MINUTES OF THE

SENATE Committee on Judiciary

 

Seventy-First Session

May 28, 2001

 

 

The Senate Committee on Judiciarywas called to order by Vice Chairman Jon C. Porter, at 9:00 a.m., on Monday, May 28, 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 Jon C. Porter, Vice Chairman

Senator Mike McGinness

Senator Maurice Washington

Senator Valerie Wiener

Senator Terry Care

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

Senator Mark A. James  (Excused)

Senator Dina Titus  (Excused)

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Bradley A. Wilkinson, Committee Counsel

Allison Combs, Committee Policy Analyst

Heather Dion, Committee Secretary

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Mark Nash, Intern, Senator Titus

Deborah K. Cahill, Lobbyist, Nevada State Education Association

Annie Rees, Lobbyist

James F. Nadeau, Lobbyist, Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association

 

Vice Chairman Porter said the committee would be hearing Senate Bill (S.B.) 572.

 

SENATE BILL 572:  Provides immunity from civil liability for school officials, teachers, pupils and parents who report certain threats of violence. (BDR 34-1532)

 

Senator Valerie Wiener, Clark County Senatorial District No. 3, introduced S.B. 572 to the committee.  Senator Wiener read her prepared testimony into the record (Exhibit C).  She stated:

 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the record, I am state Senator Valerie Wiener, representing Clark County District No. 3.  Today I am pleased to appear before you on behalf of my colleague, Senator Titus, to seek your support for Senate Bill 572.  This legislation serves as an important component in our efforts to prevent school violence.

 

Senator Titus was gracious in allowing me to add my name behind hers on this bill.  She did so because of my work as chairwoman of the Commission on School Safety and Juvenile Violence.  That commission was created by A.B. 686 of the Seventieth Session, sponsored by [Assembly] Speaker Dini last session, following the Columbine crisis.

 

This legislation provides an important policy statement to complement the work of the commission, which offered bills dealing with school safety plans, reporting requirements, and prevention and intervention measures.

 

Senator Wiener continued:

 

As a commission, we learned that being prepared for a school crisis is essential in providing our children with the confidence that they are safe on campus.  And, for crises or emergencies that do arise, we crafted measures to handle these situations to ensure swift and safe response.  However, we also spent a substantial part of our time considering “early intervention” and “prevention” measures.  Senate Bill 572 will help all of us address the “prevention” component of dealing with school violence. 

 

This bill will provide legal protections for certain people who, in good faith, report their knowledge of, or reasonable belief in, a threat of violence made by another person against a school official, teach or pupil. 

 

This protection is critical if we hope to be successful in preventing school violence.  As adults, one of our most important jobs is teaching our children how to trust us . . . to believe that what they say and do has value and that we will respect them as they develop.  This challenge in garnering their trust becomes even greater when times of crisis arise.  And, certainly, when children cannot trust the system, they often move into adulthood with this same lack of trust.  This legislation establishes a strong policy statement that those who come forward with information will not be ignored nor punished.  In our efforts to address violence, and, hopefully, prevent it, all of us need to work together in a timely manner with the appropriate protections.  Senate Bill 572 will help us accomplish this, and, it is for these reasons I join Senator Titus in urging your support for S.B. 572.  Thank You.

 

Mr. Chairman if I may offer some friendly amendments that make the bill even stronger (Exhibit C).  You will note in section 1, subsection 1, where we define those who would be protected with the immunity for reporting of good faith, currently on lines 1 to 3, we started with “school official, teacher, or pupil or parent or legal guardian of a pupil” . . . We would like to amend that with, “if a person.”  And on lines 1 to 6, where we have the “official, teacher, or pupil,” we would like to amend that to read “employee.”

 

Senator Porter asked Senator Wiener about situations involving a teacher’s aide or volunteer.  Senator Wiener replied there is good cause for the idea, but the goal was to narrow the bill to focus on those people who are required to be on campus.   

 

Senator Wiener introduced Mark Nash, Intern for Senator Titus, who worked to prepare the bill. 

 

Mark Nash, Intern for Senator Titus, read his prepared written testimony into the record (Exhibit D).  He stated:

 

A recent study conducted by the United States Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center revealed that in 37 incidents of school shootings studied, over 75 percent of the shooters had previously revealed an interest in mounting an attack at the school to another person.  In virtually all of these cases the person who received this information was not an adult, but rather another child. 

 

It is clear the best way to prevent these violent incidents is for children to promptly report threats that their friends, schoolmates, and siblings have made.  The aim of this legislation is to ensure that children feel safe and protected when reporting these threats. 

 

The idea for this legislation comes from an incident in Lancaster, California involving high school student, Kristina Tapia.  Shortly after the 1999 Columbine High School incident, Miss Tapia overheard a classmate say that he wanted to kill people.  Miss Tapia promptly reported what she had heard.  Even though the boy pleaded guilty to a charge of making terrorists threats, he and his parents sued Miss Tapia’s parents for slander.  The charge was later dismissed, but not before the Tapia family had incurred nearly $40,000 in legal expenses. 

 

This bill provides immunity from civil liability to students, parents, teachers, and school officials who report, in good faith, a threat of violence.  Similar legislation recently passed unanimously in the California State Assembly.  It is crucial that the legislature pass this measure during the seventy-first session before retaliatory lawsuits become commonplace and cause parents to instruct their children not to report anything to school officials, for fear of liability.

 

Senator Care commented Nevada does have a statutory definition of private school, elementary and secondary education institutions.  He said there is an attorney general’s opinion annotated under Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 394.103, which gives the definition.  The statute states:  A nursery school is a child-care facility, and would not be a private school.  Senator Care questioned if the intent of S.B. 572 was to include preschool and day care facilities under the definition of private school. 

 

Senator Wiener responded she did not know what the sponsor’s intent is, but she would not be adverse to have preschool and day care included.  However, she added, she was unsure if it would cause a burden on the bill but the intent to protect children would be the focus. 

 

Senator Porter asked what currently happens if an individual reports the possible discussion of an act of violence.

 

Senator Wiener replied, “The incident Mark [Mr. Nash] reported is an example.”

 

Senator Porter asked, “If individuals, as defined in the bill, over hear two student speaking what happens?” 

 

Senator Wiener stated the key to the legislation is that reports are made in good faith, which is what underscores S.B. 572.  She added, she believed, the important aspect is to encourage people to come forward.  Senator Wiener commented had more people reported incidences, “Maybe we would not have had as many headlines that hurt the country the way they did.”

 

Senator Porter commented, “I can recall days when my wife would call home for late books in the library and parents would threaten her with her life because she was calling.”  He added, “It is a freighting thing out there with acts of violence, and even threats of violence.”  Continuing, Senator Porter remarked he has great empathy for what is taking place in schools.

 

Senator Wiener said, “One of the concerns that we had is the accumulation of circumstances where people are fearful of people coming forward because of retaliation.”  She remembered the reporting on Columbine indicated that it was known that the two offenders were building their incendiary devices in the garage.  Senator Wiener stated, “We heard that reporting after the situation, and we would hope the reasonable cause with good-faith protections will prevent the reoccurrence.”

 

Senator McGinness asked Senator Wiener about the proposed amendment changes, “you changed “school official” to “school employee,” on line 3, you put in “person” but why did you leave “school official?”

 

Senator Wiener responded, “We strike “school official” and just put “person.”  She said the reason for the change is because school official would be included in the definition of person.  However, there was concern about changing the language in line 6 because of abuse of frivolous application. 

 

Deborah K. Cahill, Lobbyist, Nevada State Education Association, said she wanted to register her very strong support for the legislation with the proposed amendments.  There was concern about making the immunity extend to other employees including bus drivers, cafeteria workers, and janitors.  Ms. Cahill was aware after the Columbine incident the media had spent a lot of time talking to friends of the offenders.  She knew there were a number of students who were aware of the alarming behavior of the offenders.  Ms. Cahill added, “I think Columbine woke people up, and helped to remove this veil of secrecy that seemed to exist that we should not interfere with others lives.”  Schools are trying to create an environment where people will talk about violence. 

 

Senator Porter said, “In knowing the challenges for our educators in disciplining our children because of threats of lawsuits, and many parents do not back up the educators, is it happening more frequently?”

 

Ms. Cahill said she is not hearing increased threats based on typical disciplinary actions.  She referred to a bill from 1999, A.B. 521 of the Seventieth Session, which put the authority to remove disruptive pupils from the classroom into the hands of the teachers.  Ms. Cahill stated, “In the schools where A.B. 521[of the Seventieth Session] has been implemented we are hearing good reports and have had very good cooperation.”

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 521 OF THE SEVENTIETH SESSION:  Makes various changes relating to discipline of pupils.  (BDR 34-1328)

Annie Rees, Lobbyist, said she supported S.B. 572.  Ms. Rees noted she was one of the members of the Commission for School Safety and Juvenile Violence.  Ms. Rees said she had personal experience, concerning her daughter, with violent threats.  She said she believed her experience was a positive one in that the offender’s father was highly involved in the offender’s life. 

Continuing, Ms. Rees said she believed S.B. 572 was necessary to protect children and their families.  She added she believed the best way to control school violence is to encourage people to talk about acts of violence.  Ms. Rees suggested to the committee, “Let people know about this bill.”

James F. Nadeau, Lobbyist, Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association, stated he wanted to voice support for the legislation, “anything that will encourage people to come forward with the information.” 

Senator Porter stated, “There are rules in airports where you do not talk about violence, what is happening on the school campus . . . should we be moving in this direction?”

Mr. Nadeau replied there is zero tolerance being developed toward school violence, recognized locally and nationally.  However, Mr. Nadeau said, the reporting of the information is lacking.  He added, “We have had situations were parents have been reluctant to come forward with the information they had.”  Mr. Nadeau said schools will take action if the information comes to them, but there is reluctance to come forward.  He said if people were more comfortable coming forward with the information the children would benefit, but S.B. 572 is a step in the right direction. 

Senator Porter referred to the Columbine incident, “Unfortunately these incidents are moving to the third or fourth page of the newspaper.  It is almost like we are getting accustomed to tragedy on our campuses, which I think is wrong.”  He questioned if the classmates were aware of the extent of the activities.

Mr. Nadeau replied in many of the cases the threats, activities, and bragging had been going on for a period of time.  He gave an example:

 

The kid had actually developed a hit list and was talking about when and what he was going to do, and it went on for several months.  His circle of friends was aware of it, but they had not discussed it with their parents or anyone else.  Finally, when his threats were going to be carried out one of the kids did mention it to their parents.  It was about 2 weeks before the end of school.  Interesting twist, we had very little cooperation from the school.  I think that this stuff goes on and the kids are talking about, they are bragging about it.  The school was not willing to cooperate because they felt that law enforcement was blowing the situation out of proportion.  Initially they were cooperative, then they started seeing the . . . They did not feel that he would carry it out. 

 

Senator Porter commented, “In this committee we have talked about cooperation between different law enforcement agencies, what happens in a case of a possible threat of violence?”

 

Mr. Nadeau said action takes place, by law enforcement, when it looks like it is going to outside of campus.  Typically, the school police will handle school related issues, unless they need further assistance, he added.  Mr. Nadeau stated there have been situations where information came out and local law enforcement responded, and school police asked the local law enforcement to not get involved. 

 

Senator Porter questioned, “If the allegation comes to the local police department would you then turn it over to the school district for their police, or would you handle it?”

 

Mr. Nadeau replied, “We would handle the initial investigation, and then we would get the school police involved because they have the on-campus knowledge.” 

Senator Wiener added, “We did have a profound Nevada situation, that did not make the headlines because someone did come forward.” 

Senator Porter asked Senator Wiener if there is a secret witness on campuses.

Senator Wiener said there is no such program currently, but that it could be looked at. 

Continuing, Senator Porter remarked it was not the liability issue with children, but the fear factor in reporting incidences against their classmates. 

Mr. Nadeau commented that Washoe County has developed a response plan with the school district, and all the local agencies.  The plan involves the public, as well as the private schools, and the steps have been taken to take immediate action if something does occur. 

Senator Care noted, “School districts can have speech codes . . . Kids will joke, and sometimes very cruelly, but I read the bill to mean anyone who overhears a threat may go ahead and report that, but it does not chill anyone to speak on the subject.”

Senator Porter asked Ms. Cahill if she knew of any programs like secret witness for the students.

Ms. Cahill said she believed there was a program in Washoe County where students are given a number to report an incident. 

Senator McGinness said, “I know the young man who reported the incident in Yerington, the local businesses got together and established a college fund for him, it was a reward of sorts.” 

Senator Porter suggested, possibly, the school districts could establish a phone line for the students. 

Ms. Rees noted Douglas County had set up a number (783-SAFE), which is monitored by an employee of the Douglas County Sheriff’s Department.

With no further business on the agenda, Vice Chairman Porter adjourned the meeting at 9:55 a.m. 

                                                                                       RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

Heather Dion,

Committee Secretary

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

                       

Senator Jon C. Porter, Vice Chairman

 

 

DATE: