MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Commerce and Labor
Seventy-First Session
May 11, 2001
The Senate Committee on Commerce and Laborwas called to order by Chairman Randolph J. Townsend, at 7:00 a.m., on Friday, May 11, 2001, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. The meeting was video conferenced to the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Room 4406, 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 Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
Senator Ann O’Connell, Vice Chairman
Senator Dean A. Rhoads
Senator Mark Amodei
Senator Raymond C. Shaffer
Senator Michael A. (Mike) Schneider
Senator Maggie Carlton
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Assemblywoman Vonne S. Chowning, Clark County Assembly District, No. 28
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Scott Young, Committee Policy Analyst
Crystal M. McGee, Committee Policy Analyst
William L. Keane, Deputy Legislative Counsel
Sharon T. Spencer, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Margi A. Grein, Lobbyist, Nevada State Contractors’ Board
Renny Ashleman, Lobbyist, Southern Nevada Home Builders Association
John T. Wiles, Division Counsel, Division of Industrial Relations, Department of Business and Industry
Robert A. Ostrovsky, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association
Cliff King, CPCU, Supervisor, Property and Casualty Section, Division of Insurance, Department of Business and Industry
Herbert Jones, Concerned Citizen
Rhonda Hylton, Concerned Citizen
Nathaniel K. LaShore, President, State Barbers’ Health and Sanitation Board
Stan Washington, Concerned Citizen
Royal Byron III, Concerned Citizen
Renee Diamond, Administrator, Manufactured Housing Division, Department of Business and Industry
Daryl E. Capurro, Lobbyist, Nevada Motor Transport Association
Patricia Jarman-Manning, Commissioner, Consumer Affairs Division, Department of Business and Industry
Barry Perea, Concerned Citizen
Jan Marie Brown, Concerned Citizen
Steven Mack, Concerned Citizen
Reanie Walters, Concerned Citizen
John E. Jeffrey, Lobbyist, Southern Nevada Central Labor Council
Nancyann Leeder, Nevada Attorney for Injured Workers, Department of Business and Industry
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 439.
ASSEMBLY BILL 439: Revises provisions relating to deceptive trade practices. (BDR 52-1263)
Chairman Townsend asked Scott Young, Committee Policy Analyst, if he was aware of an existing conflict between A.B. 439 and an enrolled measure already sent to the Governor, A.B. 152, to which Mr. Young responded in the negative, adding that he was aware of a conflict between A.B. 152 and A.B. 337.
ASSEMBLY BILL 152: Revises provisions governing trade practices. (BDR 52‑485)
ASSEMBLY BILL 337: Revises provisions relating to deceptive trade practices. (BDR 52-484)
Mr. Young said the difference between the two bills was that in A.B. 152 a provision was added allowing for the recovery of attorney’s fees and costs in addition to any other remedies. Similar provisions will be added to both A.B. 439 and A.B. 337.
Directing his comments to William L. Keane, Deputy Legislative Counsel, Chairman Townsend explained questions had arisen concerning A.B. 439 and the state’s ability to limit access to telephones through automation or personal calls for political or commercial gain. He asked Mr. Keane for clarification of the legal and constitutional parameters pertaining to the issue. Mr. Keane said an exception to the prohibitions against the use of automated dialing announcement devices that could legally be removed included the use of the equipment for political speeches. Another exception that could be removed is the nonprofit organization exception, he added. Mr. Keane said the state could prohibit the use of completely automated telephone calling devices if the recipient of those calls did not request or consent to them. He provided copies of Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 597.812 to 597.816, inclusive (Exhibit C), to the committee. Mr. Young provided the committee with an informational packet pertaining to the proposed legislation which included proposed amendments and legislation on the issue from the State of Idaho (Exhibit D).
Senator Carlton said the measure had become something other than what she had anticipated; therefore, she could not support the proposed legislation in its present form.
Chairman Townsend asked if there was any additional testimony and there was none. He closed the hearing on A.B. 439 and opened the hearing on A.B. 620.
ASSEMBLY BILL 620: Makes various changes relating to contractors. (BDR 54‑407)
Margi A. Grein, Lobbyist, Nevada State Contractors’ Board, said the intent of the proposed legislation, which was sponsored by the board, is to increase the quality and availability of educational programs for the construction industry in Nevada with the primary focus on locating financial resources to pay for these programs. She explained the board was attempting to clarify the law and to keep pace with current trends throughout the rest of the United States. Ms. Grein provided the committee with copies of her written statement (Exhibit E).
Renny Ashleman, Lobbyist, Southern Nevada Home Builders Association, presented the committee with a proposed amendment (Exhibit F) for A.B. 620. Suggested language changes included establishing the effective date of the bill to be July 1, 2001, and the date for adoption of the regulations pursuant to this act would be November 1, 2001, along with the stipulation that the board advertise they are accepting applications. Mr. Ashleman explained the proposed amendment also specified that at least 90 percent of the money deposited in the account must be used to fund educational programs for licensees and their employees directly related to codes, standards, performance guidelines, construction management, financial responsibility, laws, ethics, estimating, and other construction-related subjects.
Chairman Townsend expressed concern over the lack of cohesion between all concerned parties regarding the proposed legislation and amendments. He requested they withdraw for further discussion in order to find common ground and to clarify desired language. Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 620 and opened the hearing on A.B. 44.
ASSEMBLY BILL 44: Makes various changes concerning industrial insurance. (BDR 53-772)
John T. Wiles, Division Counsel, Division of Industrial Relations, Department of Business and Industry, submitted a proposed amendment to the committee (Exhibit G) and explained the bill would change the law to allow the division to not hold a regulatory hearing in order to adopt certain medical fees.
Chairman Townsend asked for clarification on the proposed amendment from Crystal M. McGee, Committee Policy Analyst. Mrs. McGee explained the proposed amendment, as requested by Assemblyman Hettrick, was designed to ensure that individuals working outside the home as domestic workers would be covered under the endorsement in A.B. 44.
Senator Carlton said she did not want the legislation to apply to anyone under the age of 16 because it would not be appropriate for a young person to have to go through the workers’ compensation process. Chairman Townsend asked Ms. McGee if statute defined the cut-off age between child and adult as being 16 years of age, to which Ms. McGee responded there was no clear cut-off age in statute.
Robert A. Ostrovsky, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association, stated the Nevada labor statutes have age limitations which begin at age 14. He said there were some types of work permitted to children between 14 and 16 years of age, but none below that.
Cliff King, CPCU, Supervisor, Property and Casualty Section, Division of Insurance, Department of Business and Industry, explained the provision would grant unlimited medical coverage for life for individuals injured on the job. Also, Mr. King, continued, loss of wages would be covered as well. Mr. Ostrovsky said his organization did not support the proposed amendment because it lacked clarification regarding the determination of medical fee schedules.
Herbert Jones, Concerned Citizen, provided the committee with a proposed amendment (Exhibit H) which described medical fee schedules for employees injured while on the job. Additional proposed amendments were provided, one of which was provided by Nevada Alternative Solutions Incorporated, which specified the cut-off point for the filing of injured workers claims (Exhibit I). Another proposed amendment was provided by Liberty Mutual which clarified language pertaining to the storage of injured workers claim files and employee records (Exhibit J). The final proposed amendment was submitted by the Legislative Counsel Bureau staff on behalf of Chairman Townsend which presented new language for amending chapter 616B of Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) (Exhibit K).
Chairman Townsend asked if there was any additional testimony and there was none. He called for a motion.
SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 44.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED. (SENATOR AMODEI WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 44 and opened the hearing on A.B. 192.
ASSEMBLY BILL 192: Revises provisions relating to barber schools. (BDR 54‑735)
In an effort to clarify the issues for discussion, Crystal M. McGee, Committee Policy Analyst, presented the committee with copies of current statute (Exhibit L) pertaining to the practice of cosmetology as found in chapter 644 of NRS.
Rhonda Hylton, Concerned Citizen, testifying from Las Vegas, explained the intent of A.B. 192 was to ensure the first barber school in Nevada would be established in Las Vegas which would be a nonprofit educational institute. Ms. Hylton recommended the bill include a requirement that two instructors be present on campus at all times. She also suggested the bill be considered in its current, first reprint, form without any amendments.
Senator Carlton said she was concerned that 10 students for 1 teacher, as per the language of the measure, was too low a number. She recommended 15 students to 1 teacher.
Nathaniel K. LaShore, President, State Barbers’ Health and Sanitation Board, said his organization is a member of the National Association of Barber Boards of America. Mr. LaShore said it was his opinion of a 1-to-10 teacher-student radio was optimal. A second instructor would be needed to instruct any additional students as well as to serve as a substitute instructor in order to ensure the students would receive continual instruction in the event one is absent.
Chairman Townsend pointed out current law provided for a 1-to-20 teacher-student ratio. He asked Ms. Hylton to explain what recent circumstances precipitated the need for so radical a change in the teacher-student ratio. Ms. Hylton said it was her consideration that the 1 teacher to 20 or more students, as found in current statute, did not take into consideration the best interests of both the students and the consumers, whereas a lower student number would guarantee better quality training and professional performance. In addition, Ms. Hylton said the proposed legislation would allow the barber school to charge for services rendered which was not currently provided for in statute.
Chairman Townsend asked Mr. LaShore if current state regulations did not allow student barbers to charge for services rendered, to which Mr. LaShore responded in the affirmative. Chairman Townsend suggested to Mr. LaShore that rather than change the law they should change the regulations. Mr. LaShore agreed that was a viable option.
Stan Washington, Concerned Citizen, stated Royal Byron III, is the only licensed barber instructor in the state of Nevada. Mr. Washington said it was Mr. Byron’s long-time goal to establish the first barber college in Nevada. He said he was concerned that no one had contacted Mr. Byron to discuss proposed legislation on barbering in Nevada. Mr. Washington introduced Royal Byron III.
Royal Byron III, Concerned Citizen, presented the committee with copies of his proposed amendment (Exhibit M) which would make various changes to current statute including implementing a 1 to 10 teacher-student ratio. His proposed amendments also included the requirement that a barber school be located in a city with a population not less than 250,000. Mr. Byron also stated licensing fees tripled recently with no warning or explanation provided by the Nevada barber board for that occurrence.
Chairman Townsend asked Mr. LaShore if a regulatory hearing was recently held at which time the annual barber instructor’s licensing renewal fee was raised from $75 to $250. Mr. LaShore responded in the affirmative, to which Chairman Townsend stated there was no rationale for raising a renewal fee to an amount three times higher than the original application fee. Mr. LaShore said he was not certain how to respond to the chairman’s question. Chairman Townsend requested all concerned parties convene to discuss their agreements and disagreements on A.B. 192 in order to ensure common ground would be reached by the time the next work session was held.
Included in the record is a proposed amendment provided to clarify signage issues pertaining to the school’s policy on tipping (Exhibit N).
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 192 and opened the hearing on A.B. 552.
ASSEMBLY BILL 552: Revises provisions relating to manufactured buildings. (BDR 40-561)
Renee Diamond, Administrator, Manufactured Housing Division, Department of Business and Industry, said she wanted the proposed legislation to disappear. She pointed out A.B. 552 had started out simply to be a small housekeeping bill to clarify language pertaining to manufactured housing. The proposed amendment attached to the bill in the Assembly was unacceptable and triggered a fiscal note to be attached to the measure of over $100,000. In addition, no compromise between dissenting parties was evident, she said. Ms. Diamond said she regretted requesting the measure and now she wanted it “to just go away.” Exhibit O reflects Ms. Diamond’s request.
Chairman Townsend suggested the bill be indefinitely postponed.
SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 552.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED. (SENATOR SCHNEIDER WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 552 and opened the hearing on A.B. 245.
ASSEMBLY BILL 245: Makes various changes relating to advertising and charges by certain tour brokers and tour operators and requires certain tour brokers and tour operators to deposit security. (BDR 52-1021)
Daryl E. Capurro, Lobbyist, Nevada Motor Transport Association, stated the information contained within the handout (Exhibit P) was provided by Barry Perea of Nevada Coaches, Limited Liability Company, and intended as a proposed amendment to the bill. The amendment replaces the language of A.B. 245 in its second reprint form with the proposed mandatory provisions that were previously submitted. Exhibit Q is a handout provided by the Legislative Counsel Bureau research staff in an effort to clarify the chain of events leading to the requested replacement language.
Patricia Jarman-Manning, Commissioner, Consumer Affairs Division, Department of Business and Industry, said she had no objection to the proposed amendment as presented by Mr. Capurro.
Chairman Townsend asked if there was anyone else who wanted to address the committee regarding the proposed amendment submitted by Mr. Perea pertaining to A.B. 245 which deleted the language of the bill and replaces it with the new language as contained in Exhibit P.
Barry Perea, Concerned Citizen, speaking from Las Vegas on behalf of Nevada Coaches, Limited Liability Company, said he had no problem with the direction of the committee to replace the language with his proposed amendment. In addition, Mr. Perea said it was imperative that all transit coupons must be honored unless an expiration date is printed on the coupon. He suggested the commissioner of consumer affairs be allowed regulatory authority to allow her to set rules to facilitate other changes that might be suggested in the interim, in particular, to set policy to protect consumers against deceptive trade policies. Scott Young, Committee Policy Analyst, pointed out, under current law, the commissioner does not have sufficient regulatory authority to expand the definition of deceptive trade practices during the interim between legislative sessions.
Assemblywoman Vonne S. Chowning, Clark County Assembly District No. 28, said the proposed legislation and amendment in its current form was the result of a concerted effort to improve an important aspect of the tourist industry in Nevada. She said she supported the language of the bill and was certain it satisfied all her concerns.
Chairman Townsend asked if there was any additional testimony and there was none.
SENATOR CARLTON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 245.
SENATOR AMODEI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 245 and reopened the hearing on A.B. 620.
Ms. Grein stated she was not prepared to withdraw her proposed amendment at this time despite concerns of some of her colleagues representing other organizations. Mr. Ashleman said he was prepared to withdraw the proposed amendment submitted by his organization. Chairman Townsend said he wanted to process the bill by making minor language changes, which were housekeeping items, in order to clarify the measure.
Chairman Townsend asked for a motion.
SENATOR CARLTON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 620.
SENATOR O’CONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 620 and opened the hearing on A.B. 627.
ASSEMBLY BILL 627: Revises provisions relating to trade practices. (BDR 52‑554)
Ms. Jarman-Manning, explained the proposed legislation was a housekeeping measure with three proposed amendments she wanted to add. She provided the committee with copies of those amendments (Exhibit R). She recommended changing language in section 6, subsection 5, which would affect chapter 598 of NRS, which would provide that the owner of a dance studio or health club must maintain the required security deposit with the Consumer Affairs Division, so long as the business continues to operate in Nevada. Ms. Jarman-Manning also recommended changing the effective date of the bill from July 1, 2001, to October 1, 2001. Ms. Jarman-Manning introduced Jan Marie Brown, Concerned Citizen, representing the travel industry.
Ms. Brown stated the proposed legislation and amendment were good for the travel industry because it offered a sense of security because it provided regulations to protect consumers from fraudulent schemes. Chairman Townsend asked Ms. Brown what she thought of the required $25,000, specifically if the amount was high enough. Ms. Brown said she felt the amount was an insufficient amount due to the enormous amounts of money the industry generated very rapidly; however, she added, $25,000 was an amount that did offer some security to the public without causing hardship to small, legitimate travel agencies.
Chairman Townsend recommended removing section 6, subsection 5, and adding a new section requiring those industries affected in the measure to keep their bonds for the lifetime of their business in Nevada. He also agreed that changing the effective date to the recommendation made by Ms. Jarman-Manning would be beneficial.
Chairman Townsend asked for a motion.
SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 627.
SENATOR AMODEI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED. (SENATOR SCHNEIDER WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 627 and opened the hearing on A.B. 622.
ASSEMBLY BILL 622: Makes various changes to provisions governing practice of court reporting. (BDR 54-533)
Steven Mack, Concerned Citizen, representing the court reporters board, stated his organization support the proposed legislation. Senator O'Connell presented a proposed amendment to the bill (Exhibit S) which corrected an error in the printing of the fee amount on page 5 of A.B. 622. The correct fee amount is $150, not $50. Senator O'Connell explained this bill merely corrected a typing mistake.
Chairman Townsend asked if there was any additional testimony and there being none, called for a motion.
SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 622.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED. (SENATOR SCHNEIDER WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Reanie Walters, Concerned Citizen, and executive director of the board of court reporters, speaking from Las Vegas, said she had not been given the opportunity to speak at a previous hearing on the proposed legislation. She objected to the measure and the proposed amendment. Due to the lateness in the day, Chairman Townsend suggested the language of the proposed legislation and amendment be considered in a work session to convene in the near future.
SENATOR O’CONNELL MOVED TO RESCIND PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN ON A.B. 622.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
John E. Jeffrey, Lobbyist, Southern Nevada Central Labor Council, said he would try to clarify workers' compensation law as it pertains to reciprocity between Nevada and other states. Mr. Jeffrey explained reciprocity was eliminated from Nevada workers' compensation law many years ago. He explained if a Nevada worker was working outside of the state with a lapsed workers' compensation policy, that worker would not be covered by either workers' compensation insurance or the uninsured fund of the State of Nevada, nor would he be covered by workers' compensation in the state in which he was working. Mr. Jeffrey said there was a need to construct legislation that would cover such a situation.
Mr. Ostrovsky agreed with Mr. Jeffrey that legislation was needed to cover injured workers who have found themselves in the aforementioned scenario. He added language needed to be discussed and developed to ensure injured workers have workers' compensation insurance.
Nancyann Leeder, Nevada Attorney for Injured Workers, Department of Business and Industry, suggested a remedy for the problem. She said it would be possible to provide workers' compensation insurance coverage by deleting the words, “In this state” from NRS 616C.220, subsection 2, paragraph (b). Chairman Townsend said this was an issue of major importance which the committee needed to immediately address.
Chairman Townsend asked if there was any additional testimony and there was none. There being no further business before the committee, chairman Townsend adjourned the hearing at 9:54 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Sharon T. Spencer,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
DATE: