MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS AND OPERATIONS Sixty-eighth Session June 15, 1995 The Senate Committee on Legislative Affairs and Operations was called to order by Chairman Mike McGinness, at 3:15 p.m., on Thursday, June 15, 1995, in Room 227 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator Mike McGinness, Chairman Senator William J. Raggio, Vice Chairman Senator Raymond D. Rawson Senator Mark A. James Senator Dina Titus Senator Bob Coffin Senator Bernice Mathews STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Lorne J. Malkiewich, Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau Robert E. Erickson, Research Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau Mavis Scarff, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Ande Engleman, Private Citizen Yvonne Sylva, Administrator, Health Division, State of Nevada Christopher Thompson, Chief, Health Care Financial Analysis Unit, Department of Human Resources, State of Nevada Senator McGinness opened discussion on Senate Bill (S.B.) 553. SENATE BILL 553: Makes various changes concerning legislative counsel bureau. (BDR 17-1278) The chairman indicated that Lorne Malkiewich, Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau, was present to answer any questions. He reminded the committee that Senator Mathews had a question on the gift shop, and Ande Engleman, Private Citizen, had a question on the content of the work product. He stated that they are both here, and both have indicated that their problems have been addressed. SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO DO PASS SENATE BILL 553. SENATOR JAMES SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS COFFIN, RAWSON, AND RAGGIO WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) ***** Senator McGinness opened the hearing on Senate Concurrent Resolution (S.C.R.) 50. SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 50: Directs legislative commission to appoint committee to conduct interim study of feasibility of establishing comprehensive system for collection and management of data related to health care from public and private entities. (BDR R-1251) Yvonne Sylva, Administrator, Health Division, State of Nevada, stated that the state Health Division was involved in providing information for the development of S.C.R. 50, and they are a large repository of health care information. Noting that they are not included as one of the participating groups, she indicated they would like to see this resolution amended to include the state Health Division. Senator McGinness asked if they see themselves being included on page 2 where it lists the representative groups? Ms. Sylva replied in the affirmative. Senator McGinness asked if she had any comments on the scope of the proposed study; does she think it is broad enough? Ms. Sylva answered that it certainly is broad enough, and she said it is going to be a task that she hopes they would be able to make a good start on during the next biennium. The chairman asked what does she think the public policy is? He asked, "What are we trying to get to at the end of this study?" Ms. Sylva said the goal at the end of this study is to actually develop a policy that is related to the health care in this state. She explained that this will provide the data or tools to accomplish what is needed in terms of examining health care in this state. She commented that currently they have data all over, none of which is tied together, making it very difficult to forecast future needs. Senator McGinness summarized that everybody is off developing their own little segment, and nobody is pulling it altogether. Ms. Sylva agreed. Senator McGinness asked Mr. Erickson if there is not a standing committee on health care, and if this study is part of their purview? Bob Erickson, Research Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau, stated that this group would make its report back to the Legislative Committee on Health Care, and noted that committee has so much going on during each interim that they probably would not have enough time to be the entity to do this work. Senator McGinness stated that this is more of a subcommittee of that committee. Mr. Erickson replied in the affirmative, and said this committee would have at least one member of the Legislative Committee on Health Care on this appointed group. A group, he noted that would have somewhat over 20 members totally. Christopher Thompson, Chief, Health Care Financial Analysis Unit, Department of Human Resources, indicated that he and some people from the Health Division helped craft this language, determining, after discussion, that although there would certainly be some overlap, that this would be a separate committee and would report back to the Legislative Commission. He stated the funding for this would come out of the funding for the Legislative Committee on Health Care, which is funded, on an annual basis, by a $50 charge on admitted health insurers in the state. Senator McGinness asked him to repeat that statement. Mr. Thompson reiterated that the Legislative Committee on Health Care is funded by a $50 charge on admitted health insurers in the state. He said it comes out to approximately $40,000 a year, and that the funding for this committees would come out of that money. Senator McGinness closed the hearing on S.C.R. 50, and opened the hearing on S.C.R. 51. SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 51: Directs Legislative Commission to conduct interim study concerning regulation of taxicabs. (BDR R-2130) Senator Mathews asked if she were correct, and this resolution only affects the taxicabs in southern Nevada? Senator Titus replied no. Senator McGinness asked Mr. Erickson if he was aware of the origin of this resolution? Mr. Erickson said he believes that it came from the Senate Committee on Transportation, indicating that there were a couple of taxicab bills they have considered, and perhaps one of their decisions was to have a study. Senator McGinness noted that there was a fax in the members' material from the Professional Drivers' Association, asking that the additional language provided (Exhibit C) be included if the committee considers S.C.R. 51. Senator McGinness closed the hearing on S.C.R. 51 and opened the hearing on S.C.R. 52. SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 52: Directs Legislative Commission to conduct interim study of system of parole and probation within State of Nevada. (BDR R-2134) Ande Engleman, Private Citizen, indicated her support of this study and said she would like to see it go through; however, she is very much concerned about the process used by the parole board. She pointed out that during this last interim there were a number of problems, particularly down in Douglas County with the release of a sexual offender on parole. She said the community objected, and they tried to attempt to object to the parole board. Ms. Engleman reported receiving many phone calls from citizens who, when they showed up at the parole board hearing, were told that they could not enter the room until after the Governor's staff had gone in, the press had gone in, and other important people had gone in, and only, if there was enough space, then could the general public, who would be affected by what they are going to do, enter the room. She said the press finally gave up their seats, and sat on the floor, so that people could come in and sit down. She stated that the parole board does not fall under Nevada's open meeting law for some reason, but she noted, the former chairman always ran the board as though it did fall under the law; however, since a new chairman was appointed, they have not followed that. She proposed that under section 3, the consideration of methods to be used to improve communication between the State Board of Parole Commissioners and others, would fall in a look at how the board operates, what their actual process is, how they conduct meetings, and how they take votes. She said there seems to be a big question mark as to how they are voting sometimes, whether it is done in front of the public, whether it is done by telephone conference call, or whether it is done by polling. She concluded stating again her support of the study, but noting her narrow focus on it. Senator James agreed and said Ms. Engleman makes a good point. He stated it would be appropriate for the study to encompass her concerns because often "sunshine" on the process is the best reform. Senator Titus referring to the Governor's crime bill, asked if there could just be one committee who could review the sentencing and do this, too, rather than creating two separate committees? Ms. Engleman stated that she has not seen the language on the sentencing commission in the crime bill, noting her concern with the crime bill is in opening up the juvenile court system. She commented that the sentencing commission was not given this to do, and that the bill would have to be changed to give them that specific responsibility, because if it is not in the bill, it will not be addressed. Senator Titus agreed that they might have to put it in, but pointed out that they usually have a number of really good topics to study, and they do not have enough committees, time, or money, and when some of the requested studies can be combined, it works out to the advantage of all sides. Senator McGinness noted that about 10 days ago the decisions were real easy, but that now all of a sudden the committee has about 14 studies to decide on. Senator McGinness closed the hearing on S.C.R. 52, and opened the hearing on S.C.R. 54. SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 54: Directs Legislative Commission to conduct interim study of taxation of real property held in common- interest ownership. (BDR R-2121) Senator McGinness indicated that this request came from Senator Lowden and he thought it was from the southern Nevada home builders. Senator Titus said she thinks they took some testimony on this in the Senate Committee on Taxation, and killed a bill to do this resolution. She said what it had to do with was whether or not people who live on golf courses pay the property tax for the golf courses held in common. She stated her inclination would be that it is not something that the Legislature needs to study. Senator James commented that it seems it could also include people who live in condominiums or just about anything where there's common interest ownership. He asked how does one assess the value of, if that is what it truly means, the common interest ownership, which could include all kinds of cooperatives, wherever one owns a unit and there are common interests? Senator McGinness asked if this affects mobile home parks in rural Nevada that do have some common interests. Senator James called attention to line 11 which says, "other than a cooperative as defined in NRS 116.11033," and indicated he does not know if condominium comes in that. Senator Mathews said she knows a lot of the planned communities have common areas, that they pay a fee, but she does not think they are taxed on that. Senator Titus read the section from the Nevada Revised Statutes. Senator James interpreted that would not include a condominium. He said a cooperative is when one owns their unit in fee simple, and they have community interest in the common areas. Senator Mathews asked if it would that be true for large developments where there is a common area for which one pays a fee? Senator James said apparently it is any community interest other than the one that Senator Titus read. Senator McGinness closed the hearing on S.C.R. 54, and indicated that next week's meeting would be a busy one. The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Mavis Scarff, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator Mike McGinness, Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Legislative Affairs and Operations June 15, 1995 Page