MINUTES OF THE meeting

of the

ASSEMBLY Committee on Ways and Means

 

Seventy-Second Session

May 29, 2003

 

 

The Committee on Ways and Meanswas called to order at 8:19 a.m., on Thursday, May 29, 2003.  Chairman Morse Arberry Jr. presided in Room 3137 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.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Mr. Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman

Ms. Chris Giunchigliani, Vice Chairman

Mr. Walter Andonov

Mr. Bob Beers

Mrs. Vonne Chowning

Mrs. Dawn Gibbons

Mr. Josh Griffin

Mr. Lynn Hettrick

Ms. Sheila Leslie

Mr. John Marvel

Ms. Kathy McClain

Mr. David Parks

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

Mr. David Goldwater

Mr. Richard Perkins

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

Senator Raymond D. Rawson, District No.6

Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams, District No. 6

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Mark Stevens, Assembly Fiscal Analyst

Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst

Lila Clark, Committee Secretary

Susan Cherpeski, Committee Secretary

 

Assembly Bill 366 (1st Reprint):  Provides exemption from governmental services tax for vehicles registered by resident of Nevada who is on active duty in Armed Forces of United States. (BDR 32-347)

 

Assemblywoman Vonne Chowning, District No. 28, introduced herself.  She said A.B. 366 would provide an exemption from the Governmental Services Tax for residents of Nevada who were on active military duty.  She stated that the bill would be a positive revenue generator for the state of Nevada. 

 

Assemblywoman Chowning said the bill would be a positive revenue generator because every person who was on active military duty, whether they were from New York, New Jersey, or any other state, would receive the exemption if they registered their vehicle in Nevada.  Assemblywoman Chowning stated that the Department of Motor Vehicles had previously been granting the exemption but had recently found something in the statutes that made them believe they could no longer grant the exemption.  Assemblywoman Chowning said that had caused an inequity because every other state’s active military citizens had received the exemption but for the past approximately six months, Nevadans had not. 

 

Assemblywoman Chowning used the example of a Nevadan serving in the military in Mississippi who wanted to register his vehicle and keep his Nevada license plates.  She said the Department of Motor Vehicles would tell the serviceman that he would have to pay a large sum for the Governmental Services Tax compared to $33 for the registration fee.  Assemblywoman Chowning said the serviceman might decide to give up his Nevada license plates and register his vehicle in Mississippi.  Assemblywoman Chowning said the fiscal note on the bill demonstrated that passage of the bill would be a positive revenue generator for Nevada.  She reiterated that all Nevada servicemen and servicewomen stationed at bases across the country might give up their Nevada plates due to cost.  If they did not give up their Nevada plates there would be positive revenue to Nevada because they would be paying the $33 registration fee that would go into the Highway Fund.  Assemblywoman Chowning said if the bill did not pass there would be a loss of revenue to Nevada.  She added that it was the right thing to do because our active military personnel deserved the exemption that they had been receiving for many years.  The fact that they were no longer receiving the exemption was simply a “glitch” that needed to be corrected.  Assemblywoman Chowning strongly urged the Committee’s support of the bill. 

 

Assemblywoman Chowning said that the amount of fiscal impact on the state if the bill passed was a guess.  She said one person from Nevada, Mr. Roberts, who had registered his automobile in Texas and had wanted to keep his Nevada plates, told her he did not understand what had happened to his exemption but he would register his vehicle in Texas to save money.  Assemblywoman Chowning said approximately 30 people had contacted the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) with questions regarding the loss of the exemption.  She said the DMV had calculated the fiscal note based on a minimum of 10 people to a maximum of 500 people who would take advantage of the passage of A.B. 366. 

 

Chairman Arberry asked how the Nevada DMV handled active military personnel from other states when they moved to Nevada.  Assemblywoman Chowning responded that they would receive the Governmental Services Tax exemption but Nevadans would not. 

 

Ms. Marcia de Braga introduced herself and said she supported A.B. 366.  Ms. de Braga said the bill came about because a young serviceman from Nevada who was stationed in another state wanted to register his vehicle in Nevada and keep his Nevada license plates.  She said that while the serviceman was out of state he kept a tie to Nevada and met other Nevadans by keeping his Nevada license plates.  By federal law every state must give the Government Services Tax exemption to military personnel stationed in that state.  The problem was that a Nevadan would not get that exemption if he wanted to register his vehicle in Nevada.  If he wanted to register the vehicle in any other state he would get the exemption.  Ms. de Braga said there were a few Nevadans serving out of state that would like to keep their Nevada registration. 

 

Ms. de Braga stated that the fiscal note on the bill was a guess as no one knew for sure how many individuals would avail themselves of the exemption.  She said the number of people using the exemption was difficult to predict.  Of the eight active military personnel from Austin, Nevada, only two of them owned vehicles.  She said many of the young servicemen and servicewomen went directly from high school into the military and did not own vehicles.  She described the impact as a “total guess” but it would mean a great deal to those Nevadans who wanted to keep their registration.  Ms. de Braga stated that if the Nevadans did register their vehicles in another state they would receive the exemption. 

 

Chairman Arberry wondered why the bill was necessary if the DMV had been granting the exemption in the past. 

 

Ms. Dana Mathiesen, Deputy Director, Department of Motor Vehicles, introduced herself.  She said the Governmental Services Tax had been waived for military personnel for many years.  When one of the Department’s Management Analysts was developing a procedure, the statute was studied and it was determined that the Department was not following the law.  Ms. Mathiesen said the current statute stated that the DMV could not waive the Governmental Services Tax for active duty military personnel so the error was corrected approximately a year ago and the DMV was now requesting that the law be changed to allow the Department to waive the tax for active duty military personnel. 

 

Chairman Arberry asked if other states had to enact a law to provide the exemption. 

 

Ms. Mathiesen responded that the federal Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act prevented active duty military personnel from paying taxes in more than one state.  The federal law stated that any person stationed in a state other than their state of residency was not required to pay taxes in that state. 

 

Mr. Andonov asked how the bill would apply to reservists or National Guard personnel who were called up for active duty. 

 

Ms. Mathiesen said the bill would apply to anyone on active military duty including members of the National Guard. 

 

Mr. Andonov asked if they would benefit if they were called up during the time their tax was due or at some other time. 

 

Ms. Mathiesen responded that they would benefit at the time they registered their vehicle.  If they were on active duty at the time they registered the vehicle the exemption would be granted. 

 

Mr. Chuck Fulkerson, Director, Office of Veterans’ Services, introduced himself and referred the Committee to Exhibit C.  He said the bill was just a small token of appreciation that could be extended to our fellow citizens who served in the armed forces in other states.  He said that monetarily it was not a great deal but it did help balance a serviceman’s tight military budget.  Mr. Fulkerson stated that it also would send a strong message from home that there was state support on a personal, daily basis to those serving in the armed forces.  It would be a proud reminder of a connection between a young serviceman or servicewoman and the home state they came from while they were on active duty.  Mr. Fulkerson said that allowing the exemption to the military members from Nevada would provide a serviceman an opportunity to keep a connection to Nevada while being exempt from paying taxes for services and facilities they were unable to use and enjoy.  Mr. Fulkerson added that the second page of Exhibit C spoke to an amendment that he believed would be part of the bill but since it was not, the second page should be ignored. 

 

Mr. Ron Kruse, Chairman, Veterans’ Services Commission, introduced himself and spoke in support of the bill.  He said he echoed the comments of Mr. Fulkerson and Ms. de Braga and wanted to encourage passage of the bill.  Mr. Kruse said he had been on active duty for 21 years in the 1950s and 1960s and moved around the country. 

 

Assemblyman Parks described the bill as a “no brainer.”  He said that servicemen and servicewomen could register their vehicles in other states without having to pay the tax by simply going through the inconvenience of having to register their vehicles in another state.  He said that some of the Nevada residents might have a prestige plate, such as a Lake Tahoe tag, where not only would they be continuing to register their vehicle at the $33 registration fee but they would also be continuing to make payments into both the prestige plate renewal fund as well as the particular contribution that would be made to the Lake Tahoe Fund, or whatever the plate might be.  Mr. Parks said he supported the bill. 

 

There being no further testimony on A.B. 366, Chairman Arberry closed the hearing on A.B. 366 and opened the hearing on A.B. 391. 

 

Assembly Bill 391 (1st Reprint):  Makes appropriation to University and Community College System of Nevada for creation of Program of Workforce Development Challenge Grants. (BDR S-1298)

 

Assemblyman Wendell Williams, District No. 6, introduced himself.  He said the bill came from the Committee on Education and had been changed for the better after it left the Committee on Education.  Assemblyman Williams said he had the opportunity of looking at the Continuing Education Division at the Community College of Southern Nevada and the possibility and potential of providing a tremendous number of skilled individuals for the workforce to help with diversification of the workforce in Clark County.  Assemblyman Williams said that during the Education Committee hearing, the Committee was informed by Chancellor Nichols of the ability to possibly extend the opportunity for Workforce Development Challenge Grants to all community colleges throughout the state. 

 

Assemblyman Williams stated that community colleges, unlike the universities, had the infrastructure to provide skilled training for many individuals throughout the state that would allow many people to leave those systems and institutions and go into Nevada’s communities to provide a tremendous number of highly skilled individuals for the workforce.  He said the program was not included in the budget. 

 

Assemblyman Williams said the bill had been amended to include Great Basin College, Truckee Meadows Community College, Western Nevada Community College, and the Community College of Southern Nevada. 

 

Ms. Jane Nichols, Chancellor, University and Community College System of Nevada, introduced herself and said that A.B. 391 was a reflection of a regent’s priority for an important enhancement item if the funding were to be available.  Ms. Nichols said the bill would establish at each community college in the state a board with representatives from the business community to help develop a challenge grant program where there would be matching money using the grant as a match to funds provided by private industry and business to meet workforce development needs.  Ms. Nichols said the state of Nevada funded credit courses but did not fund the non-credit workforce courses and she had been looking for some time for a mechanism to be able to do more to encourage businesses to come to Nevada, to stay in Nevada, and have active programs to keep their employees up-to-date on the skills that they needed.  Ms. Nichols stated that the request was based upon the identification by the community colleges of the greatest need that they had to be able to support economic development in Nevada.  She said she believed that the program would make a big difference for the state of Nevada in terms of the support of business and the growth of those businesses in the state. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked how the funds would be allocated among the various colleges. 

 

Ms. Nichols said $1.5 million would be allocated to the Community College of Southern Nevada, $400,000 to Great Basin College, $600,000 to Truckee Meadows Community College, and $500,000 to Western Nevada Community College.  Ms. Nichols said those figures were based on a prorated basis based on the businesses in their respective areas. 

 

Mr. Jim Richardson, representing the Nevada Faculty Alliance chapters, said the Alliance supported the bill.  He said it was a wonderful concept and if funding could be located, the alliance supported it. 

 

There being no further testimony on A.B. 391, Chairman Arberry closed the hearing on A.B. 391 and opened the hearing on S.B. 258. 

 

Senate Bill 258 (1st Reprint):  Makes appropriation to University of Nevada, Reno, for certain expenses of Pediatric Diabetes and Endocrinology Center at School of Medicine. (BDR S-1204)

 

Dr. Robert Dickens, Director, Governmental Relations, University of Nevada, Reno, introduced himself and said he supported S.B. 258.  Dr. Dickens said the appropriation was a very small appropriation but a critical one that was needed so the program could operate in the month of June in the current fiscal year.  Dr. Dickens stated that if the appropriation was not made the program could not continue.  He said there was money budgeted for the next biennium for the program and he hoped the funding would be included in the base budget in the future. 

 

Chairman Arberry asked why the funding for June 2003 was needed. 

 

Dr. Dickens explained that once the program was started, the demand for services increased.  He said the program served pediatric patients with diabetes.  Dr. Dickens said diabetes was an incredibly difficult disease in adults but even more so in pediatric patients.  He said the program had experienced much more demand than resources to meet them.  Dr. Dickens said there was a single pediatric endocrinologist in southern Nevada and one in northern Nevada.  The patients required very intensive medical oversight, a great deal of work with the families, a great deal of work with allied health individuals such as nurse practitioners and such, to manage the cases.  Dr. Dickens said the resources disappeared a little earlier than the close of the budget cycle. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked when Dr. Dickens realized the shortfall would occur. 

 

Dr. Dickens said he became aware of the shortfall at the beginning of the Legislative session. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked if he knew of the shortfall when he was constructing the budget for the next fiscal year. 

 

Dr. Dickens responded that the shortfall was not known at that time and had not been “rolled into” the base budget. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked if the shortfall had been discussed with the Governor. 

 

Dr. Dickens said he did not know if the shortfall had been discussed with the Governor. 

 

Ms. Nichols said that the absence of the request for funds in the University’s original request was simply an oversight.  She said she did not know of the problem at the time the budget was constructed and sent to the Governor in the fall of 2002.  Ms. Nichols said the Governor and the University were not aware of the need at that time.  Ms. Nichols said that it was either in December 2002, or January 2003, that she realized the funding had not been put into the base budget for the next biennium.  Ms. Nichols said the Legislature had taken care of that problem for the next biennium and the only issue left to resolve was the shortfall for June 2003.  Ms. Nichols said that the news came to her late and that was the reason why a special bill had been drafted to handle the problem. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked if the Senate had passed the bill and Dr. Dickens responded that it had passed the bill. 

 

Senator Rawson said that the bill originally had a $56,000 appropriation in it but had been reduced and it passed out of the Senate.  Senator Rawson said there was a sense that the bill needed to be passed so the services could be offered through the remainder of the fiscal year. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel said he realized it was a very important program because diabetes was a very serious disease in children. 

 

There being no further testimony on A.B. 258, Chairman Arberry closed the hearing on A.B. 258 and opened the hearing on S.B. 352. 

 

Senate Bill 352 (1st Reprint):  Designates Nevada Cancer Institute as official cancer institute of State of Nevada. (BDR 40-650)

 

Senator Ray Rawson, Clark County District No. 6, introduced himself.  Senator Rawson described the bill as a simplified bill.  He said there had been a bill with an appropriation in it and under the current circumstances it became apparent there could be no appropriation for the bill.  Senator Rawson said the reason for the bill was simply to identify the Nevada Cancer Institute as the official cancer institute in Nevada.  That designation would have some federal implications to it.  Senator Rawson said that Heather and Jim Murren, from the MGM Mirage, came to him and asked him to draft the bill so they could receive the designation.  Senator Rawson said that Harry Reid, U.S. Senator, had put a Congressional measure in to bring them some federal support and he believed there was a $200 million fund for cancer institutes, however, they would not be eligible to receive the funding if they did not have an official cancer institute designation.  Senator Rawson said there was no cost to the state currently or in the future.  He said the program would be funded entirely from the proceeds of their work and the capital programs they went through.  Senator Rawson said there were only a few cancer institutes in the United States and patients in Nevada with serious cancers that could not be treated in Nevada had to go to California, Texas, New York, or Minnesota for treatment.  Senator Rawson said the designation would make the Nevada Cancer Institute 1 of 20 recognized cancer institutes in the country and that could be very good for Nevada. 

 

Assemblywoman Chowning asked if Nevada could receive additional federal funds with the cancer institute designation. 

 

Senator Rawson said that was correct.  To be able to apply for federal funds, a center would have to be designated as an official cancer institute for the state.  Senator Rawson said part of the overall objective was to get ahead of the serious cancer problem in the country.  He said there was a great deal of federal research money available. 

 

Assemblywoman Chowning asked if Senator Rawson had any idea of the amount of funds that were being lost by not having the official cancer institute designation. 

 

Senator Rawson said he believed the sum would be tens of millions of dollars.  He said $20 million was a figure he had heard and it was a significant amount of money.  Senator Rawson said that Dr. Carol Harter, President, UNLV, and Dr. John Lilly, President, UNR, were both in agreement with the bill and it did not interfere with any other cancer plans that were going on in the state. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel said that he believed there was extensive cancer research being conducted at the School of Medicine.  He wondered if the funding could be used for that use as well. 

 

Senator Rawson responded that the hope was that all of the efforts in the state would be brought together and focused.  He said the funds would go, in particular, for the cancer institute.  Senator Rawson said that in the future, as the state proceeded with the medical center, all the entities could be brought together.  Senator Rawson said that at the present time there was no unifying force that would bring all the interests together and his sense was that the passage of the bill could be that unifying force. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked how the passage of the bill would fight cancer. 

 

Senator Rawson responded that by having a cancer institute Nevada would be able to utilize the very latest treatments for cancer.  He said the Nevada Cancer Institute would have access to the latest treatments and would have access to experimental and trial procedures.  Senator Rawson said that the Institute would have access to the newest and latest procedures available to anyone.  Senator Rawson said there would undoubtedly be cancers that could not be cured and he was a prostate cancer survivor.  He said survivors always lived with the threat of cancer and he would like to see some research done quickly. 

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked if the Nevada Cancer Institute would be used for cancer treatment. 

 

Senator Rawson said the funding would be used to set up the center, bring in the physicians and researchers needed and build the capability of the center.  He said he did not believe the funding would be used for patient treatments. 

 

Ms. Nichols said the University currently had National Institutes of Health (NIH) money for cancer research and did treatment within its facilities.  She said the Nevada Cancer Institute would require the involvement of the School of Medicine and in the long term the Dental School.  She said it would provide the University another partnership to support its work in that area.  Ms. Nichols said passage of the bill would not in any way detract from the University’s current focus in the School of Medicine or the School of Dentistry related to cancer but would expand the possibilities.  Ms. Nichols stated that all cancer institutes had to be affiliated in some way with the School of Medicine and she believed the partnership with the School of Dentistry would also be a part of that.  Ms. Nichols believed that the designation would supplement and expand the University’s current capacity in the area of cancer research. 

 

Assemblywoman Chowning asked if the Nevada Cancer Institute had a physical location and if so, where. 

 

Senator Rawson said the Nevada Cancer Institute did not physically exist yet.  He said that Dr. and Mrs. Murren started the effort and had some significant fundraisers to build the institute.  Senator Rawson said it would be a $100 million cancer institute that would be built with private funds; there would be no state money involved.  Senator Rawson said Dr. and Mrs. Murren had the incorporation papers and the fundraising events had begun.  Senator Rawson said there had been a fundraiser approximately six months ago and he was amazed at the Murren’s ability to bring in multiple millions of dollars. 

 

Assemblywoman Chowning asked where the Nevada Cancer Institute would be built. 

 

Senator Rawson responded that it would be built in Las Vegas. 

 

Assemblywoman Giunchigliani asked if there would be any impact on the University System. 

 

Senator Rawson said there would be no effect on the University System as the Nevada Cancer Institute would be built with private funds. 

 

Assemblywoman Giunchigliani asked if simply designating the center as the official cancer institute of the state of Nevada would help the Nevada Cancer Institute to obtain federal grants.  Senator Rawson responded affirmatively. 

 

Ms. Buffy Martin, Government Relations Director, Nevada, American Cancer Society, referred to Exhibit D.  She said many individuals in Nevada had put forth a tremendous amount of effort towards the building of the Nevada Cancer Institute.  She said that S.B. 352 could establish Nevada as a leader in cancer research and treatment.  Ms. Martin said the Nevada Cancer Institute, which was currently underway in southern Nevada, was positioned to become a state-of-the-art research and treatment center.  On May 27, 2003, ground was broken to build the Nevada Cancer Institute and she expected it to be fully operational by late 2004.  Ms. Martin said that Nevada was grossly lacking in cancer treatment and research.  She said it had been estimated that in 2003 alone, 10,300 Nevadans would be diagnosed with cancer and about half of those diagnosed would lose their lives to cancer.  Ms. Martin said that in the past many Nevadans had to leave Nevada for cancer treatment and now they would have access to state-of-the-art technology, highly specialized care, and greater hope.  Ms. Martin said that by designating the Nevada Cancer Institute as the official cancer institute of the state of Nevada, the Committee could send a strong message of support to cancer patients and survivors of cancer and their families.  She said the designation was not merely an honorary action but such a designation would allow the Nevada Cancer Institute to have greater opportunities for federal funding.  Ms. Martin said that on behalf of the American Cancer Society and its 6,000 statewide volunteers, she urged the Committee to fight cancer and asked for the support of S.B. 352. 

 

Assemblywoman Giunchigliani asked for the location in Las Vegas of the Nevada Cancer Institute. 

 

Ms. Martin said she was not familiar with Las Vegas but she knew the land had been donated and there had been approximately six offers of donated land. 

 

Senator Rawson said he believed the location was on West Desert Inn, out towards the Summerlin area, and Dr. Dickens confirmed that location. 

 

Exhibit E, a letter dated May 28, 2003, from Mrs. Heather Murren, was submitted for the Committee’s consideration. 

 

There being no further testimony on S.B. 352, Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani recessed the meeting until the call of the Chair. 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

                                                           

Lila Clark

Committee Secretary

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

                                                                                         

Assemblyman Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman

 

 

DATE: