The Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities was called to order by Chairman Raymond D. Rawson, at 2:00 p.m., on Monday, March 29, 1999, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. The meeting was videoconferenced to the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Room 4412, Las Vegas, 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 Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman

Senator Maurice Washington, Vice Chairman

Senator Randolph J. Townsend

Senator Mark Amodei

Senator Bernice Mathews

Senator Michael Schneider

Senator Valerie Wiener

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Senator Jon C. Porter, Sr., Clark County Senatorial District No. 1

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Cynthia Cook, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Howard McClearin Lee, Chaplain, Public School Chaplaincy for America

Janine Hansen, Lobbyist, Nevada Eagle Forum

Sheila M. Ward, Lobbyist, Nevada Christian Coalition

Boaz Munnerlyn, Youth Pastor, University Family Fellowship

Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens

Andrea Golightly, Student

Christopher Grasso, Student

James W. Penrose, Attorney, Nevada State Education Association

Juanita Clark, Concerned Citizen

Gary Peck, Lobbyist, American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada

Courtney Alexander, Member, Southern Nevada Strategic Planning Authority

Larry L. Spitler, Lobbyist, Clark County School District

Vee Wilson, Concerned Citizen

David Price, Ed.D, Principal, Richard Rundle Elementary School

Dawn Havilland, Concerned Citizen

John Ellerton, M.D., Concerned Citizen

Henry Etchemendy, Lobbyist, Nevada Association of School Boards

Charles (Steve) Williams, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District

Al Bellister, Lobbyist, Nevada State Education Association

Mary C. Walker, Lobbyist, Douglas County, and Lyon County

Jim Reinhardt, Fire Chief, East Fork Fire and Paramedic District, Douglas County

Chairman Rawson presented Robert W. Sweet Jr., Professional Staff Member, Committee on Education and the Workforce, United States Congress, and President and Founder of The National Right to Read Foundation. Mr. Sweet proceeded with a power-point slide presentation, which showed 97 percent of English words are spelled regularly, yet schools use methods to teach as if most words are spelled irregularly. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) has conducted extensive research in reading instruction. Conclusions include that good readers are phonemically aware, understand the alphabetic principle, can apply these skills to the development and application of phonics skills when reading and spelling words, and can accomplish these applications in a fluent and accurate manner. Fifty percent of children in special education are there simply because they cannot read. Mr. Sweet referred to his testimony to the Assembly educational committee in support of Assembly Bill (A.B.) 294 (Exhibit C).

Mr. Sweet concluded by saying a child must be taught to read by the fourth grade, or go through life unable to read without remedial training.

Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 289.

Senator Washington testified S.B. 289 would prohibit a school district or charter school from not allowing equal access, and require schools to administer rules that would not discriminate against or discourage voluntary religious activities. Although sectarian instructions are prohibited in the public schools, the right and the freedom to religious expression is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. In 1995, President William J. Clinton authorized a statement saying pupils may not be prohibited from acting on their own accord from expressing their own views solely because they are of a religious nature, and that the schools may not endorse religious activity or encourage participation in that religious activity. Those in opposition to the bill will say there is a fine line between church and state. Senator Washington asserted students should have the right to engage in religious activities in the schools without being prohibited. It is a freedom guaranteed by the United States Constitution. In this country we have had the opportunity to assimilate many people who are able to live in harmony and exercise their faith without discrimination.

Chairman Rawson articulated his understanding that a student is currently allowed to express dietary preferences on religious grounds, pray before examinations, and to say grace. He inquired what other activities this bill would assure. Senator Washington said S.B. 289 would allow bible and scripture studies or after-school clubs of a religious nature on the campus. Several years ago, Washoe County students initiated a day of prayer that was deemed unconstitutional. Activities instigated by students should not be prohibited. Chairman Rawson asserted the definition of free speech is quite broad. How would Senator Washington feel about the Ku Klux Klan conducting meetings on campus if they were to follow the proper guidelines? Senator Washington responded as long as the Klan did not harm property, life, or limb, they should be treated as any other group under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, and S.B. 289.

Senator Wiener affirmed that Senator Washington was referring to noninstructional time; that is lunch, before school, and after school. In a hypothetical situation, during "quiet time," would these activities be allowed? Senator Washington said S.B. 289 would not preclude that. Senator Wiener expressed concern that students might be subjected to religious activities against their wishes. Senator Washington said the bill merely allows those who wish to participate to do so; it does not endorse proselytizing. Senator Wiener pointed out there may be a more subtle outcome if the child in the classroom is being subjected during "quiet time." Senator Washington reiterated if it is considered free time it would be permissible, and no student is required to participate.

Senator Washington introduced Howard McClearin Lee, Chaplain, Public School Chaplaincy for America. Chaplain Lee testified the organization was founded in order to provide trained, certified personnel for educational facilities nationwide to meet the spiritual, physical, and emotional needs of students, teachers, and staff personnel. Educational chaplains are required to have a master’s degree from an accredited school. He continued the lack of morality is a danger to our children and grandchildren, and would like to challenge Nevada to introduce educational chaplaincy in the public schools. Chaplain Lee asserted that such a program is as important as providing chaplaincy for our armed forces, hospitals, legislatures, and prisons. The voluntary services focus on prevention, intervention, and follow-up, with family members involved in the entire process. In answer to Chairman Rawson, Chaplain Lee stated he is an ordained nondenominational minister. In Dayton, Ohio, the chaplaincy teaches morals and values that would be a part of any faith. The services are scheduled at specific times, in the elementary school classrooms. Members of various faith groups have developed the curricula. Responding to Senator Mathews, Chaplain Lee said geography, demographics, and particularly the willingness of the teachers to participate are the factors used to determine the selection of the schools. The program complements S.B. 289, and is inclusive as opposed to intrusive. He continued chaplaincy is a part of the heritage of the United States of America. Since those involved are volunteers, there are no costs to the taxpayer. Chaplain Lee reiterated it is not religious education, it is ethical guidance.

Janine Hansen, Lobbyist, Nevada Eagle Forum; Sheila M. Ward, Lobbyist, Nevada Christian Coalition; and Francis P. Gillings, Lobbyist, American Independent Party, Washoe County Chairman; articulated their support of S.B. 289, which allows expression guaranteed under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights.

Boaz Munnerlyn, Youth Pastor, University Family Fellowship, testified since prayer in school was restricted in 1962, there has been a marked increase in teen problems along with a decrease in test scores. He encouraged the committee to support S.B. 289.

Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens, said S.B. 289 simply clarifies the Equal Access Act enacted by the United States Congress in 1984. The act was designed to ensure that consistent with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, religious activities by pupils are accorded the same access to public school facilities as any other nonreligious activities by the pupils.

Andrea Golightly, Student, and Christopher Grasso, Student, voiced their support for S.B. 289. Chairman Rawson reminded the students they are allowed to place posters, have access to the media, and use of the public address system under the provisions of the Equal Access Act.

James W. Penrose, Attorney, Nevada State Education Association, referred to his letter to the committee dated March 16, 1999 (Exhibit D). He stated the association objects to the language in S.B. 289, which would amend Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 388.150 by adding section 3 paragraph (b) to provide that nothing in this section: "Requires a school district or charter school to administer rules that discriminate against or discourage voluntary religious activity or speech by pupils on school property."

The association believes paragraph (b) would go far beyond the Equal Access Act. Chairman Rawson informed Mr. Penrose the committee has received a five page letter from Brenda J. Erdoes, Legislative Counsel, Legal Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, which concludes the language in S.B. 289 is constitutional (Exhibit E). Mr. Penrose added his opposition to the bill is strictly on policy grounds and ambiguities in the language, not constitutionality.

Juanita Clark, Concerned Citizen, testifying from Las Vegas, supports S.B. 289. She said administrators may not deny religious speech because of discomfort. Rights of students under the Equal Access Act should be taught to students in civics and government classes.

Gary Peck, Lobbyist, American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, testified from Las Vegas in opposition to S.B. 289. He asserted blaming the ills of modern society on the 1962 decision to ban school prayer is ludicrous and emphasized the union is not antireligious, contrary to public opinion. The union does believe paragraph (b), is unconstitutional. Mr. Peck will forward to the committee a paper outlining the position of the American Civil Liberties Union, and a legal opinion regarding the constitutionality of section 3, paragraph (b).

Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 289 and opened the hearing on S.B. 435.

Senator Jon C. Porter, Sr., Clark County Senatorial District No. 1, presented testimony concerning S.B. 383 of the Sixty-ninth Session.

Senator Porter stated the planning authority is mandated to work on a strategic plan with local government to set forth goals, objectives and strategies which address the effects on growth, education, transportation, water and the environment in Clark County.

Courtney Alexander, Member, Southern Nevada Strategic Planning Authority, read prepared testimony in support of S.B. 435 (Exhibit F).

Larry L. Spitler, Lobbyist, Clark County School District, testified the district supports S.B. 435 with proposed amendments (Exhibit G), which have been agreed to by the Southern Nevada Strategic Planning Authority. Senator Porter stated he would prefer the language of the bill not be changed to be permissive; however, he understands this is the beginning of a very important process and will be reviewed during the seventy-first legislative session.

In answer to Senator Washington, Mr. Spitler said under S.B. 435 the commission could make a recommendation concerning bonding and financing for new school construction as well as renovation.

Senator Porter said for the record:

Mr. Spitler added that the estimated amount for the fiscal note would be approximately $16,800. Chairman Rawson reminded Mr. Spitler when the language is changed from "shall" to "may," the fiscal note would disappear.

Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 435 and opened the hearing on S.B. 431.

Senator Porter testified S.B. 431 encompasses several areas. He said technology could enhance curriculum, offer many choices, and the student can set the pace in an unrestricted learning environment. Independent study is not about home schooling; it is about home instruction. Senator Porter informed the committee a representative from the Clark County School District will address the issue of liability; and George Pyne, Lobbyist, Executive Officer, Public Employees Retirement Board, Public Employees Retirement System, will testify on the ramifications of retired teachers returning to the system. Donation of surplus property by school districts will be allowed under S.B. 431. In answer to Senator Wiener, Senator Porter said Vee Wilson would testify about costs.

Senator Washington asked if S.B. 431 would change or modify the independent study program that currently exists, to allow students to work with a tutor to meet their graduation requirements. Senator Porter responded S.B. 431 provides for charter schools to specialize in home instruction, with oversight by experts in the field, but would not affect current programs.

Vee Wilson, Concerned Citizen, testified from Las Vegas. He read prepared testimony relating to the concept of Odyssey Charter School (Exhibit H). A draft Odyssey Charter School of Nevada application to the Nevada State Department of Education was distributed to the committee showing an estimated annual cost per student of $4,124.85 (Exhibit I ).

David Price, Ed.D, Principal, Richard Rundle Elementary School; Dawn Havilland, Concerned Citizen; and John Ellerton, M.D., Concerned Citizen; testified from Las Vegas, in favor of S.B. 431.

Robert S. McCord, Ed.D, Lobbyist, Director of Government Relations and Legislation, Clark County School District, offered written comments specific to the content of bill (Exhibit J).

Chairman Rawson said since the state is not giving up all control to regulate charter schools under S.B. 431, is there a reason for not talking about covering some kind of liability regarding these private schools. Dr. McCord replied the issue of liability is a difficult one, but current law prohibits the sponsor from interfering with the operation of charter schools. This limits the district’s ability to control loss. The district would like to work cooperatively with charter school applicants to create a proper liability status. Chairman Rawson stated there are ways to limit liability. A public pronouncement that charter schools serve the common good and, since they are not for profit, should have some of the same protections that other public institutions enjoy. The state law could be refined in regard to liability. Dr. McCord agreed with Chairman Rawson in theory, but once again pointed out the lack of control districts have over charter schools concerning training programs in order to limit liability. Chairman Rawson continued, public schools now self-insure and have a limit on liability and if this issue was addressed carefully, the same type of limit may be established. If someone knowingly harms a person or violates the law the exclusion from liability may not exist in any case. If public schools were required to insure every single school for liability, it could bankrupt the system. He will instruct staff to look at language to limit liability under certain circumstances.

Senator Wiener averred the law currently allows one charter school for every 75,000 students and no limit for "at-risk" charter schools. She questioned whether the Odyssey Charter School is an "at-risk" school. Dr. McCord responded the draft application of the Odyssey Charter School of Nevada does not specify whether it is to be an "at-risk" charter school. Additionally, he stated there is no definition under current law to clearly classify an "at-risk" charter school.

Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research and Evaluative Services, State Board of Education, State Department of Education, expressed support for charter schools by the board. He read prepared testimony of comments and observations offered by department staff for the committee’s consideration (Exhibit K). He added that a definition of "at-risk" could be found in statutes pertaining to alternative schools.

Henry Etchemendy, Lobbyist, Nevada Association of School Boards, referred to S.B. 258 that would allow more than one entity to sponsor a charter school. Mr. Etchemendy continued, school districts should be held harmless from the actions of charter schools if more than one entity can be a sponsor of a charter school. Upon clarification of the liability issue, the association is in support of S.B. 431.

SENATE BILL 258: Revises provisions governing charter schools. (BDR 34-43)

Charles (Steve) Wilson, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District, said the district is neutral on S.B. 431. The district concurs with the requirement that before a committee to form a charter school submits an application to the board of trustees of a school district, a written description of the educational programs that will be offered by the charter school must be provided. Mr. Wilson concluded that the sponsor of the school must be held harmless against any claim of liability.

Chairman Rawson called for ideas on the amount of monetary assistance that should go with each student; particularly if the charter school is not in a normal classroom setting. There were no ideas put forward.

Al Bellister, Lobbyist, Nevada State Education Association, submitted a proposed amendment to S.B. 431, in order to meet a federal requirement, and therefore allow access to more federal aid for charter schools (Exhibit L).

George Pyne, Lobbyist, Executive Officer, Public Employees’ Retirement Board, Public Employees’ Retirement System, identified the objection of the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) to S.B. 431. According to Mr. Pyne, the area of the bill that would exempt a retired employee, who accepts employment with a charter school as a teacher, from provisions that he or she is disqualified from PERS allowances for the duration of their employment with a charter school is unacceptable. Under current regulation, a retired employee who is reemployed by the state has their retirement benefit suspended for the duration of the employment. Most rehired employees have the opportunity to reenroll in PERS and earn additional retirement credits. A retired employee who returns to the public sector can earn up to $16,357 annually without having benefits suspended. The position of the board of PERS is that to exempt employees of charter schools from these provisions would be contrary to the purpose of PERS. It is the goal of the system to provide uniform benefits to all members of the system.

Chairman Rawson asked Mr. Pyne if the system had worked through the actuarial scenario of retired teachers returning to the profession and not being subjected to the suspension of retirement benefits. Mr. Pyne answered the system is in the process of completing a comprehensive study of the impact of such a request. Although early estimates for this small group of people indicate a cost of $14 million to $28 million, allowing such an exception will open the door for other groups to request exceptions. Additional remedies being studied include raising the earnings limitation, and declaring a type of emergency exception due to the teacher shortage. Senator Rawson commented the door has already been opened, because of the emphasis on encouraging well-qualified teachers to teach in Nevada. Retirees are often the best qualified.

Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 431 and opened the hearing on S.B. 389.

A proposed amendment to accompany S.B. 389 was distributed to the committee (Exhibit M).

Marvin Carr, State Fire Marshal, State Fire Marshal Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, testified the amendment would change the population of the counties in which the state fire marshal may act under S.B. 389, from 100,00 to 50,000. He stated that was the original intent of the bill, and a companion bill, A.B. 594, will be amended accordingly.

Mary C. Walker, Lobbyist, Douglas County, and Lyon County, stated the counties concur with the bill and the amendment as proposed.

Larry L. Spitler, Lobbyist, Clark County School District, said the district finds S.B. 389 unacceptable because the district would have to deal with five different cities that have different rules and regulations for school construction. Mr. Carr responded Clark County, Washoe County, and Carson City, are exempted from S.B. 389, by virtue of the fact their population exceeds 50,000.

Jim Reinhardt, Fire Chief, East Fork Fire and Paramedic District, Douglas County, added he thought Mr. Spitler's concern might stem from the ability for local government to request certain portions of the fire marshal’s duties and policies to be delegated down to the county level. Douglas County is one of three entities statewide who have an interlocal agreement with the state fire marshal’s office to do plan checks for schools, regardless of the jurisdiction in which they fall.

SENATOR TOWNSEND SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

*****

The meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Cynthia Cook,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman

DATE: