MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES Sixty-eighth Session May 15, 1995 The Senate Committee on Natural Resources was called to order by Vice Chairman Lawrence E. Jacobsen, at 2:02 p.m., on Monday, May 15, 1995, in Room 224 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Vice Chairman Senator Mark A. James Senator Mike McGinness Senator Ernest E. Adler Senator John B. (Jack) Regan Senator O. C. Lee COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Chairman (Excused) STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Welden, Chief Deputy Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau Billie Brinkman, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Joseph L. Johnson, Lobbyist, Toiyabe Chapter, Sierra Club Elsie Dupree, Lobbyist, Nevada Wildlife Federation Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation Mike Del Grosso, Land Use Planner, Division of State Lands Stephanie Licht, Secretary/Treasurer, Nevada Wool Growers Association Paula Berkley, Lobbyist, Reno/Sparks Indian Colony Vice Chairman Jacobsen opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 409. ASSEMBLY BILL 409: Revises provisions governing state grazing boards. Joseph L. Johnson, Lobbyist, Toiyabe Chapter, Sierra Club, came forward to give a summary on the measure. He first distributed written testimony (Exhibit C) by Rose Strickland, Chairman, Sierra Club's Public Lands Committee, which he introduced into the record as written comments. Mr. Johnson continued with background information on A.B. 409, stating this is not an attempt to discuss rangeland reform or range conditions, but that this measure is simply a bill addressing structure and character of the state grazing boards. He said the Taylor Grazing Act authorizes a return to the states for the benefit of counties of origin, 12.5 percent of the grazing fees. He said these funds statutorily have been directed to be used for the benefit of the livestock industry. He said the original bill sought to narrow that language to be restricted to range improvements. Also, the original bill asked that there be wildlife representatives appointed by the Governor on each of the grazing boards. He explained the state grazing boards are elected from the livestock industry in the grazing district. The funds the state receives are dedicated to the counties and distributed on a county basis, so there are multiple accounts. Mr. Johnson told the committee of some of the problems that the environmental community has when reviewing the nature of these funds and the distribution, because the funds can be dependent upon the annual assessment of $250,000 to $350,000, so it is not an insignificant matter of revenue. Mr. Johnson referred to a packet (Exhibit D) prepared by Fred Welden, Chief Deputy Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau, at the request of Assemblywoman Vivian L. Freeman. He said the material covered the way other states handle their annual assessment funds and the organization of other states' grazing boards. He indicated Exhibit D is a much more broad and extensive report than he planned to discuss at this time. Mr. Johnson said when reviewing the activities of the state grazing boards, it was found to be difficult to see what the money was being spent for. He stressed the open meeting law was not violated, but may not have always been adhered to in the extent that his agency would like to see. He said the ability to trace the funds and what happened in actions were somewhat limited, and detailed minutes were not kept in a desired manner. Mr. Johnson told the committee A.B. 409 simply brings the state grazing boards statutorily under the open meeting law. Mr. Johnson said his group was particularly concerned about two things: 1) notice of meetings, and 2) that a significant portion, perhaps 25 percent of the total funds, will be redesignated to the central committee which is made up of delegated members of the individual boards, and the checking account there is not administered by the county. The checking accounts are under the sole review of the central committee and the various state boards. Mr. Johnson indicated this is also an area of concern, however it is not addressed in A.B. 409. Mr. Johnson remarked that if there were better documentation of minutes and records of what the funds are expended for, then it would be easier to see what the activities of the boards are. Mr. Johnson added further remarks as he referred to Exhibit D. Elsie Dupree, Lobbyist, Nevada Wildlife Federation, reiterated the remarks by Mr. Johnson, and especially in the auditing of the accounting and spending of funds. Ms. Dupree said she is in support of A.B. 409. Committee members held a short discussion on the number of grazing boards and members within the state. Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation, came forward in support of A.B. 409, the first reprint. He indicated this measure would go a long way in clarifying some of the questions as to whether or not the grazing boards do, in fact, need to be covered by the open meeting laws. Also, Mr. Busselman indicated Joseph Guild, Lobbyist, Nevada Cattleman's Association, who was not present at the hearing, wished to express his support of this measure. Mr. Busselman told the committee there are seven grazing districts in Nevada. In reply to Vice Chairman Jacobsen's inquiry, Mr. Busselman said he had attended meetings of the grazing boards. And he remarked he did think there is a necessity for the boards to keep minutes and records. He said this subject was brought up during meetings in which Barbara Curti, President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation, was a participant with Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt. Mr. Busselman said that having a clarification that the grazing boards are under the open meeting laws will provide opportunities for those people who want to participate in the grazing board meetings, the notice that they need to become involved. Vice Chairman Jacobsen and Mr. Busselman continued a conversation concerning how and who would be responsible for taking minutes at the grazing board meetings and where those records would be housed. Senator McGinness asked if the grazing boards were aware of this proposed legislation. Mr. Busselman replied the grazing boards were in attendance when A.B. 409 was heard in the Assembly committee. He indicated this measure was a much more extensive bill at that time and the grazing board representatives were involved in the rewrite of the measure. Senator McGinness remarked the grazing board representatives must be satisfied with A.B. 409 in its present form or they would be in attendance at this hearing. Senator James indicated A.B. 409 is appropriate and that he will support it. Mike Del Grosso, Land Use Planner, Division of State Lands, came forward to answer a question posed by Vice Chairman Jacobsen. He asked if Mr. Del Grosso saw any merit in state lands having a little more part in the way grazing boards handle meeting minutes. Mr. Del Grosso said they do in a sense. That when this first came up under the rangeland reform hearings held by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt in Reno 1 « years ago, the Governor suggested that state lands become a repository for the minutes for the various grazing boards. He said some of the minutes from various years are housed with state lands and that he was under the impression they were supposed to continue to provide those records to the state lands. Vice Chairman Jacobsen said, "It seems apparent that with our action with the federal people, that we would have a little more justification if we had some proper minutes and information to translate to those people." Mr. Del Grosso said some of the grazing boards had responded, however, some did not. But the ones that did respond did keep proper minutes. Stephanie Licht, Secretary/Treasurer, Nevada Wool Growers Association, went on record in support of A.B. 409 as reprinted with its first adopted amendments. Ms. Licht offered further information concerning the grazing boards. She indicated she did have a list of the contact person (Exhibit E) for each grazing board and offered to provide that information to the committee. Through further questioning by Vice Chairman Jacobsen, Ms. Licht recited the knowledge she had about the grazing board in Elko County where she resides. Following considerable discussion between Vice Chairman Jacobsen and Ms. Licht concerning permittees and grazing boards, Senator Regan read from Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 568.060: Subsection 7. The persons, partnerships, associations or corporations holding licenses or permits to graze livestock on the public lands within the grazing district served by a state grazing board shall elect the members to serve on that state grazing board, except as otherwise provided in this section, and each such permittee is entitled to one vote. The particular state grazing board shall supply the names of eligible persons to be elected to serve on the board to each permittee within the district so that each permittee may cast his vote for a candidate of his choice. The secretary of the state grazing board for such grazing district shall certify the results of the election. Senator Regan pointed out NRS 568.070 goes on to state that the secretary and attorney may be remunerated, but the compensation of members, there is none, they are not paid for serving. He said in no section of Chapter 568 of NRS, which is roughly 20 pages, is there any mention of the open meeting law. Senator Regan indicated he has received correspondence from a number of the grazing districts and it seems they publish the minutes after the fact, but that there does not appear to be an agenda in the data in his possession. Senator Regan indicated under the open meeting law, the grazing boards would have to publish an agenda. Senator Regan said he had much of the correspondence forwarded to Ms. Dupree at her request, including the budgets, which indicate some grazing boards are paying for secretarial service; that other members receive nothing. Vice Chairman Jacobsen closed the hearing on A.B. 409 and opened the hearing on Assembly Joint Resolution (A.J.R.) 31. ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION 31: Urges National Museum of the American Indian to return portion of tule duck decoys to Department of Museums, Library and Arts of State of Nevada. Mr. Welden told the committee it is his understanding that A.J.R. 31 addresses some tule duck decoys that were found in the Lovelock Cave in the 1930s when that area was excavated and that they are nice, preserved duck decoys. He said those decoys have been since moved to Washington, D.C., to the Smithsonian Institution. Mr. Welden explained this measure asks that part or all of these decoys be returned to the State of Nevada so they can be presented in the state museum here. Senator McGinness concurred with the remarks by Mr. Welden. He said he thought it was only fitting that some of the decoys come back to the State of Nevada so that people here could enjoy part of their heritage. He explained that although the area is referred to as the Lovelock Cave, it is in northern Churchill County. There was further conversation among the committee members in reference to the duck decoys. Paula Berkley, Lobbyist, Reno/Sparks Indian Colony, told the committee that Arlan Melendez, Tribal Chairman, Reno/Sparks Indian Colony, is always in support of any measure which has to do with Indian people. She indicated he gives recognition to Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga who actually spearheaded this measure. Ms. Berkley said the in the past, Indian tribes have requested the return of the tule duck decoys but they have always been refused. Vice Chairman Jacobsen closed the hearing on A.J.R. 31, and adjourned the meeting at 2:45 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Billie Brinkman, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Vice Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Natural Resources May 15, 1995 Page