THE FIFTH DAY
Carson City(Friday), February 5, 1999
Senate called to order at 11:09 a.m.
President Hunt presiding.
Roll called.
All present.
Prayer by the Chaplain, Pastor Marvin Dennis.
As we end the first week of the 70th Session of the Nevada State Legislature, Lord I pray that You were honored and pleased in the work that has been accomplished this week. Help, I pray, each Senator to draw upon Your strength for the days, weeks and months ahead. Grant Your Prince of Peace His way in our lives as we worship You according to our hearts this weekend. Thank You for loving us just as we are.
Amen.
Pledge of allegiance to the Flag.
Senator Raggio moved that further reading of the Journal be dispensed with, and the President and Secretary be authorized to make the necessary corrections and additions.
Motion carried.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
Madam President:
Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred Senate Bill No. 20, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass.
Mark A. James, Chairman
INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING AND REFERENCE
By the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities:
Senate Bill No. 126—AN ACT relating to education; prohibiting a school district or charter school from placing a child in a program for pupils with disabilities solely because the child is a disciplinary problem; prohibiting the superintendent of public instruction from approving a special education program of a school district or charter school under certain circumstances; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities.
Motion carried.
By Senator Shaffer:
Senate Bill No. 127—AN ACT relating to the public employees’ retirement system; authorizing certain public employees to retire at any age if the sum of the age and years of service of the employee is equal to or greater than 75 years; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Shaffer moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Finance.
Motion carried.
By Senators O’Donnell, O’Connell, Amodei, Coffin, Jacobsen, James, Mathews, McGinness, Neal, Porter, Raggio, Rawson, Rhoads, Schneider, Shaffer, Townsend and Washington:
Senate Bill No. 128—AN ACT relating to advertising; authorizing in skeleton form certain licensing entities to order providers of telephone service to disconnect a telephone number included in an advertisement for services for which the advertiser does not have the required license or permit; requiring each provider of telephone service to disconnect the telephone number for which an order has been received; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator O’Donnell moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Taxation:
Senate Bill No. 129—AN ACT relating to regional transportation commissions; establishing staggered terms of office for the representatives of certain regional transportation commissions; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator McGinness moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Taxation.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Commerce and Labor:
Senate Bill No. 130—AN ACT relating to real estate brokers; revising the requirements for a brokerage agreement that includes a provision for an exclusive listing; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Townsend moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Commerce and Labor:
Senate Bill No. 131—AN ACT relating to telecommunications; requiring certain persons to maintain records of the names and addresses of users of pagers and cellular telephones; providing a penalty; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Townsend moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Commerce and Labor:
Senate Bill No. 132—AN ACT relating to industrial insurance; providing in skeleton form for the availability of benefits for industrial insurance to certain police officers for exposure to a contagious disease; limiting the availability of benefits for industrial insurance for certain retired police officers and firemen; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Townsend moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Commerce and Labor:
Senate Bill No. 133—AN ACT relating to industrial insurance; authorizing certain private companies, public entities and utilities to establish and administer a consolidated insurance program to obtain industrial insurance coverage for a construction project; providing certain limitations regarding the scope of a consolidated insurance program; authorizing the state industrial insurance system or certain private carriers to provide industrial insurance coverage for a consolidated insurance program; requiring that a consolidated insurance program must provide for the safety and administration of claims of employees of contractors and subcontractors who are engaged in a construction project; setting forth the provisions that must be included within a contract to provide industrial insurance coverage for a consolidated insurance program; allocating responsibility for the payment of claims for industrial insurance that are covered by a consolidated insurance program; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Townsend moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Commerce and Labor:
Senate Bill No. 134—AN ACT relating to insurance; providing in skeleton form for the provision of policies of motor vehicle insurance that offer medical benefits through a system of managed care; providing in skeleton form for the provision of policies of motor vehicle insurance that include certain deductibles for medical care; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Townsend moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities:
Senate Bill No. 135—AN ACT relating to health care; requiring certain hospitals that are designated as centers for the treatment of trauma to offer the lowest rate that they offer to a person who contracts with the hospital for services for the treatment of trauma to any other person seeking to contract with that hospital for such services; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities:
Senate Bill No. 136—AN ACT relating to pharmacy; prohibiting a pharmacist from making a substitution of a generic drug for a prescribed drug without the written permission of the practitioner; providing a penalty; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities:
Senate Bill No. 137—AN ACT relating to legislation; requiring an impact report to be prepared for certain legislative measures relating to the licensing or regulation of providers of health care; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Legislative Affairs and Operations.
Motion carried.
GENERAL FILE AND THIRD READING
Senate Bill No. 6.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators Townsend, Coffin and Neal.
Senator Townsend requested that his remarks and the following letter from the Arter & Hadden Law Firm be entered in the Journal.
Thank you, Madam President. Yesterday, I had distributed to the members a letter from the law firm that contacted our committee regarding the need to create this bill. I will quote from that letter as follows: “the United States Olympic Committee needs such protection (as is in this bill) so that it can have at the state level the same protection it has at the federal level due to the Amateur Sports Act (ASA) 36 U.S.C. Sec. 380. The ASA grants the USOC the exclusive right to (1) the symbol of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the five interlocking rings, (2) the USOC’s emblem, (3) any trademark name, sign, symbol, etc.” We were trying to accommodate the International Olympic Committee’s subcommittee the United States Olympic Committee. I would appreciate passage of this measure.
November 14, 1997
Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Senate Commerce and Labor Committee, State Capitol,
Carson City, NV 89710
Re: Amendment to Nevada’s Trademark Law
Dear Senator Townsend:
Arter & Hadden represents the United States Olympic Committee (“USOC”) in intellectual property matters. We are writing to you in view of your responsibility over trademark matters as Chairman of the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee, to propose legislation for sponsorship that would amend the trademark laws providing essential protection to the USOC’s trademark rights.
The USOC needs such protection in order that it can have at the state level the same protection it has at the federal level due to the Amateur Sports Act (“ASA”), 36 U.S.C. Section 380. The ASA grants the USOC the exclusive right to (1) the symbol of the International Olympic Committee, the five interlocking rings, (2) the USOC’s emblem (escutcheon having a blue chief and vertical extending red and white bars on the base with five interlocking rings displayed on the chief), (3) any trademark, trade name, sign, symbol, or insignia falsely representing association with the OPC or USOC, and (4) the words “Olympic,” “Olympiad,” “Citius, Altius, Fortius,” and combinations of those words.
The U.S. Congress recognizes that special protection is appropriate for the USOC trademarks. A substantial part of the revenue which the USOC earmarks for the training to Olympic athletes comes from the licensing of its trademarks.
In 1987, the Supreme Court affirmed that the protection granted to the USOC’s use of the Olympic words and symbols differs from the normal trademark protection in two respects: the USOC need not prove that a contested use is likely to cause confusion, and an unauthorized user of the word does not have available the normal statutory defenses. San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. Olympic Committee., 483 U.S. 522 (1987).
The Supreme Court noted one reason for Congress to grant the USOC exclusive control of the word “Olympic,” as with other trademarks, is to ensure that the USOC receives the benefit of its own efforts so that the USOC will have an incentive to continue to produce a “quality product,” that, in turn, benefits the public. 483 U.S. at 536.
The USOC needs to have the authority to prosecute counterfeiters under state criminal statutes to ensure the maximum possible protection of its trademarks. Without maximum trademark protection at both the state and federal levels, the strength of the USOC’s trademarks, and ultimately the ability to fund America’s Olympic athletes, are at risk. Consequently, amending Nevada’s trademark law to protect the USOC’s trademarks would provide the improved trademark protection the USOC needs to safeguard its sponsorship and licensing programs.
The USOC is a unique federally chartered organization, therefore, we do not believe that this proposed legislation will provide a basis for other companies to seek similar protection. We are currently proposing this legislation nationwide and many states have enacted similar amendments to their trademark statutes. Florida, Georgia, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas and Utah have enacted such statutes. (Copies of those statutes are enclosed.)
We recommend adding the following language to the definition of “trade-mark” as provided for by Nevada’s Revised Statutes, Title 52, Chapter 600, Section 600.300:
“Trade-mark” also means, but is not limited to the words, names, symbols, emblems, signs, insignias, or any combination thereof, of the United States Olympic Committee or the International Olympic Committee.
This language would prohibit the use of USOC proprietary emblems, symbols, designs and marks by non-sponsors and non-licensees that results in a false association with the USOC or the Olympic Games.
We hope you will consider our proposed amendment to the Nevada trademark law and that you will assist us in incorporating this provision into a bill during the next legislative session. Please let me know if you are interested in this issue, or if you need any further information or assistance in drafting additional language regarding the protection of the USOC’s words, symbols and designations in the bill.
Sincerely,
David I. Wilson
Senator Coffin requested that the following remarks and newspaper article from the Reno Gazette-Journal be entered in the Journal.
Senator Coffin:
Thank you, Madam President. I rise in opposition to this piece of legislation, somewhat reluctantly and belatedly, because I did not think there was anything unusual about it when I first read it. However, when I read the bill carefully, I saw that it made specific reference to statutes on trademarks (specifically those contained in Chapter 600 of NRS). I went to the statute books, looked and found that there were no other organizations, companies or whatever mentioned in the statutes seeking special treatment. Apparently, this is a precedent setting kind of statute. I asked our legal counsel about that, and they agreed that this is the first time. I asked them, in fact, if the Olympics Organizations had been trademarked with the Secretary of State’s Office. Apparently, they had not even taken that step which is the typical step and usually the most economical step. You have to ask why would this organization suddenly want to become a special case and be mentioned in our statutes. The only conclusion I could arrive at is that it evolves around money. I don’t know what testimony was heard in committee. Perhaps insufficient testimony was offered in committee to support the legislation. If so, that is a problem we sometimes face. I want to be very careful that I do not insult anyone, but I can tell you in looking at the actions of the various Olympics athletic committees that there are many who try to do their very best to be honest in trying to bring these games to their cities.
I remember vividly the efforts of Northern Nevada to bring the Olympics to this area in the ’80s. My esteemed former Assembly colleague, Bruce Bogaert, worked very hard throughout our house urging us all to work hard, vote for it, support it and get Southern Nevada to support it. Of course, he had the backing of many here in Northern Nevada, such as Senator Townsend, who is with us today. It is with great regret that I oppose this bill because Senator Townsend’s name is on it. I deeply respect him. And I also remember the work he did in the ’80s trying to bring these games to us. Now we find out that the people of Northern Nevada were cheated. They were cheated by a bunch of international extortionists, bribe seekers and takers from all over the world, looking for a free ride, telling people in one city that they would be happy to vote for them if they put their children through college or paid for their insurance or if they got special gifts such as fine matched hunting rifles. They should have been dueling pistols, members of the Senate. These thieves and brigands cruise the international airways about as freely as the old pirates cruised the seas. I just don’t think we need to do them any special favors. I don’t think we need to be a place that says to the rest of the country that it is okay to cheat and steal from us, take our money, the money of others and give them a gift and protect them under the law. They are out to have us protect their trademark which, to me, does not mean much anymore. The Olympic rings look pretty rusty now. These officials are the supposed keepers of the flame of athletic purity which, by coincidence, we see represented on our floor today with the presence of outstanding athletes from various Nevada teams. Yet, some athletes have been suspended by these old men for having used an asthmatic inhaler, indicating a small level of increase in some kind of antihistamine which might do something for their performance. They have had medals stripped from them retroactively for whatever techniques might have been used to enhance performance. Some of these were very minor, yet these people have paraded on their platform as if they were God’s keepers of angelic innocence. I think that the recent developments in Utah have been going on for a long time. Books have been written about this indicating what Sydney, Australia, and other cities have gone through. As far as I am concerned, the recent revelations have stripped these people as naked as the athletes were when they ran in the ancient Greek Olympics. They have nothing to hide behind. Now, they want us to put the law in front of them instead of the fig leaf they used to wear. I would prefer that we, at least, stand up to these people, exercise our prerogative and say “no.” Let them go to some other state and seek special protection. They already have the protection of the United States Congress. I don’t see the need for us to pollute our statutes with this special interest legislation. I want my remarks in the Journal for this day as well as a column in the Reno Gazette-Journal by Bill Martin dated Thursday, February 4, which says how hard it is, ten years later, to find out he as a member of the local committee was cheated. Thank you.
In Reno-Tahoe Olympics Woes Hard to Watch
By Bill Martin
Ten years after the U.S. Olympic Committee selected Salt Lake City rather than Reno-Tahoe to carry America’s hopes for hosting the Winter Olympics, the disappointment and disillusionment remains palpable for those who were closest to the process.
On that June 1989 afternoon in Des Moines, the Reno-Tahoe Organizing Committee had taken the USOC at its word and pinned its hopes on a $79 million package, funded through a 1‑cent increase in room taxes, all earmarked to build winter sports training facilities.
The chair of the USOC’s Site Selection Committee had stated that the bid city that delivered a “take it to the bank” proposal to build those facilities, much desired by the athletes, would be selected to carry America’s colors before the International Olympic Committee. The Reno-Tahoe Organizing Committee spent six months and $350,000 developing its bid package, including getting approval to implement the room tax increase, contingent only on being selected as the U.S. bid city. We went to Des Moines as the only city with cash in hand. We knew we had the strongest financial package, and we were hopeful our commitment would be enough to sway members of the USOC.
After Salt Lake City was selected, we were disappointed, of course, and disillusioned with the process. For the record, we wrote to the USOC protesting that the stated key standard–cash for winter training facilities–was little more than a sham. Now, as evidence piles up that the Salt Lake Olympic Committee may have bribed members of the International Olympic Committee in its efforts to be designated as host of the 2002 Winter Olympics, some have questioned whether the Utah city also used improper methods to influence the U.S. Olympic Committee.
After the Des Moines decision, most felt that the key to Salt Lake City’s success with the USOC was its lengthy history of working with amateur athletics. Even if there were irregularities in the bidding process–and there certainly were, if only in the sense that the decision was based on something other than what we had been told–I still feel that history was probably the single most important factor.
Certainly, current investigations of the Salt Lake City wooing of U.S. and international Olympic organizations should look at whether there was wrongdoing during the 1989 bid process. If a smoking gun is found, legal options and remedies should be pursued by Reno-Tahoe.
Through the last decade, it has been difficult to watch Salt Lake City’s Olympic progress without considerable envy, more than a little melancholy and some bitterness. The feeling will never go away that it should be Reno-Tahoe hosting the Winter Olympics of 2002, not Salt Lake City.
Landing the Olympics of 2002 was both the best and worst thing that could have happened to a badly embarrassed Salt Lake City. Its Olympic committee apparently succumbed to greed and the IOC process encouraged it. It is sad to watch.
Many people once believed the Olympics represented the spirit of fair competition, athletics in their purest form, and lofty ideals of truth and honesty. The Organizing Committee learned that wasn’t the case in 1989. The rest of the world is learning it now. That, too, is sad to watch.
Senator Neal:
Thank you, Madam President. I have a question I would like to ask of the Chairman of the Committee on Commerce and Labor. Is there any pending case relative to this particular trademark?
Senator Townsend:
Thank you, Madam President. With regard to the specific question asked by my colleague from Southern Nevada, to best of the committee’s knowledge, there is not a pending case. However, I refer to the document I previously handed out which has to do with a case in 1987. That case is the San Francisco Arts and Athletics, Inc. v. the Olympic Committee. The citation is after that, where the Supreme Court affirmed that the protection granted to the USOC’s use of the Olympic words and symbols differ from the normal trademark protection in two aspects. The USOC need not prove that a contested use is likely to cause confusion and an unauthorized user of the word does not have the available normal statutory defenses. It goes on to say “the Supreme Court noted one reason for Congress to grant the USOC exclusive control of the word ‘Olympic’ as with other trademarks is to ensure that the USOC receives the benefit of its own effort so that the USOC will have an incentive to continue to produce a ‘quality product’ that in turn benefits the public.” There is no pending case to the best of our knowledge.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 6:
Yeas—17.
Nays—Care, Coffin, Titus, Wiener—4.
Senate Bill No. 6 having received a constitutional majority, Madam President declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 24.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators Carlton, Neal, Mathews, Townsend.
Senator Mathews requested that the following letter be entered in the Journal.
Elizabeth C. Richitt, President, State of Nevada Board of Psychological Examiners,
Porter Box 2286, Reno, Nevada 89505-2286
Dear Ms. Richitt:
Please accept this letter as acknowledgment that the Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Abuse (BADA) agrees with the Attorney General’s opinion that qualified licensed psychologists can diagnose and treat alcohol and drug abuse.
It is BADA’s understanding, as indicated at the meeting on 5/4/98, that the Board of Psychological Examiners defines “qualified” psychologist as one who has registered that area of expertise with the Board.
We are pleased to have this issue resolved and believe we can work effectively with the Board on issues of common concern in the future.
Sincerely,
Marilynn Morrical,Chief, Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Abuse
Maynard Yasmer, Administrator, Rehabilitation Division
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 24:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 24 having received a constitutional majority, Madam President declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
GUESTS EXTENDED PRIVILEGE OF SENATE FLOOR
On request of Senator Amodei, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Michelle Gamble, Janelle Bessette, Lynda Upton, Jeanne Utterback, David R. Gamble and James W. Puzey.
On request of Senator Carlton, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Kim Wilson.
On request of Senator Jacobsen, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Rebecca Rippie.
On request of Senator Mathews, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Norma Thomas.
On request of Senator McGinness, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Kacie Frade, Matt Frade and Debbie Frade.
On request of Senator Neal, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Navanna Chambers.
On request of Senator Raggio, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Lise Mackie and the following Sports Day Teams represented by the Sierra Nevada Girl Scouts Troops Nos. 180 and 588; Sparks High School Soccer and Basketball teams, Fernley High School Athletes, Carson City Comets, Carson Stalkers, Nevada Golf Team, Smith Valley High School, Yerington High School, Reed High School, Carson City High School, Carson City Recreation Basketball Team, Carson Middle School, Mineral County Girls Basketball and Softball, St. Theresa School, Carson Girls Softball, Cobra V-12 Soccer Team, Nevada Volleyball Team, Tazmanian Devils Soccer Team, Special Olympics Athletes, Nevada Track Team, Reno High School Athletes, Nevada Swimming Team, Douglas High School, Dayton High School and Galena High School Softball, Volleyball, Basketball, Track and Cheerleading Teams.
On request of Senator Schneider, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Janelle Mack.
On request of Senator Shaffer, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Corrie Locklear.
On request of Senator Titus, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Kim Fleming.
On request of Senator Townsend, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Mandy Eisenhart.
On request of Senator Wiener, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Desirei Kinney.
Senator Raggio moved that the Senate adjourn until Monday, February 8, 1999, at 11 a.m.
Motion carried.
Senate adjourned at 11:58 a.m.
Approved: Lorraine T. Hunt
President of the Senate
Attest: Janice L. Thomas