial District

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Julie Burdette, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Senator O’Connell opened the hearing and requested testimony on Senate Bill (S.B.) 252.

Gary Horrocks, Lobbyist, Nevada Association of Concerned Motorcyclists, stated he was a 21-year resident of Las Vegas and presently resided at 1630 Mt. Hood Street, Las Vegas, Nevada. He further stated that he is the Executive Director of the Nevada Association of Concerned Motorcyclists. Mr. Horrocks understood that the committee members had copies of his prepared testimony (Exhibit C). He asked that the Legislature not unfairly single out two-wheeled visitors to Nevada State Parks. He mentioned specifically the fees that are currently collected at the Red Rock Canyon recreation area and noted that pedestrians and bicycles are free, and that there is a reduced rate for motorcycles entering the park.

Mr. Horrocks commented on Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 407.065, which defines the fees primarily for motorized visitors in four state parks. Mr. Horrocks also mentioned that it was a widely accepted practice to charge end-user fees. The Nevada Association of Concerned Motorcyclists is not against that, realizing that all visitors have an impact, but they would like this committee to recognize that theirs is a reduced impact in comparison with family vehicles that carry more passengers.

Mr. Horrocks stated that the Nevada Association of Concerned Motorcyclists believe the across-the-board fee of $5 is unfair to those driving two-wheeled vehicles. The Nevada Association of Concerned Motorcyclists requests that the Senate Committee on Government Affairs oppose S.B. 252.

Senator O’Connell inquired how many members or how large was Mr. Horrocks’ organization. He replied that the Nevada Association of Concerned Motorcyclists has a dues-paying membership, politically oriented in nature, with over 700 members in southern Nevada and a sister organization in the north with over 400 dues-paying members.

Senator O’Connell stated for the record that her son was an avid motorcyclist.

The Chairman then asked the committee if there were questions regarding Mr. Horrocks’ testimony on S.B. 252.

Senator O’Donnell inquired whether statistics were available for the numbers of motorcyclists who, in fact, visit Nevada State Parks. He further inquired if a tremendous amount of revenue would be generated as a result of passage of this bill.

Senator O’Connell replied that the information was not immediately available.

Mr. Horrocks commented that the members of the Nevada Association of Concerned Motorcyclists had made their views well known to elected officials and urged the Senate Committee on Government Affairs to oppose the passage of S.B. 252.

The Chairman closed the hearing on S.B. 252 and opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 128.

Brian Krolicki, State Treasurer, addressed the members of the committee stating that A.B. 128 was one of three authorized treasurer bills. He asked if he might go through the bill section by section in order to give a brief description of the changes. The Chairman agreed. Mr. Krolicki began by noting section 1, stating that by inserting "or his designee" some flexibility would be provided to the treasurer, especially in a bond sale. The current statute specifies that the treasurer must sign certain documents within 24 hours. Mr. Krolicki pointed out that the revision in section 2 relates to the appointment of unclassified individuals. In the process of restructuring the office it had seemed appropriate to move away from the deputy position of operations. Currently, the Director of Debt Management carries out these tasks, but a title change to Deputy Treasurer of Debt Management would seem to be valid. The treasurer’s office is not asking for an additional unclassified position, only to rename the position. The change in section 3, he stressed, was suggested by the Legislative Counsel Bureau and clarifies that the treasurer can contract with professional services in the issuance of debt securities.

Mr. Krolicki remarked that the changes in section 4 and section 5 are a further attempt to codify and consolidate the debt-issuance function into the state treasurer. Section 4 refers to Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), and that the State Treasurer shall be responsible for the selection of professional services when bonds are issued for NDOT. He elucidated on section 5, explaining that it relates to the Colorado River Commission (CRC). The language would clarify that in the issuance of bonds, the Colorado River Commission will work jointly with the treasurer in matters concerning the bond-rating agency and the selection of any necessary professional services.

Chairman O’Connell wondered if there was a reason not to have this bill on passage and approval. Mr. Krolicki answered affirmatively, stating there were no urgent issues and July 1, 1999, would be acceptable to the treasurer’s office.

Senator Neal inquired about the professional services mentioned previously. Mr. Krolicki explained that in the issuance of bonds, three primary services were required: underwriters, bond counsel, and financial advisory services. Professional services were selected through a competitive process. In the legal area, the treasurer’s office can use any of the four firms that are currently eligible to provide these services.

Senator Neal asked why there was a need for change in the language of the law if these actions were already being carried out. Mr. Krolicki answered that the Legislative Counsel Bureau suggested this language change in order to clarify and make implicit these actions in the Office of the State Treasurer.

Senator Neal asked for further clarification of sections 4 and 5. Mr. Krolicki replied by explaining that the Colorado River Commission already employs professional services. The statute says that the Commission and the Office of Treasurer need to work together. The activities of the Colorado River Commission do not bring them into the bond-issuance business. The Office of the State Treasurer has the expertise and this language further enhances the consolidation. It ensures that when NDOT and CRC issue bonds, working with the Office of the State Treasurer, they will have the advantage of experience and other proficiencies provided by the office.

Senator Neal asked what the services had cost in the past. Mr. Krolicki said the professional services for an average bond sale usually depend upon a formula, and could range from $100,000 - $200,000 (commenting that the figure could also be more or less).

Senator Neal inquired whether the attorney general was not qualified to handle this. Mr. Krolicki explained that the Office of the State Treasurer has a deputy attorney general assigned to the office, and the individual is very competent, but his expertise is not in this area. The attorney general has always acquiesced to outside professional services. It is Mr. Krolicki’s belief that the attorney general is quite comfortable with this and that this is, in fact, status quo; adding that there are also some liability and insurance coverages that apply as well.

Chairman O’Connell asked the committee for questions or comments. There were none and the Chairman closed the hearing on A.B. 128.

The Chairman then opened the work session with testimony on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.R.) 9.

Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Northern Nevada Senatorial District, proposed an amendment (Exhibit D) to S.J.R. 9, after line 14 adding subsection 4, stating that, "The functions of the controller’s office will be administered by the treasurer’s office."

Carole A. Vilardo, Lobbyist, Nevada Taxpayers Association, noted that in previous testimony, the Nevada Taxpayers Association was of the opinion there should be another amendment relating to the 8-year time frame involved in a constitutional change. Ms. Vilardo suggested that the Legislative Counsel Bureau would be much better prepared to write the language and had only to look at the 1987 and 1989 Legislative Sessions for an example of the process to accelerate a constitutional change to 3 years. If this issue was addressed at the beginning of the next legislative session, with a provision that the question appear on the May primary ballot of the municipal entities, it could be effective for the new fiscal year. The Nevada Taxpayers Association recommends that if this constitutional change is to take effect, the change should be "fast-tracked."

Chairman O’Connell requested questions and comments from the committee members.

Senator O’Donnell asked Ms. Vilardo for clarification regarding the language referring to an individual running for the office of controller. Senator O’Connell responded that there would not be a need for anyone to run for controller if the issue were to pass by putting it on the ballot that early. The Chairman reiterated that yes, this would go on the ballot as it is a constitutional change. It would have to go through two legislative sessions and be voted on by the public once. Senator O’Connell related that the bill had been introduced 6 years ago, and when the bill was heard during the second session of that 6-year period, the language was not correct. This resulted in the bill being rewritten and started the process over again.

Senator Rhoads commented that he had introduced this resolution 6 years ago because it has been the trend to consolidate or merge, not only in government but also in the corporate structure of the world. Computer systems, along with new technology have proven that consolidation will help government move into the new century and save the State of Nevada $500,000 or more a year.

Senator O’Donnell noted that it was true many corporations had eliminated the position of controller, but the major corporations have information systems (IS) managers and comptrollers. This individual is responsible for the accounting function on an enormous scale using digital information networks. Senator O’Donnell commented on the integrated financial system that had just come on-line, stating the need more for an information systems manager, but that need did not necessarily obviate the need for a controller. It was Senator O’Donnell’s opinion that by keeping the two offices, the system of checks and balances remain in place and the possibility of embezzlement is more difficult.

Senator Care noted for the record that he had been impressed by the testimony of both Robert Seale, ex-State Treasurer and Kathy Augustine, State Controller. Senator Care also stated that he had received more documentation from the State Controller and had not had the opportunity to read the material. Therefore, he would vote no today; however, it was possible that he might change his vote on the floor after reading the documents newly received.

Chairman O’Connell requested a motion on S.J.R. 9.

SENATOR TITUS SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION FAILED. (SENATORS RAGGIO, O’DONNELL, PORTER AND CARE VOTED NO.)

*****

The Chairman indicated that the committee would now discuss Senate Bill (S.B.) 215, and asked if there was anyone from the City of Sparks who wished to come forward and testify.

Senator Raggio stated that on S.B. 215 he would move to do pass. Chairman O’Connell requested that the committee review the information in the work session documents on this bill. Senator Raggio stipulated that these were the City of Sparks charter amendments heard in committee on March 1, 1999.

SENATOR RAGGIO MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 215.

SENATOR PORTER SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

*****

Chairman O’Connell opened discussion and possible action in the work session on Senate Bill (S.B.) 217.

The Chairman inquired whether anyone from the county wished to speak. There was no discussion. It was noted that there were no amendments and the previous opposition came from Jack Kenney, Lobbyist.

SENATOR O’DONNELL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 217.

SENATOR PORTER SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

*****

Senator Titus explained to the Chairman that she had been working with Elizabeth N. Fretwell, Lobbyist, City of Henderson, in order to obtain amendments for Senator Titus’ bill on infrastructure impact. Senator Titus said she hoped to have the amendments for the committee by the following Friday’s (March 12, 1999) work session.

The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 12:45 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Julie Burdette,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman

DATE: