MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Commerce and Labor
Seventy-First Session
March 1, 2001
The Senate Committee on Commerce and Laborwas called to order by Chairman Randolph J. Townsend, at 8:00 a.m., on Thursday, March 1, 2001, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. This meeting was video conferenced to the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Room 4412, 555 East Washington Street, 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 Dawn Gibbons, Washoe County Assembly District No. 25
Assemblyman Joseph (Joe) E. Dini, Jr., Lyon, Storey and part of Carson City Counties Assembly District No. 38
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Scott Young, Committee Policy Analyst
Silvia Motta, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Bill J. Bailey, D.C., Secretary, Chiropractic Physicians’ Board of Nevada
Meg Cureton, President, Nevada Academy of Physician Assistants
K. Neena Laxalt, Lobbyist, Nevada Nurses Association
Dalia Sanchez, Cosmetologist, Owner, Dalia’s Beauty Salon, Las Vegas
Alicia Valadez, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas
John Kern, Concerned Citizen, Las Vegas
Elvira Ruiz, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas
Maria Rodriguez, Concerned Citizen, Las Vegas
Ciria Perez, Administrative Assistant, Legislative Counsel Bureau, Las Vegas
Elizabeth Ortega, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas
Belen Terrasas, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas
Richard B. Harjo, Chairman, Nevada Indian Commission
Mary E. Manna, Executive Secretary/Office Manager, State Board of Cosmetology
Brenda J. Erdoes, Legislative Counsel, Legal Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau
Deborah Armstrong, State Board of Cosmetology
Kay Collins, President, State Board of Cosmetology
Mariana Gonzalez, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas
Juana Guzman Cruz, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas
Chairman Townsend opened the meeting on Assembly Bill (A. B.) 32.
ASSEMBLY BILL 32: Revises provisions regarding practice of chiropractic. (BDR 54-167)
Dawn Gibbons, Assemblywoman, Washoe County Assembly District No. 25, established the bill was requested by the Chiropractic Physicians’ Board of Nevada in an attempt to address three revisions to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 634.090, “describing the qualifications for applicants to take the exam before a chiropractor.” She said section 1 of A. B. 32 improves the wording of NRS 634.090 by clarifying applicants for licenses to practice chiropractic must first be graduates of an approved and accredited chiropractic college. It also requires applicants’ paperwork be submitted at least 60 days prior to the day of the examination. She also said other wording added to NRS 634.090 would allow the board to recognize, via reciprocal agreement, schools from outside the United States. The Council on Chiropractic Education, which serves as the accrediting body for chiropractic schools in the United States, has reciprocal agreements with schools outside the United States, even though the schools may not be accredited in the same way schools are in the United States. This amendment allows the board to recognize a foreign school graduate, as long as the graduate’s school has a reciprocal agreement with the Council on Chiropractic Education. She explained other significant amendments to the bill refer to chiropractic assistants; e.g., massage therapists.
Bill J. Bailey, D.C., Secretary, Chiropractic Physicians’ Board of Nevada, said the main reason for the amendments is the language in the existing statute is not clear; it does not directly provide for the board to examine graduates from outside the United States. Dr. Bailey noted there are a number of very good chiropractic schools in foreign countries; therefore, changing the law would be necessary in order to allow those graduates to take the examination. The other language basically requires an applicant to submit information to the licensing board 60 days prior to the examination to allow staff enough lead time to ensure all the requirements have been met prior to the examination. The board would also have the ability to grant a temporary license.
Dr. Bailey continued, the initial intent was for an out-of-state chiropractor to be able to provide services in Nevada, for example, a chiropractor traveling with a sports team. He noted another aspect to be considered is to increase the allowable number of chiropractic assistants to be supervised from two to four. The rationale would be to regulate an additional type of chiropractic assistant directly supervised by the doctor of chiropractic, who specializes in massage. In essence, it would allow for a separate type of service to be provided, in lieu of penalizing the doctor who requires a regular chiropractic assistant in addition to a chiropractic assistant for massage. Dr. Bailey said it would be reasonable to increase the number of assistants each chiropractic doctor may supervise, as in other health care professions.
Assemblywoman Gibbons clarified homeopathic physicians are allowed to supervise five, and physician assistants; physical therapist technicians, three, physical therapists, two.
Chairman Townsend noted the request for elimination of line 43 on page 2, subsection 3, requiring “A list of names and addresses of the patients to be treated by the applicant in this state or the name of the organization whose members the applicant intends to treat in this state.” Dr. Bailey explained such a list is prohibitive to the doctor who comes in, for instance, with the rodeo finals in Las Vegas; there are hundreds of participants, it becomes a burden for the doctor to provide a list of everyone participating in the rodeo.
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on A.B. 32 and opened the hearing on A.B. 78.
ASSEMBLY BILL 78: Authorizes nurses to accept direction from physicians’ assistants. (BDR 54-153)
Assemblyman Joseph (Joe) E. Dini, Jr., Lyon, Storey and part of Carson City Counties Assembly District No. 38, explained the Physician’s Assistants Association (PAA) originated to aid rural Nevada using more facilities in the urban areas to provide quality health care through physician assistants. He noted the bill would allow for physicians to manage nurses working under their direction.
Meg Cureton, President, Nevada Academy of Physician Assistants, pointed out, with the increase in population, the health care needs have increased in the rural as well as in the urban areas; the bill will reaffirm accountability and responsibility, and legitimize the physician’s assistant position as a part of the health care team in Nevada. Ms. Cureton introduced written letters from Kathy Apple, R.N., M.S., Executive Director, Administration, Nursing Practice, Discipline and Monitoring, State Board of Nursing, and Cynthia Bunch, R.N., Legislative Coordinator, Nevada Nurses Association (Exhibit C), in support of A.B. 78, along with other written testimony in support of the bill from the Nevada Hospital Association, and the Board of Medical Examiners.
Ms. Creton explained under the current law a physician’s assistant is licensed by the state, but can only practice with a supervisory physician. When a supervisory physician delegates the assistant to write an order, or make rounds on patients in the hospital, the assistant is not authorized to pass on an order to the nurse, because the nurse can only accept orders directly from a supervisory physician, an advanced practitioner of nursing, or a podiatrist. She mentioned this has been a major issue, especially in the rural areas where orders must be co-signed within 24 hours by a physician.
K. Neena Laxalt, Lobbyist, Nevada Nurses Association, emphasized her association’s support of A.B. 78.
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing on Assembly Bill 78 and opened the hearing on Senate Bill 153.
SENATE BILL 153: Provides for examinations for licensure as cosmetologist to be offered in languages other than English. (BDR 54-855)
Senator Schneider informed the committee the Spanish-speaking community “is not being served to the fullest,” particularly in the cosmetology industry, where potential applicants are not able to pass the exams required by the cosmetology state board because they do not read and speak English very well. He suggested the cosmetology state board offer the exams in Spanish. He pointed out in accordance with an attorney general’s opinion, if the test is offered in Spanish, it must be offered in every other foreign language. He said the bill would allow the exam to be offered in English and Spanish, and in any other language, as long as the application is submitted 6 months in advance for the board to review and determine if the test can be administered in the requested language.
Senator Schneider commented in Las Vegas, within the next 2 years 53 percent of the workforce will be Hispanic; according to school records, in the Clark County School District, the white population is becoming a minority due to the Hispanic population’s rapid increase. He mentioned he had the opportunity to meet with Dalia Sanchez, a beauty salon owner in Las Vegas, and observed on Saturday and Sunday mornings Ms. Sanchez’s business had a line of people waiting to be served. Senator Schneider opined the Hispanic population would prefer service from someone who could speak in the language to which they are accustomed. Senator Schneider recognized many people with a background in cosmetology are struggling to stay in business, but they need Spanish-speaking cosmetologists to accommodate their Hispanic customers. Although they try not to hire unlicensed personnel, it becomes harder for them to stay in business, because of a lack of licensed Spanish-speaking cosmetologists.
Dalia Sanchez, Cosmetologist, Owner, Dalia’s Beauty Salon, Las Vegas, presented a copy of her written testimony and a Geodemographic Analysis produced by the Bureau of Business and Economic Research, University of Nevada, Reno (Exhibit D), demonstrating the increase of the Hispanic population in Nevada. She said living in the country considered the ”land of opportunity” by most immigrants, she was encouraged to open her own business and, therefore opened a beauty salon. Since then, she has had to struggle, working 7 days a week and long shifts in order to come up with just the salon rent and other expenses. She explained she was forced to advertise for a licensed cosmetologist, for which she received no reply, except some phone calls from cosmetologists who assured her they were experienced, but were not licensed in Nevada. She told the committee there are a few licensed cosmetologists, but they are quickly hired by other salons. She stated there are times when licensed cosmetologists take advantage of salon owners like herself, by setting their own conditions, their own schedule, and even a salary figure; they know business owners, like her, are desperate and have very few or no alternatives.
Ms. Sanchez indicated, due to these problems, many salon owners are forced to hire unlicensed cosmetologists in order to keep their business running. They ultimately pay excessive fines resulting in hardships for small business owners, which can force them to close their doors. In some instances, Ms. Sanchez offered, she has to deal with cosmetologists who are licensed but not necessarily skilled or capable of doing the job; these cosmetologists were able to pass the exam by guessing the answers, but have no true understanding of the job. She drew attention to two women present with her, who had 10 years of experience in the state of California and 14 years’ experience in their native countries. She maintained they were very competent as cosmetologists, but are unable to work for her due to the lack of a license.
Ms. Sanchez emphasized by allowing a trained, experienced professional cosmetologist to take the exam in Spanish, salon owners would be able to guarantee quality service for Nevadans. She urged the committee to approve the bill and give experienced cosmetologists, who have been precluded from practicing in their profession, because they are unable to pass the examination in English, the opportunity to provide for their families: to persuade schools to pursue the Hispanic market, especially those schools which offer the classes in Spanish, but can only provide the test in English.
Senator Schneider noted, basically, due to the job opportunities that Las Vegas has to offer, predominantly Spanish-speaking immigrants are coming from everywhere, including Central and South America. “If we want to license people and have them qualify, this proposal is a step in the right direction,” he stated.
Senator Carlton wondered, with all the different dialects in the Spanish language, whether there would be a problem crafting a test in Spanish that everyone could understand.
Ms. Sanchez maintained immigrants from Central and South America and Spain speak the same language, a universal Spanish. However, some words may differ, just as the English spoken in United States defers from the English spoken in England.
Alicia Valadez, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas, testified on behalf of herself and other coworkers in support of S.B. 153. Ms. Valadez apologized for her “poor English” then proceeded to say she has 14 years of experience as a cosmetologist in her native country; however, she is currently unemployed due to the lack of a license. She said, “I have a family and I need you to help me. Thank you everybody, and God bless you.”
John Kern, Concerned Citizen, Las Vegas, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Kern offered, since 1980, the Hispanic population in Clark County alone has grown from 35,000 to over 200,000. He iterated the problem in the Hispanic community is that 70 percent of them cannot speak English. They speak Spanish exclusively, and have nowhere to be serviced; if they go to an English salon no one is able to understand their exact needs and feel unwelcome to a large degree. He emphasized it has been a problem in Nevada, particularly in the Las Vegas area, for many years; the Hispanics prefer to be serviced in their own communities. He expressed other concerns regarding Hispanic license applicants being required to go to the extreme of pursuing legislation to force the cosmetology state board to do something it already has the power to do. He claimed for years Hispanic salon owners and license applicants have pleaded with the cosmetology board to address and remedy the problem. He said the board has refused to even make an effort. The board’s attitude is “step faster, remain the same, or if you don’t like it, they close up your shop.” He also claimed the cosmetology state board could have resolved 90 percent of the problems, at no additional cost or inconvenience, by administering the written exam in Spanish.
Mr. Kern mentioned the mass migration of Hispanics in Nevada has in itself provided the state with a pool of hundreds of qualified, licensed, experienced cosmetologists. Their problem is they hold licenses from other states or other countries, but not Nevada. He indicated the states of California, Texas, Florida, New Mexico, and Washington, D.C., all offer the cosmetology tests in Spanish. For the most part, the Nevada cosmetology state board has already certified the credentials of many of these individuals and already approved them for a license, but they must pass the national written exam. He iterated all these people want to do is get a license so they can support themselves and their families, work in Hispanic salons for Hispanic clients; in an environment in which they are able to function just fine within their profession, without the need to speak or read English.
Mr. Kern asked whether the committee had any idea of how many qualified cosmetologists in the state of Nevada are drawing welfare because they are not allowed to work. In his opinion, he said, it appears the board of cosmetology has decided if you were not born or educated in this country, then you cannot work in Nevada. He made reference to Chapter 644 of NRS: “Nowhere, in its entirety, does the law state you must be tested in English, only; it does state that you must pass the test.” He informed the committee Nevada is a member of the National-Interstate Council of State Boards of Cosmetology, a nonprofit organization. He said the boards of cosmetology from all 50 states belong to this organization, and the majority of the states, including Nevada, use the council’s uniform national exams. The council does all of the research necessary to create the exam; the state of Nevada pays $12.50 for each written exam, the cost is passed on to the applicant. For the same fee, he continued, the council will also grade the exams and furnish the results to the cosmetology boards. He stated, on February 12, 2001, he spoke with Jennie Wilson, Executive Administrator of the council, who informed him the national written exam is a uniform written exam of which several variations are available. All the variations use the same computer base. When the Nevada cosmetology state board needs the exams, the board normally contacts Ms. Wilson in New Mexico, specifying which variation is needed, Ms. Wilson then mails the exams along with a bill.
Mr. Kern indicated Ms. Wilson had also informed him that the Spanish exam has been available since the late 1980s for the same $12.50 charge. As Mr. Kern explained, the state of New Mexico had experienced some difficulties at first, due to the Spanish terminology, but the council rewrote the test 5 years ago, and since then there have been no further problems. He also explained Ms. Wilson had stated, as the administrator for the board of cosmetology in the state of New Mexico, the Spanish exam was just as effective as the exam given in English.
Mr. Kern sustained there are many applicants in Nevada who need only to pass the national written exam to receive their license. They have already been certified by the cosmetology state board; however, many of them are currently on their third or fourth attempt to pass the written exam in English. These people need desperately to work to support their families. It is unfair to impose hardships on them by making them wait for months, especially since the Spanish written exam is currently available. He persisted, to immediately begin administering the national cosmetology Spanish written exam would be no problem or inconvenience for the Nevada cosmetology state board, since they do not have to create or even grade the exams. It is all done by the council.
Mr. Kern strongly appealed to the committee to pass S.B. 153 and allow Hispanic constituents to be treated in a fair and equitable manner, and to allow them to be productive in their communities, and pursue the “American Dream.”
Elvira Ruiz, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas, declared she had trouble reading aloud in public; therefore, she would have her 11-year-old daughter, Maria Rodriguez, read her statement (Exhibit E) to reinforce prior testimony.
Ms. Ruiz added:
I have managed a Spanish beauty salon for many years, finding myself in the middle of a battlefield on a daily basis, dealing with cosmetologists who have to deal with the cosmetology state board when they show up, and I am a target from both sides. I just [sic] come here to support . . . 153 [S. B. 153] and to ask a higher power, which is the Legislature in this case, to do the right thing. Just give us the opportunity and our space to work with our own community; we are not asking too much.
Maria Rodriguez read Ms. Ruiz’s written statement (Exhibit E):
I am and have been the manager of a Hispanic salon for many years. I am also a licensed manicurist. I have intimate knowledge regarding the non-licensing of qualified cosmetologists by the Nevada cosmetology state board. When I run adds in the local Hispanic newspapers to try to recruit a new cosmetologist, for each response that I get from a Nevada licensed cosmetologist, I get 75 responses from non-licensed Nevada cosmetologists, most are with licenses from other states. The reason they are not licensed in Nevada is always the same, ‘I cannot pass the written test in English.’ I even had one woman who has been trying for over 2 years, who has taken the test over 12 times but cannot pass it in English. She holds a valid California license and has years of experience, but Nevada will not let her work. In Nevada, if you are [a] qualified, licensed cosmetologist from another state, and you can read English, you are treated like you are from another planet. I personally know of qualified cosmetologists who have been forced to go on welfare because they cannot work in Nevada only because they cannot pass the written exam in English. I personally know of a cosmetologist who has won awards at competitions in California, but is not allowed to work in Nevada because she cannot pass the written exam in English; her hair and nail techniques are so refined and efficient that a local beauty school asked her to do a demonstration; she is not allowed to work in Nevada because she cannot read English, and has been reduced to cleaning houses and washing sheets at Mission Linen [Mission Industries] to support herself.
Ms. Ruiz further commented:
The attitude of the cosmetology state board in Nevada toward the Hispanic cosmetologists and the board’s treatment of Hispanic cosmetologists are a travesty, nothing short of racial discrimination. We are treated as if we are some kind of invading plague or disease, and the cosmetology state board not being able to completely eliminate us, is going to do everything within their power to keep us out of the working community of cosmetology. I came to the United States from Mexico 31 years ago, and [have] been a resident of Nevada in Las Vegas for the last 24 years. I still want to believe in justice and I still want to believe in those things [values] like the reason I came to this country, things like equality, freedom to choose my own path, [and] the ability to be a part of something good. You, the Legislature of Nevada, are the highest authority in the state. Please do the right thing.
Chairman Townsend praised Ms. Rodriguez for her command of the English language, and asked what school she attended. Ms. Rodriguez said she attends Clark County Christian School.
Ciria Perez, Administrative Assistant, Legislative Counsel Bureau, Las Vegas, introduced herself as the Spanish interpreter assigned to assist Elizabeth Ortega, Belen Terrasas, and Juana Guzman Cruz.
Elizabeth Ortega, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas, proceeded to explain:
I graduated in Tijuana, Mexico, where I was awarded [licensure] in cosmetology and manicure. Then, when I came to Nevada, I tried to do the exam, but have failed the test on five occasions. Due to that problem I have had to work on other jobs where I am not able to keep up with my career. I just had a baby so I am not working at this time, I wish that I could get a job with better pay, because [sic] [and would] like the opportunity to do the exam in Spanish.
Belen Terrasas, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas:
Through this committee I ask help for us Hispanic women. I specialize in haircuts. I have come to Las Vegas since 4 years ago, I have tried to pass the exam in English seven times; yet, I have not been able to pass it. I ask you to give us the opportunity. We do not understand English, but we really tried, many of us [have] studied English. I am one of those people who has the desire to progress. I have studied English specifically for the test, but I am not able to accomplish my goal. At this time I have no work, [and] it is very difficult for me because my husband earns very little, he works in construction; sometimes, when it rains, he does not work. I do ask you to open your heart to all Latinos. I believe we also have the right to be given . . . [the same] opportunities like those persons who speak English.
Richard Harjo, Chairman, Nevada Indian Commission, testified in support of the proposal (S.B. 153). He noted over the years there have been similar concerns about having this specific test involved, particularly from Senator Rhoads’ area. Mr. Harjo opined, due to the immense population growth, it would be more practical to consider all cultures. He said he was aware the Asian population in Las Vegas has also increased. “Not to say that the Indians of the state of Nevada want their own test, because I am not sure that we could get it down on paper correctly, but we would like to stand in support of our brothers and sisters in southern Nevada,” he proclaimed.
Juana Guzman Cruz, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas, testified:
I am a native Mexican. The reasons we have submitted [sic] here today, and that is to support us Latinas. I believe it is necessary to eradicate the initial discrimination against us for the simple reason of being Latinas. All we ask you is for an opportunity. We need your support to function in our profession. Please help us. Open your hearts; we come in search of better opportunities.
Mary E. Manna, Executive Secretary/Office Manager, State Board of Cosmetology, addressed the committee submitting a folder with several documents (Exhibit F). She established one of the issues was addressed at a board meeting by Susan Gray, Deputy Attorney General, Boards and Commissions Section, Civil Division, Office of the Attorney General, where she advised the board S.B. 153 was unconstitutional. Ms. Manna mentioned the (cosmetology) board was informed by legal opinion that if the bill were to pass, the board could be involved in legal matters.
In response to previous testimony, Ms. Manna pointed out, from 1982 until 1985, the board provided interpreters for all nationalities. Then, in 1984, during the board’s administration of the exams, both written and practical, the board was experiencing “cheating” regarding various issues. As a result, the board took the matter to the attorney general’s office asking for an advisory opinion whether or not the board could require the test be taken in English, or whether to use translators. She said the advisory opinion issued by the attorney general’s office (AG) stated the board had the ability to set a policy of “English only.” Therefore, in 1985, the board accepted the advisory opinion and adopted the policy to do all testing in English. The focus of the board was mainly to protect the public, she stated.
Ms. Manna iterated the board has no jurisdiction to tell applicants where to work. The board reviews basic entry-level skills concerning health and safety. As an example, approximately 4 to 5 years ago, there was a disciplinary case against a salon owner, wherein the board was forced to take action for unlicensed activity; the salon owner was found guilty by the board. The owner proceeded to district court for a judicial review. The district court judge determined, because of chemical usage, licensure was a required occupational standard.
Ms. Manna said she disagreed with prior testimony stating the board (of cosmetology) has been dealing on a daily basis with a major growth of ethnic diversity within southern Nevada for 3 to 5 years. There are people from Iraq, Iran, Germany, France, Lebanon, et cetera, therefore, dealing with proper translation has been a concern for the board, she stated. If, in fact, arrangements were made to accommodate even one group, or just the Hispanic-language speakers, there are issues of cost and the issue of dialects, where the meaning of words may be lost in the transition.
Ms. Manna insisted the cosmetology board is not insensitive to these issues, and very strongly maintained, “As the administrator for the cosmetology board, I take very strong offense to the terms being used that we are discriminating. I believe what I have done is [to] enforce our rules as I have been directed.”
Ms. Manna drew attention to the current 8000 cosmetologists and 5000 manicurists in the state, many of which, she said are very ethnically diverse. Many are successfully licensed Hispanics. She suggested a resolution to address the needs of all residents of this state, with little or no impact to the licensing industry, would be the use of interpreters, utilizing the language banks and resource centers set up through the University and Community College System of Nevada, such as the Language Bank of northern Nevada, and court interpreters. Ms. Manna noted this would help open the licensing process to everyone, and at the same time, protect the public without impacting the whole industry. She also noted the licensing fees would have to be considerably raised if written materials are translated into languages other than English.
Ms. Manna made reference to a packet concerning the written and practical exams from various states, but in particular a letter from Mr. Wayne Corley, entitled “National-Interstate Council of State Board Cosmetology, Inc.,” from the state of Florida (Exhibit F). Ms. Manna further said, the Nevada board has been approached regarding the bilingual issue. Each time the board has reacted immediately, but has never acted in any discriminatory manner. However, if the board were to accommodate only the Spanish-speaking people in the state of Nevada, then the board would be guilty of discriminating against other immigrants, some of whom have also come to our country with some training and experience. If accommodating all immigrants could be evaluated to ensure all comparable requirements within the law are met and go straight to the testing procedure, immigrants would not be impacted to return to school.
Ms. Manna iterated the main focus of the board is the protection and safety of the public and how it is accomplished through the national exam. She said her organization works very hard to help and assist individuals in any way possible. Senator Carlton asked for clarification regarding the dialect issue reflected in Mr. Corley’s letter (Exhibit F), and if the National-Interstate Council (NIC) is an interstate council or a federal agency.
Ms. Manna explained the NIC is comprised of members of the state licensing boards of cosmetology from throughout the United States, a nonprofit organization with an executive board, and made up of cosmetologists. She further explained, when she contacted language experts, she was told there is a variation of dialects from the Spanish language spoken in Cuba, Colombia, Mexico, or Spain, which is why the board felt the best resolution to this matter would be the use of interpreters.
Brenda J. Erdoes, Legislative Counsel, Legal Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, testified she had reviewed the attorney general’s opinion and the constitutionality of the bill. She concluded, the opinion does not address the issue directly; rather, it addresses the issue of whether the board of cosmetology, under the existing language of the law, is required to offer the exam in Spanish, “and they are not.” However, she continued, the opinion addresses the same concerns. Ms. Erdoes related, the opinion says, “If you are going to offer the exam in Spanish, you need to also offer it in all other languages.” Ms. Erdoes said she agreed with the opinion. She added, the only remaining constitutional question would be whether it is lawful for the state of Nevada to offer the test in Spanish and other languages without an additional charge. She gave examples of other states in which type of arrangement has been upheld. Texas, for example, started the same way as S.B. 153. Florida began with a free exam in English and all the other languages were offered with a set fee for translation. However, the state of Florida saw fit to make changes in its laws. Ms. Erdoes stated the latest census figures for Nevada show Hispanics are, by far, greater in number than any other minority population in the state. In her opinion, there are enough Spanish-speaking persons in Nevada to compare with other states, in which similar laws have been upheld.
Ms. Manna acknowledged several board members present: Gloria Alexander, Linda Zesiger, Maribah Bushell, and Lawrence Walthers, all cosmetologists.
Deborah Armstrong, State Board of Cosmetology, presented a written statement (Exhibit G). She testified board members require a school curriculum to reinforce the importance of sanitation and health and safety when using chemicals in cosmetology. She maintained, because there are people who are trained in the cosmetology field in other countries throughout the world, and in states like Utah, which do not require a license, the board has to be sure these people meet all the standards. She warned anyone could receive third-degree burns on the scalp if chemicals are used inappropriately. She stated the Spanish exam available through NIC is 12 years old. It is not up to date with current technology, changes, chemicals currently in use, or the cost for having the test rewritten. She suggested it would be more prudent to have an interpreter for a specific language as needed to assist applicants when taking the test.
Ms. Manna continued, applications from around the world are accepted on a regular basis; some countries have no structured curriculum, instead, they use job training when licensing, and may not focus on anatomy, physiology, bacteriology, and sanitation as schools in the United States. Many of those applicants, when not able to pass the exam, will then try to go back to school on their own, taking an additional 100 to 200 hours of training; then, they successfully retake the exam. She further said applicants are required to go to school before the exam is taken, but reciprocity is also offered to people who come from other states. For example, if a person comes from another state and has a current license and at least 1 year of salon work experience within the last 3 years, and has taken the national written exam, that person may obtain a license, since there is no other testing or schooling required, regardless of the training hours received. However, there are countries that have no basis of training, they may focus on the practical application, and not necessarily the book theory.
Kay Collins, President, State Board of Cosmetology, requested line 4 of S.B. 153 be changed, suggesting in addition to cosmetologists, manicurists, estheticians, hair designers, and electrologists be added in the language. She recommended using translators instead of translating the exam, and an interpreter’s fee be required for all, no matter the nationality.
Chairman Townsend inquired about the cost for the exam. Ms. Manna explained there is a $15 application fee and $70 for the exam, in addition to the license fee (prorated). Currently, the license fee is $40 every 2 years.
Senator Schneider inquired of the total hours and cost involved in hiring and utilizing interpreters. Ms. Manna indicated according to Mary Theresa Rodgers, Clark County Translation Bank, Eighth Judicial District Court in Las Vegas, and the Language Bank in Reno, the cost varies between the two entities, from $50 to $60 (per hour). She outlined several examples: in Las Vegas, the written exam that the NIC provides would take 90 minutes. The log and practical exam would take a minimum of 2 hours, and maximum of 6 hours, depending on the category of licensure. A person from another country would take the written exam first in a 2 to 2½ hour period, then come back for the practical test (on a Sunday), which runs for 2 to 2½ hours also; the manicure and the aesthetic exams are approximately the same; the cosmetology exams are 4 to 4½ hours. Written exams are administered in Reno and Las Vegas by cosmetology board office staff, however, the practical exam, by statute, is administered by the board members.
Senator Schneider noted it could be expensive for up to 8 hours worth of exams at $60 an hour. He said if the committee considered approval of interpreters, he would have to recommend the board of cosmetology, and all other boards, hire persons fluent in Spanish, and have bilingual staff available in their offices ready to assist with all requirements.
Senator Schneider said he recognized all boards and businesses would be affected greatly, such as the labor union, who sends out their newsletter every quarter in both English and Spanish. Using the example of Ms. Ruiz, who could not speak English very well, but her daughter had no problem, Senator Schneider stated:
Although immigrant parents from other countries are offered English as a second language, and their children [are offered] an English education through the school districts, the parents would never be able to be at the same level as their children. We are looking at a 20-year period, where we have the influx of foreigners.
Senator Schneider maintained state government should be ready to accommodate constituents.
Ms. Manna concurred, the state is becoming ethnically diverse; therefore, accommodating just one ethnic group would be discriminatory. Currently, there are about 853 beauty salons in Las Vegas, of which 41 are Hispanic, and 125 are Asian. Out of those 41 Hispanic salons there are no problems, except one, for which the license was revoked.
Senator Schneider said he recognized the growing population in the Asian community as well, and agreed there is a need to work with them just as strongly.
Senator Shaffer voiced concern about diverse business practices. Ms. Manna established the licensing board is only responsible for the health and safety issues. She stressed the board is enforcing the laws consistently; what is done for one is done for all. She offered to comprise a list of the unlicensed activity in the state. She pointed out unlicensed activity is not specific to any ethnic group.
Ms. Manna reiterated:
We take the issue very seriously, [and] are willing to work with these issues, but strongly oppose the bill as written. We believe it would impact a great number of your constituents throughout the state with the fees. Because we are supported on our licensing fees, we do not impact the taxpayer in our state. We serve a very viable purpose.
Ms. Collins offered another example of how a person from Iran would be impacted if he/she was to apply under the bill as written. The applicant would have to pay anywhere from $6000 to $7800 to have the exam translated.
Mr. Kern persisted other states have recognized that these non-English-speaking immigrants know how to work with chemicals, and know how to work on people without harm, and have authorized them to do their jobs. Many of them have as much as 20 years of experience, know what they are doing, and have been tested and licensed in other states. He insisted the remedy is already available without having to hire translators and without having to increase the budget or the size of the bureaucracy.
Ms. Sanchez agreed the cost of $6000 to $7800 would be a major impediment. She emphasized some people are forced to work in their own homes when not able to obtain a license, which is more dangerous in regards to safety and sanitation. Ms. Sanchez stated it has been brought to her attention there are incidents in which applicants have been denied a translator. She offered, a beauty school instructor once told her, not knowing she was a cosmetologist and salon owner, the instructors advised their students not to consider working in Hispanic salons. Ms. Sanchez told the instructor she had the right to hire any stylist. Ms. Sanchez said the best way to enforce the law is by providing these people with a license.
Mr. Harjo stated:
I do not propose to be an expert on the Hispanic ethnic minority, their businesses, or cosmetology, but I can tell you that as a Native American, it is less expensive to impose a small fee than to put these people on public assistance.
Mariana Gonzales, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas, testified:
I come from Mexico [and] have been a resident of Las Vegas for 3 years. I just wanted to inform you that we are capable [after] having attended school for 1 year. But I feel we have been treated as ignorant or [have] been discriminated against. Also, there is a high percentage of Latinos; Latinos would never frequent an English-speaking salon. That is why we [are] encouraging this proposal. I think the cosmetology state board does not need to pay $60 per hour for an interpreter; I think they can find a way to accommodate every ethnic group. I went three times to do [take] the exam, but have not been able to pass; they send us a notification by mail, but never the results or any advice as to where [sic] I did wrong, so that next time I can be better prepared.
Juana Guzman Cruz, Cosmetologist, Las Vegas, testified she was born in Mexico City, where she had studied cosmetology for 3½ years, and graduated as a beauty teacher. All graduate students are 100 percent capable of doing their jobs. Ms. Cruz noted all academies (throughout the world), whether they are local or governmental, are subsidized by the makers of some of the prestigious beauty products; and at the end of each training, graduates receive a diploma verifying the graduate is ready to perform the job and work with these products.
Chairman Townsend closed the hearing S.B. 153, and re-referred to A.B. 32.
Senator Carlton indicated she was not clear on some of the language in the bill, specifically “out of country,” and would need more information. Chairman Townsend suggested she contact Dr. Davis (Lawrence Davis, D.C., Vice President Chiropractic Physician’s Board of Nevada).
Chairman Townsend proceeded with A.B. 78 and requested a motion.
SENATOR AMODEI MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 78.
SENATOR SHAFFER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR O’CONNELL WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Chairman Townsend adjourned the meeting at 9:29 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Silvia Motta,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
DATE: