MINUTES OF THE meeting

of the

ASSEMBLY Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Mining

 

Seventy-First Session

April 13, 2001

 

 

The Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Miningwas called to order at 1:30 p.m., on Friday, April 13, 2001.  Chairman Marcia de Braga presided in Room 3161 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

Mrs.  Marcia de Braga, Chairman

Mr.    Tom Collins, Vice Chairman

Mr.    David Brown

Mr.    John Carpenter

Mr.    David Humke

Mr.    John J. Lee

Mr.    John Marvel

Mr.    Harry Mortenson

Mr.    Roy Neighbors

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

Ms.   Genie Ohrenschall

Mr.    Jerry Claborn

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

Assemblyman Don Gustavson

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Linda Eissmann, Committee Policy Analyst

June Rigsby, Committee Secretary

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Lou Thompson, Walker Lake Working Group

Robyn Mellender, Sierra Club

Gordon Depaoli, Legal Counsel, Walker River Irrigation District

Ken Spooner, General Manager, Walker River Irrigation District

Robert Quintero, Tribal Chairman, Walker River Paiute Tribe

Gerry Emm, Chairman, Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Team

R. Michael Turnipseed, P.E., Director, Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Robert Barengo, Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA)

Susan Asher, Executive Director, Nevada Humane Society

 

Chairman de Braga announced a quorum was not present and declared the meeting would convene as a subcommittee, pending the arrival of additional members. The hearing on A.B. 403 was opened.

 

            Assembly Bill 403:  Makes appropriation to State Department of Conservation      and Natural Resources for costs relating to preservation of Walker Lake.             (BDR S-802)

 

Assemblyman Neighbors, representing District 36, introduced Lou Thompson, a resident of Mineral County and advocate for Walker Lake. Assemblyman Neighbors distributed a handout (Exhibit C) and presented an overview of proposed changes to A.B. 403.  The first amendment was to revise subsection 1 of Section 1, lines 3 and 4 by deleting the language “and buying upstream water rights.” He explained it was an oversight, and that was not the focus of the bill. The second amendment was to delete Section 2, lines 7 through 15. The last change was to amend lines 16 through 19 of Section 3 to become Section 2.

 

Chairman de Braga summarized and stated the changes were related to the appropriation of $275,000 and $375,000. Assemblyman Neighbors agreed and   replied “$275,000 would be 201, 202 and $375,0000 would be 202, 203 and deleting out the part to do with the Corps of Engineers on their match.”

 

In response to Assemblyman Marvel, Assemblyman Neighbors clarified there had been a lot of money wasted in engineering costs and not enough had been done to complete projects. Because the money would go to the State Engineer, the funds would be more efficiently spent there. The intent of the bill was to get some money to clean up the 25-mile channel that cut across the Indian reservation. Assemblyman Neighbors added he had received no negative comments from the tribes.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors clarified further by stating water traveling down the channel encountered significant impediments, including trees, bushes, and debris. He described it as the first step in the effort to get more water to Walker Lake. There had been a period of seven years during which no water flowed into Walker Lake, and the salt level was increasing each year. He emphasized, since 1982, the level of Walker Lake had dropped over 140 feet, and the need to act was critical.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors acknowledged the bill would go to the Committee on Ways and Means, and he reminded the committee of the millions of dollars spent on Lake Tahoe. He concluded by saying the money would be better spent if the Corps of Engineers was not involved.

 

Chairman de Braga asked what the bill would access on the federal level (i.e., matching federal funds). Assemblyman Neighbors explained he was working with Senator Reid, and there appeared to be understanding that, knowing what has been done to help Lake Tahoe, help would be forthcoming for Walker Lake.

 

Chairman de Braga requested clarification on the mid-sentence deletion of lines 3 and 4. Assemblyman Neighbors referred the committee to Exhibit C and reiterated his desire to eliminate “and buying upstream water rights.”

 

Assemblyman Carpenter asked if the idea of a brine pond had been considered for the area. Lou Thompson, a resident of Mineral County, offered to respond. He acknowledged he had seen the proposal to dike one-third of Walker Lake for use as a brine pond and preserve the remaining two-thirds as fresh water. Mr. Thompson declared it to be feasible; however, the dike would be 50 feet high and stretch across 20 miles of Walker Lake. He estimated it would require approximately ten million cubic yards of material to construct a dike at a cost of millions of dollars. The addition of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would magnify the complexity. Mr. Thompson concluded by saying, even if it could be done, it would not be completed in time to save the lake.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors commented if there was a drought, as had been predicted, there might only be two years left before the fish population was lost.

 

Mr. Thompson reviewed the condition of Walker Lake. In 1994 it reached its lowest level in recent history. He described it as a closed basin, due to the lack of outlets. As such, the minerals in the lake became more concentrated as the volume of water decreased. Mr. Thompson declared the lake as being within one or two years of being too toxic to support fish.

 

Mr. Thompson viewed the amendment to A.B. 403 as a means to clarify the intent of the bill and to allow any monies to be used for channel cleanup work. He envisioned the project as being designed by the University of Nevada Agriculture Department, the Extension Service, and others with expertise. Those agencies would work with willing water users to convert from flood irrigation to a state-of-the-art irrigation system. Better utilization of water through more efficient systems would result, and it would not be necessary to take any land out of cultivation.

 

Mr. Thompson concluded his testimony by saying it would take money to save Walker Lake. He assured the committee his group, the Walker Lake Working Group, would work cooperatively with state and federal agencies to meet the needs of upstream and downstream users.

 

Chairman de Braga interrupted the testimony to call the Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Mining to order. Roll was called. The hearing on A.B. 403 resumed.

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked for clarification on the reference to state-of-the-art irrigation systems. Mr. Thompson explained there were several systems, including sprinkler, drip, and improved flood systems. Assemblyman Marvel asked if it included pumping water out of the river. Mr. Thompson deferred to the experts.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors offered final comments. He had met with R. Michael Turnipseed, P.E., Director of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, who voiced support on the issue. Cleaning the 25 miles of channel would be a good start to helping Walker Lake.

 

Robyn Mellender, representing the Sierra Club, asked to be on the record in support of A.B. 403 as amended.

 

Assemblyman Mortenson requested clarification on the subject of cleaning the channel. He remarked the reverse process was underway in southern Nevada, and voiced concern that, in years to come, plants and other vegetation would have to be restored. Ms. Mellender replied she would have to research that issue. Assemblyman Neighbors offered to speak with Assemblyman Mortenson after the meeting.

 

Gordon Depaoli, Counsel for the Walker River Irrigation District (WRID), distributed a handout (Exhibit D) and commenced testimony in opposition to A.B. 403. Mr. Depaoli explained the WRID had stated opposition primarily due to the language Assemblyman Neighbors had suggested be deleted. The specific reference was to the acquisition of upstream water rights. Mr. Depaoli called the committee’s attention to an amendment (Exhibit D) that he declared to be similar to that of Assemblyman Neighbors.

 

The witness shared an historical perspective on the issue. The Walker River continued to be the subject of much litigation and controversy, according to Mr. Depaoli. Although there had been a court decree in 1936 adjudicating the waters of the river in California and Nevada, there was additional litigation at the present time. The United States and the Walker River Paiute Tribe were seeking additional water rights for lands in the reservation and for Weber Reservoir. The United States was also seeking additional water rights for federal enclaves in Nevada and California, from the top of the system to the bottom. Mineral County intervened in the federal court action, seeking to have the court readjudicate and reallocate the waters of the system to maintain Walker Lake.

 

Mr. Depaoli commented there was currently no binding interstate allocation on the Walker River between Nevada and California. The interstate compact, which was approved by both state legislatures in 1971, had never been ratified by Congress and likely never would be ratified. The Truckee River, Carson River, and Lake Tahoe had been handled separately through Public Law 101-618. Mr. Depaoli remarked there were many reasons why the acquisition of upstream water rights would not be helpful.

 

He called the committee’s attention to his amendment (Exhibit D) and explained the intent. It would focus the restorative channel work on the area between the Wabuska Gauge and Walker Lake; however, it added specific recommendations to increase water flow that included the eradication of the tamarisk stands and expansion of cloud seeding activity.

 

In conclusion, Mr. Depaoli concurred with the deletion of “requiring matching funds” from the Corps of Engineers. He agreed it would not be wise to make that a condition at the present time.

 

Chairman de Braga inquired about the cloud seeding effort. Mr. Depaoli stated the Desert Research Institute (DRI) performed cloud seeding, and the Irrigation District was exploring the expansion of the program.

 

Ken Spooner, General Manager of the Walker River Irrigation District, offered to clarify. A scientific study had been funded for work by Joe Warburton, and preliminary results revealed the feasibility of increasing the yield of the river system. The program was described as very new, and extra funding would definitely enhance the system.

 

Chairman de Braga requested clarification of (b), the eradication of tamarisk (Exhibit D), specifically if the state’s noxious weeds program and the local conservation districts would be addressing that problem. She voiced concern, if the bill went to the Committee on Ways and Means, there would have to be the same dollar figure, but no specific uses for that figure. An outline of where the funds were proposed to go would be required.

 

Assemblyman Collins asked how much effort was made by the Walker River Irrigation District to control the tamarisk. Mr. Spooner replied it was not in his district. Assemblyman Collins repeated the question, but there was no response.

 

In response to Assemblyman Marvel, Mr. Depaoli predicted there would be many issues associated with moving, from getting the money to actually getting anything done. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was beginning a Lahontan Cutthroat trout recovery implementation program for the Walker River. With upstream projects related to the 1997 flood, Fish and Wildlife indicated it needed to be involved in consultation under the Endangered Species Act. As such, the process was complicated in moving from planning to implementation.

 

Assemblyman Marvel recalled problems from the 1997 flood in Gardnerville where ranchers were trying to work the channel, and the Corps of Engineers prohibited the work. Mr. Depaoli acknowledged the analogy and agreed it could be difficult. Regarding total costs, Mr. Depaoli replied he did not know.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors concurred it would likely be difficult, but it was important to get started before Walker Lake was a mud hole. He welcomed the amendments to A.B. 403 and expressed his hope the witnesses would testify before Ways and Means. 

 

Chairman de Braga, in response to the witness, explained A.B. 403 would have to make it out of the committee before going to the Committee on Ways and Means. Assemblyman Marvel added the bill was exempt from deadlines during the session.

 

Robert Quintero, Tribal Chairman representing the Walker River Paiute Tribe, commenced testimony in opposition to A.B. 403.  He read from a prepared statement (Exhibit E). There were two reasons the tribe did not support the bill. The first was related to the need for a comprehensive approach that would address the entire basin. He viewed A.B. 403 as piecemeal action. The second reason related to vague language about which parts of the channel would be cleaned up with the funds. He reminded the state it did not have jurisdiction to clean up the Walker River channel on reservation land.

 

Chairman de Braga asked if the tribe had examined the Depaoli amendment that outlined the exact area of the channel (i.e., between the Wabuska Gauge and Walker Lake). Mr. Quintero replied in the affirmative; however, it was all on reservation land.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors expressed disappointment that no input had been received from the tribe. He voiced concern for the entire channel, and he hoped, if the funding came through, all parties could sit down and work it out. Regarding endangered species, Assemblyman Neighbors stated if Walker Lake dried up, there would be many endangered species.

 

Chairman de Braga asked the witness the extent to which the problem existed. Mr. Quintero declared the tribe knew the reservation land and, in his judgment, the area from the Wabuska Gauge was wildlife area, tribal wetlands, and warm water fisheries. Chairman de Braga asked for confirmation that the tribe had jurisdiction over the banks and beds of the river. Mr. Quintero replied in the affirmative.

 

Chairman de Braga asked if there was a need in the tribal area to clean up the channel. Gerry Emm, Chairman of the Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Team, offered to respond. Mr. Emm referred back to Assemblyman Mortenson’s question regarding the revegetation of the channel bank. He recalled, in the 1950’s, the Corps of Engineers cleared and straightened some of the Walker River. A concrete ditch replaced the natural vegetation, and, in later years, the area flooded. Mr. Emm emphasized the lower Walker was the last remaining wetland area, and it acted as a sponge during the 1997 flood. He concluded by saying, before recharging the level of Walker Lake, it was essential to understand the upstream impacts.

 

Chairman de Braga inquired about the amount of wetlands created because of the channel conditions. Mr. Quintero replied, “All of it.”

 

Assemblyman Neighbors stated, with the amount of money requested, there would be no possible way to construct concrete waterways. He reiterated his disappointment that the tribe would not welcome an effort to get more water into the Walker Lake.

 

Mr. Emm offered to respond. It was the tribe’s belief the problem should be addressed holistically. The river was not considered as a separate entity from the lake. He declared a collaborative, comprehensive approach involving all parties would be essential.

 

Assemblyman Mortenson explained in southern Nevada, channels had been cut through to Lake Mead to speed up the flow of water back. It had turned out to be a horrible mistake. The channels and roads washed out, sending a tremendous volume of debris into Lake Mead. The grass and vegetation, that once had cleansed the water, was eliminated during the channel enhancement work. He cautioned the committee to consider the value of vegetation in water pathways.

 

Chairman de Braga called a temporary recess on the A.B. 403 hearing in order to consider action on A.B. 391.

 

Assembly Bill 391:  Provides additional means to enforce Nevada’s claim to public lands. (BDR 26-1455)

 

Linda Eissmann, Committee Policy Analyst, distributed a work session document (Exhibit F) and commenced testimony on A.B. 391. She called the committee’s attention to the Carpenter amendment on pages 3 through 8 of Exhibit F.

 

Assemblyman Carpenter explained the amendments to A.B. 391 would authorize county commissioners to enact and enforce local ordinances in their respective areas and to address emergency situations. 

 

Chairman de Braga asked if the Attorney General had reacted to the amendment. Ms. Eissmann stated it had not been seen by that office.

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked if there was a fiscal note addressing how the lands would be administered. Chairman de Braga stated the fiscal note was always there, and it was undeterminable. Assemblyman Carpenter interjected his view that, with the amendments, the fiscal impact would be passed on to the counties.

                 

A motion was made to amend with the Carpenter amendment in Exhibit F.

 

 

            ASSEMBLYMAN LEE MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 391.

 

            ASSEMBLYMAN COLLINS SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

            THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY ALL PRESENT. ASSEMBLYMAN CLABORN AND ASSEMBLYWOMAN OHRENSCHALL WERE ABSENT.

 

Chairman de Braga announced the hearing on A.B. 403 would resume.

 

Gerry Emm resumed testimony and stated the tribe strongly supported the preservation of Walker Lake. The point of disagreement was the use of the wetlands as a source of water downstream. He reiterated the value of vegetation in the removal of sediment and the cleansing of flowing water. Weber Dam was viewed as an asset to water management.

 

Assemblyman Marvel stated he would like to consult with the Director of Conservation and Natural Resources.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors declared he would welcome the opportunity to sit down and discuss the issue with the tribe. He reiterated his one concern was the “ticking clock” and the death of the lake.

 

Robert Quintero replied the water was not being held in the tribal wetlands. The source of the water was the headwaters. He declared the tribe would continue to use as much water as was required for their needs.

 

Chairman de Braga asked the witness how he would propose solving the problem. Mr. Emm explained the tribe was in the process of completing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Weber Dam. It was his view a fishery could be established below Weber Dam that would help with a naturally propagated Walker Lake strain. There would always be fluctuations, and the encouragement of a species acclimated to high concentrations of salts should begin.

 

Chairman de Braga asked if the tribe had equipment that would move 90 million cubic feet of dirt. Mr. Emm replied it was not their plan.

 

R. Michael Turnipseed, P.E., Director of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, commenced testimony and declared the issue to be a “huge watermelon that cannot be chewed up and swallowed in one bite.” Many of the solutions were, in fact, above the Wabuska Gauge and the tribal reservation land. Improvements at the Mason Valley refuge would result in downstream benefits by freeing up an estimated 5000 acre-feet of water. Cloud seeding programs had the promise to generate a significant amount of water per year.  A well-drilling project in the aquifers was underway by the United States Geological Service (USGS).

 

Mr. Turnipseed declared there would be no way to build a channel below the reservation with $650,000. The eradication of the tamarisk, overgrowth estimated at 10,000 acres, would help the situation. Mr. Turnipseed reminded the committee any effort would have to be in cooperation with the tribe. He concluded by saying his agency’s stance on A.B. 403 was neutral and added it was not in the Governor’s Executive Budget.

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked what could be accomplished with $650,000. Mr. Turnipseed commented that Senator Harry Reid had a serious interest in the situation. It could ultimately become a negotiated settlement worked out among all parties. As such, the $650,000 would likely be diverted to planning and decision-making.

 

Assemblyman Marvel referred to the eradication of tamarisk and the need for physical work. Mr. Turnipseed agreed and reminded the committee of the prison crews that could be called upon to do the work. 

 

Chairman de Braga asked Mr. Quintero if his agency was part of a conservation district in Mineral County. He replied “no” and clarified the tamarisk was very hardy and consumed a great deal of water. Chairman de Braga reminded the witness of other state agencies (e.g., Agriculture) that had programs for the eradication of noxious weeds.

 

Mr. Turnipseed offered a point of clarification and stated, if an additional 40,000 acre-feet of water flowed into Walker Lake, it would become stabilized.

 

Chairman de Braga commented to the Committee Policy Analyst there were only six committee members of ten remaining in the room. The hearing on A.B. 403 was closed.

 

Chairman de Braga opened the work session on A.B. 419.

 

 Assembly Bill 419:  Confers powers of peace officer upon certain members, agents or local or district officers of society for prevention of cruelty to animals under certain circumstances. (BDR 50-1279)

 

Linda Eissmann, Committee Policy Analyst, called the committee’s attention to her work session document, Exhibit F, and commenced discussion on A.B. 419. She read from a prepared statement and summarized the concerns expressed during the original hearing on April 4.  Witnesses had testified about instances of enforcement officers acting inappropriately. The requirement of POST training was suggested; however, the cost of that training was predicted to have significant financial impact on nonprofit animal welfare organizations. Two amendments were suggested during testimony.

 

Assemblyman Lee distributed an amendment (Exhibit G) on A.B. 419. In the Nevada Revised Statutes it stated any three citizens in Nevada could incorporate for purposes of preventing cruelty to animals. In his judgment, a group of 25 or more citizens would be a more appropriate size to incorporate, and his amendment captured that intent.

 

Chairman de Braga summarized for understanding and asked, if the amendment was added, what would remain of the original bill. Assemblyman Lee responded and stated his amendment only addressed one of the concerns aired during the original hearing. He recommended asking Assemblyman Gustavson, the sponsor of the bill, to respond.

 

Chairman de Braga understood Assemblyman Gustavson’s amendment to include Mr. Lee’s amendment and would strike from statute all references to peace officer powers for humane societies. Assemblyman Gustavson concurred. He explained his amendment would delete Section 574.040, subsection 1 and 2 of the statutes. That would eliminate the arresting powers of the humane society officers. The protection of the public was essential.

 

Assemblyman Collins agreed with the increase in numbers as proposed in the Lee amendment, and recommended the bill be passed as amended. That would address the possibility of radical fringe groups violating the rights of citizens. Research on humane society training appeared to be needed and would be utilized to craft future legislation. Assemblyman Gustavson concurred and said he would be willing to look at changes in the law during the next session.

 

Chairman de Braga stated the amendment would take out all existing police powers for humane society officers. Assemblyman Gustavson agreed, but added they would have the same arrest power as would ordinary citizens and nothing more.

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked for clarification on problems with the current Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS). Assemblyman Gustavson reiterated any group of three citizens could approach a judge and be sworn in as peace officers; however, they received that classification without the education and training normally associated with that title. Assemblyman Marvel voiced his disbelief that a judge could certify a group of three citizens. The committee all responded “yes.”

 

Robert Barengo, representing the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), offered to testify. Under the statute, if a group was certified by a judge, they could exercise peace officer powers. Historically, the Nevada Humane Society, with a 60-year history in the Reno area, had a very positive relationship with local courts and law enforcement. No abuse of power had ever been demonstrated. Confrontations were handled by calling the local police departments.

 

Assemblyman Mortenson agreed there were reputable humane societies in northern and southern Nevada; however, management of those organizations could change in the future. Additionally, if three overzealous citizens had police power, they could run amok.

 

Chairman de Braga asked the committee if they would consider amending A.B. 419 with the Lee amendment, removing all other proposals, and leaving the police powers temporarily as they stood. As part of that package, an interim study would be requested to examine the authority, jurisdiction, and training of peace officers in Nevada. Assemblyman Gustavson agreed with the package.

 

The problem with the bill, according to Chairman de Braga, was it targeted six humane society officers: four with the Nevada Humane Society, one in Pershing County, and one in Carson City. There were currently no smaller humane society groups exercising peace officer authority; however, the potential was there for abuse.

 

Assemblyman Gustavson reiterated his commendation of the wonderful work of the Nevada Humane Society, and his motivation to draft legislation was a preventative measure and not based on existing problems.

 

Robert Barengo added there were a variety of people with the same authority as the SPCA, and they were not peace officers. With only six individuals in the state certified as peace officers, Mr. Barengo stated his willingness to agree to the Lee amendment. He was confident that a district judge would take any request for police power certification very seriously, and that was a check and balance.

 

Chairman de Braga countered, if there was no formal police training required, on what premise would a judge base his decision. Mr. Barengo concurred and recommended standards be developed unique for animal work. 

 

Assemblyman Humke voiced concern with the logic of an interim study based on six individuals with police power. He was unsure there would be enough substance to the police issues to warrant a study of all police officer powers in Nevada. As he understood the situation, even if an individual was certified by a judge, he was not really a peace officer. Mr. Barengo replied the individual would not be covered by the same statute as peace officers; however, he would have similar authority to arrest.

 

Assemblyman Humke raised the issue of liability and the inevitability of that leading back to a public agency, the judiciary. He voiced concern and stated the arresting powers applied to citizens and not to animals. That placed the issue into the arena of peace officer power. Mr. Barengo replied no harm had ever been demonstrated that required fixing. Assemblyman Humke countered the power of arrest did one thing and that was to get a peace officer to respond to their call for assistance in difficult situations.

 

Mr. Barengo voiced disagreement. When a situation arose that was too difficult, the police were summoned. Assemblyman Humke reiterated a call in that situation would send a message of an escalating situation involving a person with the power of arrest. He viewed it as such a limited power that it begged for a lawsuit.

 

Assemblyman Collins reminded the committee, in 1991, legislation was passed under NRS 574 granting additional police power authority to humane society officers. The intent of A.B. 419 was to cover those situations where there were threats or attacks on legitimate animal welfare workers. Currently, there appeared to be a need to increase the minimum number of citizens that could incorporate, as well as clarify the training and qualifications of those individuals. Assemblyman Collins added it would take the next session before the training aspects could be fully addressed.

 

Robert Barengo offered a suggestion. He acknowledged it would take time to develop standards and training, and his organization would be willing to return in 2003 with a list of recommendations; however, Mr. Barengo voiced concern over losing what was before the committee.

 

Chairman de Braga suggested the committee vote on the amendment to increase the groups from 3 to 25 and require training of certified individuals similar to the National Cruelty Investigation School. She asked about the availability of such training courses.

 

Susan Asher, Executive Director of the Nevada Humane Society, clarified that the National Cruelty Academy traveled to different areas throughout the year. Level I and II training were offered at least once per year, with Level III during alternate years. Ms. Asher had originally opposed A.B. 419 because it involved the removal of police power authority. That authorized them to enforce the cruelty statutes through education and not arrest. A badge was displayed, and that conveyed a seriousness of their intent to enforce statutes. She voiced support for increasing the number of a group to 25 and added there should be additional training and education. Her final recommendation was to set a minimum length of time a group could exist before applying for police certification.

 

Chairman de Braga asked what the length of time would be. Ms. Asher suggested a minimum of five years due to the need for field experience. She recommended the committee pass A.B. 419 with the Lee amendment, and let the peace officer status alone. She gave assurance of returning in 2003 with a list of specific requirements.

 

Assemblyman Gustavson agreed with the recommendations and with the need to return with a list of specific requirements in the next session. Assemblyman Mortenson suggested that the five-year experience requirement be added to the Lee amendment. Chairman de Braga stated it would be easy to do with the committee’s agreement.

 

Assemblyman Lee voiced one remaining concern and that was the intensity of support on the Senate side. He offered to add his name to the bill and carry it forward to the Senate. Assemblyman Gustavson appreciated the offer, but stated he was willing to carry the bill.

 

A motion was made to amend A.B. 419 with the Lee amendment, to add a provision to require a minimum of five years of experience before certification as a peace officer, and delete the remainder of the bill.

 

            ASSEMBLYMAN MORTENSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS                         A.B. 419.

 

            ASSEMBLYMAN COLLINS SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

            THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY ALL PRESENT.

 

Robert Barengo asked for confirmation that it would apply prospectively. Chairman de Braga agreed.

 

Assemblyman Neighbors asked to return to A.B. 403 for a motion to amend and do pass, without recommendation, and rerefer the bill to Ways and Means.

 

            ASSEMBLYMAN NEIGHBORS MOVED TO AMEND A.B. 403 WITHOUT

            RECOMMENDATION.

 

            ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

            THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY ALL PRESENT.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 3:38 p.m.

 

 

 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

                               

June Rigsby

Committee Secretary

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

                                                                                         

Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga, Chairman

 

 

DATE: