MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Human Resources and Facilities
Seventy-second Session
May 5, 2003
The Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities was called to order by Chairman Raymond D. Rawson, at 1:51 p.m., on Monday, May 5, 2003, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator 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 John Oceguera, Assembly District No.16
Assemblywoman Christina R. Giunchigliani, Assembly District No. 9
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
H. Pepper Sturm, Committee Policy Analyst
Patricia Vardakis, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Richard McCorkle, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Rick Bennett, Lobbyist, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
R. Ben Graham, Lobbyist, Nevada District Attorneys’ Association/Las Vegas
Leticia Johnson, Program Officer, Central Repository for Nevada Records of Criminal History, Department of Public Safety
Tya Mathis, Intern for Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams
Stacey Ellmore, Senior Consultant, ACT Incorporated
Jennifer Staats
Dorothy L. (Dotty) Merrill, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District
Craig Kadlub, Lobbyist, Clark County School District
Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research, and Evaluative Services, Department of Education
Chairman Rawson:
I will open the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 246.
ASSEMBLY BILL 246 (2nd Reprint): Establishes Center for Analysis of Crime Statistics at University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and provides that Center may accept and expend gifts, grants and donations of money. (BDR 34‑367)
Assemblyman John Oceguera, Assembly District No.16:
Nevada is the only State in the nation that does not have a criminal justice statistical analysis center (SAC). The center would serve two purposes. It would act as a clearinghouse for State and local criminal justice activities and related data. It would conduct and publish policy-relevant research on State and local criminal justice issues. Once the statistical center has been authorized by State legislation, it is eligible for federal funding to carry out data collection and analysis of criminal justice themes or topics of significant interest to criminal justice policy and decision makers. The themes are identified each year by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Justice Research and Statistics Association. Statistical analysis centers can then submit applications for financial assistance through federal funding in order to carry out the data collection and analysis necessitated by their themes. The availability of federal funding renders a zero fiscal impact to this bill.
Assembly Bill No. 146 of the 71st Session sought to establish the same statistical analysis center, but died in the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means. It did receive a vote of do pass by the Assembly Committee on Judiciary. For an additional 2-year period Nevada has had the dubious distinction of being the only state in the nation without a SAC. In the state of Washington, the state SAC is part of a network supported by the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA). This is a national nonprofit organization of SAC directors and other researchers and practitioners throughout government, academia, and criminal justice organizations. Washington State’s SAC conducts and publishes policy-relevant research on justice issues such as the annual State of Washington Data Book and theannual State of Washington City and County Data Book. It provides training and technical assistance and maintains a clearinghouse of state criminal justice activities. The Center for Analysis of Crime Statistics to be established by A.B. 246 will be under the direction of Richard McCorkle, Chair, Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Mr. McCorkle also conducted the Traffic Stop data collection study completed in January 2003 and submitted to the Office of the Attorney General.
The repository believes in the necessity and purpose of a SAC. It is unable to accept the responsibility of operating such a center, but wishes to express its support of Mr. McCorkle and his department for making it possible for the center to be established and operated without any fiscal impact on local and State entities. Your favorable consideration of A.B. 246 will cause two positive things to occur: (1) it will put an end to Nevada being the only State in the nation without a SAC, and (2) it will establish a necessary and relevant research center in this State.
Senator Neal:
How are crime statistics being defined in the bill?
Richard McCorkle, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Criminal Justice, University of Nevada, Las Vegas:
It is defined broadly. It would include incidents of crime and the processing of felony cases through the system. It would reveal the number of cases, dispositions, sentences awarded, statistics about prison, and probation populations. It is broadly defined as crime and justice data.
Senator Neal:
Would the crime need to have been committed?
Mr. McCorkle:
Yes. These are crimes known to have been committed. They have been reported by citizens or observed by police officers while on patrol.
Senator Neal:
Would this include a study of police profiles?
Mr. McCorkle:
Yes, it could be one of the activities of the center. In addition to collecting information about the incidents of crime and the processing of criminal cases, the centers provide an opportunity to use federal funds to conduct the types of studies done in accordance with A.B. No. 500 of the 71st Session. These funds could have been tapped into if we had a center at that time.
Chairman Rawson:
I will take additional testimony on A.B. 246.
Mr. McCorkle:
I am speaking in support of A.B. 246. The major points have already been summarized. Since 1972, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, which is a research component of the National Institute of Justice, has provided financial assistance to the states to operate crime and justice information systems, known as statistical analysis centers. They are in operation in all states except Nevada. Their mission is to contribute to the state and local criminal justice policy development through the collection, analysis, and dissemination of information related to crime and criminal justice issues.
They serve as clearing houses for crime, substance abuse, and justice data. The types of data collected are; crime and arrest statistics, substance abuse prevalence, how felony cases are processed, and parole and probation populations. This information is collected and maintained at one site. As a central repository for information supplied by the various components of the criminal justice system, a SAC can provide an extremely comprehensive picture of crime and justice in a state. The centers perform research on a range of topics of concern to state and local policy makers and criminal justice practitioners. Last year, federal dollars were made available to SAC to conduct studies on domestic violence, how reforms affect prison populations, citizen satisfaction with police services, racial profiling, traffic stop studies, firearm crime, and the list continues.
In Nevada there is a need for the type of functions a SAC can provide. There are several large State and governmental agencies in Nevada that collect and publish information on crime- and justice-related agencies. The information collected by these agencies is not widely disseminated. Interested parties outside the agencies, policy makers, university researchers, and the general public should confront problems of public access that stands in sharp contrast to the dissemination practices of most states and the federal system in which vital crime and justice statistics, policy reports, and other types of information are made available on line. There is very little information sharing among justice‑related organizations and agencies in the State. Agency officials and policy makers are generally unaware of the existence of these pockets of information and must develop policies and procedures based on the limited information available.
Over the past 30 years, there has been an increasing recognition of the need for criminal justice policy to be informed by empirical research. In Nevada, the relationship between research, policy, and practice exists in embryonic form. The extent of rigorous policy-oriented research is limited and conducted by research units within larger agencies, the Legislative Counsel Bureau, or private research organizations throughout the State. While recognizing the benefits provided, relying on these sources is problematic. It may be difficult for a criminal justice organization to conduct objective research on the effectiveness of one of its programs or policies given the findings would affect future funding. While contracting with private research agencies outside the State is a solution to the problem, this practice should take place after all Nevada’s resources have been exhausted.
There are three benefits for the State of Nevada to have a SAC. First, we collect data. Existing databases in State, local organizations, and agencies would be collected and integrated into shared formats to access easily. There would be a data warehouse. This would allow for the centralization of data from law enforcement, the courts, and correctional components of State and local criminal justice systems. Procedures would be developed to periodically collect data from the smaller network of justice-related agencies as well. We collect data from across the criminal justice spectrum. Second, we would disseminate that information in compliance with federal and State guidelines. Information from the database and from the data warehouse would be available through web‑based technologies. From the Nevada SAC Website authorized portions of the data would be available for downloading in spreadsheet form. There would be information available at the click of a mouse. Third, One of the significant contributions of the SACs nationally has been to provide rigorous system-wide research on state and local crime injustice issues. The proposed Nevada SAC would provide policy makers with impartial evaluations of existing programs in the effect of the enacted or proposed programs or statutes. Statewide surveys of victimization, gambling, substance abuse, and attitudes toward other proposed crime legislation, and other important topics could occur. Funds for this research could be accessed through the federal funds that are specifically earmarked for these SACs.
The proposed Nevada SAC would be located in the Department of Criminal Justice at UNLV. The SAC would utilize the knowledge and skills of faculty from other academic disciplines at UNLV and throughout the State. I urge the committee to give A.B. 246 their strongest consideration.
Chairman Rawson:
There is other statistical analysis being done at UNLV, which makes me wonder why this could not be done by those individuals. Would we be duplicating some of our capabilities?
Mr. McCorkle:
We would be duplicating them. The problem exists in the data being fragmented. Across the State and in the university system there are people who are collecting data and doing research but it is scattered and difficult to access. There are people who are not aware the information is being collected and research is being done. A SAC would provide a central point where information could be accessed.
Chairman Rawson:
Would this compete or interfere with Dr. R. Keith Schwer’s operation?
Mr. McCorkle:
Are you referring to the Center for Business and Economical Research?
Chairman Rawson:
Yes.
Mr. McCorkle:
Senator Nolan:
Who would request research and studies conducted by the center?
Mr. McCorkle:
Any person in the Legislature and the Office of the Attorney General might need such information.
Senator Nolan:
Would a private entity have access as well?
Mr. McCorkle:
They could, if it had relevance for State or local policy. We would not be doing private research that does not have a direct and immediate impact on State and local criminal justice policy.
Senator Nolan:
How would the decision be made as to whether you accepted a request?
Mr. McCorkle:
In a typical SAC fiscal year, the Bureau of Justice Statistics releases themes or ideas for research projects and will provide substantial amounts of money for people who are interested and willing to do their specific type of research. The decision as to whether a piece of research is conducted depends on the funds and objectives of the funds provided by the federal government.
Senator Nolan:
I agree with the concept. I believe it is needed. We compile a lot of data, which is collated into mediums that we utilize. You testified that you would use information already gathered, do an analysis, and collate the information. Will you conduct research and study in areas where we are not getting any information?
Mr. McCorkle:
We hope to work and have the relationship with local police departments to acquire the type of data that would make this clearinghouse useful and productive on a regular basis.
Senator Washington:
The Legislature has been involved with making changes in our criminal sentencing structure, the juvenile aspect of our statutes, issues concerning parole and probation after a fatal incident occurred because of the lack of data available to us when we constructed policies. In doing so we always had to consider the fiscal ramifications to those policies. Would your center be able to provide us with the fiscal data that would help us in making these policies?
Mr. McCorkle:
Statistical analysis centers provide projections based on sentencing reform changes in the system, and its consequences.
Senator Washington:
Would you also give recommendations based on your findings?
Mr. McCorkle:
Yes.
Senator Neal:
How are the topics selected?
Mr. McCorkle:
Each year the federal government through the Bureau of Justice Statistics does release ideas or themes. What they want are people to do research on these topics. Last year’s “hot” topic was traffic stops. There were a lot of federal dollars disseminated to the SACs to do traffic-stop studies. There are certain topics that rise to the surface as to being important and demand a closer look. During a Legislative Session, as topics arise, that might be the time for people to address the fiscal impacts and changes in policies.
Senator Neal:
Is the selection of a topic from the federal list a subjective one?
Mr. McCorkle:
The people in the center make that decision. What we want to do with the center is be relevant to the State in a way the university is not presently. This would fill a critical need for empirical data to shape and form criminal justice policies. It is subjective.
Senator Mathews:
Could this be built into the curriculum in your department now?
Mr. McCorkle:
Unless a SAC is created either by executive order or a piece of legislation, we cannot access the federal funds.
Senator Mathews:
Without a statistical department can you not access the federal funds?
Mr. McCorkle:
Yes.
Senator Cegavske:
I am hoping an annual report could be given to the Legislature.
Mr. McCorkle:
Yes, we would like to provide one.
Senator Cegavske:
How many staff would be required? How much will you grow?
Mr. McCorkle:
We expect to grow substantially over the next 5 years. We will enlist the labor of graduate students to staff the center. There will be full-time faculty members at various campuses that are involved in research projects. The day-to-day operations of the center will be handled by graduate assistants and faculty who volunteer their time.
Senator Cegavske:
Will the staff you bring on be made permanent and be part of your department?
Chairman Rawson:
The bill states General Fund appropriations will not be requested to support the center.
Senator Cegavske:
My question is, if they have permanent staff and are within the university system, would they be UNLV staff?
Chairman Rawson:
Without changing the law that could not be done.
Mr. McCorkle:
There are 49 SACs operating across the country and Puerto Rico, most of them do not take state money. They operate very productive and useful centers using private dollars and federal government funds.
Senator Cegavske:
Would the facilities be housed at the university? Who would pay the expenses?
Rick Bennett, Lobbyist, University of Nevada, Las Vegas:
The center would be supported by grants and contracts. There are indirect costs built into those grants and contracts that are meant to support the costs related to the university. If a portion of the faculty members’ time is involved in the center, they would not be getting State dollars, but would be getting paid through the grants and contracts. We do need the statutory recognition before we can seek those federal funds. There may be State agencies wanting to contract with the center for certain research or studies. We could accept a State contract.
Senator Mathews:
Is this the same way the Desert Research Institute (DRI) was started?
Chairman Rawson:
They started in a similar manner.
Mr. Bennett:
I would suggest to you and others that in the future when this center is doing exceptional work, and if you want the services expanded, you may have to put General Fund dollars into it.
Senator Mathews:
I am not against DRI.
Mr. Bennett:
You would have to make that decision.
Senator Neal:
The Traffic Stop project has become a controversial issue. How would the center obtain cooperation and handle a controversial subject?
Mr. McCorkle:
The Traffic Stop study was a learning experience. I worked with law enforcement agencies to develop the instrument, the data collection card. I would do the study differently.
Senator Neal:
Would you explain?
Mr. McCorkle:
The study was done without funds. We were limited in terms of what we could do. If we had a SAC and could have acquired federal funds, we could have offset many of the costs to individual agencies. We could have developed some additional benchmarks or points of comparison from which to draw conclusions about the study. We could have accomplished more.
R. Ben Graham, Lobbyist, Nevada District Attorneys’ Association/Las Vegas:
I am also standing in for Lieutenant Stan Olsen and James Nadeau of the Nevada Sheriff’s and Chief’s Association. Many times we just do not give good answers to questions of how many are involved, what will happen, and how many are doing this. We just do not have good answers. From a law enforcement and prosecution standpoint we urge the establishment of the facility. We have cooperated in the past and will work with it in the future.
Mr. Bennett:
Lieutenant Stan Olsen, James Nadeau, and James Richardson have given their support to A.B. 246.
Leticia Johnson, Program Officer, Central Repository for Nevada Records of Criminal History, Department of Public Safety:
Due to a meeting conflict, Daryl Riersgard, the criminal information services manager could not attend this hearing. Mr. Riersgard previously testified to the Assembly Committee on Judiciary that the repository is in support of A.B. 246. Mr. Riersgard said he wishes to assure the committee and Mr. McCorkle of the repository’s full cooperation in sharing and providing information that will assist in making the proposed center of crime statistics and analysis a success.
SENATOR NOLAN MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 426.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Rawson:
I will open the hearing on A.B. 510.
ASSEMBLY BILL 510 (1st Reprint): Requires State Board of Education to prescribe course of study to prepare pupils for high school proficiency examination. (BDR 34-1239)
Tya Mathis, Intern for Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams:
I will be reading from prepared testimony and giving a slide presentation (Exhibit C) concerning the need for an elective course that will better prepare students for the Nevada proficiency examination, American College Test (ACT) and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT).
Stacey Ellmore, Senior Consultant, ACT Incorporated:
I will be giving a slide presentation (Exhibit D) explaining why test preparation is an important part of improving ACT scores, but the greater goal is to ensure that all students are ready for postsecondary education once they leave high school.
Jennifer Staats:
I am reading from prepared testimony (Exhibit E) concerning my experiences with the proficiency examinations I have taken.
Senator Cegavske:
Is the focus of the course study to make sure it is outlined?
Ms. Mathis:
It is to review the subjects where eachindividual student might need help. One student might need help with mathematics and another student might need help on the writing portion of the test. They would receive assistance in the area where they need help. This will assist the student with their test-taking skills; therefore, helping them with the SAT and ACT tests. Some students cannot take tests well.
Senator Cegavske:
Would you explain lines 30 through 32, on page 2? You are trying to have dual study courses. Are they separate or the same?
Ms. Mathis:
They would be in the same course. There would be one course for proficiency and all college entrance examinations.
Senator Cegavske:
Would it be an elective course?
Ms. Mathis:
Yes, it would be the student’s choice whether to take the course.
Senator Neal:
What assistance would be provided to the student?
Ms. Mathis:
At the beginning of the course, whoever would be teaching the course would give the students a sample of the proficiency examination. The results would determine where each student needed help. Students in the class would need different kinds of help.
Senator Neal:
Would there be a pretest to determine a student’s weakness?
Ms. Mathis:
Yes, at the beginning of the course.
Senator Neal:
Would this be a subject the student did not comprehend or did not receive in high school?
Ms. Mathis:
Both are a possibility. It could be a subject taught throughout high school, but some students have different ways of learning.
Chairman Rawson:
The language in section 1, page 1, of the bill is the same as in chapter 389 of Nevada Revised Statutes. Is there something more needed than what is already written in law?
Ms. Mathis:
The course is open. The instructor could teach as much or little as the school district felt was needed. It does not specify what should be included in the course. The language was left in that manner because it is not known why students are not passing the proficiency examinations.
Chairman Rawson:
Are you suggesting there would be a course specifically to prepare students for the tests?
Ms. Mathis:
Yes, it is an elective course for that purpose.
Dorothy L. (Dotty) Merrill, Lobbyist, Washoe County School District:
We are testifying in support of A.B. 510 as amended. We are supportive of the permissive language starting on line 1, page 2. Our school district has established and integrated into our curriculum a set of skills that assist our students in passing the high school proficiency examination and their performance on the ACT/SAT tests.
Chairman Rawson:
Is this a specific elective course?
Ms. Merrill:
Yes, if the district chooses to offer such a course.
Craig Kadlub, Lobbyist, Clark County School District:
We support the bill as amended.
Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research, and Evaluative Services, Department of Education:
I question the need for the language in section 1 because statute and regulation requires all school districts to provide remediation for students who cannot pass the test. This can be done through a class, after school, weekends, or during the summer months. It does not need to be an elective course.
The course of study would require us to address all the concerns of the high school proficiency examination. The course of study would include all the writing, reading, and mathematics standards we already have in place. It has been stated every student would be assessed at the beginning of the course. There could be 20 different needs from among the students. It would be difficult to define one course of study. It would be different if this were a test prep course.
When the statute was passed in 2001, the intent was to provide detailed and current information to junior and high school students regarding the high school proficiency examination. If information and courses concerning college prep is combined with the high school proficiency examination, it detracts from the pamphlet’s intention. Paragraph (g) on lines 27 through 29, requires our pamphlet to list the high school courses students should take to be successful on the high school proficiency examination.
The bill states on lines 30 through 32, ”the Department recommends,” the recommendations would be coming from SAT or ACT, which would include courses through Algebra II, Calculus, or other mathematics. This strays from the intent of the pamphlet and the information is readily available in other sources if the student is planning to go to the university and take the testing.
Chairman Rawson:
On page 2, line 4, the word ”may.” Does that offer some of the concerns you have with the bill?
Mr. Rheault:
We can put together a course of study, but the district must offer the course. There are courses being offered voluntarily, and without restrictions. If a course of study is an elective, it must be taught to get credit for the course.
If ten objectives were listed in an elective course of study, all should be taught. It could be a 2-week remedial course or a whole semester. This bill may be more restrictive by putting any course of study where currently there is flexibility for districts to vary the course based on the student’s need.
Chairman Rawson:
I will close the hearing on A.B. 510 and open the hearing on A.B. 507.
ASSEMBLY BILL 507 (1st Reprint): Revises provisions governing transferability of certain community college credits to university or state college. (BDR 34-254)
Assemblywoman Christina R. Giunchigliani, Assembly District No. 9:
Assembly Bill 507 is a complement to the issue of transferability of course work. Dr. Jane A. Nichols, Chancellor, University and Community College System of Nevada, has provided the committee with a letter (Exhibit F) which is “congruent with and supportive of Board of Regents’ policy mandating strong and effective transfer practices and emphasizing more pathways to the baccalaureate degree.”
Not all students are going to a college or university, but those in college who choose to get an associate arts degree (A.A.) or degree of associate in applied science (A.A.S.), the courses need to have transferability to the university system. Many people go to work and later decide to get their degree. In attempting not to be a barrier, this bill will allow their course work to be transferred over to the university system. There may be a review by the commission, but in most cases the courses would be the same. The intent is to clarify our educational system so it is one system and classes taken in a community college should count in the university system.
Chairman Rawson:
Will the bill accomplish your purpose?
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani:
Yes, A.B. 507 will accomplish and clarify our intent without usurping the regents. It would work within the confines of the commission that does the course approvals.
Chairman Rawson:
We thought this issue was resolved.
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani:
The course work is not always accepted even though a person has had the same curriculum, course of study, instructor, and used the same textbook.
Senator Cegavske:
I hope A.B. 507 will finally make the change permanent.
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani:
Chancellor Nichols recognizes there are problems in the system. This bill would allow those problems to be erased.
Senator Wiener:
Would this help the student who has not completed the A.A. but wants to transfer over? A person would know which courses were transferable. Would this take the next step in that direction?
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani:
Language on page 1, lines 4 through 6, addresses the credits earned toward the award of an associate’s degree. If a person has a degree in education and wishes to go back to further their education, they might have to start over. We want to eliminate that barrier. If the course is approved by the regents, it should have the same curriculum; therefore, it should be counted.
Senator Neal:
The language on line 8 “if acceptable” presupposes the university would have the same course as a community college. The term “if applicable” becomes the controlling language.
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani:
A person could get an A.A. and have a couple of courses not deemed applicable by the university. Those courses would have to be taken at the university.
Senator Neal:
If the term was changed to “does it apply or will it apply” to the course work required of the student for the award of a baccalaureate degree, the language “if applicable“ leaves it to the discretion of the university.
Chairman Rawson:
There might be courses in the community college that are not applicable to the major or minor, or other course work the student had taken. One way to avoid this problem would be to have prerequisite courses.
Mr. Bennett:
I agree this is an ongoing problem. The Board of Regents made progress over the last few years concerning articulation. An associate’s degree is the completion of core requirements. A student’s first 2 years of college is related to the core requirements.
Chairman Rawson:
You are interpreting the language as “if applicable.”
Mr. Bennett:
There are courses in heating and air-conditioning at the community college, but such a course would not translate to a 4-year degree in physics. There are courses for which a student would not get credit.
Chairman Rawson:
If the course is given at a 4-year institution and it is the same in the catalog, why would it not count?
Mr. Bennett:
If it were a part of the physics degree program, then it should count.
Senator Neal:
Utilizing the terms “must” or “shall” makes the language mandatory, but using the term “if applicable” makes the intent discretionary.
Chairman Rawson:
We could strike the term “if applicable.”
Mr. Bennett:
The chancellor has submitted a letter (Exhibit F) to the committee indicating agreement with the bill as written. The Board of Regents determines what is applicable. This has become a prime issue in many board hearings. They have indicated the issue needs to be resolved.
Senator Neal:
The Board of Regents does not make these determinations out of a vacuum. It comes from the university system.
Chairman Rawson:
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani has said A.B. 507 is another step forward.
Senator Mathews:
I was a community college person for 26 years. If the term “if applicable” remains in the bill, nothing will change. The students are the losers. Could the committee write a letter of intent stating courses taken at the community college would transfer to the university?
Chairman Rawson:
We could “sunset” if applicable.
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani:
I do not feel comfortable with the language. The term could be deleted from the bill in 2004 giving the commission time to adjust.
Chairman Rawson:
I do not recall ever drafting language to make a word disappear.
Senator Mathews:
Nursing courses are all the same. Yet, the courses cannot be transferred.
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani:
Strike the term “if applicable” on page 1; line 8, and “as applicable” on page 1, line 15, and on page 2, line 3, of the bill.
Chairman Rawson:
I believe the term on page 2 does have a different intent.
Mr. Bennett:
The chancellor should be provided the opportunity to consider what the change would imply.
Senator Neal:
It is very important because it will change mandatory language into discretionary by utilizing the term “if applicable.”
Mr. Bennett:
I understand, but I am not knowledgeable enough to respond to what that really means.
Senator Cegavske:
I appreciate this issue being brought to my attention.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 507.
Chairman Rawson:
The motion is amend and do pass striking the term “if applicable” on page 1, line 8, page 1 of A.B. 507.
SENATOR WIENER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR NOLAN WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Rawson:
The work session scheduled for today will be postponed until Wednesday. There being no further business at this time, I adjourn this meeting at 3:21 p.m.
Patricia Vardakis,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
DATE: