MINUTES OF THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY Sixty-eighth Session April 19, 1995 The Committee on Judiciary was called to order at 7:08 a.m., on Wednesday, April 19, 1995, Chairman Humke 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. 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 COMMITTEE MEMBERS EXCUSED: Mr. Thomas Batten GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: Assemblyman Dennis Nolan, District No. 13 Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams, District No. 6 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis Neilander, Research Analyst Patty Hicks, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Ms. Debra Elder, Paramedic Supervisor, Mercy Medical Services Mr. Michael Denton, Paramedic Field Training Officer, Mercy Medical Services Ms. Cindy Shapiro, Staff Attorney, Nevada Legal Services Ms. Nancy Angres, Chief Deputy, Attorney General's Office Mr. Jon Sasser, Coordinator of Litigation & Training, Nevada Legal Services Dr. Jackie Kirkland, Board of Education & Counseling of Displaced Homemakers Ms. Paula Berkley, Reno-Sparks Indian Colony Mr. Gerald Allen, Director, Nevada Indian Commission Mr. Richard B. Harjo, Sr., Chairman, Nevada Indian Commission Mr. Jeffrey Richardson, Executive Director, Nevada Urban Indians, Inc. Mr. Brian Wallace, Chairman, Washoe Tribe of Nevada/California Ms. Stacy L. Stahl, Chairman, Yerington Paiute Tribe Mr. John Sarb, Administrator, Division of Child and Family Services Ms. Kathleen Shane, Washoe County Social Services Ms. Patricia Justice, Legislative Representative, Clark County Ms. Helen A. Foley, Pro Bono Lobbyist, Help of Southern Nevada Ms. Janice Brooks, Legislative Representative, Junior League of Las Vegas Ms. Bobbie Gang, Nevada Women's Lobby/National Association of Social Workers, Nevada Chapter ASSEMBLY BILL NO, 353 - Increases penalty for commission of assault or battery against emergency medical technician. Assemblyman Dennis Nolan, District No. 13, sponsor, accompanied by Ms. Debra Elder, Paramedic Supervisor, Mercy Medical Services, and Mr. Michael Denton, Paramedic Field Training Officer, Mercy Medical Services, testified in support of A.B. 353. Assemblyman Nolan testified this legislation would provide protection against assaults for EMTs. Mrs. Monaghan commented that as a nurse it is considered part of the job when a patient becomes combative and hostile due to a head injury or under the influence. The patient is not aware sometimes of their actions. Mrs. Monaghan inquired why it would be different for EMTs. Mr. Nolan advised in some rural areas they are afraid of being assaulted or battered when responding to calls. In the urban areas the ambulances are private providers whereas in the rural areas some are volunteer ambulance services. Mr. Anderson inquired in what percentage of calls was a police officer present. In response the police usually answer a majority of calls in the rural areas. In the urban areas they respond when the call is an offense or accident situation. Mr. Anderson questioned if EMTs have filed assault charges in the past. Ms. Debra Elder related incidents in Las Vegas where charges were filed but not pursued by the district attorney. They realize there are going to be certain instances when people are under the influence and that is taken into consideration. Ms. Ohrenschall inquired if there were any fiscal statistics to support passage of A.B. 353. Mr. Nolan advised only 2%-3% of the calls turn into problems. Mr. Nolan noted it would be a savings on workmen's compensation. Chairman Humke advised if the committee passes this bill it will go to Ways and Means Committee. He noted a stronger penalty will not make a difference with the district attorney's office processing the complaint, as they must triage cases. ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 361 - Clarifies that Indian children are exempt from application of certain provisions governing child custody, adoption, termination of parental rights and placement in foster care. Ms. Buckley disclosed she works with Nevada Legal Services, Inc., Las Vegas, NV. Assemblyman Brian E. Sandoval, District No. 25, sponsor, testified the bill incorporates the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 into state law. Mr. Sandoval concurred in Nevada Legal Services' proposed amendments which make reference to the Indian Child Welfare Act in various sections of the NRS distributed to committee. The fiscal note on the bill has no effect on local government. Mr. Brian Wallace, Chairman, Washoe Tribe of Nevada/California, testified in support of A.B. 361. Mr. Wallace shared that it was common practice since the 1920's to remove Indian children from their homes and communities and place them in institutions, such as Stewart Indian Boarding School. Prior to passage 25- 35% of all Indian children were separated from their families and placed in foster care, adoptive homes and institutions. Congress recognized there is no resource more vital than our children and was alarmed at the high percentage of Indian families broken up by removal of the children and loss of their cultural identity. Mr. Wallace stated, "children are our messengers to another time." A.B. 361 is modeled after an Oregon statute. Mr. Wallace announced the opening of a child treatment trauma facility open to all children throughout Nevada and California. Mr. Wallace reinforced how deeply heartfelt and important this matter is to Nevada tribes. Mr. Humke related his personal experience with informal foster care of an Indian child. He asked if this bill would help to find foster parents from within the tribe. Mr. Wallace advised a registry of foster parents is being established. Mr. Carpenter commented he has been involved with Indian people in ranching for many years. He described circumstances where a non-Indian rancher assumed the responsibility of raising his Indian ranch hand's child when no family came forward. Mr. Carpenter inquired with passage of this bill if it would still be possible for a non-Indian family to provide foster care or become adoptive parents of an Indian child. Mr. Wallace replied it can still happen. There really are no orphans in Indian country. Whatever helps raise a healthy child is paramount. In deference to tribal communities, they should be given first consideration. Inability to provide adequate medical care in circumstances is an instance that may warrant a non-Indian care giver of a child. Ms. Ohrenschall remarked she was sympathetic in every way with the Washoe culture. She requested clarification of definitions of jurisdiction and Indian child. Mr. Wallace advised an Indian child is an unmarried person who is under the age of 18 and is a member of an Indian tribe or eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is a biological child of a member of an Indian tribe, 25 U.S.C., Sec. 1903. Mr. Wallace advised the attorney can provide a definition for jurisdiction. Mr. Jon Sasser, Coordinator of Litigation & Training, Nevada Legal Services, Inc., accompanied by Ms. Cindy Shapiro, Staff Attorney, Nevada Legal Services, testified in support of A.B. 361, attached as (Exhibit C and D). Proposed amendments were shared with Nevada Attorney General's Office, Washoe County Social Services, Clark County Department of Family and Youth Services, Nevada Division of Child and Family Services, and Inter-tribal Council of Nevada, attached as (Exhibit E). Chairman Humke commented their materials submitted were excellent. Mr. Anderson expressed concern with Sec. 19 as to how it would be applicable where a child may be from an eastern tribe with a different prevailing social and cultural standards from Nevada's tribes. Ms. Shapiro advised that expert witness is narrowly defined to provide they must possess special knowledge beyond that of an average social worker in the social and cultural aspects of Indian life or sensitivity to Indian culture. The grant received from the Nevada Urban Indians, Inc., will provide training and technical assistance to identify expert witnesses. In reference to p. 13, Mr. Carpenter questioned if it would be difficult to determine whether or not the child is an Indian. Ms. Shapiro advised "Indian" means any person who is a member or eligible for membership in an Indian tribe, or who is an Alaska Native. In regard to Ms. Ohrenschall's inquiry about definition of jurisdiction, Ms. Shapiro advised there are two different kinds of jurisdiction over Indian child custody proceedings. The first is exclusive jurisdiction. A tribe has jurisdiction exclusive to the state court if the child is domiciled or residing on tribal lands, or is a ward of the tribal court. The second type of jurisdiction is "transferred jurisdiction." If an Indian child is neither domiciled or residing on tribal lands nor a ward of the tribal court, the state court must still transfer the proceeding to tribal court at the request of the tribe, parent or custodian. A state court can retain jurisdiction only if a parent objects to transfer, the tribe declines jurisdiction or there is other good cause. Mr. John Sarb, Administrator, Division of Child and Family Services, testified in support of A.B. 361. Further, Mr. Sarb stressed it was important to include Indian Child Welfare Act in our statutes. He advised we have to live by that act now because it is federal law. Mr. Sarb agreed with the proposed amendments. Ms. Nancy Angres, Chief Deputy, Attorney General's Office, testified in support of A.B. 361. Ms. Angres agreed with the amendments and pointed out the provision for a state court to retain jurisdiction only if a parent objects to transfer, the tribe declines jurisdiction or there is other good cause. Ms. Ohrenschall inquired if the tribe affirmatively declined jurisdiction, would it prohibit it from later entering a case. Ms. Angres advised the tribe can enter the case at any time. Ms. Kathleen Shane, Washoe County Social Services, testified in support of A.B. 361 and the amendments. Ms. Paula Berkley, Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, testified in support of A.B. 361 and the amendments. Mr. Richard B. Harjo, Sr., Chairman, Nevada Indian Commission, accompanied by Mr. Gerald Allen, Acting Director, Nevada Indian Commission, testified in support of A.B. 361 and the amendments, attached as (Exhibit F). Mr. Jeffrey Richardson, Executive Director, Nevada Urban Indians, Inc., testified in support of A.B. 361 and the amendments. Mr. Richardson further advised his organization was in receipt of a grant from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to fund the Indian Child Welfare Act programs. His organization will establish and maintain a list of court expert witnesses at no cost for protective and adoptive services. ASSEMBLYMAN ANDERSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 361. ASSEMBLYMAN OHRENSCHALL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. The Honorable James Stone was introduced by Chairman Humke. Judge Stone was Chairman of Assembly Judiciary Committee in 1985. ASSEMBLYMAN ANDERSON MOVED TO INTRODUCE B.D.R. 631. ASSEMBLYMAN MONAGHAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 277 - Authorizes residential confinement as punishment for certain convictions of driving while license is suspended, revoked or restricted. ASSEMBLYMAN PERKINS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS AMENDMENTS OF A.B. 277. ASSEMBLYMAN ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 410 - Revises provisions regarding filing fee for divorce. Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams, District No. 6, sponsor, testified the bill will assist displaced homemakers. He stated there are many underlying reasons why individuals stay in unhealthy marriages under detrimental circumstances. This bill will help clients regain self-sufficiency through reentry into the workforce. It is estimated that the state has saved at least 2.5 million dollars per year in food stamps costs since commencement of the displaced homemaker program. Ms. Helen A. Foley, Pro Bono Lobbyist, Help of Southern Nevada, testified in support of A.B. 410, attached as (Exhibit G). To adequately fund the program an increase from $15 to $20 is requested to be added to each divorce filing fee. Mr. Carpenter commented this is a program that works and is well worth the cost and indicated his support of the bill. Ms. Foley advised it will provide $72,000 statewide to assist displaced homemakers. Mr. Schneider recommended research staff provide a breakdown of the $140 filing fee to determine if there is an area to cut to allow for the $5 increase. Dr. Jackie Kirkland, Board of Education & Counseling of Displaced Homemakers, testified in support of A.B. 410, attached as (Exhibit H). The key component of the program is job placement. Chairman Humke stated the merits of the program are not in question. He asked the committee to focus for the moment on where the filing fee comes from. He pointed out people who do not qualify as a true indigent are borderline in a financial sense. Ms. Foley advised the $5 raise would be a burden to them but a small price to pay. Mr. Anderson expressed concern with the 33% increase in filing fee and asked if it was because the program was underfunded to begin with or because of a decline in divorces between 1992 and 1994. Ms. Foley responded all of those reasons are valid, as funds from the state can in no way meet the needs. Ms. Janice Brooks, Legislative Representative, Junior League of Las Vegas, testified in support of A.B. 410. Chairman Humke pointed out one factor is the difference in the filing fees between Douglas and Washoe County in that the court clerk in Douglas County accepts pro per filings and Washoe County does not, see (Exhibit H). Ms. Bobbie Gang, Nevada Women's Lobby/National Association of Social Workers, Nevada Chapter, testified in support of A.B. 410. Both organizations are concerned about the well being of women and their families. It is a way to help women who suddenly find themselves without emotional and financial support to become more independent. Ms. Foley stressed statistics should not affect the passage of this legislation. The filing fee in Douglas County is $130 and Washoe County, $140. Of that amount the $15 divorce fee is first applied to the state job training office and then reallocated to the county of origin. Mr. Anderson pointed out the remainder of the filing fees support other administrative operational expenses of the courts. Certain jurisdictions are unwilling to waive those administrative fees. Mr. Dennis Neilander, Research Analyst, briefly summarized amendment no. 250 of A.B. 362 and amendment no. 241 of A.B. 84. ASSEMBLYMAN BUCKLEY MOVED TO AMEND AMENDMENT NO. 241 OF A.B. 84 TO REFLECT THAT THE OFFENDER THAT IS CURRENTLY BEFORE THE COURT FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFFENSE WOULD BE EXCLUDED. ASSEMBLYMAN PERKINS SECONDED THE MOTION. Under discussion, Ms. Steel thought one of the reasons for exclusion of domestic violence offenders was because they had other programs that they could access. Chairman Humke advised a person under the purview of A.B. 84 must separately qualify by an evaluation process to determine if there is a drug or alcohol problem. There is an assessment process for domestic violence program to determine the need for anger management assistance, etc. The two programs are very separate. THE MOTION CARRIED. (ASSEMBLYMEN ANDERSON AND STEEL VOTED NO.) Mr. Sandoval requested clarification if the judge has the discretion to order community service in lieu of payment of fine. Mr. Neilander pointed out in subsection 4, the court may issue a judgement in favor of either the court or the treatment facility. The judgment portion is discretionary as is the community service. Mr. Sandoval suggested in the event a person is unable pursuant to an order to pay the costs, the judge may issue a judgment or order community service. Chairman Humke requested Mr. Neilander to have the bill drafter determine if further clarification could be incorporated. Ms. Buckley advised she reviewed the certification amendment. It would combine the certification hearing for juveniles with the probable cause hearing. Chairman Humke noted this is the amendment the committee agreed not to make a part of A.B. 317 and agreed to consider it separately as a potential bill draft. The Co- Chairmen will take the recommendation under advisement. There being no further business before the committee, the meeting adjourned at 10:23 a.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Patty Hicks, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Assemblyman David E. Humke, Chairman Assemblyman Bernie Anderson, Chairman Assembly Committee on Judiciary April 19, 1995 Page