MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Transportation
Seventy-First Session
April 16, 2001
The Senate Committee on Transportationwas called to order by Chairman William R. O'Donnell, at 1:54 p.m., on Monday, April 16, 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 William R. O'Donnell, Chairman
Senator Mark Amodei, Vice Chairman
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen
Senator Maurice Washington
Senator Raymond C. Shaffer
Senator Terry Care
Senator Maggie Carlton
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Donald O. Williams, Committee Policy Analyst
Joan Moseid, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ronna Hubbard, Legislative Representative, Nevada State Fire Fighters’ Association
Raymond (Rusty) C. McAllister, Lobbyist, Professional Fire Fighters of Nevada
John Holmes, Concerned Citizen
Virginia (Ginny) Lewis, Deputy Director, Motor Vehicles, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety
Chairman O’Donnell:
We will open the work session on Senate Bill (S.B.) 257.
SENATE BILL 257: Revises provisions relating to special license plates indicating employment as current or former professional fire fighter. (BDR 43-505)
Ronna Hubbard, Legislative Representative, Nevada State Fire Fighters’ Association:
In the last hearing, we presented an amendment adding another section to the bill to provide for a volunteer license plate, with the excess monies collected to go into a special budget account in the Nevada state fire marshal’s office.
There have been some problems with the bill and we have had a couple of private work sessions on it to address some of the language offensive to volunteer firefighters. Throughout the state of Nevada, there are approximately 2500 volunteer fire fighters. Our suggestion, at this point, is to leave the bill as is, and change the words “professional firefighter” because all of the volunteers consider themselves professionals, and they do not get paid for fighting fires. We suggest the wording be changed to “full-time salaried firefighter.” This and another suggestion have been agreed upon by the concerned parties.
We would also change subsection 8 of section 1, of the original bill, by removing the final sentence under the definition of “professional firefighter,” which reads: “The term does not include a member of a volunteer fire department or any other person who serves as a volunteer or with a fire-fighting agency.” These are the only changes we suggest.
Chairman O’Donnell:
Does this leave in the aspect the firefighters have to go back to the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety to reestablish the authenticity of their professional status?
Ms. Hubbard:
Yes, sir, any measures in the bill before, or anyone who currently has a professional fire fighter license plate would have to go back and reregister the plate at the time of renewal.
Chairman O’Donnell:
Where would the money be distributed with the new revision in the bill?
Ms. Hubbard:
The monies from the existing license plate, according to the original bill, would go to the burn center, any burn center in the state of Nevada; presently, there is only one. The money for the volunteer fire fighter license plate would go to a training fund for the volunteers, which is a special budget account to be set up with the state fire marshal’s office to work with the Nevada State Fire Fighters’ Association or its replacement.
Raymond (Rusty) C. McAllister, Lobbyist, Professional Fire Fighters of Nevada:
We would agree to the language change removing the word “professional,” and replacing it with “full-time salaried.” But on page 2 at the bottom, if you are changing the definition of a professional fire fighter, and if we are changing this to “full-time salaried firefighter,” which would mean a person, then you would take out the sentence: ”The term does not include a member of a volunteer fire department or any other person who serves as a volunteer with a fire-fighting agency.” If the word “professional” is removed, there is no reason this should be removed. In the past, there have been several volunteer firefighters who described themselves as professional firefighters, by saying they are salaried, they are in the retirement system, they work full-time, and because they fight fires all the time, this would mean there are volunteers all the time.
So, if we removed the word “professional,” and inserted “full-time salaried,” there is no reason to remove the bottom section because, in fact, volunteer firefighters would not be salaried, full-time firefighters.
Chairman O’Donnell:
If this first term gets deleted, then what difference would it make if the rest stays in the bill?
Mr. McAllister:
No, it would actually have a meaning if it stays in the bill. Then, volunteer firefighters could not say they are “salaried” only because a volunteer firefighter is a member of the retirement system. This is part of the reason these changes came up in the first place.
Senator Amodei:
I know of people who are in the volunteer organization who are also paid members of Carson City Fire Department, and these changes would apply to them, as well.
Mr. McAllister:
Is there a way the language could be changed to say a person could be a member of both, a “full-time salaried firefighter” and also a volunteer firefighter, because there are some people in Clark County who work for the Clark County Fire Department who are also volunteers in Logandale, and the Blue Diamond area.
Senator Amodei:
I believe this would also take some of the stigma away from the non-volunteers. The statement I believe you are trying to make is you need to be a full-time firefighter to qualify for this plate and if you are not, you do not qualify for the plate.
I suggest we ask Donald O. Williams, Committee Policy Analyst, to write up these things we discussed in amendment form.
John Holmes, Concerned Citizen:
To simplify, since a section has been added on the volunteer plate under section 3, I believe there is a distinction in the statutes between the “volunteer” and the “full-time salaried positions.” If this had not been added, I believe there could be some confusion, but now there are two distinct sections, one applying to the volunteers and one applying to full-time salaried.
Mr. McAllister:
To address the situation Senator Amodei is talking about, a full-time salaried firefighter who is also a volunteer firefighter would be able to walk into the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety with proper identification and receive the professional fire fighter license plate or he or she could choose to have the volunteer fire fighter license plate with the proper identification. They could have either plate; this would not preclude them from receiving one or the other.
Ms. Hubbard:
I cannot see any reason why the word “professional” should be kept in the bill because it is very offensive. I am willing to work on it.
Senator Amodei:
The problem is, if we leave it the way it is written, it is inconsistent with the issues we are trying to resolve.
Chairman O’Donnell:
The chairman would accept a motion to amend S.B. 257 with the proposed amendment submitted by the Nevada State Fire Fighters’ Association, deleting the last sentence of subsection 8 of section 1: “The term does not include a member of a volunteer fire department or other person who serves as a volunteer with a fire-fighting agency;” and also, deleting the word “professional” and replacing it with the term: “full-time salaried.”
SENATOR AMODEI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 257.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman O’Donnell:
We will close the work session on S.B. 257 and open the work session on S.B. 481.
SENATE BILL 481: Provides for reorganization of department of motor vehicles and public safety into two departments. (BDR 43-1107)
Chairman O’Donnell:
I tried to get some information on Friday from Assemblyman Arberry (Morse Arberry Jr., Clark County Assembly District No. 7) in terms of where he is on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 611 which would take off the cap on the split. As you know, committee, this budget is crafted on the fact the budget for the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety will exceed the 22 percent cap. However, we have no bill in the Senate to allow bypassing the 22 percent cap prohibition, so I was visited by someone in the Governor’s office who gave me a copy of the bill currently in the Assembly. The Assembly bill would allow the cap to be lifted.
ASSEMBLY BILL 611: Removes limitation on amount of money in state highway fund that may be used to pay costs of administration. (BDR 35-1322)
Chairman O’Donnell:
I believe A.B. 611 proposes to delete the following: “Costs of administration for the collection of the proceeds for any license or registration fees and other charges with respect to the operation of any motor vehicles must be limited to a sum not to exceed 22 percent of the total proceeds, so collected.” With the language (of section 4 of the Nevada Revised Statutes [NRS] 408.235) deleted, is it your (Ms. Lewis) contention, with the split of the department, your department would cost more than the 22 percent cap, as it stands currently? But is it your intention, down the road, you are looking to maintain the 22 percent cap or go below it, providing the department can get efficiencies by doing this split?
Virginia (Ginny) Lewis, Deputy Director, Motor Vehicles, Department Of Motor Vehicles And Public Safety:
I believe the 22 percent cap, as established in the statute, is an obsolete limitation and with the demand for services placed upon this department, I could not commit to our going below the 22 percent. My understanding is this has been in place since the 1950s and, as you are aware, the state has grown to the point where, certainly, the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety has been severely impacted. So, I cannot get us under the 22 percent without severely impacting the services we provide.
Chairman O’Donnell:
Knowing the 22 percent cap is limiting the number of people who can be hired to service the people at the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety offices, will this lifting of the 22 percent cap increase the level of service or the quality of service?
Ms. Lewis:
I believe what the elimination of the cap would do is to allow us to submit budgets and to operate with the same level of scrutiny every other budget in this state receives. So, if we come forward with a budget reflecting our needs in order to service the customers we deal with, as budgets are currently, it would exceed the 22 percent, and we have exceeded the 22 percent.
Chairman O’Donnell:
With that in mind, the chairman would accept a motion to amend S.B. 481 with the following two amendments: repeal the 22 percent cap in subsection 4 of the NRS 408.235 incorporating proposed change in A.B. 611, and amend the language conflict with S.B. 59.
SENATE BILL 59: Changes designation of privilege taxes on motor vehicles to governmental services taxes. (BDR 32-39)
SENATOR AMODEI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 481.
SENATOR WASHINGTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman O’Donnell:
Committee, with regard to the resolutions, we do not have to act on them because they are not under the bill drop-dead date. For the record, please note there was no action on S.B. 195.
SENATE BILL 195: Revises provisions governing issuance of certain permits to occupy or encroach upon state highways or rights of way. (BDR 35-932)
Chairman O’Donnell:
There being no further business, the meeting is adjourned at 2:13 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Joan Moseid,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman
DATE: