MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Finance
Seventy-First Session
April 16, 2001
The Senate Committee on Financewas called to order by Chairman William J. Raggio at 8:00 a.m., on Monday, April 16, 2001, in Room 2134 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, 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 William J. Raggio, Chairman
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen
Senator William R. O’Donnell
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator Bernice Mathews
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gary L. Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Judy Jacobs, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Michael Hillerby, Deputy Chief of Staff for Legislative Affairs, Office of the Governor
John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration
Rose E. McKinney-James, Lobbyist, Clark County School District
Deborah K. Cahill, Lobbyist, Nevada State Education Association
Charlotte Brothwell, Lobbyist, Nevada Classified School Employees Association
Steve Williams, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District
Douglas C. Thunder, Deputy Superintendent for Administrative and Fiscal Services, Department of Education
Janelle Mulvenon, Program Administrator, Community Connections; Program Manager, Early Intervention Interagency Coordinating Council, Department of Human Resources
Maynard R. Yasmer, Administrator, Rehabilitation Division, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation
Charlotte Crawford, Director, Department of Human Resources
Robert Desruisseaux, Northern Nevada Center for Independent Living
Paul Gowins, Rehabilitation Division, Independent Living Advisory Council, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation
Jon L. Sasser, Lobbyist, Washoe Legal Services Inc.
Bernard T. Santos, Lobbyist, AARP (American Association of Retired Persons)
Marybel Batjer, Chief of Staff, Office of the Governor
Frankie Sue Del Papa, Attorney General
Robert R. Loux, Executive Director, Agency for Nuclear Projects
Brian McKay, Chairman, Commission on Nuclear Projects
M. Paul Workman, Commissioner, Commission on Nuclear Projects
Janelle L. Kraft, Lobbyist, City of Las Vegas
Kaitlin Backlund, Executive Director, Citizen Alert
Gary L. Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, gave a status report. He indicated that the subcommittees had reviewed 100 percent of The Executive Budget by the end of the previous week, and the Senate Committee on Finance had closed 84 of the 419 budgets. He reported 172 bills had been referred to the committee, 106 had been heard, and 153 remained.
Senator Raggio commented there were approximately 60 bills that had not been heard, and he requested that committee members review those remaining to determine which ones they would prefer to hear, and which could be withdrawn in view of the limited revenues.
SENATE BILL 250: Makes supplemental appropriation to State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources for certain shortfalls in budget. (BDR S-1260)
Senator Raggio reminded the committee the bill was heard on February 14, 2001, and the testimony of Freeman Johnson suggested a need to add $11,619. He drew attention to a green sheet (Exhibit C) setting out a proposed amendment.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS SENATE BILL 250 WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Rawson stated he would like a report on water levels and whether water is being lost through seepage, or whether the dam is working as anticipated. Senator Raggio requested staff to pass that request along to the Division of Wildlife.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS O’DONNELL AND NEAL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 453: Makes appropriation to Department of Human Resources for marketing efforts and enhancement of subsidies for provision of prescription drugs and pharmaceutical services to senior citizens. (BDR S-1404)
Senator Raggio announced that Senate Bill (S.B.) 453 would be deferred and rescheduled.
SENATE BILL 427: Makes appropriation to Department of Education for training of teachers, textbook resources and information technology. (BDR S-1349)
Senator Raggio noted a bill similar to S.B. 427 requested by the Governor was being heard in the Assembly, and it would be best to postpone the hearing. He said the Assembly bill would provide $20 million for training, textbooks, and information technology, and the Governor referred to it in his State of the State message.
Senator Raggio stated S.B. 427 would be rescheduled along with S.B. 453. He pointed out both bills were exempt. He noted S.B. 453 would appropriate $1 million for marketing efforts and enhancement of subsidies for the Senior Rx Program. He said one bill reprocessed in the Senate would lower the cap on senior participants.
Michael Hillerby, Deputy Chief of Staff for Legislative Affairs, Office of the Governor, reported S.B. 427 was discussed the previous Friday in the Assembly Committee on Health and Human Services, and was now in the Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities. He said Senate Bill 539, which makes changes to the program, was also discussed.
SENATE BILL 539: Makes various changes concerning fund for a healthy Nevada. (BDR 40-536)
Mr. Hillerby said S.B. 539 refers to refinements and streamlining. He stated the Office of the Governor would like to return later with more information. Senator Raggio asked whether the bill is non-exempt. Senator Rawson replied that it is not, but he opined it would pass during the hearing by his committee later in the day.
SENATE BILL 458: Makes appropriation to Department of Education for cost-of-living bonus for all public employees in local school districts. (BDR S-1424)
John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration, stated S.B. 458 would provide $57.5 million for a cost of living bonus for all public employees of local school districts. He explained the Governor was unable to find ongoing funds to recommend a salary increase to include in the Distributive School Account (DSA). Mr. Comeaux said the bill would award a one-time 5 percent bonus to all school district employees, including teachers, support personnel, bus drivers, and everyone else.
Senator Coffin asked what percentage of an average salary the bonus would provide. Mr. Comeaux responded it would represent approximately 5 percent. Senator Coffin asked whether the Governor had considered cutting down the bonus and adding a percentage to the base. Mr. Comeaux reiterated there was no way to do so, because the cost of a 1 percent increase for school district employees amounts to more than the cost for all state employees and all university personnel, combined. He said there was no place to find that from ongoing funds.
Senator Coffin said he was not privy to any meetings going on in which the matter was under discussion, but he opined it might be possible to put in a permanent raise of 2 or 3 percent or more, instead of a one-shot. Mr. Comeaux pointed out that since $57.5 million represents about 5 percent, the cost of 1 percent would be approximately $11.5 million. Senator Coffin suggested the state could give a 3 percent raise in the first year, and guarantee at least 2 percent in the second year. Mr. Comeaux reminded Senator Coffin that $57.5 million is available this year, but not next year, and although it could be allocated over the biennium, the following years could present a problem.
Senator Raggio confirmed that the one-shot bonus would be payable in the current fiscal year, as intended by the administration. Mr. Comeaux concurred.
Senator Raggio drew attention to page 9 of the Supporting Documentation packet (Exhibit D) showing the proposed allocations by school district. Mr. Comeaux said the proposed allocation is based on payrolls reported to the State Department of Education by the various school districts.
Senator Coffin inquired how much flexibility would be available to take the bonus appropriation out of the present fiscal year and put it into the next biennium as a permanent part of the base, allocating 3 percent the first year and 2 percent the second year.
Mr. Comeaux responded the budget could not be balanced under that situation. He acknowledged he understood the premise, but without the prospect of ongoing funds in 2 years to make the payments, the payments would be made with onetime funds. He noted some members of the Legislature felt recommendations in The Executive Budget may create a “hole” for following biennia, and the proposal made by Senator Coffin would create a “big hole.” Senator Coffin admitted there is already a “big hole” in the current biennium. Mr. Comeaux stated the Governor wanted to find a way to do something similar, but no satisfactory way was found to do it.
Rose E. McKinney-James, Lobbyist, Clark County School District, stated:
The school district would like to go on record expressing our appreciation to the Governor for recognition of a very significant need for us. We have, throughout the session, indicated to you that we have an ongoing concern about our fiscal stability, and this measure, of course, takes an important step toward recognizing that.
Ms. McKinney-James said the one-shot would make it very difficult to sustain the support needed, especially in the recruitment of teachers. She acknowledged the one-shot would provide some incentive, but there are “teachers who are turning us down in record numbers.” She reported that since the beginning of session, Clark County lost approximately 400 teachers, and in the past week she learned another 150 were lost to the district. She attributed the loss to the fact the salaries are not competitive.
Ms. McKinney-James acknowledged the state will have a revenue shortfall, but she expressed hope the educational community will have a share in any additional revenue stream that the body might consider. Senator Raggio asked whether the Clark County School District would like S.B. 458 passed if there are no additional revenues. He said the Economic Forum projects even less than in December, and there is no additional revenue except the one-time funds that are available. Ms. McKinney-James replied, “We would absolutely prefer for you to pass this bill.”
Senator Raggio commented everyone on the committee would like to have ongoing funding available in order for the cost of living increase to go into the base, but he asserted the committee is trying to be realistic and honor the Governor’s request.
Deborah K. Cahill, Lobbyist, Nevada State Education Association (NSEA), stated NSEA “thinks this is symptomatic of a very serious problem that must be dealt with this session.” She asserted the state is facing a crisis. She said there are teachers who would like the bonus money, because Clark County School District has made budget cuts and many people are losing salaries this year. She noted teachers are dealing with the problem of an increase in insurance premium costs.
Senator Raggio asked what the status was of negotiations in various school districts, especially Clark County. Ms. McKinney-James replied that the process is ongoing. Senator Raggio commented there is still an opportunity for the representatives of the teachers and the district to negotiate, even during the next biennium, which gives that capability should assessed values increase.
Charlotte Brothwell, Lobbyist, Nevada Classified School Employees Association, offered support for S.B. 498. She expressed gratitude for the Governor’s recognition that the employees need some assistance. She said many of the people who she represents work with special needs students. She declared they are very caring and loving people who love their jobs and would like to stay, but they cannot afford it, so many are leaving.
Steve Williams, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District, added his sentiments to those of the previous testifiers. He agreed a long-time solution was most desirable, but said the district would appreciate any help.
Douglas C. Thunder, Deputy Superintendent for Administrative and Fiscal Services, Department of Education, endorsed the previous commentary. He pointed out there are some people in school districts who would not be covered through S.B. 458 because they are not paid out of state funds. He cited those who have funding that are not affected by the state because they come under Title 1, such as food service employees. He said they are paid through enterprise funds and other funds.
Senator Raggio requested that Mr. Thunder compile a list of those who would not be covered. Mr. Thunder responded he would attempt to do so, but it is information not normally compiled. Senator Raggio asked whether a bonus could be paid out of the other funds. Mr. Thunder responded that if funding is made available, it might result in increased fees. Senator Raggio suggested the department work with the Budget Office to determine whether there would be an inequity to be addressed.
SENATE BILL 477: Makes appropriation to Department of Human Resources for assistive devices to help disabled persons maintain independent living environment. (BDR S-1413)
Senator Raggio noted S.B. 477 would appropriate $500,000.
Janelle Mulvenon, Program Administrator, Community Connections; Program Manager, Early Intervention Interagency Coordinating Council, Department of Human Resources, spoke from written testimony (Exhibit E) said she was present to represent various divisions within the department. She stated S.B. 477 is supported by both the Department of Human Resources (DHR) and the Department of Employment, Training, and Rehabilitation (DETR).
Ms. Mulvenon said the appropriation would assist individuals of all ages with disabilities to increase, maintain, and improve their capacity to live independently. She explained the funds would be administered through an inter-local agreement between DHR and DETR to ensure access will be available to all persons with disabilities. She noted the appropriation would be allocated to DHR.
Ms. Mulvenon explained that assistive equipment provides any kind of assistance to the disabled, from hand splints to access ramps, and the devices decrease the need for placement in nursing homes. She pointed out Medicaid does not include coverage for environmental modifications such as ramps or lifts. She stated there are no dedicated funds for such devices in DHR.
Ms. Mulvenon said she is responsible for the population aged birth to 3 years under the Individuals Disabilities Education Act. She said assistive technology devices and services are required under federal law. She noted in fiscal year (FY) 2000 there were 1,197 eligible for the service. She declared, “This appropriation permits the state’s efforts to focus on abilities instead of disabilities.” She said the issue is not whether the state can afford effective assistive devices, but what the cost would be without the devices.
Maynard R. Yasmer, Administrator, Rehabilitation Division, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation, stated DETR has had a long experience with independent living services, and a good infrastructure for providers in the community. He asserted S.B. 477 will help expand services across the continuum of needs, especially with the interaction between the two departments.
Senator Raggio asked whether the agency agreement would result in greater cost effectiveness and give people easier access to services. Mr. Yasmer averred it would.
Mr. Yasmer described the types of equipment that would be provided under the measure, including ramps or bathroom modifications. He cited a recent example in which employees of Home Depot in Douglas County remodeled the bathroom and built a ramp for fellow employee who had become paralyzed from the waist down.
Senator Raggio inquired about the Medicaid restrictions on devices. Charlotte Crawford, Director, Department of Human Resources, responded that the Governor had extreme concern whether funds would be available for individuals with disabilities and their families who might not be able to afford assistance or who would not be eligible through insurance or Medicaid. She said Medicaid, like many private insurance companies, does not provide for environmental adaptations such as ramps. She noted Medicaid does provide for adaptations only under the physically disabled waiver, but not as a general benefit.
Ms. Crawford explained the intent was to provide funding at $500,000 for the biennium for those individuals, regardless of their age, or the source of their disability.
Robert Desruisseaux, Northern Nevada Center for Independent Living (NNCIL), testified in favor of S.B. 477. He reported those at the center have recognized the need for assistive services for a long time, and the center has worked with DETR for many years to deliver services. He said NNCIL has seen a shortfall every year, so the center has acquired various grants from the community and donations from businesses and private individuals to obtain assistive technology services. He attributed much of the success to volunteer labor and monetary donations, and he opined as a result the center has delivered services to approximately 50 people per year.
Mr. Desruisseaux said there is a waiting list of 103 people for the independent living program, with an average wait between 1 and 2 years. He said over the past 2 years he has noticed an unfortunate trend. He said people are dying before they can get help. He said a 2-year wait for an individual who cannot leave his home to access friends, medical assistance, or buy groceries, or get into a bathroom to bathe, can be very detrimental to the person.
Mr. Desruisseaux told the committee the center is located in Sparks. He said through various services and programs, the center served approximately 450 last year. Senator Raggio commended Mr. Desruisseaux for service to those people.
Senator Rawson reported he was asked whether any of the funds were available for the blind, but he did not know. Mr. Desruisseaux responded the independent living program is used as an absolute last resort, and NNCIL looks for any other resources that may be available to determine whether people are eligible for services through vocational rehabilitation, the Veterans’ Administration, or the Bureau of Services to the Blind and Visually Impaired.
Mr. Desruisseaux admitted there are some people with visual disabilities who fall through cracks in the current system, perhaps because of their age or the extent of their impairment. He noted when that is the case, the independent living program could help.
Senator Raggio asked Ms. Crawford whether S.B. 477 could provide help in those cases. Ms. Crawford responded the intent of the additional $500,000 is to broaden some categories to include all disabilities. She acknowledged all needs might not be met, but the area would be broadened.
Laura Sheldon Casson, Participant, Northern Nevada Center for Independent Living, said she was born and raised in northern Nevada, and she is a victim of multiple sclerosis. She said the NNCIL provided her with ramps in her home so that she can access her yard. They took out her bathtub and installed a roll-in shower, where before she had a very difficult time. She declared, “The Center for Independent Living has been wonderful.”
Ms. Casson added that in time she will probably need more funding to widen her bedroom door. She explained that right now her wheelchair will not go in her bedroom and her husband carries her. She said she will probably need help with her computer to help her do things around the home. She said a friend with multiple sclerosis, who is a paraplegic, needs a stick in his mouth with a phone attached to Velcro on his wrist to dial a phone. She said if there was funding for him to have a program for his computer, he could simply ask his computer to dial the phone.
Ms. Casson asserted more funding is desperately needed for the disabled community.
Paul Gowins, Rehabilitation Division, Independent Living Advisory Council, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation, reported Dr. Ralph Baker of the Independent Living Advisory Council was unable to appear and requested that Mr. Gowins speak on behalf of the council.
Mr. Gowins said last September a group of people with disabilities met with representatives of the Governor’s office and attempted to put together a list of priorities. He said the personal care issue was one of the priorities, as was the ability to live in the community with assistive technology and devices. He said for at least 10 years the state Independent Living Advisory Council has had a sponsorship program that allows people to apply for services regardless of age or disability. He noted every year the council has a problem because it cannot provide service to about 100 people.
Mr. Gowins said the Governor has provided an opportunity for people with the one-shot proposal, which the disabled community felt would provide help right now. He said 60 percent of those with disabilities are elderly, and there is a high need in that population. He noted the matter was not discussed much at the gathering last September, but there have been many modifications for seniors, including ramps, racks on the backs of cars for carts to enable them to go shopping, and similar things. He added the council has assisted in installing better lighting for sighted people, and it has helped children.
Mr. Gowins indicated that after the council promoted the one-shot, the council was concerned that the funds were going to DHR. He said the council had hoped the funds would go to the independent living project at DETR, and he requested the committee to consider that during deliberations. He said the program already existing has guidelines, sliding fee scales, and other usable programs.
Senator Raggio asked whether Mr. Gowins heard the testimony regarding the inter-agency agreement. Mr. Gowins acknowledged that he had, but that he was not very familiar with the agreement. He reiterated he was speaking on behalf of the Independent Living Advisory Council, and although he admitted to some bias since he works in that department, he stressed he was speaking on behalf of the council. He reiterated support.
Jon L. Sasser, Lobbyist, Washoe Legal Services Inc., offered a written statement (Exhibit F) in support of Senate Bill 477. He explained Washoe Legal Services Inc works closely with the Northern Nevada Center for Independent Living, and the organization makes a number of referrals to Mr. Desruisseaux’s “excellent program.” He took note of the long waiting list for NNCIL and repeated support for the bill.
Bernard T. Santos, Lobbyist, AARP (American Association of Retired Persons), stated AARP believes there is a great need to fund programs that will allow disabled persons to maintain independent living. He noted a large population of those 65 years and older is moving into Nevada, and he stressed the importance of providing some assistance. He said 60 percent of the disabled are 65 years or older.
Mr. Yasmer offered response to Senator Rawson’s question regarding the blind. He said the major part of living needs of blind or visually impaired people are handled through the Bureau of Services to the Blind and Visually Impaired. He said the bureau has an older blind and independent living program and a life skills program, both of which relate to teaching, mobility training, and daily activities.
Senator Raggio asked whether Mr. Yasmer could address Mr. Gowins’ concerns regarding DHR administration of the program. Mr. Yasmer acknowledged the concerns, but opined the program could probably be handled through an agreement. He pointed out the infrastructure is in place and could be used by DHR.
Senator Rawson noted all the funds are slated to cover those activities, so he surmised it would not be a problem for DETR. Mr. Yasmer replied, “I do not know if it would be a problem either way, except I think there are areas we may not have touched because we have other programs throughout DHR that, at least, need to be enlivened and involved. I think it could work.”
Ms. Crawford reported DHR is aware of the concerns of DETR and its staff and their wish that the funds be added to their independent living fund. She explained the reason that DHR was incorporated into the program, and that DHR Director Myla Florence and she felt DHR could better meet the Governor’s wishes, would be through a combined effort. She stated:
It is true those funds are available. However, they are not being directed across the broad range of individuals, primarily because the majority of those are served through resources out of the Department of Human Resources, and we felt this would make a much better outreach area, would make all staff and all providers aware of services across those areas and better meet the Governor’s need to assure all families and all individuals with disabilities were addressed.
There being no further testimony to be heard on Senate Bill 477, the Chairman closed the hearing and opened the hearing on Senate Bill 494. He noted the measure would appropriate $5 million.
SENATE BILL 494: Creates Nevada protection account in state general fund. (BDR 31-1430)
Marybel Batjer, Chief of Staff, Office of the Governor, said she was accompanied by Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa, Commissioner Paul Workman, Commission on Nuclear Projects, and Chairman Brian McKay, Commission on Nuclear Projects.
Ms. Batjer reported that Governor Guinn feels very strongly that protecting Nevada from nuclear waste is probably the most important issue facing the state now and well into the future. She said the Governor proposes a Nevada Protection Fund of $5 million in S.B. 494.
According to Ms. Batjer, Nevada and the nation are approaching a critical juncture with respect to the federal High Level Radioactive Waste Program. She said during the next year the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will, under the current schedule, issue a final environmental impact statement for the Yucca Mountain project, and decide whether to formally recommend Yucca Mountain for development as a repository.
Ms. Batjer said following DOE’s action the President will have to decide whether to ask Congress to endorse the site recommendation and attempt to move ahead with the Yucca Mountain program. She opined these decision points in the federal government program represent both challenges and opportunities for Nevada. She said the upcoming statutorily prescribed actions represent the first time that the state will have the opportunity to formally challenge final decisions on Yucca Mountain’s suitability and legal, procedural, and technical processes that underlie those decisions. Just as importantly, she said, the upcoming decisions will force DOE to acknowledge the extensive and potentially severe risks and impacts posed by the unprecedented spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste transportation campaign required to operate a repository in Nevada.
Ms. Batjer reported Nevada has been preparing for the technical and legal battle for Yucca Mountain for over 15 years. To date, she said, the DOE has gone to great lengths to avoid making formal decisions that the state could contest before the courts, putting off each subsequent controversy to yet another study or another interim program milestone.
Ms. Batjer reiterated the upcoming federal decisions regarding the Yucca Mountain Program provide Nevada with legal challenges and opportunities that will have major effects on the ultimate fate of the project. She said for the first time Nevada will be able to formally challenge final federal agency actions, including the final Yucca Mountain Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the site recommendation decision itself, and various changes to the environmental, health, safety, and repository regulations required to enable DOE to recommend Yucca Mountain as a repository location.
Ms. Batjer declared that Nevada must be prepared with adequate resources and expertise to successfully challenge the actions in the appropriate legal and adjudicatory arenas. She said the principal objective of the Nevada Protection Fund project is to assure Nevada’s success in future litigation that will inevitably be required to halt the Yucca Mountain project. She said the task will entail the creation of a legal defense contingency fund that will be used to procure the highest quality legal support to supplement and complement the legal work being done by the Office of the Attorney General.
Ms. Batjer stated that at the present time, the Attorney General (AG) and the Agency for Nuclear Projects have a contract in place with a law firm that specializes in legal cases involving challenges under the National Environmental Policy Act and related matters. She asserted the relatively modest contract does not, however, provide for the level of legal resources required to mount effective challenges based on important constitutional issues that will be faced if the federal government attempts to go forward with the Yucca Mountain Project in spite of the serious site flaws and the strong opposition by the State of Nevada.
Ms. Batjer declared that, should Nevada be required to fully mount a challenge to the program on constitutional and related grounds, it is anticipated highly specialized legal expertise, support, and representation would be required. She said that element of the Nevada Protection Fund effort would provide funds to support the acquisition of such high quality and high profile expertise, should it become necessary.
In addition, Ms. Batjer said, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) laws, regulations, and procedures governing licensing of nuclear facilities are extremely complicated and fraught with legal and procedural mine fields. She said NRC licensing has become a highly specialized field unto itself, one that requires legal services with expertise and experience beyond what the State of Nevada is able to provide using in-house legal staff. In order to assure that Nevada’s interests are adequately protected in the event NRC initiates a licensing procedure for the Yucca Mountain project, the state must be represented by legal counsel intimately knowledgeable about the intricacies of licensing processes, and with a track record of successful interventions in such proceedings, she said. She noted this is something that could occur as early as FY 2003. Ms. Batjer further reported the DOE has already retained such a firm to initiate preparations for the licensing activities at a cost of approximately $17 million.
According to Ms. Batjer, the legal situation will be reviewed periodically by the Attorney General and the Governor, and if it appears that the funds allocated to legal contingencies will not be required during FY 2003, the Governor will maintain the funds in a reserve. During her testimony she referred to a written statement (Exhibit G).
Ms. Batjer said several state and local entities will inevitably play important roles in advancing Nevada’s case against the Yucca Mountain Project in the legal arena. The Nevada Attorney General, she stated, would provide the sanction and venue for employing outside legal experts. The Governor’s office, she said, would work cooperatively with the Attorney General’s office in all aspects of the legal contingency effort.
Ms. Batjer said the Agency for Nuclear Projects would assist in identifying legal needs, formulating legal strategies, identifying appropriate outside legal resources, providing project-related data and information, and managing contracts that are executed. Local governments, she said, would also be engaged and would provide input on legal needs and strategies, and might be asked to provide some form of matching financial support for the state’s legal defense effort. She stated legal defense fund activities would be undertaken within the framework of mutual aid and support on the part of state and local governments, with the state acting in close coordination with effective local jurisdictions in Nevada. She noted the project proposes to utilize $4 million of the overall $5 million Nevada Protection Fund as a fund for the above legal activities.
Ms. Batjer reported the second objective that the Governor wished to address with the proposal and S.B. 494 is a national information and awareness campaign. She said the objective is to raise public and institutional awareness about planned shipments of spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste in targeted cities and communities around the nation. She said once people are aware of the risks and impacts associated with such shipments, it could be expected that their concern and opposition would be transmitted to elected representatives and decision-makers at state and national levels, thereby assisting Nevada in its efforts to oppose any decision to move ahead with the Yucca Mountain program, or to enact legislation designed to facilitate a central interim spent fuel storage facility in Nevada.
Ms. Batjer declared the most potentially explosive aspect of the federal program is the reality that tens of thousands of shipments of deadly spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste will travel the nation’s highways and railroads through 43 states and thousands of communities, day after day, for upwards of 40 years. Once states and communities along potential shipping routes become aware of the unprecedented volumes of waste to be shipped, the duration of the required shipping campaign, and the potential adverse consequences of accidents, opposition to the entire effort could be expected, she opined.
Ms. Batjer said previous work by Nevada indicates there is an as-yet untapped groundswell of opposition to the potentially dangerous nuclear waste shipping campaign, which will affect cities and communities around the country. She asserted framing and carrying the message about transportation risks and impacts to targeted states, cities, and communities, and raising awareness about the dangers of spent fuel and high-level waste transportation is a critical element of the proposal.
Ms. Bajer indicated the national information and awareness campaign would be implemented through a coordinated and integrated set of activities, all aimed at raising awareness of the spent fuel and high-level waste risks, impacts in targeted states and communities, and in stimulating increasing public and official opposition to such shipments. She said a variety of people and organizations would play key roles in the national information and awareness campaign. The Office of the Governor would have overall administrative fiscal and management responsibilities for the effort. The Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects, she said, would act as an overall planning and coordinating entity of the program. Private sector individuals, companies, and organizations, she said, such as the effort being organized by the business community today, would implement complementary efforts aimed at raising public awareness of the dangers of Yucca Mountain-related transportation.
Ms. Batjer stated the Agency for Nuclear Projects, at the direction of the Governor and the commission, would serve as a principal technical assistance resource for the effort. Local and state officials, she said, would participate in media activities, coordinate and energize counterparts in other states, and assist in various other capacities. She reported Governor Guinn has already been working with Governor Levitt in Utah where over $1 million has been budgeted for the Utah public awareness campaign.
Ms. Batjer continued, saying public interest organizations would provide local focus and attention for messages presented through the advertising campaign. She stated Nevada local governments, cities, and counties would be solicited to contribute funds and in-kind support for national information initiatives. Ms. Batjer also said other national organizations, such as the Western Governor’s Association, the National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, and others, could assist in gaining access to key officials, and nationalizing the message on risks and impacts of the spent fuel and high-level waste transportation.
Ms. Batjer stated it is estimated that the initial budget for the National Informational Awareness campaign will be $1 million. No funds would be used for overhead or administrative costs, and all funds would be used for direct project costs. She said matching funds from private-sector efforts and local governments would be used, either directly or in a coordinated manner, to complement and expand the state’s efforts.
Ms. Batjer concluded by saying that Nevada faces a very tough fight against the Yucca Mountain Project. She asserted a concentrated effort in the legal and public awareness arenas is needed if the state is to level the playing field with the Department of Energy. She stated it is time for Nevada to go on the offensive in those areas, and the activities proposed will permit the state to do just that. She said the Governor strongly believes that the single greatest threat to the health and safety of the people of Nevada is the prospect of Nevada becoming the nation’s nuclear waste dumping ground.
Senator Raggio requested that those testifying attempt to avoid repetitiveness and to be concise in order to allow everyone an opportunity to speak.
Frankie Sue Del Papa, Attorney General, testified she was appearing before the committee to urge support for S.B. 494. In order to shorten her remarks, Ms. Del Papa offered a copy of her testimony, attached as Exhibit H. She asserted that Nevada and the nation are approaching a critical juncture with reference to the nuclear waste program. She said under the current schedule, for the next year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will issue its final radiation protection standards.
Senator Raggio asked when that is expected. Ms. Del Papa responded she understands that will be in December, and it will provide a “big trigger” for Nevada. She indicated another concern is the potential licensing situation, which she opined is very critical. She reported she has worked very closely with the Governor’s office, the agency, and the commission, and there is a team from the Office of the Attorney General now headed by Solicitor General Tony Clark.
Ms. Del Papa opined that the Nevada Office of the Attorney General is in good condition to play its role. She reported she has cooperated and fully supported the Governor, who has shown very strong leadership and keen interest in the problem. She urged support for the bill.
Senator Raggio asked whether the next step will be for the DOE to submit a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Ms. Del Papa responded that is part of it. She noted there are other problems, such as a glaring deficiency in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that has to do with the omission of transportation routes. She stated a bill was heard recently in the Senate Committee on Transportation that requests that the issue of the transportation routes be addressed. She reiterated that is a glaring deficiency. She said the bill was a resolution introduced by Senator Porter.
Ms. Del Papa declared that Nevada is putting up a united front, with everyone very concerned. She repeated her request for support of S.B. 494.
Senator Raggio commented both women testifying indicated that the Department of Energy has retained legal counsel at the rate of $16.5 million. He asked what purpose counsel is to serve. Ms. Batjer responded it would be for the licensing process, and in defense of DOE decisions that are forthcoming in the next 2 years.
Senator Raggio asked whether Nevada has a firm presently under contract.
Ms. Del Papa responded there are some counsels under contract, but she would like to pursue special licensing counsel in Washington, D.C. She asserted the area is a very specialized and complex area of the law. She reiterated the DOE has begun to gear up very seriously in that regard.
Senator Raggio asked what the defensible issues would probably be in the event it reaches the stage of licensure. Ms. Del Papa replied:
I think that, certainly, there are a lot of steps that will need to be taken before we get there. I think that, what I would do, is characterize this as a multi-track procedure. We have concerns, certainly, with reference to the environmental impact statement. That issuance is, of course, very important because the way the law is configured, no siting recommendation can occur until that happens. So obviously you are fighting on one front with reference to the environmental impact statement.
We have also indicated that that environmental impact statement will be flawed, because of the lack of a transportation plan that has been addressed therein. So there is a second issue.
There is the issue of the licensing. It is a multi-track procedure, but, obviously, everyone is going to gear up to it, because under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, if Nevada’s Notice of Disapproval is overridden by a simple majority in Congress, then DOE will file a licensing application and then we will have to go through the legal procedures vis-a-vis the processing of that application.
There are also several other issues that we are engaged in. It is not a single-track procedure, it is a multi-track procedure, but it is a very important one. We already know that the DOE has engaged, at an extraordinary fee, counsel to begin their preparation.
Senator Raggio asked whether Ms. Del Papa could elaborate on the public awareness program and how implementation is envisioned. Ms. Batjer replied the Governor has envisioned that the public awareness campaign, or a portion of the fund, approximately $1 million, be set aside to publicly inform the citizens of the communities in which nuclear waste is now accumulating, and from which it will be transported across the United States. She said he envisions that the program would be informational in terms of what type of transportation would carry the waste, from what locations it would be carried, and through what communities and on what highways and railways it would be carried.
Ms. Batjer related the Governor envisions that he would collect funds to engage in the effort from local communities, and one of the commissioners has a letter from one of the Clark County commissioners regarding a contribution they would like to make toward the effort. She said the information would let citizens in various communities across the United States know that nuclear waste will be traveling through their communities.
Senator Rawson stated that is the only part over which he has great concern. He acknowledged much thought has gone into the problem, and he voiced hope that focus groups or others will consider the consequences. He said he has great concern about “going on the road around the country and expressing anything that may hurt the tourist economy.” He noted there are others on the committee who have expressed similar concerns, and the committee may not want to make a big fight out of the objections because it may not help the process. He reiterated the committee has a “great nervousness” about anything that ultimately casts a bad light on Nevada. He suggested if the fight is lost, the state will never be able to repair the damage done. He asserted, “When you go to war, there is always a consequence, there is always burned bridges on both sides.” He declared, “We do not want to scorch any of the earth that we have to live with.”
Senator Rawson expressed caution with the hope that “this will pass.” He voiced hope the Governor will use great care in what is developed.
Ms. Batjer responded that the Governor has taken some of those comments that he has received from members of the committee and the Legislature under consideration. She reported he is concerned that some information should be imparted to citizens in those communities from which the waste will be transported.
Ms. Batjer acknowledged there have been concerns about focusing on the fact that nuclear waste will be transported across the state of Nevada and the states and communities in which a public information campaign may be carried out. However, she said, the focus is in those communities, as opposed to Nevada communities.
Senator Rawson commented there are over 100 nuclear power plants in the country that still operate, and each one produces waste, which is presently stored in their own communities. He said there is great potential for a campaign such as that proposed to backfire, because communities are dealing with the matter in the best way they can. He said to the extent that Nevada demonstrates how bad the material is, it has the potential to leave a bad taste everywhere. He declared he did not want to belabor the point, but it is very dangerous for Nevada.
Senator Neal asked how the campaign to transmit the information will advise communities to challenge the interstate commerce issues that are subject to being a part of all this. He noted it is not possible to stop trucks or trains. He asked whether the Governor is planning on hiring a militia to do that. He noted the language needs to be broad enough to do that while creating the fund.
Ms. Batjer responded the Governor has no plan to implement any such plan. She said the $1 million requested by the Governor to concentrate on a public awareness campaign would be established in such ways as using a focus group effort or public service announcement format. She reiterated the majority of the fund should be set aside for legal defense.
Senator Neal asked whether the data collected at Yucca Mountain will be presented to the President under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, and when that will occur. Ms. Del Papa responded her understanding of the timetable is that the next major trigger could occur in December 2001 in terms of the Yucca Mountain EIS. She said that is according to the schedule that originally was to be finalized by this June. However, she said, the date has been pushed back to December. She explained issuance of the EIS is significant because it triggers allowing the rest of the process to go on. She said no siting recommendation can occur until the EIS is issued.
Ms. Del Papa explained there is one significant issue that has been omitted. She said all the dates could be set back again because of the absence of a transportation issue in the EIS. She reiterated that is just one track of the multi-track procedure.
Senator Neal asked whether the President is supposed to make a decision next month. Ms. Del Papa replied she is not aware of any decision to be made by the President next month.
Senator Neal commented once the Yucca Mountain evidence is presented to him, the President is supposed to make a decision within 30 or 40 days.
Robert R. Loux, Executive Director, Agency for Nuclear Projects, said the current schedule calls for the Secretary of the DOE to make a recommendation to the President with the accumulation of Yucca Mountain data sometime in December or January. He said at that point in time the President has an unlimited amount of time to review the data and determine whether he will recommend the site. Mr. Loux said the President could make his recommendation as early as 60 to 90 days after the Secretary’s recommendation, depending upon the state’s notice of disapproval, and how long Congress takes to deal with the issue.
Senator Neal interjected his belief that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act requires the Secretary to make the recommendation at a specific time. Mr. Loux responded that time was actually January 1998, and the deadline was missed.
Senator Neal argued that was when the waste was to be accepted. He asserted now the data is supposed to be submitted to the President to determine whether the site is feasible. Mr. Loux replied that was supposed to have been done in 1987, and the agency is now 12 years behind the schedule. He said, “There is no specified time in the law since they have missed all the dates in the law.” He said no new dates have been established in the law to put the information and recommendation forward. He asserted, “It is clearly as the Department of Energy wants to do it, subject to Congressional oversight.”
Senator Neal repeated his understanding that would happen in April or May of this year. Mr. Loux responded:
They originally announced that they wanted to make a recommendation . . . in June of this year, but because of the Inspector General investigation and a number of other investigations going on about the Department of Energy, all those dates have been pushed back to the end of this calendar year, or early next calendar year.
Senator Neal asked what will allow Nevada to challenge it when the President receives the information. Mr. Loux replied that at the point in time when the President makes a recommendation to Congress, the state will have an opportunity to issue a Notice of Disapproval, commonly known as a veto, with an accompanying statement of reasons as to why the state is doing that. He said Congress will then have 90 days within which to pass a resolution, a simple majority in each house, to override the objection.
Senator Neal commented, “So then it becomes a political issue, not a legal one, right?” Ms. Del Papa replied, “No.” She said:
As has been stated for the third time this morning, this is a multi-track procedure. Obviously there is a political component. . . . There are several other arguments that need to be prepared for. Then, of course, you get into the licensing proceedings, as has been indicated. There are several other tracks that the State of Nevada has as an option, and an obligation, to aggressively pursue.
Brian McKay, Chairman, Commission on Nuclear Projects, said the commission endorses and supports everything said by the Attorney General and the Chief of Staff. He said the commission is required by law to advise and make recommendations to both the Governor and the Legislature prior to each session of the Legislature. He stated this year a report was submitted which contained advice and recommendation that a national public information campaign be undertaken and that the Attorney General’s office be given additional support as stated.
Mr. McKay said S.B. 494 implements those recommendations, and the commission strongly offers support. He noted the commission and staff are aware of the sensitivity of a public information campaign and what could come back, but he reiterated the belief of the commission that there is an obligation to counter some of the lack of information and disinformation provided by the DOE in the process.
M. Paul Workman, Commissioner, Commission on Nuclear Projects, offered his appreciation for the opportunity to address the committee as the newest member of the commission. He averred:
The protection account proposed by Governor Guinn in S.B. 494 is a critical component in the fight being waged to have the truth heard about the studies and future plans for Yucca Mountain. The scenario that now exists in the public relations campaign, deceptively disguised as unbiased informational tours and exhibits, reminds one of the plight faced by a candidate unable to raise campaign contributions going against a person with an unlimited war chest. Money talks.
In the case of Yucca Mountain, the federal entities and their subcontractors deliver what they call an objective look at the matter, with a missionary zeal, an unmistakable slant that should make onlookers smirk. However, the ignorance on the part of the public of several of the underlying aspects of the subject, together with a sweeping delivery of the government that we have grown to trust, have left people unsure of what the situation really is. This is what needs to change.
Mr. Workman said he took a tour of the Yucca site recently with several members of a Latin Chamber of Commerce. He stated:
Steve Frishman, the state’s technical policy coordinated, and Judy Trishell, Executive Director of Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force, accompanied us on the tour to offer another point of view on several points made by the tour guides. In light of the information I have had access to for the better part of a year, regarding all aspects of the Yucca studies, their involvement was welcomed and was very informative to me. To many others on the bus, they were made to appear as detractors. Though initially acting courteous to them, the tour guides ultimately treated their input as disruption. It was so evident, in fact, that other members of the tour commented to me that Judy and Steve were a nuisance on our tour.
The end result was that Steve and Judy’s information, based as I alone knew it to be, on scientific evidence, was treated as outside interference. One of the tour guides characterized the non-binding resolution passed by your colleagues as “a bill to approve Yucca Mountain.” From my perspective, such misinformation was more commonplace than exceptional on that tour.
I have spent 26 years in the banking business, and the federal government, and the state as well, have made very sure that we are extremely careful in disclosing what we do to people so that the public is protected. I was very disenchanted with no such care being taken for this disinformation as I noted it.
My university studies were in public relations. They made me aware of the power of perception. The conclusion I have come to is that the single most crucial need we have regarding Yucca Mountain is the honest disclosure of the truth from all parties associated with it. And therefore I would strongly recommend that the passage of this bill occur so that such a fight could be taken.
Senator Neal asked how many lawsuits the Office of the Attorney General has filed on the issue. Ms. Del Papa replied she did not have the exact number with her, but she said a large number have been filed, at least eight or nine.
Senator Neal asked how many were won. Ms. Del Papa replied, “At this point, the way to characterize it is that the courts have told us that issues are really not ripe, and probably will not be ripe until the actual site recommendation has been made.” She noted the “biggest fight of all it the one that is on the horizon.”
When Senator Neal suggested she has not won any, Ms. Del Papa reiterated the office will have to wait until the actual site recommendation is made in order for the final litigation to begin. She asserted, “Even with the final recommendation there will be a number of tracks that will be taken with reference to that final litigation.”
Senator Neal said he has information that the Attorney General’s office had eleven or twelve suits and only won one, having to do with benefits. Ms. Del Papa replied:
Right. As . . . . the former attorney general to my left has indicated to me, there are lawsuits that we have won. That is correct. There are lawsuits with reference to water issues. The bottom line, Senator, is this: that was then, and this is now. And where we are, as you have heard the representative of the Governor of the State say today, and I know that the Governor is extraordinarily serious in this regard, as every one of us as elected officials in this state should be, we are concerned that as to where we are right now, because this is a critical juncture in terms of the litigation to come. And the litigation will, in all likelihood, revolve not only around the inadequate EIS, but, as I said, if you go to the next level with reference to the licensing that could occur, there is very substantial litigation that is critical to the State of Nevada, and, in fact, critical to the country. So I think that with all things considered, this proposal is a very fair and reasonable and just proposal, and it is something that is very important . . .
Senator Neal asked, “Are you telling the committee that you are going to be able to stop nuclear waste from coming to this state?” Ms. Del Papa responded:
I think that those leaders of this state that have gone before me, and those that are currently engaged in this issue, have done a pretty good job. It is not here yet. You heard some of the deadlines. I think that we have an excellent opportunity, and it is a just fight that has to be fought, because there are huge technical problems with Yucca Mountain, and I think the proposed repository is seriously flawed as far as that particular location is concerned. I personally believe that when you look at a map of the United States and you see that 80 percent of the high level radioactive waste in this country is generated east of the Mississippi River, I think that the dry-cast storage plan should be left intact until science can catch up with this challenge that we face as a country. Just because we face this challenge as a country does not mean that Nevada should accept this with all the incumbent problems related thereto.
Senator Neal commented the answer must be no.
Senator Raggio asked the Attorney General to submit a list of the litigation and the status of the litigation.
Senator Coffin commented, “When you have a cause that you think is just, I think you need to continue to pursue in the courts, that is how society keeps from breaking down, and that is how it keeps from violence.” He noted in other areas of the country other causes have been fought in the courts as long as possible, yet no one gave up.
Mr. McKay responded yes to Senator Neal’s question as to whether Nevada can stop the importation of nuclear waste.
Janelle L. Kraft, Lobbyist, City of Las Vegas, reported the issue is of great concern to the mayor of Las Vegas and the council. She read his statement (Exhibit I):
On behalf of the City of Las Vegas, I am writing to express our opposition to the location of federal nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. My responsibility is to protect and provide for the safety of the city’s residents. Preventing the nuclear waste transfer would be a great step toward protecting the citizens of Las Vegas who live only 90 miles from the proposed site. I believe that the potential impact to the environment would do more harm than any benefits derived from the proposed repository. Therefore, I wholeheartedly support the Nevada Protection Account, and urge passage of Senate Bill 494. I further recommend that a portion of the money be set aside for legal defense use, and I thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Oscar B. Goodman
Senator Jacobsen commented there has been a committee on high level waste for nearly as long as he has been around the Senate, and he has been chairman for the past 2 years. He asked where the committee stands, and what responsibility and obligation the committee has, realizing that the separation of power should be apart from that of the Executive Branch. He commented there is no benefit in the Legislature and the Executive being at odds. He opined that either there is no committee, or the committee is one and the same with the Executive Branch. He noted that although most of the Legislature is “anti,” he has attended meetings in Las Vegas in which some of the people are “in favor.” He acknowledged even the committee is not solidified, and he asked, “Do we continue to exist, or do we fold up the committee?”
Ms. Del Papa commented it would not be the prerogative of the Executive branch to tell the Legislature that it should go out of business regarding the committee. She stated every attempt has been made by her office and by the agency and the Governor’s office to keep the Legislature informed, and it would be the intent to keep on doing so throughout the process. She said the next phase will probably involve litigation, perhaps on many fronts, and there are steps that should be taken prior to that time. She suggested the Governor’s plan is important, and other elected officials around the country have concern as to how Nevada handles the problem. She opined the state is entering into a phase “where the litigation component will be a primary component.”
Ms. Batjer stated the Governor would want to work cooperatively with the Legislature, and the Executive Branch would not want to interfere with the Legislature’s prerogative to have a committee that is well informed and could help in the effort.
Kaitlin Backlund, Executive Director, Citizen Alert, explained the group is a grassroots organization based in Nevada that has been working on issues surrounding nuclear waste for nearly 26 years. She said Citizen Alert works with over 50 community organizations around the country.
Ms. Backlund voiced concern about reactor communities. She said a woman from Atlanta, Georgia, declared that reactor communities should keep the waste on site, and her community group is not in support of the Yucca Mountain project. Ms. Backlund stated, “They believe that this is a shell game by the Department of Energy, a plan for shifting waste around the country but actually not finding a true solution, because they have looked at the science at Yucca Mountain and do not believe that this is the right path for the country.”
Ms. Backlund sated Citizen Alert supports the testimony, and also supports the allocation of funds for litigation and for an awareness campaign.
There being no further testimony, Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 494. He asked the committee to review non-exempt bills.
Opening the hearing on S.B. 391, Senator Raggio commented it was non-exempt in its present form.
SENATE BILL 391: Revises provisions governing millennium scholarships. (BDR 34-282)
Referring to the funding of S.B. 391, Senator O’Donnell noted, “It is $300,000 total in the third year. . . . It is only $75,000 in the first year, $150,000 in the second year, because the students enroll in the programs.”
Senator Raggio asked Senator O’Donnell to explained what an amendment would do for Senate Bill 391. Senator O’Donnell responded:
The amendment would place it under the General Fund, and it would require the students to come back and service the community for at least 1 year. The program would be sponsored and run by the WICHE (Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education) organization.
Senator Rawson inquired, “One possibility would be to fund it the second year, which would be this session at $75,000 fiscal note, and rather than amend and do pass, if we did an amend and brought it back to this committee, could it be exempted so that it could be looked at for a while?”
Senator Raggio responded, “The staff indicates that if we want to amend it for further consideration, that would be the proposal, that would make it exempt. Do you want to do that at this point?”
SENATOR O’DONNELL MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 391 TO APPROPRIATE $75,000 IN THE SECOND YEAR, TO PROVIDE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR NURSING AND MENTAL HEALTH POSITIONS, WHICH ARE QUALIFIED UNDER WICHE, AND REREFER TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 519: Provides for establishment of programs for re-entry into community of certain prisoners and parolees. (BDR 16-1477)
Senator Raggio reminded the committee members they had last heard testimony on the bill on April 12 in which Assemblywoman Sandra Tiffany, Director of Prisons Jackie Crawford, and Judge Peter Breen representing the court system appeared. He noted they had intended to obtain federal grants to accommodate the program, and he passed out copies of a proposed amendment (Exhibit J) for the committee’s perusal.
Senator Raggio noted there was a question on Section 22 regarding sealing of the records, but no response had been received. He remembered that the testimony indicated it would be required in order to qualify for federal grants.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS SENATE BILL 519 WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 136: Eliminates exclusion of certain employees from provisions requiring additional compensation for overtime. (BDR 53-306)
Senator Raggio related that Senator Townsend indicated there had been no support for the bill. The Chairman recollected nobody had appeared to testify on the measure.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE S.B. 136.
SENATOR O’DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
The committee pondered whether there were other bills that should be discussed, but it was determined those remaining for hearings were exempt. At 10:13 a.m. Senator Raggio recessed the committee hearing, subject to the call of the chairman. Otherwise, he noted, the members would meet in joint subcommittees on the following day, with the next full committee meeting scheduled for Wednesday.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Judy Jacobs,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
DATE: