MINUTES OF THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY Sixty-eighth Session March 3, 1995 The Committee on Judiciary was called to order at 8:08 a.m., on Friday, March 3, 1995, Chairman Anderson presiding in Room 332 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Bernie Anderson, Chairman Mr. David E. Humke, Chairman Ms. Barbara E. Buckley, Vice Chairman Mr. Brian Sandoval, Vice Chairman Mr. Thomas Batten Mr. John C. Carpenter Mr. David Goldwater Mr. Mark Manendo Mrs. Jan Monaghan Ms. Genie Ohrenschall Mr. Richard Perkins Mr. Michael A. (Mike) Schneider Ms. Dianne Steel Ms. Jeannine Stroth STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Neilander, Research Analyst Joi Davis, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Bayer, Department of Prisons George Kaiser, Department of Prisons BDR 16-922 Increases number of members of board of parole commissioners and changes number of members required to decide issues involving certain offenders. ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL DRAFT. ASSEMBLYMAN BATTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. Chairman Anderson also announced that each committee was provided a copy of the book, "The Law Handbook, A Manager's Guide to Landlord/Tenant Law" which was provided to the committee by the Nevada Apartment Association. It is included here as (Exhibit C). The committee went off record so copies could be made of the Work Session Document prepared by Mr. Neilander for those members not having a copy. Mr. Neilander's Work Session Document is attached hereto as (Exhibit D). Chairman Anderson opened the work session with Assembly Bill 87. ASSEMBLY BILL - 87 Makes appropriation to bureau of alcohol and drug abuse in rehabilitation division of department of employment, training and rehabilitation for support of certain programs of treatment for criminal offenders who abuse alcohol or drugs. The committee discussed this bill in the previous work session but were unable to conclude discussion in that regard. Chairman Anderson believed they had left off with the concern of Mr. Carpenter about justices in the rural areas. Mr. Neilander stated that, upon Chairman Anderson's notice to him, the interim subcommittee had considered the notion of the $90,000 being divided among whichever of the nine districts, excluding Clark County and Washoe County, actually set up a program to divide the $90,000 among them. So if three districts set up a program and the others did not, the $90,000 would be divided three ways and that would be an amendment to this bill if the committee chooses to go in that direction. Mr. Neilander informed the committee that if A.B. 87 is passed by them it would proceed directly to the Ways and Means Committee regarding the appropriation. Chairman Anderson noted that the subcommittee did have the intention as stated by Mr. Neilander but the bill drafting did not clarify that in A.B. 87. Also, Mr. Neilander requested a date, possibly January 1st, to be included in the amendment to A.B. 87. The date would be the time each district had to set up a program and if they did not set up a program by that date, the $90,000 would be split equally among those districts that did establish a program and then the Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Abuse (BADA) would funnel the money to them. A discussion was held between committee members regarding Section 2 of the bill in that the language therein would be retained even after amendment. Mr. Carpenter asked if there was a program established in Washoe County, could someone in the near proximity use the Washoe County program? Mr. Neilander stated there could possibly be some type of cooperative arrangement between the judges; however, the district in which the offender commits a crime has jurisdiction over that offender so initially that offender would have to go through whatever county in which the crime was committed. Mr. Sandoval asked if the Ways and Means Committee does not approve the money for the drug court in the other bill, which was amended, would Washoe County still have the ability to apply for the funds under this bill? Chairman Anderson stated he believed so, citing lines 11 and 12 of A.B. 87. Mr. Neilander stated his understanding was the same and reiterated that he would need a date of when the programs have to be established to put in the amendment. Mr. Carpenter brought up the date of December 31st and further stated that his understanding of the bill is also that if some of the other districts did not utilize the funds, Las Vegas and Reno could also apply. Mr. Carpenter also felt it should not be difficult for the rural counties to work with the judges in Washoe County to establish their programs. Mr. Humke added that the money referred to in A.B. 87 goes through BADA for funding so that puts it more on the program side rather than on the judicial side of it. So, the BADA certified providers of the treatment services would then cooperate with Washoe County to Carson City and Douglas County and that would not necessarily involve much judicial involvement. Mr. Neilander clarified the current language of the bill shows the funds are administered by BADA so that portion of A.B. 87 does not need an amendment. Mr. Carpenter stated the amendment needs to be broad enough to encompass everything the committee has discussed thus far. ASSEMBLYMAN CARPENTER MOVED FOR A MOTION TO AMEND & DO PASS A.B. 87. ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT, ASSEMBLYMAN BATTEN ABSENT AT TIME OF VOTE. ASSEMBLY BILL - 96 Provides for deferred prosecution of certain persons accused of driving under influence of intoxicating liquor or controlled substance. ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE MOVED FOR A MOTION TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 96. ASSEMBLYMAN STEEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. ASSEMBLY BILL - 89 Eliminates mandatory minimum penalty for unlawful use of certain controlled substances. Mr. Neilander stated A.B. 89 was designed as the first step in a truth-in-sentencing measure. However, testimony in Las Vegas indicated the bill actually has no legal effect. Mr. Neilander further explained the one year minimum problem as relates to the definition of a felony in 176. Mr. Perkins agreed with Mr. Neilander and further explained that taking out the one or more years in prison would not really be a truth-in-sentencing measure. Ms. Steel asked Mr. Neilander if the definition was that you must be sentenced to one year or more or that you are capable of being sentenced to one year or more. Further discussion was held regarding the mandatory one year minimum requirement in the statute and the proposed legislature. Ms. Buckley stated in light of the Rose Commission, a study which may address this area, A.B. 89 should not be passed. It is too early and there are too many inconsistencies with the proposed legislation of A.B. 89 at this time. ASSEMBLYMAN CARPENTER MOVED FOR A MOTION TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 89. ASSEMBLYMAN OHRENSCHALL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION 15 - Urges Congress and President of the United States to oppose legalization of certain controlled substances. ASSEMBLYMAN PERKINS MOVED TO DO PASS A.J.R. 15. ASSEMBLYMAN GOLDWATER SECONDED THE MOTION. In discussing A.J.R. 15, Mr. Carpenter stated he had a problem with the resolution relating to the language "passably enforced" because he did not know if we are passably enforcing them at all. Not having a solution to the problem, however, he further stated we have done nothing on the war on drugs and we are further away from resolving the drug problem. He felt the resolutions were contradictory of what is really being done in this country regarding drugs. Mr. Carpenter elaborated his personal feelings about the problem of drugs in our country. Chairman Anderson stated he understood Mr. Carpenter's frustration with the drug problem and reiterated the interim subcommittee study dealt with those same feelings. Mr. Batten asked for clarification in the summary description and the actual text of the body, specifically as relates to the wording "certain" controlled substances. Mr. Perkins stated controlled substances came in many forms, both legal and illegal. The prescription drugs are not the ones they are trying to urge Congress to address. Mr. Neilander stated the word "certain" was standard in bill drafting. Mr. Goldwater believed A.J.R. 15 and similar resolutions were necessary policy to follow to pin flags as to where policy goes and therefore it is meaningful. Ms. Steel stated she had a problem with the first portion of the bill, " . . . to oppose the legalization of unlawfully obtained controlled substances." If they were to legalize marijuana, for instance, it would no longer be "unlawfully obtained" so it appears to be a double negative. Mr. Humke stated there are legal controlled substances that could be illegally obtained. Ms. Steel withdrew her comment. THE MOTION TO DO PASS A.J.R. 15 PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ASSEMBLY CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 2 - Urges peace officers to identify and arrest, and courts to impose prompt, meaningful and consistent sanctions upon, juveniles who violate the laws related to alcohol and drugs. Ms. Ohrenschall spoke in favor of A.C.R. 2 stating she believed the focus of 2 was on early identification of young people who may have or be developing drug and alcohol problems and she believes it is important to encourage law enforcement officers and the courts to remain as proactive as possible to identify those youths and get them into therapy. ASSEMBLYMAN OHRENSCHALL MOVED TO ADOPT A.C.R. 2. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. Mr. Carpenter changed his vote on A.J.R. 15 to "no", stating he believed they needed to do something more than just say do not legalize drugs. ASSEMBLYMAN PERKINS, HAVING VOTED ON THE PREVAILING SIDE, MOVED FOR A MOTION TO RECONSIDER A.J.R. 15. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY ASSEMBLYMAN CARPENTER. THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER A.J.R. 15 WAS PASSED, ASSEMBLYMAN MONAGHAN VOTED NO. ORIGINAL MOTION AND SECOND TO DO PASS A.J.R. 15 WAS RECONSIDERED BY THE COMMITTEE. THE MOTION TO DO PASS A.J.R. 15 PASSED, MR. CARPENTER VOTED NO. Chairman Anderson gave A.J.R. 15 to Mr. Perkins to present on the floor, A.C.R. 2 was given to Ms. Ohrenschall to present on the floor. Chairman Anderson gave A.B. 87 to Mr. Manendo to present on the floor. Mr. Neilander informed Chairman Anderson that A.B. 87 is a concurrent referral to Ways and Means and although the amendment would be handled on the floor it will not go to Third Reading. Chairman Anderson retracted his presentment of A.B. 87 to Mr. Manendo. ASSEMBLY BILL 98 - Establishes within department of prisons position of coordinator of programs for treatment of officers who abuse alcohol or drugs. Chairman Anderson recognized that although this meeting was a workshop, he was informed there was further testimony requested. Robert Bayer, Director, Nevada Department of Prisons, stated that during his previous testimony on A.B. 98 he felt there may be some confusion or misclarification about the position. Mr. Bayer stated the position of program director had previously been by a grant and is now temporarily being covered by psychologists through BADA funding. He would like the committee to recognize that the counselors, at least in the Governor's recommended budget, are less than a correctional classification counselor II and they may not be as skilled in other areas. Therefore, there needs to be some people to make sure the program is running efficiently and effectively. He stated at this time he is the only one at the Department of Prisons who is certified by the Bureau of Drug and Alcohol Abuse and he does not have the time to micro-manage a program of this nature. Mr. Bayer provided the committee with some statistics which were requested at the last hearing on A.B. 98. The document, mistitled "BDR# 16-974" is attached hereto as (Exhibit E). Mr. Bayer reviewed the document with the committee. Mr. Bayer stated there are currently programs within the prisons but they are sporadic, self-initiated, and are being conducted by the medical staff. The programs currently in effect are not an organized, comprehensive approach and do not extend to the DUI programs. Mr. Carpenter questioned the statistics provided to the committee by Mr. Bayer regarding the percentage of inmates with substance abuse and asked if the discrepancies related to those inmates who did not admit they had a substance abuse problem. Mr. Bayer stated denial was a cardinal sign of substance abuse disorder. Mr. Carpenter also asked Dr. Kaiser the current thinking on a substance abuser being treated when he does not want to be cured. Dr. Kaiser stated the current research shows that people do respond to treatment . . . that addiction has a high rate of relapse so it needs to be looked at more as a chronic disease. Some people break through their denial and accept treatment while others enter treatment hoping for success and do not succeed. There is a varied response. Dr. Kaiser felt if an individual is counter-therapeutic then the treatment system should release that person from treatment when it becomes evident there is no progression in treatment. Dr. Kaiser stated we should not spend money on people who are not responding to treatment. Mr. Carpenter asked for a clarification on the treatment of individuals using drugs versus those being treated for alcohol. Dr. Kaiser stated there are many forms of treatment to apply to the varied types of addictions. A discussion was held between Mr. Carpenter and Dr. Kaiser regarding the specific types of treatment for drug addiction and alcohol abuse. Acting Chairman Buckley announced the order of committee members to speak being Ms. Ohrenschall, Mrs. Monaghan, Mr. Goldwater, Ms. Stroth. Ms. Ohrenschall asked if A.B. 98 was not adopted, what would happen to the therapy systems currently in effect in the prisons now. Mr. Bayer stated those programs would continue; however, they are an unorganized form of programs. Also, Ms. Ohrenschall recalled testimony that stated the entire cost of the program was somewhere in the range of $110,000 to $130,000 however the figures on page two of (Exhibit E) show the cost being $331,000 to $492,000.00. Mr. Bayer thought the figure of $110,000 in previous testimony related to the salary of the director of the program over the biennium. Mr. Goldwater asked if currently the prison had a sufficient number of individuals who would be responsive to treatment. Mr. Bayer stated yes they do. Replying to Mr. Goldwaters second question, Mr. Bayer stated the cost of the program would not go up or down according to how many people are being treated in the program. Ms. Stroth expressed her confusion about developing a position for a treatment director if they are planning to divert more drug users out of the system. The other thing that bothered her was, through her visits to the prisons, she was informed there was a large problem with drugs within the prison systems. She wondered what good it would do to spend all this money to try and rehabilitate these people if they are going to continue to use drugs inside prison. Mr. Bayer emphasized that the position outlined in A.B. 98 is tied into whether this committee wishes to continue the current DUI programs, and other substance abuse programs including Phase I and Phase II. If the committee wishes to continue the programs and include other programs as outlined in proposed legislature, the position would be necessary for someone to head the program. The director position would run the programs inside and outside of prison and would be in charge and be a communicator with BADA and other community funding. Mr. Bayer then addressed the comment about drug use in the prison stating that it is a large problem and unfortunately there are laws that restrict the Department of Prison Systems from doing certain things. He also referred to a movie entitled, "American Me", which is a graphic movie involving Los Angeles gangs bringing drugs into a California prison. Mr. Bayer stated manpower was a problem in finding the drug use in the prison and he further stated he does not think it is worth it to perform strip searches or dog searches on the family members and visitors who come to see the prisoners. He did state it was a concern of his and he would be giving it his attention. He concluded by stating he will be taking a harder line on inmates who break rules. Dr. Kaiser concluded that the care the mental inmates are receiving now at the prisons complies with the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Approximately 13% of the inmates have serious mental illness. The counselors and psychologists licensed and employed at the prisons now are trained in that area (constitutional care of the mentally ill) and not substance abuse treatment. He feels the committee would need to look at that when deciding if this position is warranted, appropriate, and cost-effective. Ms. Steel asked if A.B. 98 was not adopted, would the 305 program be cut off. Dr. Bayer stated no. Mr. Manendo asked if the fiscal figures for the counselors as indicated for 95/96 on (Exhibit E) were for a one year salary. Dr. Bayer stated one position comes on July 1st and the other positions come on 12/1/95. Mr. Manendo again asked if the substance abuse counselor gets $24,073 for one year. Dr. Bayer stated that was a half year salary. Ms. Ohrenschall noted while touring prison facilities the Native Americans are allowed to perform their religious services and wondered if Peyote was used in any of their religious services. Mr. Bayer stated it was not used. Mr. Humke informed the committee that A.B. 98 was a concurrent bill to Ways and Means and perhaps it should have been sent directly to Ways and Means rather than have come before Judiciary. Further, if the members had any doubts about the need for this position, Mr. Humke assured them Ways and Means will determine whether the position is needed. Further, they have a fiscal analyst in Ways and Means who is most knowledgeable in the prison and state budgets. Mr. Humke stated he had faith in the Ways and Means Committee and therefore he would vote yes to pass this bill to bring it one step further through the process. Chairman Anderson addressed the hard work of the A.C.R. 71 Study and the frustration of having served on that committee because of the lack of information of the programs in our communities. Ms. Steel stated she would vote yes on A.B. 98 to get it over to Ways and Means but if it comes to the floor she would be voting against it as she was not convinced there was a need for the position. Ms. Ohrenschall stated she was not certain how she would vote if this bill made it to the floor because she was unsure about the need for the position. ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 98. ASSEMBLYMAN MANENDO SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED. ASSEMBLYMAN BATTEN VOTED NO. ASSEMBLY BILL 93 - Makes various changes to provisions governing assignment of offenders to program for treatment of abuser of alcohol or drugs established by director of department of prisons. Mr. Neilander set forth suggested amendments to A.B. 93 , contained in the Work Session Document (Exhibit D). It was suggested that "entire" be deleted from lines 16 so it just refers to the 305 program. Also, a new subsection requiring the director to give preference to those offenders who appear to be capable of completing both Phase I and Phase II of the program since that is where the lowest recidivism rate is. It also authorizes the director, at his discretion, to revoke and prohibit any sentencing reducing credits if the offender successfully completes Phase I but refuses to enter Phase II. ASSEMBLYMAN PERKINS MOVED TO AMEND & DO PASS A.B. 93. ASSEMBLYMAN BUCKLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Anderson assigned A.B. 93 to Mr. Batten to present on the floor. Mr. Neilander pointed out there were three work sessions next week so if any member of the committee had questions or comments, let him know. Ms. Monaghan thanked Mr. Neilander the Work Session Document stating it was of great aid during work sessions. There being no further business before the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 a.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: ___________________________________ Joi Davis, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: ________________________________________ Assemblyman Bernie Anderson, Chairman ________________________________________ Assemblyman David E. Humke, Chairman Assembly Committee on Judiciary March 3, 1995 Page