The Senate Committee on Judiciary was called to order by Chairman Mark A. James, at 9:30 a.m., on Friday, April 16, 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 Mark A. James, Chairman

Senator Jon C. Porter, Vice Chairman

Senator Mike McGinness

Senator Dina Titus

Senator Valerie Wiener

Senator Terry Care

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

Senator Maurice Washington (Excused)

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Assemblywoman Barbara K. Cegavske, Clark County Assembly District No. 5

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Jo Greenslate, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Assemblywoman Barbara K. Cegavske, Clark County Assembly District No. 5, testified that, in her opinion, A.B. 340 is a simple deletion of language that is no longer necessary in the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS). She distributed a handout titled "Text of Repealed Sections Assembly Bill 340" (Exhibit C). Assemblywoman Cegavske requested the committee’s support of this bill.

Chairman James inquired of Brad Wilkinson, Committee Counsel, Legal Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, if it is customary to include the proposed deleted text of a bill rather than just the lead lines of the deleted text. Mr. Wilkinson replied if there are four or more sections to be deleted, only the lead lines are printed. Chairman James requested Assemblywoman Cegavske give a more thorough explanation of the reason for passage of A.B. 340.

Assemblywoman Cegavske explained the proposed deleted language is archaic because it is no longer necessary to distinguish between the different status of married women versus non-married women. Additionally, there are no provisions in the NRS for married men. Further, Assemblywoman Cegavske pointed out the terms, such as "executrix" or "administratrix," are obsolete.

Senator Wiener mentioned she attended the meeting during which A.B. 340 was heard in the Assembly Committee on Judiciary, and asked if there was any way deleting the language could inadvertently cause unexpected consequences for women, married or not. Assemblywoman Cegavske replied that it does not.

Hearing no further testimony on the bill, Chairman James closed the hearing on A.B. 340. He then opened the hearing on A.B. 645.

Mr. Wilkinson distributed two handouts, "Explanation of Assembly Bill No. 645" (Exhibit D), and "Assembly Bill No. 645 Proposed Amendment" (Exhibit E).

He explained this is the reviser’s bill and is a collection of provisions that are inappropriate, inaccurate, or in some way do not make sense. Mr. Wilkinson advised that the Legal Division receives these corrections before session, when they are drafting bills, or during the interim. They compile all of them and put together a bill. He proceeded to go through each section of the bill. Mr. Wilkinson stated section 1 adds the words "on judicial selection" following "commission." He said this would change the reference to "commission" to "judicial selection." Section 2 is a Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provision. Mr. Wilkinson told of revisions made during the Sixty-ninth Legislative Session that revised some provisions of Article 8, and this adds definitions that will also be used in Article 9. According to Mr. Wilkinson, section 3 amends NRS 176A.500 to remove a provision regarding the period of probation for person convicted of violating NRS 484.3795. However, probation is not allowed in those cases, and therefore that statute refers to something that does not exist.

Continuing, Mr. Wilkinson explained that section 4 of the bill sets forth penalties for desertion and nonsupport of a spouse or children, and it refers to a second offense, but does not refer to the penalty for a first offense. Therefore this revision adds that the penalty in paragraph (a) of subsection 1 of NRS 201.020 is for a first offense. Section 5 relates to weapons, and a bill from the Sixty-ninth Legislative Session defined a concealed weapon. Mr. Wilkinson stated the definition is unnecessary and inaccurate as well, because it refers to the definition of a concealed firearm. He said that in correcting this section, a mistake was made in changing the term from concealed weapon to concealed firearm. A way to correct this statute, according to Mr. Wilkinson, is to remove the definition for concealed weapon in section 5, subsection 8 of A.B. 645. Chairman James inquired whether there is a definition of a concealed weapon, to which Mr. Wilkinson replied there is not. Chairman James suggested that in order to correct the statute, concealed weapon should be defined for purposes of this criminal statute. Mr. Wilkinson acknowledged that is an option.

Senator McGinness stated he has served on the Senate Committee on Judiciary five of the six sessions he has served, and he does not understand what the listed weapons are. He questioned whether someone from law enforcement could bring some of the lesser known weapons before the committee to give the members an opportunity to view the various weapons.

James F. Nadeau, Lobbyist, Captain, Washoe County Sheriff’s Office, and Nevada Sheriffs & Chiefs Association, offered to provide information regarding the listed weapons. He said nunchaku are used in the martial arts, and are typically two pieces of wood, generally teak, held together with chain or rawhide. Trefoils are also used in martial arts, and are throwing stars and those types of things. Captain Nadeau explained a "billy" is a short nightstick, approximately 8 to 12 inches, whereas a nightstick is 24 inches in length. He stated a dirk is a slender knife similar to a stiletto. Captain Nadeau remarked he would be happy to bring in some of the weapons mentioned in section 5 of the bill to exhibit to the committee.

Chairman James reiterated the term "firearm" is wrong, and a definition of concealed weapon is necessary in section 5. Mr. Wilkinson stated the Legal Division could add a definition for concealed weapon. Chairman James asked if they do add that definition, will the only thing that a sheriff will be unable to issue a permit to carry concealed is a switchblade knife. Mr. Wilkinson answered affirmatively. Chairman James asserted, in his opinion, this section needs more revision than offered in the reviser’s bill.

Mr. Wilkinson continued with section 6, stating it includes the definition of two terms that are not used in NRS 239.010, in which they are included. Section 7 has a reference to negotiable instruments law, which should actually be to the section of the UCC on negotiable instruments. Section 8 defines "administrator" for the purpose of various sections of NRS. However, that term is not used, so it is an unnecessary definition. Mr. Wilkinson commented section 9 of the bill has a table of substances designated as highly hazardous if present in certain quantities, and this simply clarifies that certain chemicals may be called by other names. Section 10 refers to providing a certain amount of money that is distributed to a redevelopment agency, and it refers also to an "area." He remarked it should not have the reference to an "area," because it does not make sense. Section 11 of the bill, according to Mr. Wilkinson, refers to license revocations in the juvenile chapter 62 of NRS, and it has an erroneous reference to subsection 7 of NRS 62.224, which does not exist. Section 12 of the bill refers to the "council"; it should refer to the "advisory council on the metric system." Section 13 is simply rewriting a section that had a rather awkward flush line that was apparently confusing people.

Continuing, Mr. Wilkinson stated sections 14 through 18 add provisions into the "Inspectors of Structures" statutes that were added during the Sixty-ninth Legislative Session. He said when those were added, the new provisions necessary under federal law were not added into that chapter, as they are for all other provisions regarding making statements concerning orders for the support of children. Therefore those provisions were added into chapter 645D of NRS. Responding to a question by Chairman James, Mr. Wilkinson explained this was a bill that passed at the very end of the Sixty-ninth Legislative Session and was missed.

Mr. Wilkinson referred to Exhibit E, and explained it affects sections regarding fees collected by clerks of various courts. The language states that clerks can only collect the fees set forth in specific sections or chapters; they do not take into account fees that are set forth in other chapters sprinkled throughout NRS. Senator Wiener requested Mr. Wilkinson look into the exclusion of "diisocyanate," a chemical included in a bill during the Sixty-ninth Legislative Session, from the list of hazardous chemicals in section 9 of A.B. 645.

There being no further testimony on the bill, Chairman James closed the hearing on A.B. 645. He next opened the hearing on A.B. 649.

Mary Liveratti, Deputy Administrator, Aging Services Division, Department of Human Resources (DHR), read from her written testimony (Exhibit F). She stated the division is requesting a revision of NRS 200.5093, NRS 200.50984, and NRS 200.50986, effective July 1, 1999. Further, Ms. Liveratti explained the DHR director has proposed the elder protective services program be transferred to the Aging Services Division, effective July 1, 1999. Therefore this bill would correct the appropriate sections of NRS to conform them to the actual location of the program as of July 1, 1999.

Chairman James recommended the committee pass the two obsolete provisions bills and place them onto the consent calendar.

*****

Chairman James indicated the committee would vote on A.B. 645 when the amendment is received. There being no further business to come before the committee, Chairman James adjourned the meeting at 10 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Jo Greenslate,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator Mark A. James, Chairman

DATE: