MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Government Affairs
Seventy-First Session
May 4, 2001
The Senate Committee on Government Affairswas called to order by Chairman Ann O'Connell, at 1:06 p.m., on Friday, May 4, 2001, in Room 2149 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 Ann O'Connell, Chairman
Senator William J. Raggio, Vice Chairman
Senator William R. O’Donnell
Senator Jon C. Porter
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
Senator Terry Care
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Senator Dini Titus (Excused)
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Assembly Joseph (Joe) E. Dini, Jr., Lyon, Storey, Carson City (part) Counties, Assembly District No. 38
Senator Mark E. Amodei, Capital Senatorial District
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Kimberly Marsh Guinasso, Committee Counsel
Juliann K. Jenson, Committee Policy Analyst
Laura Hale, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Sean McGowan, City Attorney, City of North Las Vegas
Jeanne Greene, Director, Department of Personnel
Bob Gagnier, Lobbyist, State of Nevada Employees Association
James J. Spinello, Lobbyist, Clark County
Jim Foreman, Manager Public Response Office, Administrative Services, Clark County
Thomas J. Grady, Lobbyist, Nevada League of Cities and Municipalities
David Stix, Jr., Mayor-elect, City of Fernley
William B. Clegg, Director, North Lyon County Fire Protection District
Ted J. Wait, Lobbyist, Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center
Scott M. Craigie, Lobbyist, Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center
Chairman O’Connell opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 93.
ASSEMBLY BILL 93: Revises provisions of charter of City of North Las Vegas concerning city attorney. (BDR S-431)
Sean McGowan, City Attorney, City of North Las Vegas, testified support for the bill to allow the city council to outsource or privatize the city attorney function in whole, or in part. He asserted the request for the bill is not due to personal or political agendas, but the council wants to have this tool available. He said he was aware of this when he took the position and has a severance package available. Also, he said if he went back into private law practice, he would probably bid on city contracts. He noted this same model has been used in other cities in Nevada, as well as in cities in California. Currently, he said, there is no plan for implementation, but the city wants to have it on the books as an option. In response to Chairman O’Connell, he said his current position with the city is full-time.
Mr. McGowan responded to a question from Senator O’Donnell, saying he thought the city might be able to obtain legal services more cheaply through privatizing the city attorney function, but he asserted the current eight in-house attorneys provide in-depth service that could not be afforded with private attorneys.
Chairman O’Connell pointed out a bill in the Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor was similar, but dealt with the State Contractors’ Board. She reported the board has done this on a needs basis and always get about 50 applications, finding that they could get things done more cheaply this way. She said the Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor supported that bill.
Mr. McGowan clarified for Senator O’Donnell that privatizing deputies who prosecute in municipal court would be difficult and the city may retain an employee for that purpose. He explained his position is appointed by the city council and is not an elected position. Further, he said, the city attorney deals with issues like zoning and is separate from the district attorney.
Chairman O’Connell closed the hearing on A.B. 93 and opened the hearing on A.B. 95.
ASSEMBLY BILL 95: Revises provision regarding filing of annual report on performance of permanent employee. (BDR 23-343)
Jeanne Greene, Director, Department of Personnel, proposed an amendment to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 284.340 to eliminate the provision for a 30-day grace period following the date an employee performance evaluation is due. She explained the current language creates confusion and elimination would allow employees to get an evaluation prior to their anniversary date. Employees who have not reached the top step in their grade expect to receive a merit increase, she said, and those who have eight or more years of state service expect to receive a longevity award. However, she said, when supervisors provide a substandard rating, employees’ merit increases and/or longevity awards are withheld. She said it is unfortunate when this occurs during the 30-day grace period, and it is easy to understand employees’ confusion.
Additionally, Ms. Greene explained merit awards are implemented automatically within the payroll system on employees’ anniversary dates, unless a substandard performance report is submitted prior to the processing of paychecks. She pointed out if an employee is subsequently given a substandard evaluation during the 30-day grace period, money paid to the employee must be recovered. Bob Gagnier, Lobbyist, State of Nevada Employees Association, testified support for the bill.
In response to a question from Senator Neal, Ms. Greene explained that currently, an employee is entitled to an evaluation on an annual basis, but the supervisor is allowed 13 months to provide that evaluation, which could fall after the employee’s anniversary date, creating a potential problem with merit increases.
Chairman O’Connell closed the hearing on A.B. 95 and opened the hearing on A.B. 537.
ASSEMBLY BILL 537: Authorizes construction and maintenance of benches and shelters for passengers of public mass transportation on exclusive basis by governing body or by franchise within unincorporated towns. (BDR 21-829)
James J. Spinello, Lobbyist, Clark County, testified support for the bill, explaining that Assemblyman Bache had sponsored the bill, but was unable to attend the hearing. Mr. Spinello stated the bill would give townships and counties the same authority that cities already have with regard to creating a franchise and limiting competition. The important issue for the county, he said, is to make “absolutely certain” that bus stop shelters are covered. Senator Care expressed surprise that the county has to come to the Legislature for approval of this activity.
Mr. Spinello said the counties and cities provide bus stop shelters in all of Southern Nevada through contract and franchise agreements with private providers who receive advertising rights in exchange. He explained the bill provides for the county to limit who is able to put a facility in a public right-of-way, and added the county works closely with the regional transportation commission (RTC), as does every other jurisdiction. Mr. Spinello said that through the Citizen Area Transit (CAT) system and RTC, ridership surveys are used to determine where stops and shelters are located, then a list is provided to the county about every 6 months and is prioritized from highest to lowest ridership. He explained there might be conditions on a right-of-way; for example, if there are no sidewalks, a shelter cannot be provided due to liability issues. In conclusion, Mr. Spinello said the right-of-ways are owned by each individual jurisdiction and there are associated property rights, but the RTC and the CAT system determine bus routes, stops, and frequency with a list provided to the jurisdictions regarding where bus stop facilities are most appropriate.
Chairman O’Connell closed the hearing on A.B. 537 and opened the hearing on A.B. 571.
ASSEMBLY BILL 571: Authorizes board of county commissioners to provide by ordinance for covering or removal of certain graffiti on certain types of property. (BDR 20-389)
Mr. Spinello explained A.B. 571 would give unincorporated areas the same kind of authority the city has for graffiti abatement. Amendments from the Assembly impose requirements on the unincorporated areas that do not currently exist for the cities, he said, and although the county is not asking for that to be changed, the county is asking for the same authority that the city currently has.
Jim Foreman, Manager, Public Response Office, Administrative Services, Clark County, testified that the City of Las Vegas added graffiti to their nuisance abatement section of regulations so that regardless of whether property is residential or commercial, city representatives can ask the landowner to remove graffiti. Currently in NRS, counties are required to take care of graffiti on government buildings in their jurisdiction, he said, but do not have authority to require private property owners to do so. He claimed that because the city is “home-ruled,” they can require owners of private property to remove graffiti, or require them to pay for the city to remove it.
In response to a question from Senator Neal, Mr. Foreman explained that destruction of private property is the language cited by police when they apprehend “graffiti vandals.” Senator Neal asked how something is determined to be graffiti and if it would be in the eye of the beholder. Mr. Foreman responded in the 20 years that he has worked in this area, there has been no argument with a landowner claiming something is artwork rather than graffiti, and 99.9 percent of the time the landowner has not authorized the marking of property. Mr. Foreman asserted it may come up some day, and if it did, he would be reasonable and try to work things out. In response to Senator Neal’s example of someone depicting a flag, Mr. Foreman said that would not be considered graffiti at this time. He cited a case where someone had created a tribute to deceased racecar driver, Dale Earnhardt, where the authorities have not required removal, but have asked neighbors to work it out among themselves.
Chairman O’Connell stated Kimberly Marsh Guinasso, Committee Counsel, verified that a bill from the last session from the city of North Las Vegas created a tax to fund the purchase of graffiti eradication equipment. According to Ms. Guinasso, currently, the burden is on the city to go after the person who did the graffiti and the city is not authorized to charge private property owners.
Mr. Foreman said the City of Las Vegas has a nuisance code, 904, which is very broad and includes graffiti. He said it is used infrequently, but when it is used, it is usually with commercial property that has been neglected and has graffiti that can be seen from the thoroughfare. Typically, he said, the city does not actually go onto the property and remove the graffiti, but they use the code as a catalyst to get property owners to respond.
Mr. Foreman confirmed for Chairman O’Connell that there is currently a neighborhood pride zone program to encourage neighborhood stewards, with county-provided supplies, to maintain neighborhoods. But if one or two property owners in a neighborhood choose not to participate, he said, there is nothing the county can do because it is private property. Senator Care related his own experience regarding difficulties the county encounters with graffiti abatement.
Chairman O’Connell closed the hearing on A.B. 571 and opened the hearing on A.B. 663.
ASSEMBLY BILL 663: Revises provisions governing cities. (BDR 21-1507)
Thomas J. Grady, Lobbyist, Nevada League of Cities and Municipalities, provided a copy of a letter of support for the bill (Exhibit C). Assemblyman Joseph (Joe) E. Dini, Jr., Lyon, Storey, Carson City (part) Counties Assembly District No. 38, explained the bill came about due to a recent election that resulted in the incorporation of Fernley as of July 1, 2001. David Stix, Jr., Mayor-elect, City of Fernley, explained the bill would provide for the mayor and the city council to set their own wages for the first and only time. He said the budget is not yet finalized, but $700 to $800 is anticipated for the mayor and $600 to $700 is anticipated for the city council members, which amounts are in line with other cities, based on Fernley’s population.
William B. Clegg, Director, North Lyon County Fire Protection District, testified the fire district has no authority under NRS 266.043 to collect ad valorem taxes in the boundary of the new city, which would take the assessed value down to $12 million from $245 million. He pointed out this amount would be insufficient to operate the fire district, whereas the bill would allow the fire district to continue collecting taxes within the city. Assemblyman Dini expressed there was some urgency to accomplish the provisions of the bill so that ordinances can be adopted and budgets finalized. Mr. Stix stated the final budget hearing is scheduled for June 15, 2001.
SENATOR RAGGIO MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 663.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR TITUS WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman O’Connell closed the hearing on A.B. 663 and opened the hearing on Assembly Concurrent Resolution (A.C.R.) 6.
ASSEMBLY CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 6: Expresses support for projects for economic development at Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center. (BDR R-763)
Ted J. Wait, Lobbyist, Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center, provided brochures (Exhibit D. Original is on file in the Research Library.), and testified that Scott Craigie’s consulting firm represents the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center supported by the bill. He said the center would create economic opportunity and an employment base in Lyon and Storey counties.
Senator Mark E. Amodei, Capital Senatorial District, stated one of the objectives of the bill is to support development that has the potential for major regional impact without seeking government material resources. He asserted the project would drive the infrastructure, which is the way things should be done, rather than having to create infrastructure to support a project. He noted this project is already providing benefits to the entire Western Nevada area through sales tax revenues in the seven-figure range. He added Washoe County is currently benefiting as the supply and service center for construction of the project, and there is the potential for right-of-way donations through the development of a road with preliminary grading work being done by the developer. This would be a primary crossroad for central Lyon County on the Interstate 80 corridor, which could develop into a bedroom community, he said.
Continuing, Senator Amodei said he is familiar with land-use planning and is excited to see “someone come in and do things right in terms of not asking government to step up.” He suggested it would be something legislators could point to in the future, as the way things ought to be done to spur economic development in both rural and urban areas.
Assemblyman Dini said he is excited about the project and the developer is spending about $1 million per month, which is a boon for Storey County and other counties in the surrounding area. He asserted Storey County has had economic problems with a low tax base and will now be on the map as a “major player.” He remarked the companies are outstanding and will give the region a “heads up” on attracting industry from Silicon Valley. He also noted the location is good with access to railroad, Interstate 80, and the Reno airport, and will eventually open up a road to Lyon County with possible housing development in the central area of Lyon County, as well as Sparks. Assemblyman Dini emphasized this was the “best thing to happen to Western Nevada in a long time.”
Senator Raggio said he thought this was a very fine project with great potential to attract significant and worthwhile businesses, and said he knows the developers personally. He mentioned there was some bad publicity early on in relation to a proposal to establish a brothel and asked for some assurance this would not happen, because, he said, it would detract from the potential quality businesses being considered for the park. Assemblyman Dini said he shared Senator Raggio’s concerns and reported he had expressed those concerns to the county commissioners as well as to the developers.
Scott M. Craigie, Lobbyist, Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center, provided assurance there would be no such industry “in this particular park.” He reported through conversations with the county commissioners, assurances were given that should brothels be located in the county, they would not be in the park area and would not be using the same highway exits. In conclusion, he requested an amendment to change the highway to State Route 805 since it would run between Interstate 80 and Highway 50.
SENATOR RAGGIO MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.C.R. 6.
SENATOR CARE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR TITUS WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman O’Connell adjourned the meeting at 1:47 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Laura Hale,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Ann O'Connell, Chairman
DATE: