MINUTES OF THE Meeting

of the

ASSEMBLY Committee on Taxation

 

Seventy-First Session

April 26, 2001

 

 

The Committee on Taxationwas called to order at 2:57 p.m., on Thursday, April 26, 2001.  Chairman David Goldwater presided in Room 3142 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.                     David Goldwater, Chairman

Mr.                     Roy Neighbors, Vice Chairman

Mr.                     Bernie Anderson

Mr.                     Greg Brower

Mr.                     David Brown

Mrs.                     Vivian Freeman

Mr.                     John Marvel

Mr.                     Harry Mortenson

Mr.                     David Parks

Mr.                     Bob Price

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

Mr.                     Morse Arberry Jr. - Excused

Ms.                     Sandra Tiffany - Excused

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Ted Zuend, Fiscal Analyst

Cheryl O'Day, Committee Secretary

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Mary Walker, Represented Carson City, Douglas County and Lyon County

Renee Diamond, Administrator, Nevada Manufactured Housing Division (NMHD)

Charles W. Joerg, Represented Nevada Manufactured Housing Association (NMHD)

John Sande, Represented Washoe County Airport Authority (WCAA)

Keith L. Lee, Representing Southwest Airlines (SWA)

Colonel Matt Wallace, Nevada Wing, Civil Air Patrol (NWCAP)

Jack Schofield, Legislative Advisor to Nevada Wing, Civil Air Patrol

Steve Bremer, Chief, Administrative Services, Nevada Department of Conservation and National Resources (NDCNR)

 

 

Chairman Goldwater advised that the meeting would continue as a subcommittee until such time as a quorum was present.

 

 

Senate Bill 70:  Revises provisions governing classification of manufactured homes as real property. (BDR 32-337)

 

Mary Walker introduced herself as representing Carson City, Douglas County and Lyon County.  She stated that S.B. 70 clarified the intent of S.B. 323 of the Seventieth Session, which allowed manufactured homes to be placed anywhere within a jurisdiction as long as it met certain criteria.  The manufactured homes would then be treated as a “stick-built” home for zoning purposes.  Also they would be real property and not personal property, just as with a stick-built home.  The change in zoning allowance would not apply if the manufactured home was moved to an area specifically zoned for personal property manufactured homes.  She then introduced Renee Diamond, an administrator with the Nevada Manufactured Housing Division (NMHD).

 

Ms. Diamond advised that the division had only one concern with S.B. 70 and addressed her written statement (Exhibit C).  The problem was that S.B. 70 did not provide for the handling of personal property titles received prior to the statutory conversion.  The division was satisfied that a new Section 2 addressed its concerns.  Revised Section 2 clarified that a new home going directly onto property would not receive a personal property title.  Ms. Diamond outlined the proposed, existing and former procedures.  Assessors would be notified of the conversion.  She pointed out that manufactured homes on real property could obtain better financing rates.

 

Charles W. Joerg introduced himself as representing the Nevada Manufactured Housing Association (NMHA) and stated that the NMHA was in support of S.B. 70.  He had believed those issues were covered last session but allowed that the bill might not have been clear enough.  The NMHA felt that S.B. 70 clarified the situation properly.

 

Mr. Marvel inquired if mobile homes were included in the phrase “manufactured home.”

 

Ms. Diamond responded that the phrase “mobile home” was used prior to the Manufactured Housing Act of 1976.  She confirmed for Mr. Marvel that the homes specified in S.B. 70 were not stick-built homes and discussed the distinctions between the two types of homes.

 

Chairman Goldwater called for questions and further testimony before advising that a quorum was present and closing the hearing on S.B. 70.

 

 

Senate Bill 39:  Expands purposes for which proceeds of certain taxes on fuel for jet or turbine-powered aircraft may be used by governmental entity. (BDR 32-789)

 

John Sande, representing the Washoe County Airport Authority (WCAA), advised that the Nevada Resorts Association (NRA) also supported S.B. 39.  He stated the bill was fairly straightforward and that, under NRS 365.170, there was a 1-cent per gallon tax on aviation and/or jet fuel.  Pursuant to NRS 365.203, each county commission was authorized to impose up to an additional 4 cents per gallon in taxes.  NRS 365.545, Section 1 of the bill, required that any tax imposed pursuant to either statute was to be distributed.  Mr. Sande confirmed that S.B. 39 would broaden the options available for utilization of the jet fuel tax.  By way of example, he discussed how the airport in Reno had been losing flights and how tax moneys could be used to promote the use of the airport, including increasing the number and availability of flights.

 

Mr. Parks believed he understood the bill to also allow other counties to use those funds.

 

Mr. Sande confirmed that existing statute specified that the “tax collected must be distributed to the governmental entity which owns the airport” and that it must be used for certain specific purposes.

 

Chairman Goldwater inquired about asking existing taxpayers to help recruit competition.

 

Mr. Sande stated testimony as to the airlines’ agreement with S.B. 39 would be provided.  He described the bill as one more tool that might or might not be utilized.

 

Keith L. Lee introduced himself as representing Southwest Airlines (SWA) and referenced his proposed amendment (Exhibit D).  He advised that Southwest Airlines did not oppose S.B. 39.  Their only concern was that the tax was not used as a vehicle that would allow an increase in aviation fuel tax.  Although the language was developed too late to be processed by the Legislative Counsel Bureau, it had been agreed to by the Senate.

 

Mr. Lee pointed out factors that brought airline service into an airport.  He advised that the flights must fit the airline’s strategic plan and discussed the difference systems, such as Southwest’s point-to-point and American, United and Delta who were hub-based airlines.  If service to the airport did not serve a particular airline’s needs, flights would most likely not be brought in.  Mr. Lee then outlined a proposed task force that would address increasing airline service as well as sharing the related costs.

 

In response to Mr. Marvel’s inquiry, Mr. Lee confirmed there was a cap on the fuel tax of 5 cents.  Mr. Marvel then asked who had the authority to levy such a tax.  Mr. Lee advised that the first penny was levied by state statute and from 2 cents to 5 cents was levied by the county commission.  He assured the committee that the tax could not, under present law, go beyond 5 cents.

 

Mr. Parks asked whether revenue generated at an airport must still be utilized specifically for areas that involved that airport.

 

Mr. Sande confirmed that there were restrictions on what tax moneys could be used for and provided examples.  He confirmed that the subject of S.B. 39 as it related to the promotion of air service would be acceptable by the FAA.

 

Chairman Goldwater called for questions and further testimony before closing the hearing on S.B. 39.

 

 

Senate Bill 389:  Revises provision concerning amount paid to Civil Air Patrol account. (BDR 32-1157)

 

Chairman Goldwater opened the hearing on S.B. 389.

 

Colonel Matt Wallace, Nevada Wing, Civil Air Patrol (NWCAP), introduced himself and Jack Schofield, his legislative advisor.  Col. Wallace discussed his handout (Exhibit E).  The last increase in state funds for the Civil Air Patrol was implemented in 1989, raising the amount from $45,000 to $85,000.  Col. Wallace then compared 1989 dollars and 2001 dollars.  Although adult membership had remained steady, cadets had risen from 95 in 1989 to the current membership of 275.  He described the youth program as well as advising that the Civil Air Patrol (CAP) performed 85 percent of the search and rescue missions in the United States.  The United States Air Force (USAF) and CAP headquarters had awarded the NWCAP its ninth plane and attributed NWCAP with saving eight lives last year.  Additionally, the Air Force Academy (AFA) was obtaining new gliders and agreed to provide two gliders to the NWCAP.  One glider would go to Minden and the other to Jean.  Those gliders would add additional motivation for cadets to join and remain with the NWCAP.  Col. Wallace described the very favorable support the NWCAP had received before detailing some of the larger costs it faced.

 

In response to Chairman Goldwater’s inquiry whether he had faced any opposition within the Senate, Col. Wallace advised that 18 senators had sponsored S.B. 389.

 

Mr. Marvel asked if anyone had suggested where the additional subsidy was to come from.

 

 

Senate Bill 499:  Revises name of parks marina development fund and expands permissible uses of money in that fund. (BDR 32-1316)

 

Chairman Goldwater opened the hearing on S.B. 499.

 

Ted Zuend, Committee Fiscal Analyst, addressed a document entitled, “Legislative Committee for the Fundamental Review of the Base Budgets of State Agencies.”  He had been requested to monitor S.B. 499 by a program analyst and directed the committee’s attention to the Marina Development Fund.  Mr. Zuend suggested that the committee might wish to call for the development of a Bill Draft Request (BDR) to revise NRS 365.535 in order that those funds could be transferred to the state parks’ operating budget.  He confirmed that transfer had been the practice in previous sessions.  The legislation was part of the Authorizations Act but there had been no need of a parks Marina Development Fund.  Also, S.B. 499 renamed the fund.  By way of suggestion, Mr. Zuend advised that certain language should be deleted and he provided specific examples to the committee.  As a final note, he pointed out that current language provided that the state treasurer supplied services that were actually the responsibility of the state controller.

 

Mr. Anderson inquired whether S.B. 499 affected local marinas.

 

Mr. Zuend responded by assuring the committee that S.B. 499 only related to state park property.  He described the bill as a housekeeping matter that offered clear direction.

 

Steve Bremer, Chief, Administrative Services, Nevada Department of Conservation and National Resources, advised that he had submitted a proposed amendment of S.B. 499 to the legislative staff (Exhibit G).  That amendment proposed many of the same “housekeeping” changes.  He addressed page 4, lines 5 and 6, and stated that S.B. 499 would remove the reference to “on state-owned wildlife management areas.”  Further, it would legitimize the historical use of those funds.

 

Chairman Goldwater called for questions or further testimony before closing the hearing on S.B. 499 and adjourning the meeting at 3:31 p.m.

 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

Cheryl O'Day

Committee Secretary

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

                       

Assemblyman David Goldwater, Chairman

 

 

DATE: