MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY Committee on Transportation
Seventy-Second Session
March 11, 2003
The Committee on Transportationwas called to order at 1:37 p.m., on Tuesday, March 11, 2003. Chairwoman Vonne Chowning presided in Room 3143 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
Note: These minutes are compiled in the modified verbatim style. Bracketed material indicates language used to clarify and further describe testimony. Actions of the Committee are presented in the traditional legislative style.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mrs. Vonne Chowning, Chairwoman
Ms. Genie Ohrenschall, Vice Chairwoman
Mr. Kelvin Atkinson
Mr. Jerry D. Claborn
Mr. Tom Collins
Mr. Pete Goicoechea
Mr. Don Gustavson
Mr. Ron Knecht
Mr. Mark Manendo
Mr. John Oceguera
Mr. Rod Sherer
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Assemblyman John C. Carpenter (excused)
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Marji Paslov Thomas, Committee Policy Analyst
William E. Fowler, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Carol Mills, Program Analyst, Selective Service System, Region III, Denver Colorado
Clay Thomas, Field Administrator, Department of Motor Vehicles
Marcia de Braga, former Assemblywoman, District No. 35
Heather Dye, Executive Secretary, Nevada Future Farmers of America (FFA) Foundation
Carl Sarman, Vice President, Nevada FFA Association
Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau
Martha Barnes, Administrator, Central Services and Records, Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles
Secretary, please call the roll. [Roll call.] Thank you, Mr. Secretary. The only person who is not here is Assemblyman Carpenter. I believe he is in another committee and will be arriving afterwards. The first item we have on our agenda today, Committee members, is Assembly Bill 170. The sponsor of that bill is one of our Committee members, Assemblyman Manendo. Mr. Manendo, if you would like to go to the table, with the others, and present your bill to us. Thank you.
I’m sorry, with your indulgence; before we begin, we need to say, “Welcome back” to our Vice Chairwoman, Ms. Ohrenschall. We are very, very glad she has survived her health incident. We did miss her presence, and we’re glad to have her back.
Assemblyman Manendo, please continue.
Assembly Bill 170: Provides that certain applicants for drivers’ licenses, instruction permits and identification cards may authorize Department of Motor Vehicles to forward to Selective Service System personal information necessary for registration with Selective Service System. (BDR 43-774)
Assemblyman Mark Manendo:
For the record, Mark Manendo, Assemblyman, District No. 18. Madame Chairwoman, I appreciate your scheduling Assembly Bill 170 so quickly. Today, I’m pleased to have with me Carol Mills, who is the Program Analyst for the Selective Service System, Region III, from Denver, Colorado. She has testimony for us. We also have a packet (Exhibit C), with one correction.
Assembly Bill 170 deals with the Selective Service. Right now, registration rate for 18-year olds in Nevada is a little over 62 percent, which ranks us about 48th in the nation. We need to do better. We should do better, and it is federal law. A.B. 170 makes the registration process easier for all men in our state. Currently, 27 states and the District of Columbia have enacted this type of legislation.
In your packet (Exhibit C), there is a suggested amendment. I would like to turn your attention to language on page 6, line 2, 21, and 43. [When you] register young men [they] stay eligible for the federal student loans, grants, job training benefits, most federal jobs, and U.S. citizenship, for male immigrants seeking citizenship. This would be just a positive notation on the application form that we would like to include in this [proposed legislation].
Madam Chair, if it’s O.K. with you, I will have Ms. Mills testify, and then we’ll answer questions.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Welcome to our state of Nevada, to our Legislature, Ms. Mills. Please continue.
Carol Mills, Selective Service System:
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman Chowning, and members of the Committee, for allowing me to come before you. I am Carol Mills, Program Analyst for the Selective Service System, Region III, located in Denver, Colorado. I am also a member of the U.S. Air Force Reserves. Today I represent and bring greetings from Mr. Louis C. Brodsky, acting Director of the Selective Service System.
I’m here to provide testimony and support of Assembly Bill 170. Here you have an opportunity to give urgently needed support to an important federal program that is a key element of the national security strategy. National defense is a partnership between the federal government and all states and is every citizen’s responsibility. America must remain prepared to employ all necessary resources in our fight against terrorism. The events on and since September 11,2001, have made us realize this even more.
Let me reassure you that we presently do not have a draft. The last draft ended more than 29 years ago. Since its inception over 60 years ago, the Selective Service System has been in the national defense readiness business. We are also in the fairness and equity business. So, A.B. 170 is not about reinstating the draft, it is about being ready for the uncertainty of war. It is also about guaranteeing future peace through strength and readiness. It’s about helping Nevada’s youth accept responsibility in doing what’s right.
Here are some facts to consider. Although we presently do not have a draft, our nation must be capable of conducting one if needed. Federal law requires that men must register with Selective Service at age 18. They can register late, but once they reach age 26, they can no longer register. Registration preserves the vital link between our all-volunteer force and society. It shows the world that we aim to remain strong, and that we expect our youth to be responsible as the generations before them have been. It also demonstrates to men and women in our all-volunteer military that the general population stands behind them, ready to serve if a crisis makes the draft necessary.
Some of you may have draft-age sons, 18 through 25 years old. I hope you share my sentiment that, if a draft is necessary, we want the young men in our lives to be subject to the most fair and equitable draft in our nation’s history. The degree to which a draft can be fair and equitable during wartime is directly related to today’s registration compliance in peacetime. Every man not registered increases a law-abiding registrant’s chances, perhaps your sons’ chances, of being drafted.
Furthermore, under federal law, if a man fails to perform his civic and legal registration duty, he makes himself ineligible for federally-backed student loans and grants, jobs with the U.S. Government, vocational job training; and if he is an immigrant seeking citizenship, he will be denied citizenship by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) if he hasn’t registered with Selective Service. Registration is vitally important to both the security of our nation and to the futures of our young men.
Presently the registration rate for 18 year-olds in Nevada is 62.38 percent, as of November 30, 2002. This means that young men are not registering when they turn 18, as the law requires. This will hinder the fairness of any future Nevada draft. Presently, you have a Selective Service System registrar in 100 percent of the high schools in the state. However, we are not reaching all those young men who drop out of school. Those who need the benefits the most will be forever denied them.
One thing is certain: Enactment of A.B. 170 will, hopefully, cure this problem. As we have discovered in many other states, driver’s license laws in support of Selective Service System registration makes the process easier for all men in the state. It will also skyrocket the compliance statistics to nearly 100 percent. We are grateful to the 27 states, the District of Columbia, and the 2 U.S. Territories who have enacted this type of legislation. We would be delighted if Nevada adds itself to the growing list of states.
By conditioning applications for a driver’s license or state I.D. card to registration compliance, you send a powerful reminder to the young men in Nevada and keep them eligible for programs and benefits funded by federal tax dollars. A.B. 170 will require registration compliance as a condition for obtaining a driver’s license under an optional billing. By passing this bill, Nevada Legislators will preserve a strong and ready America.
On behalf of the men and women of the Selective Service System here in Nevada and throughout America and our acting Director Mr. Louis C. Brodsky, I thank Assemblyman Manendo for sponsoring the bill. I also thank each of you for giving me your consideration.
I wanted to mention some of the things in your packet. You will find on the left-hand side a map, which shows states that have enacted some sort of driver’s license legislation into law. The legend should match the map, and the legend should have color blocks with “up arrows” which help you read the map better.
Assemblyman Manendo mentioned some of the key points. On the page behind that page are some “Fast Facts” which are found on our Web site: www.sss.gov. Behind that, still on the left side, are some support letters from states that have passed driver’s license legislation, from their Departments of Motor Vehicles (DMV), showing the amount of time it took for programming and some of the cost factors. They felt it wasn’t much hindrance to their business.
On the right side of the packet, we have little tri-fold cards in different languages, which are available through our agency. Behind that, are the proposed amendments. Behind those are shorter versions of typical questions. Behind that is a copy of my testimony, and the last item is a PowerPoint presentation, which I won’t go over unless you have specific questions. Do you have any questions?
Chairwoman Chowning:
Before we take questions, would you please walk us through the amendment? Because there are two amendments.
Carol Mills:
Correct. What came to our attention yesterday in meeting with the DMV is that the note that is repeated throughout the lines, one references more benefits the young men would be missing out on once they hit age 26, and the other one references the penalties associated with not registering. We found out that the application itself will not lend itself to providing all of that, so we will have to pick one or the other.
We opt for the positive rather than the negative. The more ideal would be the one that has the note that says “by registering, the men stay eligible for federal student loans, grants, job training benefits, most federal jobs and U.S. citizenship for male immigrants seeking citizenship.”
Chairwoman Chowning:
The first amendment, page 6, lines 17 and 18, would you like to describe to us the difference that that makes now from the original bill?
Carol Mills:
The original bill is written as an “opt-in” registration. What we are proposing is to make it an “opt-out” registration, where the young men would only check the box if they did not want to be registered.
Chairwoman Chowning:
You said that very clearly. Now, I will be happy to take questions, first from Assemblyman Claborn.
Assemblyman Claborn:
Madam Chair. Ms. Mills. Would you have to produce a birth certificate when you sign up? Or just state that you are 18 years old?
Carol Mills:
It would be whatever the DMV is currently doing. We wouldn’t ask them to do anything else. Once they sign it, they are giving their word that is their age. We’re not sure if DMV is requiring that, but we would not require anything additional.
Assemblyman Claborn:
I would think they have to produce a birth certificate to get a driver’s license.
Carol Mills:
That would be a question for the DMV, sir. I’m not sure.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Assemblyman Claborn, we’ll have someone from the DMV come forward in just a moment to answer those questions. Any other questions of Ms. Mills? Assemblyman Goicoechea.
Assemblyman Goicoechea:
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Assemblyman Manendo, do you have the fiscal note of what it actually will cost the state of Nevada?
Assemblyman Manendo:
I’ve requested the fiscal note to Chairwoman Chowning, I believe. Is it in the green [fiscal note] book?
Chairwoman Chowning:
Members of the Committee, the fiscal note is here and it says $136,862. Ms. Ohrenschall?
Assemblywoman Ohrenschall:
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I think the point that I was looking at has been covered.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Are there other questions of Assemblyman Manendo, or of Ms. Mills? Mr. Sherer.
Assemblyman Sherer:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I had a question on training. Is there a process for that at the DMV? Would it work with the program we presently have without causing longer lines?
Carol Mills:
That is our intent.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Let’s proceed with Mr. Thomas from DMV. Mr. Sherer, did you have any other questions of these folks?
Assemblyman Sherer:
Is it a similar program that already works? Just a note with a box checked or not? Is that what you’re looking at?
Carol Mills:
Yes, sir. That is our intent.
Assemblyman Goicoechea:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just one more. Is the existing penalty for failing to sign up a $250,000 fine and 5 years in prison?
Carol Mills:
Assemblyman, that is correct. There hasn’t been anyone penalized to my knowledge. The information is turned over to the Department of Justice, and it becomes their responsibility. The fine and imprisonment remain the same.
Assemblyman Goicoechea:
That seems reason enough to sign up. I don’t know why we would have to have the DMV doing anything for them. Thank you.
Chairwoman Chowning:
That’s the largest fine that I’ve ever heard in all of my years as a legislator. Mr. Thomas, will you please continue and answer some of the questions that we have put forth.
Clay Thomas, DMV:
For the record, my name is Clay Thomas. I am the Field Administrator for the Department of Motor Vehicles. I am here to discuss A.B. 170. It is the DMV’s position that the existing language that is in the bill draft today, we do not oppose. There is a fiscal note attached which will be amended downward to some degree. I can go into that if you wish or speak to the other questions.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Mr. Thomas, you’re saying that if the bill were passed as currently written, the fiscal note would not be as high as what has been presented. Then, what if the bill is amended, in either one of these versions?
Clay Thomas:
Madam Chair, to answer your question, first of all we will be amending the fiscal note downward predicated upon [the fact that] we see no need to adopt regulations. So therefore we would be removing that and removing the travel associated with that.
We did have a meeting with representatives from the Selective Service yesterday. At that point, they advised us they would be willing to take up the public relations campaign. I don’t know if that has been addressed yet. If that is the case, then that will substantially reduce the cost to about $82,000, which would cover both printing and contract programming hours.
Chairwoman Chowning:
That’s with the bill as currently written and if the bill were to be amended by one of these two amendments?
Clay Thomas:
That’s correct, Madam Chair. The amendment in itself would not change the documents, but we would still have printing and programming costs to electronically transfer the data to the Selective Service System.
Again, speaking about the Selective Service campaign, I think we need some clarification. If we are responsible, we would need to retain the $52,500 for education and public relations campaign. If Selective Service elects to take that over, then it would reduce the cost.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Could you address the concern about the two-line or three-line additions on page 6 and the other pages? In other words, this notice would be added to the application, as either a two-line that says, “Your failure to register as required is a federal crime punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine”; or as a three-line addition that says, ”By registering, you remain eligible for federal loans, grants, job training benefits, most federal jobs, and U.S. citizenship.”
Clay Thomas:
Madam Chair. Under the current bill draft, it is an opt-in proposal, and we do support that. Given that, probably the positive reinforcement, which is page 6, line 43, is less aggressive and less authoritarian. We would support that language.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Do you also support the opt-out language that they have [included] as part of this amendment?
Clay Thomas:
Madam Chair. Prior to this meeting, we did have a discussion. There is a concern from the DMV with the opt-out language. The reason for that is on the document, if you identify or use language like “you must comply with the law,” then the individual is being asked to check a box stating that he will not comply. This gives the DMV a concern that if it ever comes time that the documents need to be subpoenaed for other criminal activity or prosecution, then we would have to present those documents. The opt-in would take away [that concern], and allows the individual to not say that he will not comply with the law. He is just asking the DMV to assist in going forward with that.
Chairwoman Chowning:
And the law that you’re citing is a federal law?
Clay Thomas:
Yes.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Thank you. Mr. Claborn?
Assemblyman Claborn:
Thank you. For instance if a young man comes in to get a driver’s license and he refuses to sign that individual form, would you refuse him a driver’s license?
Clay Thomas:
No. If it is an opt-in situation, we would not because it is not mandated.
Assemblyman Claborn:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Mr. Sherer?
Assemblyman Sherer:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a question. If a driver’s license is good for four years, and you get your license at 16, and you need to register when you’re 18, but it doesn’t expire until you’re 20, whose job is it to track that? Would you send a notice that they need to register when they turn 18?
Carol Mills:
Chairwoman Chowning. The 16-year-old registrants would go to our data management center, but the information would remain in a repository. They would not be actually registered until they are age 18, but the data would be transmitted. When they turn 18, they would be registered with the Selective Service.
Assemblyman Sherer:
What you’re saying is that you could sign up for Selective Service when you are 16 and would be automatically [registered] when you turn 18? Is that what you’re saying?
Carol Mills:
That’s correct.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Assemblyman Goicoechea?
Assemblyman Goicoechea:
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. What happens if you move to another state?
Carol Mills:
That is the responsibility of the applicant. They need to keep the Selective Service abreast of moves, and the post office has change-of-address cards.
Assemblyman Goicoechea:
I agree with that. When I turned 18, I signed up for the draft. I believe it is the individual’s responsibility and has nothing to do with the DMV. I can see an incident where a person signs up when he’s 16, completely forgets about it, has moved out of the state, out of the area, he’s not looking to follow it up, and then down the road someone comes knocking on his door and he’s faced with 5 years or $250,000. I think some responsibility needs to be borne by the individual.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Mr. Thomas, would you address Mr. Goicoechea’s concern that this is putting an added burden on the DMV.
Clay Thomas:
Yes. That is a concern, and we have a few concerns with the bill. The most important concern is any impact on the field wait times. Any transaction that takes longer to do obviously means you have to deal with that individual longer, and the lines back up. It appears that the way the bill is written or proposed, with just a check block, there should not be an adverse effect on our wait times.
A point of clarification to Assemblyman Sherer is that the current statute says “If citizens of the United States are immigrants and at least 18 - 26 years of age . . .” It does not address the issue of 16-year-olds. So it’s a good point that an individual at 16 getting a 4-year driver’s license would not be seen again until age 20 or 21.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Mr. Thomas, concerning a 16-year-old, if they sign for the information to be turned over to the Selective Service System, then it just stays there waiting for the Selective Service System to advise them when they are 18. Nothing is done with the information until they are 18. Correct?
Clay Thomas:
I’m here today to bring to your attention that the statute says “between the ages of 18 and 26.” It does not address the issue of a 16-year-old coming in to get a driver’s license. I don’t know if the statute needs to be clarified, but Committee members should know that that is the way the law is written today.
Chairwoman Chowning:
They need to register between the ages of 18 and 26. When they come in to the DMV at age 16, the information would be collected by the DMV and turned over to the Selective Service System. Then one would assume that they keep the information for two years, and then when the man turns 18, he would be automatically registered. I presume they would receive notification in the mail.
Clay Thomas:
I can’t speak to that.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Can you answer that Ms. Mills?
Carol Mills:
Madam Chair. Actually, Mr. Thomas is correct. The way the statute is written now, we would not be able to capture the 16-year-olds. Some of the other bills have said “under 26,” so it would capture anyone. We cannot register the person until they are 18, so at this point, I guess we would not be able to reach [the 16 year old] until he turns 20, unless they happen to come in when they are 18, perhaps because they are new to this state, or something.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Mr. Sherer’s perception is correct. They come in when they are 16, it would not even be handed to them, so they would not receive the notification until they renew around age 20.
Carol Mills:
Correct, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Chowning:
My question is, never having had any sons, I don’t know how notice is given to young males. How are they notified?
Carol Mills:
There are various ways, sometimes through the high school registrar, sometimes cards from our data management center. The average young man we can reach. The ones we have difficulty reaching are the ones who drop out of school, who move, who are immigrants, or those new to the state. Some young men are notified almost automatically.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Immigrants new to the state can’t register anyway. Correct?
Carol Mills:
They have to be registered but they can’t [complete] their immigration through INS unless they are registered.
Assemblyman Claborn:
I registered in high school, and when I turned 18, I received a registration card.
Chairwoman Chowning:
This is just another tool to be an avenue for giving notice.
Carol Mills:
That’s right, Madam Chairwoman.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Any other questions?
Assemblyman Gustavson:
I have a question on the amendment that would add the notice of punishment, that being 5 years imprisonment and up to a $250,000 fine. How often has that been changed? Has it been this way for many, many years? Because if it changes every 5-10 years, we would have to revise our statutes too.
Carol Mills:
To my knowledge, I don’t think it has changed. I believe it has remained that same figure for some time.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Remember, the preferred amendment is the second one. Correct?
Assemblyman Manendo:
Right. That language would go with the positive statement rather than the negative, just in case [the punishment] changes.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Are there any other questions? Did the Committee members get all their questions answered by the DMV folks? There are no other questions. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak either for or against A.B. 170? Assemblyman Manendo.
Assemblyman Manendo:
I apologize. If it’s O.K., could Ms. Mills go on record discussing the public relations campaign dollars that DMV wanted on the record?
Carol Mills:
Madam Chair. The Selective Service System will cover the public relations campaign. What would happen is that if the bill were to pass, a press release would go out to all major radio and television slots in the state. We would also make posters and other publications available to the state of Nevada.
Chairwoman Chowning:
That brings the fiscal note down to $82,000. Because there are questions about this bill, we will handle those and the proposed amendment in a work session at a future meeting. Thank you.
The hearing on Assembly Bill 170 is now closed, and we’ll open the hearing on Assembly Bill 192.
Assembly Bill 192: Revises provisions relating to issuance of special license plates indicating support for promotion of agriculture within this state. (BDR 43-181)
Good afternoon, our former Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga.
Marcia de Braga, Former Assemblywoman, District No. 35:
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, members of the Committee; for the record, my name is Marcia de Braga. I’m here to speak on behalf of A.B. 192. This bill does three things:
1. It deals with the special license plates in support of agriculture, adding a provision to support the Future Farmers of America (FFA).
2. It expands the type of vehicles the license plate can be used on, allowing for heavier and farm vehicles.
3. It allows for the making of a souvenir license plate that is the same as the one for vehicles, but that can be used as a fund-raiser for the FFA.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Can you tell us the type of vehicles this plate would go on, versus the types it is restricted to now?
Marcia de Braga:
I’m not an expert on this, but I did some research. I think this would allow [the plates] to go on almost any type of vehicle that is required to be licensed. Specifically, we’re looking at stock trailers, horse trailers, farm trucks, and those kinds of things that are a part of the agriculture economy. Now it’s limited to vehicles less than 36,000 pounds.
Assemblyman Claborn:
Madam Chair. Ms. De Braga, regarding the souvenir plate, can it be used on the front but not on the rear?
Marcia de Braga:
No. I think it can be used only on your wall, or something else. I don’t think you can use them on a vehicle. Just for souvenirs, for someone who wants to support the FFA.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Everyone. The folks from the DMV were shaking their heads. Yes, you can purchase them, put them on the back ledge in the vehicle, you can put them on your wall, you can put them on Committee desks, but you could not put them on a vehicle, neither on the front nor on the back. Any other questions?
Marcia de Braga:
It may be necessary to amend this. Will someone explain this?
Chairwoman Chowning:
Folks, come forward, please, to speak on behalf of A.B. 192. There are three seats. Please state your name for the record.
Heather Dye, FFA:
Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Heather Dye, and I’m representing the Nevada FFA Foundation. Marcia hit on the main points of what this bill would do. Since the plate was originally released in August 2001, I’ll give you an update on how it has affected the FFA Foundation, because we do receive part of those funds.
During the fiscal year 2001-2002, we’ve sold 660 plates, and the FFA Foundation alone has received a little over $8,200. As of January of this fiscal year, we’ve received a little over $7,300. A rough estimate is about 237 plates. The report from DMV does not split out renewal versus new plates. Since we’re in our second year, we have a mixture of that. If you want a plate, you would go to the DMV. It costs $61 for the plate, and $25 of the $61 is split equally between the Nevada FFA Foundation and the Agriculture Council of Nevada. The renewal fee each year is $30, with $20 of that going back to the FFA Foundation and the Agriculture Council.
The plate was created to promote agriculture in the state. As a foundation, our sole purpose is to support agriculture education students and the FFA. Those funds have gone back to help those students in various activities. I have a student here to tell you about those.
Does this cause any financial burden to the state? As this expands, our marketing project is to get more plates out there. With that, we receive more funds and the DMV receives $36 of the initial fee and $10 from each renewal. There is not much of a burden to the state. Thank you. I will answer any questions you may have; or if not, I will turn this over to our student who can tell you what the money does.
Assemblyman Gustavson:
I have a question on the souvenir plates. I’ve seen others they manufacture for various reasons, but what would your price be? Wouldn’t this take away from the other fund because it’s less people buying the real plates?
Heather Dye:
Definitely. We came across the Cowboy Poetry event in Elko, for example. We would sell the souvenir plates at these kind of special events, or at FFA events, to out-of-state people. Some people collect these, and we can’t give a collector a DMV plate, so the souvenir plates serve those purposes, too.
Assemblyman Gustavson:
Some of us on this Committee collect plates, too.
Chairwoman Chowning:
He asked what the cost would be. I believe that the cost is $15, so you would have to charge over $15. Are there any other questions? Sir. Would you identify yourself?
Carl Sarman, FFA:
I am Carl Sarman. I’m the Vice President of the Nevada FFA Association. I’m here today to represent Nevada FFA on A.B. 192 regarding the agriculture license plate.
Nevada FFA offers so many opportunities to its students. FFA took me under its wing. I started my FFA experience in Spring Creek, Nevada, with the Silver Sage FFA Chapter. FFA taught me many life skills I can use for the rest of my life. I have learned the value of hard work and the importance of agriculture, and that nothing is impossible. FFA gives students so many opportunities. They offer career development events including public speaking, parliamentary procedure, and livestock evaluation, to name a few. FFA helps develop leadership, helps develop leaders, and guides them to their chosen occupation.
Over the past year, I’ve had the opportunity to promote agriculture in our state and beyond. This has given me a great perspective on how much agriculture is in our state, and how much potential lies within our students. I have been able to travel and talk with agriculture students throughout the state. I have had the opportunity to travel to Washington D.C. to meet with the President and elected officials. FFA provides these opportunities to its students. For these reasons, I urge you to pass A.B. 192.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Thank you for informing the Committee of the good activities that FFA provides and the benefits to the people who purchase the agriculture plates. We’re very appreciative because we’re the ones that passed the plate in the first place. These opportunities might not be available if people didn’t support organizations like this.
Who designed the plates? Because the colors are vivid and very nice. Some of the plates I’ve seen in my district are purchased by people who are not really trying to promote FFA activities. I think they just really like the design, the rancher holding the animal, and the look because many come from a ranching background. So, whose idea was it? How was the plate designed?
Heather Dye:
Several people put forth ideas but one person from Carson Valley, John Duffy, had the idea. Students put together a marketing plan to make the plate available.
Doug Busselman, Nevada Farm Bureau:
My name is Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau, and holder of an agricultural license plate number 0010, which we purchased for a little extra in order to support the FFA Foundation and agriculture in the state. When the bill first came to you a few sessions ago, we spoke in favor of the bill then, and we are still strong supporters of the measure. We found that in certain experiences, like airports, security guards have noticed the uniqueness of the plates, which fostered opportunities for us to “spread the gospel according to agriculture.” The promotion through the Department of Agriculture and their contributions to various activities have been very beneficial. We urge your support for A.B. 192.
Chairwoman Chowning:
I would appreciate it if some folks from DMV would come forward, because we have some other measures regarding other special license plates that maybe could be added to this bill. We’d like to ask you some questions.
Martha Barnes, DMV:
Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Martha Barnes, Administrator of Central Services and Records Division of the Department of Motor Vehicles. I’ve distributed a copy of a proposed amendment to A.B. 192 (Exhibit D) in order to address the issue of placing specialty plates on trailers.
The current numbering sequence utilized to identify trailers consists of five numbers and an alpha character. As you can see, this standard sunset plate is identified by this number sequence 12345L. As a comparison, I have a rodeo plate and the new Virginia & Truckee (V&T) Railroad plate, with the same numbering system on the plate. As you can see, it looks like 345L. This is the problem we have with the current numbering system. Our amendment would enable the DMV to determine what numbering system can be used with the trailer plates. Law enforcement would be unable to distinguish the correct plate number on this plate, with the current numbering system.
The proposed amendment would allow the Department to determine if the specialty plate could be issued to trailers, following approval of the final design. We made up a plate as a possibility for the agriculture plate, and it only allows for four spaces. This is the problem with the numbering system and why we propose the amendment.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Does everyone understand what she just said? It sounds like the colors are causing the problem on the Rodeo plate….
Martha Barnes:
Excuse me, Madam Chairwoman, it has to do with the design. When you put the numbers over the design they disappear.
Chairwoman Chowning:
With the agriculture plate that would not be a problem because of the lighter colors. Is that correct?
Martha Barnes:
Again it has to do with the numbering sequence, because right now we’re running out of numbers on the trailers and we’ll have to go to seven [digits], and you’re limited on space with this design.
Chairwoman Chowning:
So you would agree the plate could still go on trailers, if DMV had the ability to change the number and letter systems in some way?
Martha Barnes:
Madam Chairwoman, yes, if we could determine what numbers were available.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Could a scenario exist, because there are only four numbers, that if an applicant requested the number “10,000” for a trailer, they would not be able to because the numbers had run out?
Martha Barnes:
We hope to find out what numbers are available. Currently, four and five [digit] numbers are issued to motorcycles. We would have to go through our database.
Assemblyman Collins:
What about some flexibility so that past 9,999… First of all, a plate on a trailer will be obvious that it’s a trailer, so you don’t need the “TR” so big maybe. Or, you could have five digits with the “TR” in smaller letters. Does that make sense? Is that what you’re asking for? To amend to do that?
Martha Barnes:
What we are trying to do is for the DMV to determine what lettering sequence we can use on trailer plates, based on design and space available. We need to see what has not been used.
Chairwoman Chowning:
You just want to have the flexibility to be able to change the design if the letter and number systems don’t work and changes are necessary?
Martha Barnes:
That’s correct.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Committee, for the new members, the only specialty plate now that allows for the sale of souvenir plates is the V&T Railroad plate…
Martha Barnes:
And also the Pyramid Lake plate.
Chairwoman Chowning:
That’s right. A good clean-up measure, then, would be to amend this bill to say “all specialty plates” would have that privilege to sell them as souvenir plates. That wouldn’t be a problem would it?
Martha Barnes:
The way that portion of the bill is written, we do not have a problem with that.
Chairwoman Chowning:
People with rodeo plates also would like to put the plate on horse trailers. Would that be a problem?
Martha Barnes:
That would be the same as this plate. We just want the flexibility to determine the numbering system that would fit with the design.
Chairwoman Chowning:
OK. So, that wouldn’t be a problem. In addition, we have two other items, including the organ donor plate, where the funding [was not allocated correctly] and the money all went to the General Fund instead of the organization that the sponsors wished. Maybe we could work on that.
The money from the veterans’ plates is to go to the Veterans’ Home. The funds need to go into the Veterans’ Special Gift Account. With the agreement of the sponsors of the bill, we’d like to fix the problems of [all] the specialty plates using this bill to do so.
Martha Barnes:
We’d be happy to work with you on that.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Are there any other questions regarding this bill? No. Does anyone else wish to speak for or against A.B. 192? There are none. Committee members, are there any other business items you wish to bring up?
Assemblyman Collins:
Vote?
Chairwoman Chowning:
We have to get the amendments written.
Assemblyman Collins:
My suggestion would be to AMEND and DO PASS. When the amendments come to the Floor, if you have a problem with them, hold them up. Because of this time limit, let’s get it done. Also, if you put all this other stuff in that bill, you’ll need to work twice as hard for votes for it.
Chairwoman Chowning:
That’s what I mean: We’d have to have the language for the amendment written, but we could probably do this at the next meeting.
Assemblyman Collins:
We could do that when it comes back, because we aren’t going to get them in for a week and a half or two weeks. It could be two weeks before we see an amendment. Plus we’re only doing a conceptual amendment…
Chairwoman Chowning:
We are doing a conceptual amendment. If the members of the Committee have no problem, I have no problem. I would like to bring the items in the amendment to the Committee’s attention. The first item in the amendment would be that which was presented by the DMV, the second would be to allow all specialty plates to be sold as souvenir plates, the third would be to allow specialty plates to be placed on trailers or larger vehicles, the fourth would be to address the organ donor plate funding issue, and the fifth would be the Veterans’ Home specialty plate funding issue.
Assemblyman Collins:
I would like to ask DMV to find five digits for the trailer plates, but they could do that without our needing to hold up the bill.
Assemblyman Goicoechea:
As I read the bill, it precludes trucks over 36,000 pounds, but not trailers. So, there are no restrictions on trailers?
Martha Barnes:
The answer is that if it is a different number system, that’s all we are concerned with. If it’s the regular numbering system, then we can put it on a trailer.
Assemblyman Collins:
Well, most of them we do not have to go to motor carrier to register, and we do them in our local DMV, whether a 48-foot bull wagon or whatever, it carries a trailer tag. So, we could register those?
Martha Barnes:
Yes.
ASSEMBLYMAN COLLINS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 192.
ASSEMBLYMAN SHERER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairwoman Chowning:
Is there any other business to come before the Committee? Seeing none, we are adjourned. [Meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.]
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
JoAnn Aldrich
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblywoman Vonne Chowning, Chairwoman
DATE: