MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Human Resources and Facilities
Seventy-second Session
April 28, 2003
The Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities was called to order by Chairman Raymond D. Rawson, at 1:49 p.m., on Monday, April 28, 2003, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. The meeting was videoconferenced to the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Room 4406, 555 East Washington Avenue, Las Vegas, 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 Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
Senator Barbara K. Cegavske, Vice Chairman
Senator Maurice E. Washington
Senator Dennis Nolan
Senator Joseph Neal
Senator Bernice Mathews
Senator Valerie Wiener
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Assemblyman David E. Goldwater, Assembly District. No. 10
Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, Assembly District No. 27
Assemblyman Joseph (Joe) Hardy, Assembly District No. 20
Assemblyman Thomas (Tom) J. Grady, Assembly District No. 38
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
H. Pepper Sturm, Committee Policy Analyst
Cynthia Cook, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Rhonda Mittenzwei
Traci Kannon
Karyn Wright, Lobbyist, Clark County School District
Mary Pierczynski, Superintendent, Carson City School District
Dorothy L. (Dotty) Merrill, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District
Bonnie L. Parnell, Lobbyist, Nevada PTA
Roxanne Boyce
Duncan R. McCoy
Charles W. (Chuck) Fulkerson, Executive Director, Office of Executive Director for Veterans’ Services, Office of Veterans’ Services
Ronald Kruse, Chairman, Nevada Veterans’ Services Commission, Office of Veterans’ Services
James Inman
Ron Gutzman
Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research, and Evaluative Services, Department of Education
Steve Mulvenon, Director of Communications, Washoe County School District
Ex-Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Lobbyist, Carson City, Douglas County, and Lyon County
Ray Bacon, Lobbyist, Nevada Manufacturers Association
Sara F. Jones, Administrator, Division of State Library and Archives, Department of Cultural Affairs
Rose E. McKinney-James, Lobbyist, Clark County School District
Randy Robison, Lobbyist, Nevada Association of School Boards/Reno
Chairman Rawson:
We will open the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 138.
ASSEMBLY BILL 138 (1st Reprint): Revises provisions governing use of cellular telephones, pagers and other electronic devices on school property. (BDR 34-385)
Assemblyman David E. Goldwater, Assembly District No. 10:
Traci Kannon, a teacher at Becker Middle School, requested this bill. The students in her class participated in “Project Citizen,” a program designed to motivate and enable young people to enjoy the rights and accept the responsibilities of citizenship. The sponsors are the National Conference of State Legislatures and the Center for Civic Education. Ms. Kannon’s class identified a statute they felt was unjust, one that prohibited the use of cellular telephones or pager devices on school property.
Rhonda Mittenzwei:
I am a student in Ms. Kannon’s class. Ms. Kannon and I would like to testify that we are in favor of this bill. It would be great if it were passed.
Chairman Rawson:
The concern is the cellular telephones will be disruptive to teaching. Do you have a perspective on that?
Ms. Mittenzwei:
Currently we have students who bring cellular telephones to class, and a phone has never rung in class during school.
Chairman Rawson:
I think at the time this law was enacted there was concern about drug dealing. Is this no longer an issue?
Ms. Mittenzwei:
I am in seventh grade, so it is not a problem. However, the law is for K-12, so it could be an issue in the high schools.
Chairman Rawson:
In this committee room we have a rule that the ringer of a cellular telephone must be turned off in order not to disrupt the proceedings. I think there should be the same concern in a classroom.
Assemblyman Goldwater:
The white paper the students provided outlined a number of issues, including student safety. There were incidents cited of reporting violence to the authorities, and contacting parents during an emergency. The possession of a cellular telephone simplified these events.
Senator Cegavske:
I am willing to support A.B. 138 if guidelines by the school trustees are in place. Are you willing to support those policies if the bill passes? The concern about classroom disruption will need to be addressed.
Ms. Mittenzwei:
I would be glad to participate in the process. If the trustees have meetings, I want to participate in those meetings.
Traci Kannon:
The students who participated in this project are interested in the passage of this bill. They are also interested in helping to set the procedures to be developed by the school district. I have had contact with the Clark County School District and have been assured students will have a voice in the development of the policies. The students endorse the idea of having the cellular telephone confiscated if it is not turned off during school hours.
Karyn Wright, Lobbyist, Clark County School District:
The district is in support of A.B. 138 with the language that provides for local control. We appreciate the opportunity to write policy concerning the use of electronic devices on school property.
Mary Pierczynski, Superintendent, Carson City School District:
The Carson City School District supports the principle of local control and this bill.
Dorothy L. (Dotty) Merrill, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District:
The Washoe County School District is in support of this bill. We believe the board of trustees should have the responsibility of adopting this policy.
Senator Cegavske:
Have you been working on new policies in anticipation of the passage of the bill?
Ms. Wright:
We have had conversations with a potential committee we will assemble to work on the exact policies regarding the bill. I spoke with principals regarding the usage of electronic devices. There are rules in each of the schools.
Senator Cegavske:
Have students currently been allowed the use of cellular telephones with certain guidelines?
Ms. Wright:
It is my understanding the students are not supposed to have them on at school during school hours.
Senator Cegavske:
Is confiscation the consequence of having an electronic device on during school hours? Also, will you be working with police to insure the safety of students concerning drug trafficking?
Ms. Wright:
I believe confiscation is the consequence at some of the schools. We will be working with law enforcement when implementing policies upon passage of A.B. 138.
Ms. Merrill:
The Washoe County School District has followed the prohibition of not allowing cellular telephones on campus. Enforcing it has been time consuming for the staff. We are glad to see this proposal emerge and think it is important.
Bonnie L. Parnell, Lobbyist, Nevada PTA:
Parents are supportive of this bill, which enables them to communicate with their children.
Chairman Rawson:
We will open the hearing on A.B. 52.
ASSEMBLY BILL 52 (1st Reprint): Provides for issuance of standard high school diplomas to certain veterans. (BDR 34-269)
Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, Assembly District No. 27:
This bill, which will be effective upon passage, provides for the issuance of a high school diploma to veterans who left high school before graduation to serve during World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam Era. The program exists in 24 states and is known nationwide as “Operation Recognition.” The opportunity to receive a diploma will be open to all eligible veterans. Massachusetts was the first state to enact this legislation in 1999. The program rewards valor for veterans who sacrificed their high school education to serve in the armed forces. I believe it a small and overdue gesture of the gratitude of our society. The State Department of Education has worked with the Office of Veterans’ Services to establish guidelines for identifying eligible veterans.
Senator Neal:
The bill does not stipulate whether the veteran is from the State of Nevada.
Assemblywoman Leslie:
It does not matter which state the veteran is from; any veteran who is a resident of Nevada is eligible.
Chairman Rawson:
We will suspend the hearing on A.B. 52, and open the hearing on A.B. 407.
ASSEMBLY BILL 407: Authorizes school districts to open public school libraries to general public. (BDR 34-1183)
Assemblyman Joseph (Joe) Hardy, Assembly District No. 20:
The City of Henderson and Boulder City have rejected requests for funding of new libraries. Thinking about the need for libraries and literacy programs I realized we needed to do something to improve access to books and reading. In every neighborhood there is a library within a public school. I had the idea of opening them to the public under certain circumstances. I discovered I was not the first to think of this concept. The Washoe County School District has implemented the idea of partnership libraries for many years, as have other states. I believe Nevada can realize this concept on a Statewide basis.
Senator Cegavske:
An additional responsibility will incur costs. The bill says the school board cannot come to the State for money, and the expenses are that of the school district if they decide to implement the program. If this is effective on July 1, 2003, does that allow for enough planning time?
Assemblyman Hardy:
I realize there is no money for new programs; I just want people to think about the possibilities within the bill. This is a permissive bill that gives people the opportunity to think. The effective date would not be mandatory, but would allow the schools to consider the idea. The Clark County School District currently has people who volunteer. The concept is to get this out to the public, and then begin to solve the problems.
Assemblyman Thomas (Tom) J. Grady, Assembly District No. 38:
In the community of Smith, a joint-use library is part of a dual-construction project, through the fund raising efforts of the Friends of the Smith Valley Library and the Smith Valley Library Planning Committee. The library will be shared between Lyon County and its library system, and the Lyon County School District/Smith Valley Schools. Construction began on April 7, 2003, and is set for a 180-day construction period. If there is a problem within the partnership, the library reverts to the high school.
Senator Cegavske:
There is a shortage of books within our school libraries, and I am concerned there are not going to be enough books.
Assemblyman Grady:
There is a good chance there will be twice as many books. There will be the school district and the library budgets for the purchase of books. Another example is in Silver Springs. The new library is adjacent to the new high school, middle school, and grammar school complex. There have been no problems.
Senator Neal:
When the bill was drafted, was any thought given to the fact school libraries have a general exemption to the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and public libraries do not have the exemption?
Assemblyman Hardy:
There is a difference in the mission of a public library and a school library. Washoe County has been doing this for many years and faced the issue. I believe that is a reasonable issue for concern.
Senator Nolan:
I believe priority should be given to the school children for books.
Assemblyman Hardy:
That is the priority. When we are looking at the literacy side, that is the way we want to do it. The concept is to bring young children to the school to check out books and become familiar with the procedure for borrowing.
Roxanne Boyce:
I am the librarian of the Boulder City High School Library. I will read prepared testimony in support of A.B. 407 (Exhibit C).
Duncan R. McCoy:
I am the director of the Boulder City Library. I will read prepared testimony in support of A.B. 407 (Exhibit D).
Senator Cegavske:
Who would be responsible for tracking returns and overdue books?
Assemblyman Hardy:
There are numerous tasks to overcome before the bill can be implemented. Standard library cards good throughout Nevada will be used. Local schools will execute rules for their joint-use library.
Senator Neal:
The bill is permissive as far as the school district is concerned. I am afraid once permission is granted to the public, the school district can be forced to go beyond having books most fitting for the student population. Presently the school district determines the books they want on their shelves. Do you foresee any problem along this line?
Ms. Boyce:
The books on our shelves are solely to support curriculum. We do not have the funds to purchase any other categories of books. I cannot imagine this being a problem without proper funding.
Mr. McCoy:
Washoe County has been doing this for over 20 years. The issue of the appropriateness of materials in the joint-use library has been discussed over the years. I will defer to the wisdom of the people from Washoe County.
Senator Neal:
With passage of this bill we are making public policy. Washoe County School District has been operating without public policy and can stop the program when they choose. Once this goes forward, we are talking about providing to any and all people who claim residence in the State.
Mr. McCoy:
The relationship of the joint-use libraries in Washoe County concerning issues of governance and policies is a continuing dialogue to deal with day-to-day situations. I think they have a 20-year ongoing work-in-progress
Chairman Rawson:
Section 1 says the board of trustees of a school district may enter into one or more cooperative agreements. It does not define those agreements. That is like a memorandum of understanding or an interlocal agreement. They will define the agreements, and live by them. Also, section 3 says they can grant those privileges for a period not to exceed a year. Doing it on a year‑to‑year basis makes it renewable and revocable in the view of the board of trustees. I do not think this is an issue that is going to get out of hand, but I do think the point is well taken. We will establish that as legislative intent.
We will return to A.B. 52.
Charles W. (Chuck) Fulkerson, Executive Director, Office of Executive Director for Veterans’ Services, Office of Veterans’ Services:
Assembly Bill 52 will award high school diplomas to armed forces veterans who left school to go to war. The program originated in the state of Massachusetts and is titled “Operation Recognition.” Since 1940, thousand of men and women have left high school to serve in the armed forces. Their sacrifices have ensured our freedom and shaped the entire course of history. After discharge, many of these veterans were unable to complete high school. In recognition of their outstanding contribution, we recommend passage of A.B. 52 as a small overdue gesture for the sacrifices these fellow citizens have made in the name of freedom.
Senator Neal:
Why stop at high school; what if they had to leave college?
Mr. Fulkerson:
I do not know the answer to that question.
Ronald Kruse, Chairman, Nevada Veterans’ Services Commission, Office of Veterans’ Services:
I am very active in the community and in total support of this bill to put diplomas in the hands of those who deserve it.
Senator Neal:
Would this be a special diploma, and what high school would be listed?
Mr. Fulkerson:
That question was discussed at a meeting with the State Board of Education and they agreed this would be a standard high school diploma awarded from the school district of which the veteran is a resident. It is issued without regard to where the veteran entered the service.
Chairman Rawson:
It would be the Clark County School District if the veteran resides in Las Vegas. The superintendent of education would sign it.
Mr. Fulkerson:
There have been instances throughout the country when the veteran participated in a graduation ceremony. In other cases the diploma has been mailed to the widow of the veteran.
Senator Cegavske:
Would it be better to have the diploma issued from the state where the veteran was living when he or she entered the service?
Chairman Rawson:
Not all states are a part of this program. This is a way for us to recognize our veterans residing in Nevada.
Mr. Fulkerson:
It is my understanding veterans living in other states have applied to their home state when that state decided to join this program. I think it is a matter of personal preference.
Senator Neal:
How many veterans from Nevada will be applying for a diploma?
Mr. Fulkerson:
I do not know how many will apply, but there are 231,000 veterans residing in Nevada.
Senator Wiener:
For clarification, a veteran residing out of State who attended high school in Nevada could apply here in Nevada.
Chairman Rawson:
As I read the bill, both a veteran residing out of Nevada and a veteran residing in the State could apply in Nevada.
Mr. Fulkerson:
My understanding of this bill is to allow veterans living in Nevada to apply for a high school diploma.
James Inman:
I have been a resident of Sparks since 1923. I enlisted in Reno in June 1941. I am supporting this bill. I dropped out of high school when I was 17 years of age. In 2002 I was awarded a high school diploma from Sparks High School. I think we should recognize our veterans. Also, for the record, for the past 7 years I have worked with the Veterans of Foreign Wars. We have dedicated six monuments, two parks, and a highway.
Ron Gutzman:
I speak for the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, and the United States Marine Corp League. We strongly support this bill.
Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research, and Evaluative Services, Department of Education:
The department voted unanimously to support the bill. As I interpret the bill, the Office of Veterans’ Services will establish guidelines for identifying eligible veterans, and the State Board of Education will provide the diplomas for any qualified veteran who makes a request.
Ms. Pierczynski:
The Carson City School District supports A.B. 52 with the understanding the Office of Veterans’ Services are to establish guidelines.
Steve Mulvenon, Director of Communications, Washoe County School District:
I will read prepared testimony in support of this bill (Exhibit E).
Ex-Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Lobbyist, Carson City, Douglas County, and Lyon County:
I spent many years in the service and I approve of this bill to give our veterans recognition.
Ms. Wright:
The Clark County School District is in support of A.B. 52. We appreciate lines 15 through 18 on page 2, which will provide continuity throughout the State.
Senator Cegavske:
I am curious to know the cost of this program. Again, if any veteran requests a diploma, will he or she be issued one?
Mr. Rheault:
If there is a question of eligibility, we will work with the Office of Veterans’ Services to implement a requirement the veteran currently resides in Nevada, or resided in Nevada when he or she entered the service. The district will pay the cost, which will be approximately 50 cents for each diploma.
SENATOR WIENER MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 52.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Rawson:
We will reopen the hearing on A.B. 138.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 138.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Rawson:
We will reopen the hearing on A.B. 407.
Ray Bacon, Lobbyist, Nevada Manufacturers Association:
I recently donated books to a local school library and discovered they generally do not get many contributions. One of the side benefits of this bill may be increased donations. As the bill is written, there is not a requirement for extended hours, because it is permissive. A school library retains the definition as a school library, and there should not be a First Amendment issue.
Sara F. Jones, Administrator, Division of State Library and Archives, Department of Cultural Affairs:
I am here to support A.B. 407, a bill that encourages but does not require school districts to open libraries to the general public. Joint-use libraries are workable options in expanding services to the public. In Nevada there are 10 such facilities, with one more planned in Smith Valley. Libraries, books, and parental involvement are the most effective means to combat illiteracy. Legislation such as this to encourage the expansion of libraries and services is commendable. The question of the First Amendment is important in terms of the missions of school libraries versus public libraries. In the joint-use facilities normally a policy is set forth up front. A book purchased by the school district usually follows school district policy, and a book purchased by the public library usually uses the reconsideration policy based on public library policy. I previously ran a joint-use facility, and it is very workable.
Ms. Merrill:
The Washoe County School District has had joint-use facilities for a number of years. The facilities fill a need until a new library can be built.
Rose E. McKinney-James, Lobbyist, Clark County School District:
The Clark County School District is in support of this measure. Many of our concerns have been addressed today in previous testimony. There will clearly be some funding issues, but to the extent this measure is permissive, we will give the trustees the opportunity to look at pursuing partnerships.
Chairman Rawson:
I would like to caution the proponents of this measure not to come to the Legislature for funding. It may be allowed as a local issue, but it is not a part of the State plan.
Senator Neal:
It troubles me when you extend the rights of the general public associated with a constitutional right. One may be hard pressed to limit that right under a challenge once the policy is in place. I am concerned with the possible danger. It is fortunate Washoe County School District has not been challenged.
Chairman Rawson:
The ability to terminate the agreement would be the safeguard in that event.
Senator Neal:
Once you enter this area, it becomes a question of whether you can fall back.
Chairman Rawson:
The Legislation says you can.
Ms. Merrill:
Washoe County School District has had no such problems in 20 years. Perhaps the patrons are there for different reasons than those patrons who would raise that concern. I can speak to the issue of the cooperative and collaborative agreements that have occurred through the years with the library system and the school district, and simply say the record speaks for itself.
SENATOR WIENER MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 407.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR NEAL ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Rawson:
We will open the hearing on A.B. 509.
ASSEMBLY BILL 509: Revises provisions governing review of decision of board of trustees to close or change use of particular school. (BDR 34-1294)
Randy Robison, Lobbyist, Nevada Association of School Boards/Reno:
Assembly Bill 509 relates to the process by which the local board of school trustees decides to close or change the use of a school. Currently, once a decision is made, any resident of the district can request reconsideration. The board must go through the hearing process again. After that hearing, if a resident is aggrieved by the decision, they may make a written request to the State Board of Education to hold a hearing to review the decision. The change this bill seeks affects the last hearing. The bill would require the resident to petition the school board, and the petition be signed by 10 percent of the people who voted in the previous general election. The process starts whereby the petition is verified by the county clerk, and the school board reconsiders the decision. This does not happen frequently, but the hearings can often be intense.
Chairman Rawson:
We are taking away a free, uninhibited right of any citizen to be able to block the process. Ten percent of the voters in the previous election do not necessarily have a lot to do with that school district. In White Pine County maybe all individuals will be affected by a school closure. If we close an elementary school in Las Vegas, the voters close to the school may care, but 10 percent of the voters would probably not care. We are changing the standard radically here. We need a reason for that.
Mr. Robison:
It is true we are changing the standard.
Chairman Rawson:
I understand the need to tighten the standard. Do we want to throw the key away? Essentially there is no hope to be able to change a decision here.
Mr. Robison:
The reason we settled on 10 percent is because it is used for the referendum process. Whether in a large or small district, closing or changing the use of schools will impact all the residents of that district.
Chairman Rawson:
The practicality of getting 10 percent in 30 days is nearly impossible. So you have closed the door. What you are saying is all decisions of the board are final. Yes, you have this review, but it is not a realistic possibility for people. I have not spoken to anyone about this, it just hits me in the face. We are taking an absolute right and making it an absolute not right. Is there not a means of focusing on those people affected?
Mr. Robison:
That is the standpoint with which we are viewing the bill. The decision to close a school is infrequent and the current process is unbalanced. It implicates the State board, which does not have a fiscal responsibility in the local district, and is often put in the difficult position of reviewing the decision. This would simply say if you want an additional review of the decision, the board is not opposed if a percentage of the electorate agrees.
Senator Wiener:
Based on the concern the chairman has raised, to gather 10 percent of the voters in the preceding election is costly and time prohibitive. It appears to be designed to fail. Has it been considered to look at the representative voice of the community being served by the school, perhaps 10 percent of those who voted from the school’s zone, or something on that order?
Chairman Rawson:
I have raised an issue, and reading some of the existing language, if a school board decides to close a school, a resident may ask for one review. That is not the review we are eliminating.
Mr. Robison:
There was no discussion concerning a percentage of voters within the affected school zone. Perhaps because this situation typically occurs in rural counties. That concept might be practical in Clark County zones, but not in the rural counties.
Senator Neal:
Can you tell us the situation that brought this bill about?
Mr. Robison:
The most recent closing of a school was in Lander County. One reason the bill was brought forward is a couple of school trustees were concerned about the process and a couple of members of the State board were also concerned.
Senator Neal:
We gave the members of the State board the authority to conduct the third hearing. Do they no longer want to carry out their duties?
Mr. Robison:
Some State Board of Education members relayed concerns to me, and having heard similar concerns from local board of trustee members whom I represent, we tried to come up with a method to better balance the responsibilities.
Mr. Rheault:
The State Board of Education is here to support the bill, and we are open to suggestions. After one resident is aggrieved in a school district decision and there has been a hearing, the same resident can write to the State board and say, “I am still aggrieved.” In the two cases where this has happened in the past 5 years, that is what occurred. One did not have a student in school; he was just a citizen requesting a public hearing. The board went to White Pine to conduct the hearing. The other case, in Lander County, was about closing the elementary school in Austin. The State board is not opposed to taking responsibility to make a decision. We conducted an all-day hearing. It was an emotionally split decision. The elected officials on the board of trustees in Lander County decided to close the school for financial reasons. At the hearing it was clear some technical items were not considered. The State board overturned the decision of the local district. When we left, the local school district had to figure out how to keep the school open.
Senator Neal:
What does the operative word “aggrieved” suggest to you?
Mr. Rheault:
We are not against the public having a right to a hearing. We think two hearings are enough. If any resident claims to be aggrieved and asks for a hearing from the State board, we show up. They are not required to describe their definition of aggrieved. I think there is a compromise concerning the 10 percent. I do not know how the precincts work, but perhaps the voters in the precinct where the school is located can be used.
Senator Neal:
What if you just changed the word “aggrieved” to “affected”? I mean the person who was affected by the decision, such as having a student in the school or something of that nature.
Mr. Rheault:
It still would take an objective opinion; was that person affected or not. I can tell you in one case, it was a teacher at the school who brought the action. The teacher was affected and also a citizen who lived in the district.
Senator Neal:
I agree with the chairman, this seems expansive. If we go to Clark County and limit it to the district where the school is located, then it becomes more appropriate.
Chairman Rawson:
What if we said in large counties the petition must be signed by 10 percent of the voters in the school attendance area, and in rural counties 10 percent of the those who voted at the last preceding general election in the county?
Mr. Robison:
I think that would be reasonable.
Ms. Merrill:
The concept you discussed would be agreeable to the Washoe County School District.
Chairman Rawson:
We will consider an amendment to insert permissive language and change the description of 10 percent.
SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 509.
SENATOR WIENER SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Neal:
We are talking about a due-process hearing for those who feel they are aggrieved. You are mixing the due-process hearing with the petition process. I am not sure that can work.
Chairman Rawson:
They would have their first due-process hearing.
Senator Neal:
We still have language pertaining to a petition. I do not know of any statute ever passed with this type of mixture. I will be opposed to the bill as written and the amendment.
THE MOTION FAILED. (SENATORS CEGAVSKE, WASHINGTON, NOLAN AND NEAL VOTED NO.)
*****
Chairman Rawson:
If the people who have testified and those who have expressed a concern will work on language, we will not indefinitely postpone this bill. This meeting is adjourned at 3:46 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Cynthia Cook,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
DATE: