MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY Committee on Government Affairs
Seventy-First Session
May 14, 2001
The Committee on Government Affairswas called to order at 9:09 a.m., on Monday, May 14, 2001. Chairman Douglas Bache presided in Room 3143 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:
Mr. Douglas Bache, Chairman
Mr. John J. Lee, Vice Chairman
Ms. Merle Berman
Mr. David Brown
Mrs. Dawn Gibbons
Mr. David Humke
Mr. Harry Mortenson
Mr. Roy Neighbors
Ms. Bonnie Parnell
Mr. Bob Price
Mrs. Debbie Smith
COMMITTEE MEMBERS EXCUSED:
Mrs. Vivian Freeman
Ms. Kathy Von Tobel
Mr. Wendell Williams
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Eileen O’Grady, Committee Counsel
Dave Ziegler, Committee Policy Analyst
Glenda Jacques, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Mary Keating, Manager Internal Controls, Internal Audit Division
Wayne Carlson, Executive Director, Nevada Public Agency and Insurance Pool
Stan Miller, Tort Claims Manager, State of Nevada Attorney General
Madelyn Shipman, Assistant District Attorney, Washoe County
Robert Hadfield, Executive Director, Nevada Association of Counties
Robin Reedy, Deputy Treasurer, State of Nevada Treasurer
Senate Bill 561: Makes various changes concerning division of internal audits of department of administration. (BDR 31-392)
Mary Keating, Manager Internal Controls, Internal Audit Division, said S.B. 561 clarified that training from the internal audit department was for those governmental agencies that did not have external audits. Professional licensing boards and commissions would be exempt. The University and Community College System of Nevada, Public Employees’ Retirement System, Housing Division of the Department of Business and Industry and Colorado Commission were subject to outside audits. The bill established the manager of internal controls in statute and included the occupational and educational experience necessary for the position.
Ms. Parnell asked if the exempt agencies used the same qualifications for their audits. Ms. Keating believed the entities were audited by certified public accounting agencies (CPA) and their qualifications were comparable. Her agency would be available to answer any questions that arose. Regulations required her to train each agency at least once every five years. She logistically could not train 148 state agencies without an increase in staff and personnel. Her office would train those agencies that did not have outside CPA services.
Chairman Bache asked if the exempt agencies were General Fund agencies. Ms. Keating believed the university system received a majority of their money from the General Fund.
Chairman Bache closed the hearing on S.B. 561 and opened the hearing on S.B. 568.
Senate Bill 568: Allows risk management division of department of administration and attorney general to assess counties for certain tort claims under certain circumstances. (BDR 27-1447)
Wayne Carlson, Executive Director, Nevada Public Agency and Insurance Pool, had been working with risk management to establish the status of district court employees. The proposed amendment (Exhibit C) outlined how the county could fund liability coverage. Assessment was defined by relating how the state assessed each county for coverage.
Stan Miller, Tort Claims Manager, State of Nevada Attorney General, explained the bill was a result of a lawsuit involving a juvenile probation officer in Elko County. Elko County and Nevada had agreed to split the $170,000 settlement cost. Elko filed a lawsuit against Nevada because they felt the juvenile officer was a state employee. The judicial court ruled he was a county employee and the case had been appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court. The bill addressed who would cover district court employees for liability coverage.
Mrs. Gibbons asked why the settlement was for $170,000 when the state and county maximum liability was $50,000.
Mr. Miller explained the state tort cap was $50,000 per cause of action. The case had three claimants entitled to settlement costs. District court employees were paid by the county but were under the direct supervision of state employees, the judges. The judges could hire, fire, and discipline. The question still existed whether they were state or county employees.
Mrs. Gibbons asked if the bill affected the lawsuit filed by a Washoe County clerk. Mr. Miller explained the bill had no affect on the lawsuit because no liability action had been filed.
Mr. Price asked if employees were currently responsible to pay their liability costs. Mr. Miller replied affirmatively.
Mrs. Gibbons asked if the employees were “at will” employees. Mr. Miller replied affirmatively. Two Nevada Supreme Court cases, Amy Harvey vs. The Second Judicial District Court Judges and Elko County vs. The State of Nevada, could determine the status of district court employees.
Mr. Carlson replied the bill resolved funding issues. The counties were obligated to fund the positions. They ran the employees through county payroll, benefit, and workers’ compensation systems for the convenience of the court. The county felt they were state employees because they were employed by the judge. The bill allowed the county and Attorney General to enter into an agreement to mutually agree how liability coverage should be handled.
Chairman Bache said the bill had raised questions about whether county employees would lose their collective bargaining protection. He felt they should be defined as county employees except for liability issues. He did not want their county status taken away.
Mr. Miller replied the bill did not specify whether they were state or county employees. The intent was to protect employees from liability. If they were determined to be state employees they would lose county bargaining rights, but would be granted certain immunities under the eleventh amendment.
Mr. Carlson clarified district court employees did not participate in collective bargaining units.
Madelyn Shipman, Assistant District Attorney, Washoe County, explained every court employee was a county employee except in Washoe County. In 1974 Washoe County judges assumed the right to state their employees should be court employees. Washoe County court employees were “at will” and did not have collective bargaining rights. The juvenile probation officers were county employees. The bill clarified the roles of the county and the state in ensuring there was some acceptance of responsibility for their employees’ actions.
Robert Hadfield, Executive Director, Nevada Association of Counties, urged the committee to pass the bill. The county employees and political jurisdictions needed protection and the amendment allowed flexibility to accomplish that.
Chairman Bache closed the hearing on S.B. 568.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN PARNELL MADE A MOTION TO DO PASS S.B. 561.
ASSEMBLYMAN BROWN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT.
********
ASSEMBLYMAN LEE MADE A MOTION TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 568.
ASSEMBLYMAN NEIGHBORS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT.
Senate Bill 488: Revises authority of state treasurer to invest money held in certain trust funds and to administer proceeds from settlement agreements and civil litigation between State of Nevada and tobacco companies. (BDR 18-361)
Chairman Bache explained the bill was concurrently referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The bill affected the budget and the tobacco settlement fund and needed to be rereferred to the Assembly Ways and Means Committee.
Ms. Parnell welcomed the students from Mrs. Starett and Ms. Franco’s Carson Middle School eighth-grade history class and hoped they enjoyed themselves.
Chairman Bache introduced the proposed amendment to S.B. 488 that was worked out between the Attorney General and the treasurer’s office (Exhibit D).
ASSEMBLYMAN NEIGHBORS MADE A MOTION TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 488 AND REREFER TO THE ASSEMBLY WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE.
ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mrs. Smith stated she would move the bill but wanted to reserve her floor vote because of the concerns she had.
Chairman Bache commented he had the same concerns. He felt the creation of a nonprofit organization would end up costing the state more money. The four large tobacco companies were still doing quite well.
Mr. Lee questioned where monies would be found for additional legal expenses.
Robin Reedy, Deputy Treasurer, Nevada State Treasurer, stated the Legislature had designated the tobacco money and the direction could not be changed. The lawsuits to smaller tobacco companies were figured in the Attorney General’s annual budget. The bill did not change the direction of tobacco money.
Mr. Lee said he supported the bill in committee and would reserve his floor vote until he had talked to the treasurer.
Ms. Parnell reserved her right to vote against the bill on the floor. She did not see the need for a nonprofit organization.
Chairman Bache commented several committee members had reservations and suggested the “do pass” be changed to an “amend without recommendation.”
ASSEMBLYMEN NEIGHBORS AND HUMKE WITHDREW THEIR MOTIONS.
********
ASSEMBLYMAN NEIGHBORS MADE A MOTION TO AMEND WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION S.B. 488 AND REREFER TO THE ASSEMBLY WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE.
ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT.
Chairman Bache advised Ms. O’Grady the amendment was a priority to get the bill delivered to the Assembly Judiciary Committee as soon as possible. Seeing no further business the Chairman adjourned the committee at 9:48 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Glenda Jacques
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblyman Douglas Bache, Chairman
DATE: