MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Transportation
Seventy-second Session
February 25, 2003
The Senate Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman Raymond C. Shaffer, at 1:34 p.m., on Tuesday, February 25, 2003, in Room 2149 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. The meeting was videoconferenced to the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Room 4412, 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 C. Shaffer, Chairman
Senator Dennis Nolan, Vice Chairman
Senator Mark Amodei
Senator Warren B. Hardy, II
Senator Michael Schneider
Senator Terry Care
Senator Maggie Carlton
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Marsheilah Lyons, Committee Policy Analyst
Lee-Ann Keever, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Jacob Greguras, Concerned Citizen
Stan Olsen, Lobbyist, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Lisa A. Foster, Lobbyist, California State Automobile Association (dba AAA Nevada)
Barry S. Frank, M.D., Concerned Citizen
John Fildes, M.D., Concerned Citizen
Frank “Rocky” Gonzales, Trooper, Nevada Highway Patrol
Jeanne Cosgrove, Concerned Citizen, SAFE KIDS – Clark County
Eric Guevin, Concerned Citizen, Regional Emergency Medical Services Authority, Washoe County
Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Teamsters Local 14
Traci Filippi, Highway Safety Representative, Nevada Office of Traffic Safety, Department of Public Safety
Eric Breen, Director, Safe Community Partnership, Transportation Center, Engineering College, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens
Chairman Shaffer presented three bill draft requests (BDRs) for committee introduction. He said the BDRs were requested by State agencies.
BILL DRAFT REQUEST 43-1058: Revises provisions concerning enforcement of requirement of registration of motor vehicle by new resident of this state. (Later introduced as Senate Bill 214.)
SENATOR CARLTON MOVED TO INTRODUCE BDR 43-1058.
SENATOR AMODEI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
BILL DRAFT REQUEST S-484: Authorizes Department of Motor Vehicles to establish pilot program pursuant to which period of registration for certain motor vehicles is expanded. (Later introduced as Senate Bill 213.)
SENATOR AMODEI MOVED TO INTRODUCE BDR S-484.
SENATOR HARDY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
BILL DRAFT REQUEST 43-585: Revises provisions governing salvage vehicles. (Later introduced as Senate Bill 212.)
SENATOR AMODEI MOVED TO INTRODUCE BDR 43-585.
SENATOR HARDY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 116: Revises provisions relating to use of equipment to secure children traveling in certain motor vehicles. (BDR 43-87)
Chairman Shaffer opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 116, and requested Senator Nolan explain the measure. Senator Nolan, Clark County Senate District 9, said the Safe Kids Coalition of both northern and southern Nevada requested he sponsor S.B. 116. Based on his personal experience as both a paramedic and a coroner’s investigator, Senator Nolan agreed there was a need for such legislation.
Senator Dennis Nolan, Clark County Senatorial District No. 9, explained S.B. 116 addressed the forgotten child. The forgotten child was one who was too big for a child’s car seat and not big enough to safely wear an adult restraint system. Typically, a forgotten child tended to be between the ages of 5 to 9 years of age. There was evidence indicating severe or fatal injuries occurred when a forgotten child wore an adult restraint system. The bill was intended to protect a forgotten child by requiring the child to sit in a child booster car seat.
Senator Nolan said the Volvo Car Corporation sponsored a study which showed a 45 percent reduction in injuries to children in the age group targeted by S.B. 116, when they used the proper restraint system.
Senator Nolan outlined a proposed an amendment to S.B. 116 (Exhibit C) which defined the children affected if the measure were to pass. The target population would be between 5 to 9 years of age and weigh less than 80 pounds. Currently, if a child was 5 years of age or younger, the law requires them to use a child safety seat while riding in a motor vehicle.
Senator Nolan addressed the installation and manner of use of a child booster seat. He said the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway and Traffic Administration, established the regulations and policies for the use of booster seats. Such oversight included instructions to those individuals certified to install the booster seats in vehicles. Senator Nolan talked about subsection 2 (Exhibit C) which addressed the proposed penalties should a parent fail to use a child booster safety seat for his or her child. The original fine of $35 had been deemed too lenient, especially for the repeat offenders. The new language read “$50 or not more than $500,” and had been requested by judges who felt the new language would give them increased flexibility when imposing fines.
Senator Nolan said the rest of the bill remained as originally written with the exception of the gross vehicle weight. The bill had been amended to reflect the increased weight of sport utility vehicles.
Senator Nolan said public education and training would contribute to the public’s acceptance of new technological safety initiatives, especially if their children were protected. Senator Nolan stated the government had a few responsibilities toward its citizens. One of those responsibilities was to insure the safety of all citizens, including children.
Senator Nolan presented a child booster safety seat for the committee members’ inspection. He said he purchased the seat for $17 at Kmart and would be using it for his 3 year old.
Senator Nolan introduced Jacob Greguras, Concerned Citizen. Due to Mr. Greguras’s young age, Senator Nolan requested he be allowed to testify before the other witnesses. Senator Nolan did not want Mr. Greguras to see the graphic photographs the other witnesses would be presenting.
Mr. Greguras said he was 7 years old, weighed 75 pounds, and used a child booster safety seat. The adult shoulder strap cut into his neck, and hurt his armpit. Until he received a child booster safety seat, Mr. Greguras said he had used an adult shoulder strap despite the inconvenience and pain. He preferred the child booster safety seat to the adult shoulder strap system because it did not cut into his neck.
Stan Olsen, Lobbyist, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, said his agency supported S.B. 116 because it felt the use of the child safety booster seats would save lives, and protect children involved in car accidents. Mr. Olsen asked Mr. Greguras to testify on his use of the child safety booster seats.
Senator Care had a series of questions regarding the provisions of S.B. 116. First, he asked if failure to use a child safety booster seat would be a secondary offense. He wanted to know if a person could be pulled over if a law enforcement officer observed a child was not properly secured in the car.
Next, Senator Care wanted statistics on the number of citations issued under the current law mandating the use of child safety seats. Then, Senator Care asked how the out-of-state drivers would receive notice of Nevada’s requirement for the use of a child booster safety seat. Finally, the senator said he had often transported his children’s friends. He asked if he would be responsible for providing child booster safety seats when transporting children other than his own.
Lisa A. Foster, Lobbyist, California State Automobile Association (dba AAA Nevada) said the offense would be a primary offense. She noted the failure to use a car seat was considered a primary offense in all 50 states and a vehicle could be pulled over for failing to use car seats for children riding in the vehicle.
Ms. Foster said the use of restraints for infants to age three and children age nine and above was very high. However, for 3 to 8 year olds, the use of restraints was at the bottom of the chart, because the three to eight year olds were too big to use a child safety seat and too uncomfortable using an adult restraint system. These two factors accounted for non-use of a restraint system by a forgotten child.
Ms. Foster stated 16 states required a child safety booster seat to be used. It was not unusual for a family to go from a state requiring a booster seat to a state that did not require a booster seat. She said it would be difficult to post a notice. Most of the people traveling into the Las Vegas area were from Los Angeles, California and already using a booster seat due to California’s booster seat law.
Ms. Foster said when she transported children, she made sure she had enough booster seats to accommodate all her young passengers. She added the seats were easily transportable. Senator Care said his concern had been when he was asked to transport children other than his own. Ms. Foster said when transporting children other than her own, she had not encountered trouble. She used a child safety seat as required.
Senator Carlton said the situation was the same as transporting older children and not having a sufficient number of seat belts in the vehicle for the children. Senator Carlton said she would not transport children in her vehicle unless each child had his or her own seat belt or child booster safety seat.
Dr. Barry S. Frank, M.D., Concerned Citizen and Director Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Washoe Medical Center, introduced his 8-year-old son, Eric, who used a child booster safety seat. Dr. Frank told the committee members when the time came for Eric to use a child booster safety seat, he researched the matter thoroughly and consulted with officials at the Regional Emergency Medical Services Authority (REMSA) in order to make an informed decision.
Dr. Frank referenced figure 10, page 2, of SAFE KIDS BUCKLE UP (Exhibit D. Original is on file in the Research Library.) illustrating an incorrect seat belt fit. Dr. Frank referenced figures 7, 8, and 9 (Exhibit D). He elaborated on the injuries a child received when using an adult restraint system. Dr. Frank said a child booster safety seat raised a child to a level consistent with a properly positioned adult using an adult restraint system, and prevented the injuries shown in Exhibit D. Those injuries were sometimes referred to as the seatbelt syndrome.
Dr. John Fildes, M.D., Concerned Citizen, testified from Las Vegas, Nevada via videoconferencing. Dr. Fildes said he was a professor of surgery at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and the medical director at the University Medical Center (UMC), Trauma Center in Las Vegas, Nevada. Dr. Fildes was testifying in his capacity as the State Chairperson of the American College of Surgeons’ Committee on Trauma in Nevada.
Dr. Fildes said each year in Nevada, 5 to 10 children died in motor vehicle accidents. Those children were between the ages of 4 to 8 years of age. In the year 2002, UMC’s Trauma Center admitted 29 children in those age groups, who had been injured in car accidents. The children who died as a result of those accidents had been unrestrained while the survivors had been properly restrained. Dr. Fildes said the injuries a restrained child received differed in severity from those received by an unrestrained child.
Dr. Fildes cited specific examples of the injuries received by unrestrained children, including broken necks and paralyses, while restrained children received sprained necks. The unrestrained children also suffered from ruptured spleens and internal bleeding. Children improperly using an adult restraint system suffered from spleen injuries and small bowel ruptures. Of the 29 children treated at the trauma center in 2002, two were in child booster safety seats. One child was uninjured while the other had a small cut on his forehead and an uncomplicated leg fracture. Dr. Fildes noted the proper positioning of a child in a restraint system was beneficial and reduced serious injuries.
Dr. Fildes said children involved in a car accident and who were not properly restrained, received a significant number of brain injuries including comas, intercerebral bleeding, and skull fractures. In contrast, a restrained child suffered from brief loss of consciousness and a mild concussion. Dr. Fildes said unrestrained children suffered wrist and elbow fractures during an accident in their attempt to brace themselves. Restrained children did not receive such upper extremity fractures.
Frank “Rocky” Gonzales, Trooper, Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP) said Exhibit D contained photographs from three Nevada traffic accidents and demonstrated what happened to unrestrained children involved in car accidents. Trooper Gonzales reviewed the photographs and explained injuries the children received. Trooper Gonzales said he investigated all traffic accidents in his district in which a child was involved. He noted the proper installation of a child safety seat was critical in determining gross negligence. If a car seat was installed in the right front passenger seat, it was critical for the car seat to be properly installed. The front seat should be pushed as far back as possible in order to provide maximum protection for the child.
Trooper Gonzales explained after a motor vehicle accident involving children, the NHP photographed the car to show the stress marks and belt path of the vehicle’s seat belts.
Trooper Gonzales talked about the Toyota Camry on the second page of photographs (Exhibit D). Despite the car seat being properly installed and the parents taking all possible precautions, the child was killed due to the impact of the collision.
Trooper Gonzales said many of the aftermarket car seat options were illegal and often voided the manufacturer’s warranty. In Nevada, a parent could not install aftermarket products in a child’s car seat. Trooper Gonzales said the aftermarket products affected the car seat’s design and function and often reduced the seat’s effectiveness.
Trooper Gonzales said the NHP conducted classes on the proper installation of child safety seats. One point emphasized in those classes was the installation of the child safety seat in the rear seat of a vehicle. He referenced the photographs of the Jeep Cherokee in the Safe Kids Buckle Up folder (Exhibit D). A small child riding in the front seat of the Jeep suffered head injuries due to the damage the vehicle sustained in the accident. If the child had been riding in the back seat of the Jeep, he would not have been as severely injured. Trooper Gonzales also noted the car seat in the photograph had not been properly installed in the vehicle.
Trooper Gonzales talked about a newspaper article (Exhibit D) that described a fatal auto accident involving a child on November 18, 2002 in Elko. The child, 4-year-old Mikayla Whalen, weighed 30 pounds and was sitting, unrestrained, in the front passenger seat of the vehicle. The force of the impact threw her into the windshield. The airbag deployed and ejected Mikayla through the windshield. The other child, Nicole Whalen, was a passenger in a child safety seat in the rear seat of the vehicle. Nicole’s car seat was not restrained in any fashion. Trooper Gonzales said the child’s mother, Bridget Whalen and the driver of the car, was not wearing a lap or shoulder belt.
Trooper Gonzales told the committee members Ms. Whalen was a repeat offender cited numerous times for failing to properly restrain her children while in a motor vehicle. Ms. Whalen had been charged with involuntary manslaughter in her daughter’s death due to her failure to properly restrain her children in a motor vehicle.
Trooper Gonzales said the NHP wanted to educate people on the proper use of child safety seats. Trooper Gonzales’ region of patrol for NHP covered two‑thirds of the rural areas in Nevada. The NHP wrote 131 child passenger safety citations in that particular region of patrol during 2002. During the same time period, the NHP wrote 1738 citations for failure to use seat belts. Nevada experienced 41 traffic fatalities in 2002 with 12 of the victims using seat belts which translates to a 70 percent fatality rate for nonseat belt usage.
Besides parents, other caretakers needed to assume responsibility for the safe transport of children. This category included grandparents, aunts, uncles, babysitters, and day care facilities. Trooper Gonzales said education and enforcement were the key components to child safety in motor vehicles. He added enforcement was a means of education. The NHP would take steps necessary to prevent motor vehicle fatalities in any age group.
Trooper Gonzales said many of the stores and manufacturers provided coupons to reduce the cost of a new car seat. There were some car seats which do not fit into a standard car. To counteract the problem, the NHP had a Safety Seat Program in place. The goal of the program was to provide parents car seats which fit into the majority of cars on the road. It was critical for a safety seat to fit both the child using it, and the car in which it was installed. Trooper Gonzales said if a safety seat was not practical, then the parents were less likely to use it correctly.
Senator Care said the language in S.B. 116 stated, “the operator of the vehicle shall secure…” instead of “the operator of the vehicle shall properly secure.” Senator Care wanted to know what could be done about a person who improperly secured a child in a motor vehicle. Trooper Gonzales said the language of the bill mandated the installation of a car seat according to manufacturer’s instructions. He added such language would help law enforcement officials when dealing with operators of vehicles where children were improperly restrained in a motor vehicle.
Trooper Gonzales said when the NHP conducted safety seat installations, it also conducted a clinic on the proper and safe installation of a safety seat. Due to the instruction provided, a car seat installation could take as long as an hour to complete. Trooper Gonzales said it was not the NHP’s place to tell parents they had made an improper purchase if a safety seat was difficult to install. Trooper Gonzales said many parents purchased their car seats through an Internet vendor because they were not able to purchase a car seat locally. Trooper Gonzales stressed the NHP would assist parents in any way it could in order to ensure the safe installation of a car seat.
Trooper Gonzales said the NHP had a car seat loan program. This program made car seats available to out-of-state visitors to Nevada. The NHP’s website contained contact information. People could use the site to request the loan of a car safety seat while traveling in Nevada. Trooper Gonzales reiterated the NHP would help those individuals with the proper installation of the child safety seat they were borrowing.
There were many parents who did not take time to properly restrain their children in motor vehicles. The NHP wanted stiffer penalties in the law for the failure of parents to properly restrain a child in a motor vehicle.
Senator Hardy said he appreciated the trooper’s compelling testimony. He asked about aftermarket options for child safety seats. Senator Hardy said he had purchased aftermarket options for his children’s safety seats. He made such purchases based upon a recommendation from his children’s pediatrician. Senator Hardy had no idea the devices were harmful and wanted to know if these devices were still available. Trooper Gonzales told the Senator “yes,” adding many of the devices available in local stores had not been crashed tested. The devices were often purchased due to looks, matched the parent’s car, or a child’s outfit. Many devices altered the position of the car seat’s harness and gave a false sense of security to the parent.
Senator Hardy suggested the committee members review the sale of aftermarket devices in Nevada. He said he had purchased these devices because he had been told they increased his child’s safety. Trooper Gonzales said some child safety seats came equipped with factory-installed aftermarket options. These seats met all safety standards.
Chairman Shaffer wanted to know if there were any recognized laboratories which tested car safety seats and also provided labels for the manufacturers to place on the child safety seats. Trooper Gonzales said if a seat had a Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) sticker attached or the instructions for the child safety seat indicated the seat met the FMVSS, the government would recognize the seat.
Senator Carlton asked for and received clarification from Trooper Gonzales on the circumstances under which a parent would be penalized. Trooper Gonzales said he was not mandated by the child passenger safety law to issue citations to parents who failed to properly restrain a child in a motor vehicle, but he did so. He carried child safety seats in his NHP car and gave those seats to parents who did not have a child safety seat. Trooper Gonzales said in those instances, he still issued a citation to the parent for failing to properly restrain their child in a motor vehicle.
Senator Carlton confirmed when Trooper Gonzales issued a citation to a parent, the parent would have to appear before a judge. She wanted to know if a parent would be fined once they proved purchase of a child safety seat since the date of the citation. Trooper Gonzales said if it were the parents’ first offense, they would have 14 days to purchase a child safety seat. If they provided the receipt for the purchase to the judge, the judge could waive the fine.
Jeanne Cosgrove, Concerned Citizen, SAFE KIDS – Clark County, said she was the Injury Prevention Coordinator for Sunrise Children’s Hospital in Las Vegas. She is the first nationally certified child passenger safety instructor in Nevada.
Ms. Cosgrove said people were confusing the existing child passenger safety law with the provisions of S.B. 116. The current law allowed a ticket to be waived if a parent appeared in court within 14 days of being cited and showed proof they purchased a child safety seat. The problem was a parent could present any child safety seat to a judge and have the fine waived, even one not appropriate for the child. Ms. Cosgrove said S.B. 116 prevented a parent from showing a judge a misleading car seat receipt. Further, if the car seat was appropriate for the child’s age and weight, it might be broken or on a recall list.
The judges in Clark County were asked if they could identify the differences between the child car seats available for purchase. None of the judges were able to identify the differences in the various child car seats. The SAFE KIDS Coalition Clark County instituted a court diversion program to inspect the car seats purchased by the offending parents. The program was funded through the Office of Traffic Safety, and its purpose was to insure every child in Clark County had an age and size appropriate car seat. Parent participation in the program was voluntary and the citations of those parents who participated were waived. If a parent did not have an age or size appropriate car seat for their child, the program provided one. The program further ensured the car seat was correctly installed in a parent’s vehicle. Ms. Cosgrove said a similar program was being instituted in Washoe County.
Ms. Cosgrove noted the provisions of S.B. 116 contained the same provisions as the child safe passenger law. It allowed a judge or court diversion program to waive a fine or a ticket, if the parent proved an age and size appropriate car seat had been purchased. The court diversion program had a $25 participation fee, and provided car seats on a complimentary basis, if a parent could not afford to purchase a car seat for their child.
Eric Guevin, Director of Washoe County SAFE KIDS Coalition, and the Director, Community Education for the Regional Emergency Medical Services Authority (REMSA) testified next. Mr. Guevin said S.B. 116 addressed the proper use and installation of a child safety seat as well as the use of child safety booster seats. Mr. Guevin said traffic accidents were the number one cause of death in American children. If parents used a child safety seat, the death rate would be reduced. REMSA’s Point of Impact Program provided education to parents. The program was started in 1997 due to six children dying in traffic accidents in Washoe County.
Washoe County SAFE KIDS Coalition was affiliated with the National SAFE KIDS campaign whose motto was “Safe kids are no accident.” In his professional capacity, Mr. Guevin had seen many children injured in traffic accidents due to improper seat belt fit. Mr. Guevin talked about the forgotten child, stressing proper seat belt fit was important to the safety of children. A booster seat elevated a child to the proper height to receive the maximum protection from an adult restraint system.
Mr. Guevin referenced an article in the Reno Gazette Journal (Exhibit D) describing a child who had been ejected and pinned underneath the vehicle. The child was restrained only by a seat belt that failed to secure him during the vehicle’s rollover. The REMSA freed the child in approximately an hour and did not cause further injury to the child during the extraction process. Mr. Guevin stressed the child would not have been injured if he had been properly restrained.
Mr. Guevin said most parents were open to learning about the means by which they could protect their children. Mr. Guevin told the committee members the driving under the influence (DUI) checkpoints were already funded by the State, and REMSA used the checkpoints as an opportunity to inspect vehicles for proper child safety seat installation. At a DUI checkpoint held in January 2003 (Exhibit D), 20 vehicles did not have child safety seats installed. Twelve of the motorists were given child safety seats.
Mr. Guevin said all child safety seat inspections in Washoe County were voluntary. The REMSA was happy to assist parents in the selection and installation of child safety seats.
Mr. Guevin stated REMSA viewed traffic stops as a means to educate parents. He made reference to the three Es in child safety: education, enforcement, and engineering. Those three elements had to come together in order to ensure a child’s safety. Mr. Guevin said he had another E he added to the equation: economics. He said child booster seats were affordable and easy to use. Mr. Guevin stated a child’s car safety seat was technical to install. For that reason, there were trained technicians throughout the State assisting in car safety seat installations.
Mr. Guevin reiterated his previous testimony on the need for car booster safety seats for the forgotten child. During 2003, 12 forgotten children were killed in traffic accidents. Mr. Guevin asked the committee members to protect the forgotten children of Nevada by passing S.B. 116.
Ms. Foster outlined AAA’s plans to educate parents and caregivers on the subject of child safety in motor vehicles. She said when the laws changed, people needed to be made aware of the change in order for compliance to be achieved.
Ms. Foster told the committee members about AAA’s Seated, Safe and Secure program is designed to educate parents and caregivers on appropriate child safety seat usage. One of the elements of the program was a public service announcement (PSA) airing in Nevada. Ms. Foster made an effort to educate Nevada’s Spanish speaking population through the Spanish media. Ms. Foster stated AAA intended to continue and expand the program. She outlined the means by which AAA intended to enlarge the program. Ms. Foster said the PSA would be expanded from 30 seconds in length to 60 seconds. If S.B. 116 were passed into law, the expanded PSA would inform parents of the bill’s passage and a parent’s obligation under S.B. 116 provisions. Ms. Foster stated the rural areas of Nevada, as well as Nevada’s Hispanic population, were the last groups of parents to receive information relative to child safety.
Ms. Foster said AAA planned to purchase child booster safety seats for distribution to the economically disadvantaged parents in Nevada. She stated other insurance companies would be participating in similar programs to provide child safety booster seats. She stressed AAA fully supported S.B. 116.
Chairman Shaffer asked if Ms. Foster had reviewed the proposed amendment to S.B. 116. Ms. Foster said she had reviewed the proposed amendment and agreed with it.
Senator Care asked Ms. Foster if data existed on the impact to the insurance industry when legislation requiring the use of a child booster safety seat was enacted. Ms. Foster said she did not have the statistics, and added the legislation was so recent, the figures might not be available. She promised to see if it would be possible to generate the information Senator Care requested.
Mr. Guevin said an accident with a death resulted in little or no cost to the county or insurance companies. The additional costs resulted from the medical treatment a person received after being involved in a motor vehicle accident. Mr. Guevin referenced the chart on page 6 (Exhibit D) which compared medical costs between a restrained passenger versus those incurred by an unrestrained passenger.
Senator Care asked if the information contained on page 6 (Exhibit D) had been translated into cost savings realized by insurance companies. Mr. Guevin said he was not sure if that had been done, adding REMSA’s main goal was child protection.
Ms. Foster said she would work with the National Insurance Institute and other insurance groups in an effort to determine if data on cost savings existed. She would report her findings to the committee members as soon as it was available.
Ms. Cosgrove outlined existing educational programs available to Nevada parents. She explained the voluntary child safety seat inspection programs, the car seat distribution programs, the minority outreach coordinators, and the community workshops for parents in Clark County. Ms. Cosgrove referred to the licensed technicians in Nevada certified to properly and safely install child car safety seats in vehicles. A list of those technicians was included in Exhibit D.
Ms. Cosgrove explained the funding available to Clark County SAFE KIDS for the next 3 years. The program received $50,000 a year from the General Motors Corporation (GMC) for at risk and minority children. The program received an additional $15,000 a year from GMC for the SAFE KIDS BUCKLE UP program. The court diversion program received $36,000 year. Inspection stations with specific hours of operation received $38,000 a year. The funding level allowed Clark County SAFE KIDS to reach parents who needed assistance and provided free car safety seats to parents who could not afford car safety seats.
Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Teamsters Local 14, said his union members, the Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP), fully supported S.B. 116, as did other law enforcement agencies in Nevada. Mr. Wolff said he worked for the NHP for 31 years. During his years as a trooper, the most heart-wrenching sights were the traffic accidents involving children. He said his heartache often turned to anger when he learned the children were not properly restrained. Mr. Wolff congratulated Mr. Guevin and Ms. Cosgrove’s efforts to educate the public on child safety.
Traci Filippi, Highway Safety Representative, Nevada Office of Traffic Safety (OTS), Department of Public Safety, stated the mission of her office was to provide funding, expertise, create partnerships, promote education to reduce deaths, injuries, and property damage on Nevada roads. She outlined the means by which these tasks were accomplished. There were approximately 200 nationally certified passenger safety technicians and 12 nationally certified instructors in Nevada. These individuals were certified after completing a hands‑on course. As additional classes were conducted, the number of certified technicians in Nevada increased on a yearly basis. Ms. Filippi said while her office was funded primarily by federal dollars, her office received $14,000 a year from the State’s Highway Funds.
Ms. Filippi reviewed the child booster car seat laws in other states, noting Washington was the first state to pass such legislation in 2000. In the last two years, 13 other states and the District of Columbia had strengthened their child restraint laws to include child booster safety seats. In December 2001, 29 states had legislation pending that addressed the issue of child booster safety seats. As of December 31, 2002, 10 of those states had passed legislation needed to protect the forgotten child. Currently, 16 states had child booster safety seat laws on the books.
Ms. Filippi told the committee members the Ford Motor Company (FMC) donated 2500 child booster safety seats to the State to promote booster seat education. At the same time, OTS donated in excess of $74,000 in car seats, including child safety booster seats, and educational materials to agencies throughout Nevada.
Ms. Filippi said from October 1, 2001 through October 1, 2002, eight children under the age of 9 died in fatal car accidents on Nevada’s highways. She noted only 13 percent of those children had been restrained in some fashion. During the same time period, 59 children survived fatal crashes with 77 percent being restrained. Ms. Filippi stated the number of potential child fatalities would drop to half and serious injured would be reduced by 60 percent if S.B. 116 were enacted.
The National Highway Safety Administration estimated the cost of motor vehicle fatality to be $977,000, while the cost of an injury would be $1,200,000 million. Based on the number of lives saved if S.B. 116 were passed, a savings of $46 million could be realized.
Ms. Filippi discussed the forgotten child, vehicle injury, and fatality rates for that age group. She said the forgotten child group was the only group which did not have a decline in fatalities or injuries in the past 20 years. Ms. Filippi said it was time to marry public policy with science in order to keep children safe while riding in motor vehicles.
Mr. Guevin said Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) fully supported S.B. 116.
Erin Breen, Director, Safe Community Partnership, Transportation Research Center, Engineering College, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said her agency produced the statistics in Exhibit D. She said the statistics were produced for all groups of passengers in motor vehicles.
Ms. Breen reiterated the previous testimony regarding the forgotten child and outlined the means by which seat belt usage was counted. She said when children put the shoulder strap of an adult restraint system behind their backs, it was not counted as usage. Ms. Breen told the committee members Nevada ranked 30 percent below the national average for seat belt usage by children. Ms. Breen’s office would work with other agencies to educate people about the need for the forgotten child to use a child booster safety seat.
Ms. Breen said because adult restraint systems were often uncomfortable, a parent was inclined to let a forgotten child go unrestrained. She said a child booster safety seat was easy to use, and inexpensive. An educational program for child booster safety seat usage could be easily begun. She said if S.B. 116 was enacted, she would be able to demonstrate a dramatic drop in the number of injuries and/or fatalities in the forgotten child group of motor vehicle passengers at the 2005 Legislative Session.
Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens, said she was not opposed to S.B. 116, but she had concerns over the wording of the bill. She referred to page 2 of Exhibit C. Ms. Luck said the page did not make reference to a court diversion program being allowed to waive a fine issued under S.B. 116 should it be enacted. Ms. Lusk was concerned a parent might have purchased an incorrect seat or installed it incorrectly. She said she did not think it would be fair to fine them for their efforts.
Senator Nolan told Ms. Lusk that judge could waive any fine over $50 imposed under S.B. 116 as long as the parent or caretaker proved they had purchased age- and weight-appropriate seat for their child. Senator Nolan said S.B. 116 was designed to address the repeat offender, the parent who refused to abide by the child passenger safety law.
Ms. Lusk said she understood the provisions of S.B. 116 as Senator Nolan explained them. She said she did not think many people understood the $50 fine was mandatory.
Mr. Guevin said there was a fine of $100 for illegal use of a handicapped parking space. There was no threat to life by improperly using a handicapped parking space. The improper restraint of children in motor vehicles was the number one killer of small children in America, and a $50 fine was not even a slap on the wrist. The suggested fine structure in S.B. 116 gave it enforcement powers without destroying a family financially.
Before voting on S.B. 116, the committee members decided to further review it. They wanted the discussion regarding the proposed amendment (Exhibit C) and suggested language or modifications received during testimony incorporated into the bill. The changes to S.B. 116 would be done before the committee members voted on the bill.
There being no further business, Chairman Shaffer adjourned the Senate Committee on Transportation at 3:06 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Lee-Ann Keever,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Raymond C. Shaffer, Chairman
DATE: