THE SIXTY-FIRST DAY
Carson City(Friday), April 2, 1999
Senate called to order at 10:46 a.m.
President pro Tempore Jacobsen presiding.
Roll called.
All present.
Prayer by the Chaplain, the Reverend David Campbell.
Most Gracious God:
We humbly pray to You for the people of this nation in general and the citizens of Nevada in particular. Be gracious to us all this day. Especially bless this Senate as it deliberates on our behalf. May its actions be to Your glory and to the safety, honor and welfare of the people. May their work this day be upon the best and surest of foundations; that peace, happiness, truth and justice may be established among us. Accept now our thanksgiving for Your presence in our lives. We pray in Your glorious Name.
Amen.
Pledge of allegiance to the Flag.
Senator Raggio moved that further reading of the Journal be dispensed with, and the President pro Tempore and Secretary be authorized to make the necessary corrections and additions.
Motion carried.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
Mr. President pro Tempore:
Your Committee on Commerce and Labor, to which were referred Senate Bills Nos. 128, 131, 351, 357, 375, 452, 465; Assembly Bill No. 58, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Amend, and do pass as amended.
Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
Mr. President pro Tempore:
Your Committee on Government Affairs, to which was referred Senate Bill No. 533, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass, and place on Consent Calendar.
Also, your Committee on Government Affairs, to which were referred Senate Bills Nos. 498, 499, 531, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass.
Ann O’Connell, Chairman
Mr. President pro Tempore:
Your Committee on Human Resources and Facilities, to which was referred Senate Bill No. 382, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass.
Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
Mr. President pro Tempore:
Your Committee on Judiciary, to which were referred Senate Bills Nos. 148, 273, 297, 395, 396, 400, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Amend, and do pass as amended.
Also, your Committee on Judiciary, to which were referred Senate Bills Nos. 421, 514, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass.
Mark A. James, Chairman
Mr. President pro Tempore:
Your Committee on Taxation, to which was referred Senate Bill No. 494, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Do pass, and place on Consent Calendar.
Mike McGinness, Chairman
Mr. President pro Tempore:
Your Committee on Transportation, to which was referred Senate Bill No. 179, has had the same under consideration, and begs leave to report the same back with the recommendation: Amend, and do pass as amended.
William R. O’Donnell, Chairman
MESSAGES FROM THE ASSEMBLY
Assembly Chamber, Carson City, April 1, 1999
To the Honorable the Senate:
I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the Assembly on this day passed, as amended, Assembly Bills Nos. 51, 74, 268, 309, 311.
Also, I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the Assembly on this day passed Assembly Bills Nos. 548, 620, 649; Assembly Joint Resolution No. 15; Assembly Joint Resolution No. 5 of the 69th Session.
Susan Furlong Reil
Assistant Chief Clerk of the Assembly
MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES
By Senators Raggio, Amodei, Care, Carlton, Coffin, Jacobsen, James, Mathews, McGinness, Neal, O’Connell, O’Donnell, Porter, Rawson, Rhoads, Schneider, Shaffer, Titus, Townsend, Washington and Wiener:
Senate Resolution No. 6—Inducting Zebedee “Zeb” Kendall into the Senate Hall of Fame.
Whereas, The Senate of the Legislature of the State of Nevada has established a Senate Hall of Fame whose members are selected by leadership from former state Senators who have served with distinction with exemplary contributions to the State of Nevada; and
Whereas, Senator Zeb Kendall served as a representative of Nye County in the Senate of the Nevada Legislature for 8 years from 1909 through 1916 and during his tenure served as Chairman of the committees on Mines and Mining, Agriculture, Counties and County Boundaries, Railroads, Internal Improvements and Manufactures, and Rules and Joint Rules; and
Whereas, Senator Kendall introduced and helped secure the passage of important legislation pertaining to mining claims and regulations, telephone-telegraph franchises and requiring public water companies to supply water for fire protection; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate of the State of Nevada, That Senator Zebedee “Zeb” Kendall, a well-respected mining pioneer, civic leader and Legislator, is hereby inducted into the Senate Hall of Fame of the Legislature of the State of Nevada.
Senator McGinness moved the adoption of the resolution.
Remarks by Senator McGinness.
Senator McGinness requested that his remarks be entered in the Journal.
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. The resolution does not quite get to the heart of Mr. Kendall. Those pioneers of Nevada were hearty individuals. Zeb Kendall was a resident of Tonopah. As the current representative of Nye County, it gives me great honor to be able to speak about Mr. Kendall. He was a twice-elected Democrat. He was one of the original group of men who went to Tonopah in the spring of 1901, obtained a lease on the Mizpah mine and acquired considerable wealth. He helped initiate the second big mining boom in Nevada. In 1902, Mr. Kendall built the Palace Hotel which was the first hostelry in Tonopah. On July 4, 1904, he won the double jack rock drilling contest, which was a momentous event in mining circles. I am sure that he bragged for days on that. Tonopah continues this contest during Jim Butler Days.
Senator Kendall’s first son was born on February 12, 1909, exactly 100 years after the birth of President Abraham Lincoln. The 1909 Nevada Senate passed a resolution suggesting that the newborn son of Senator Kendall and his wife be named Abraham Lincoln Kendall. The Kendalls considered this a great honor and named their son accordingly. This apparently is the only recorded instance of the naming of a person by the Nevada Legislature.
After his years in the Legislature, Zeb Kendall became President of the Consolidated Virginia Mining Company in Virginia City. He resided in Virginia City during his later years, where he became known as “Virginia City’s first Citizen.”
Mr. Erickson of the Research Division has provided me with copies of the Territorial Enterprise which has some great headlines such as “ZEB KENDALL, PIONEER PROMOTER DIES.” Virginia City’s grand old man was 78. They note in the newspaper that he was a well-known figure at California race tracks and was highly respected for his knowledge of horse racing. A favorite anecdote of the period concerns the occasion when he returned to his apartment at the St. Francis Hotel to find Mrs. Kendall vexed at his being late for dinner. To placate her, he opened his satchel and showed her $80,000 in gold and bank notes he had won that afternoon at Bay Meadows Race Track. Mrs. Kendall, who was obviously not real happy with Mr. Kendall, took the bag and tossed it out the window onto Powell Street. The hotel attendants recovered most of the money, it was reported.
Resolution adopted.
Senator McGinness moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Motion carried.
Senate in recess at 11 a.m.
SENATE IN SESSION
At 11:05 a.m.
President pro Tempore Jacobsen presiding.
Quorum present.
By Senators Raggio, Amodei, Care, Carlton, Coffin, Jacobsen, James, Mathews, McGinness, Neal, O’Connell, O’Donnell, Porter, Rawson, Rhoads, Schneider, Shaffer, Titus, Townsend, Washington and Wiener:
Senate Resolution No. 7—Inducting T. Tracy Fairchild into the Senate Hall of Fame.
Whereas, The Senate of the Legislature of the State of Nevada has established a Senate Hall of Fame whose members are selected by leadership from former state Senators who have served with distinction with exemplary contributions to the State of Nevada; and
Whereas, Tracy Fairchild, a leader in the Republican Party in Elko County and this state, served in the Nevada Legislature with distinction and fairness for 18 years as an Assemblyman from 1914 through 1918 and 1920 through 1922, as a Senator from 1922 through 1934, and as President pro Tempore of the Senate in 1929; and
Whereas, Former Senator Fairchild was Chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Ways and Means for every legislative session he served as a Senator and was instrumental in establishing tax levies, providing appropriations for the operation of government, adopting biennial state budgets and setting the salaries of state officers and employees; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate of the State of Nevada, That T. Tracy Fairchild, a powerful and influential leader who set many of the fiscal policies for the State of Nevada, is hereby inducted into the Senate Hall of Fame of the Legislature of the State of Nevada.
Senator Rhoads moved the adoption of the resolution.
Remarks by Senator Rhoads.
Senator Rhoads requested that his remarks be entered in the Journal.
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. I am quite privileged and honored to share some of this information with you. The great grandson of Mr. Fairchild has provided me with a handbook of the 36th Session of the Nevada Legislature in 1933. The order of business is almost identical to what it is today.
Tracy Fairchild’s father was born in New York City, came out west in 1852 and got into the newspaper business in 1863 in Austin, Nevada. It was named the Reese River Reveille which is the oldest newspaper in the state. In 1871, he went to Oakland, California, and was part owner of the Oakland Daily News. In 1877, he returned and bought the Tuscarora Times. Many of you do not realize it but Tuscarora had two newspapers at one time which were the Tuscarora Times and the Tuscarora Mining-Review. The two newspapers merged in 1877 and was then called the Daily Times-Review. Tracy was 31 years old and took the newspaper over. The mining had dwindled down by 1905; the paper was suspended, and Tracy expanded his ranching operation and probably made a mistake when he entered politics.
Tracy Fairchild was born in California in 1855. He moved to Austin, Nevada with his family in 1863 which was just one year before Nevada became a state. He relocated to Tuscarora in 1877. As a resident of Tuscarora, Senator Fairchild represented Elko County in the Legislature for 6 years in the Assembly and 12 years in the Senate. When he became a Senator, he immediately became Chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee and continued as chairman for 12 years. In 1923, Senator Fairchild gained passage of S.B. No. 110 which emphasized the importance of high school education in Nevada by providing additional funding. As Chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, he was responsible for the setting of tax levies, providing appropriations for the operation of the government, adopting the biennial state budget and setting the salaries of state officers and employees.
In 1929, Senator Fairchild served as President pro Tempore of the Senate. It is very interesting that some of the committees he served on were: Agriculture, Irrigation, Reclamation of Arid Lands (which maybe we need to start again), Military and Indian Affairs, Banks and Banking, Livestock, State Prison, Mental Health and Taxation.
In 1943, the Fairchilds announced that they were leaving Elko County and the ranching business. This ended an era of one of the most influential pioneer families in Nevada. It is very interesting to note that (Sharon) my wife’s parents bought that ranch in 1943, and we are living in the same house that Senator Fairchild built in the early 1900s. One of Tracy’s sons married Sharon’s grandmother’s sister. So, in a way, Sharon and I are related to the Fairchilds.
There are four surviving grandchildren and a number of great and great-great grandchildren. It gives me great honor to welcome Tracy Fairchild into the Senate Hall of Fame.
Resolution adopted.
Senator Rhoads moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Motion carried.
Senate in recess at 11:15 a.m.
SENATE IN SESSION
At 11:20 a.m.
President pro Tempore Jacobsen presiding.
Quorum present.
Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 6.
Senator Rawson moved the adoption of the resolution.
Remarks by Senator Rawson.
Resolution adopted, as amended.
Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 14.
Resolution read second time.
The following amendment was proposed by the Committee on Legislative Affairs and Operations:
Amendment No. 316.
Amend the resolution, page 2, line 13, by deleting “4” and inserting “3”.
Amend the title of the resolution, third line, by deleting “4” and inserting “3”.
Amend the summary of the resolution, third line, by deleting “4” and inserting “3”.
Senator Porter moved the adoption of the amendment.
Remarks by Senator Porter.
Amendment adopted.
Resolution ordered reprinted, engrossed and to the Resolution File.
Assembly Joint Resolution No. 15.
Senator Rawson moved that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Human Resources and Facilities.
Motion carried.
Assembly Joint Resolution No. 5 of the 69th Session.
Senator Rawson moved that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING AND REFERENCE
Assembly Bill No. 51.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
Assembly Bill No. 74.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Finance.
Motion carried.
Assembly Bill No. 268.
Senator Raggio moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Finance.
Motion carried.
Assembly Bill No. 309.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
Assembly Bill No. 311.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
Assembly Bill No. 548.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
Assembly Bill No. 620.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Transportation.
Motion carried.
Assembly Bill No. 649.
Senator Rawson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Senate Bill No. 367.
Bill read by number.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 367:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 367 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
SECOND READING AND AMENDMENT
Senate Bill No. 291.
Bill read second time.
The following amendment was proposed by the Committee on Natural Resources:
Amendment No. 272.
Amend section 1, page 1, by deleting line 3 and inserting: “and household purposes [, in] directly related toa single-family dwelling, including, without limitation, the watering of a”.
Amend section 1, page 1, line 5, by deleting “pets.” and inserting: “pets, if the draught does not exceed the threshold daily maximum amount set in NRS 534.180 for exemption from the application of this chapter.”.
Senator Rhoads moved the adoption of the amendment.
Remarks by Senator Rhoads.
Amendment adopted.
Bill ordered reprinted, engrossed and to third reading.
Senate Bill No. 352.
Bill read second time and ordered to third reading.
GENERAL FILE AND THIRD READING
Senate Bill No. 15.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators O’Connell and Raggio.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 15:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 15 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 41.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators Neal, Washington, Care, Wiener, Rawson and Amodei.
Senator Neal requested that the following remarks be entered in the Journal.
Senator Neal:
May we have an explanation of this bill?
Senator Washington:
Mr. President pro Tempore, Senate Bill No. 41 authorizes parents to apply to put their children in different schools or different attendance zones. It provides a mechanism for them to apply if there is space available and they meet certain conditions under a contract that they sign with the district concerning behavior or minimum grade point average. It also provides that the school district will notify the parent and the school that the student is applying to attend. It also provides for those parents that live in adjoining districts that if they want to send their children to another district for the matter of convenience or because they work in that location, they can do so. The conditions of the bill are spelled out to ensure the school district will provide for the application and the process of the application and they will notify the applicant if there is space available.
Other than that, the bill does not do much more. It is a matter of convenience and choice for those parents who wish to apply for rezoning in a certain district.
Senator Care:
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. I think we all agree that the most important thing in a school is education. My concern is the student athlete who does not share that concern or that priority and even worse, the high school coach who does not share that belief and thus, actively recruits the student athlete or the student athlete who seeks out the coach. I am wondering if this legislation prohibits that practice in any fashion.
Senator Washington:
To the Senator from Las Vegas, yes it does. The bill basically says that the pupil will sign a written agreement with the school of choice. The agreement will state that they have to maintain a certain behavior, a certain grade point average and there must be space available for that student to attend the school. The attendance is not based on the giftedness as an athlete. It is based upon the conditions that are set in the terms of the agreement. I understand that there is a concern about some coaches going out to recruit gifted athletes, but I have to remind the Senator that on every athletic team there are a certain amount of spaces that an athlete could fill. For instance, on a football team, there are 11 slots.
Being a former athlete, if I were gifted in a certain position, I would want to make sure that I had an opportunity at that position. Some would choose to go to the best school. Some would look for an opportunity just to play to show their wares and their talent to perhaps, get an opportunity for a scholarship.
I would say that if the conditions are met based on the written agreement, available space, behavior and/or a grade point average, the student should be able to attend that school.
Senator Neal:
The question I have is that at the present time, a student can apply for a waiver to go to a school. Therefore, why do we need to have this in statute? Am I missing something here that is not presently being taken care of?
Senator Washington:
Mr. President pro Tempore, I feel honored that I was not called the “young senator from the north” so I will try to answer this question. There is an understanding that there are variances or waivers given to students or parents who apply for those waivers. In the testimony it was found that certain variances or waivers are given to students that meet selected criteria. This bill opens up the door for anybody that wants to make the choice of their own selection without going through the variance process and without having to meet preference of selections and opens it up to a random selection. The other thing that we found out in the testimony was that variances that are applied for are very often not granted. The districts were unable to give us substantial numbers of variances that were granted. With this process we are hoping that the process is fair, across the board and that students will have an opportunity to attend the schools of their choice.
Senator Neal:
After hearing the explanation, I would have to oppose this bill and this measure simply because when schools are built, it is based upon preplanned neighborhoods, and are built to accommodate certain students. If by passing this bill, we are taking out of the hands of those superintendents and local school boards to make those decisions as to where the kids could be placed, I dare say that this would affect the way that these individuals have to plan for the coming school year. If we are going to insert into law that these individuals can go from school to school or whatever they find is the best school or to join their friends. We are allowing them to do this without a reason. I do know that in Clark County you must give that reason. We do not state in this bill that you have to have a reason. You just want to go to another school. The big question that I would have with this is that it simply means that individuals who have the means, the influence would probably, no doubt, get their kids in a school that is near their work place or even the place that they might go to exercise.
I do not think that this is a good public policy to take this authority away from the local boards and put this right into state law. The school districts cannot anticipate and control the number of children that might be attending a particular school. I think this is bad policy and is fraught with danger and might cause the school district to wind up in lawsuits based upon this policy. I do not think this is the way that this legislature should go in terms of passing this measure because it does not enhance the education of the child. Let those who say it does answer this question, what about the children who are not transferred? What I heard being said is that it favors the parent, not the child. If the parent needs to drop his kids off to a closer school where he works, that is accommodating the parent and not the child. With those reasons that I have stated, that it is taking away the authority of the local school board trustees and the superintendents who manage this type of situation that it is a bad policy for us to do that. We should not let this bill out of this house.
Senator Wiener:
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore: I rise in reluctant opposition to Senate Bill No. 41. Reluctant because I am a strong believer of choice and alternatives for students and parents in our public schools. As you know, I am a particularly strong advocate of charter schools and co-authored with the sponsor of this bill last session’s charter school legislation.
I oppose this bill because as it has been mentioned, local school district variance policies are already in place and allow thousands of students each year to choose other schools.
More importantly, I feel compelled to oppose this bill because it legislatively endorses a “have and have-not” policy.
Those students who have parents or caregivers with financial means and ability to drive them across town to a different school can take advantage of this bill. Those who do not have parents with the financial means or flexibility in their own work schedules cannot.
I represent a district of working people, many of whom work swing shifts, many who work two jobs to make ends meet, many of whom are single parents struggling to balance work with being a good mom or dad. No matter how many of my constituents might want to take advantage of this legislation, they simply could not. Parents who can provide transportation could.
I want to thank my colleague from Washoe County for his efforts to address the needs of our students. However, Senate Bill No. 41 is not a school choice bill for all students. For this reason, I will be opposing this legislation.
Senator Rawson:
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. I have just a few things that I could add to the discussion and the consideration here. There is indeed a policy here whether or not it is best for the government to make this decision in our children’s lives or if parents should be involved in it. There are many valid reasons for wanting to have some choice in where your child goes to school. We have a mobile society. People move. There may be a situation where it is deemed in the best interest of the child to stay with their current friends and associates and not uproot them. We have a maldistribution of students in many of our schools because of the growth in southern Nevada. We look out on the west bench of the valley and the class sizes are huge. They are overcrowded with all of these people moving into new areas and they are leaving schools behind that do not have a sufficient number of students. They just do not have the means in the district to be able to bus in all situations. So, we end up with some schools where a child may be pulled out because of moving into a zone that is very detrimental for them until more schools are built. There are as many reasons as there are parents and children out there that may be valid reasons for considering. This is a compromise bill. We can not afford to go into a blanket open choice for everyone. It simply is not available to us now. We do not know how to work out the details and do not have the money and resources to be able to accomplish that. This does take those people who have the biggest problems and the most significant interruption in their lives and gives them some option to be able to deal with that. I can tell you from experience, that the school districts at this point simply do not deal with these issues. If they do make an exception, then your child loses a year or two of extra curricular activities whether it is sports, band or other things. Children are simply placed at a disadvantage now that is not necessary.
Senator Amodei:
To my colleague from Clark District 7 on the interscholastic activities issue, during testimony on the bill, you should know that the NIAA already has a set of regulations that presently apply to transfers between schools. It is established in those regulations a presumption that a transfer was made for athletic purposes, and therefore, the student would be ineligible for a year. Those regulations would still apply under this measure. It does nothing to change those regulations. In fact, during testimony on the bill, there was an indication that the NIAA felt well within its regulatory authority to craft additional regulations if that would become an abuse under this. That was a concern of the committee. I think it is adequately addressed under existing regulation, and they do have the ability to enact further regulations in the event that happens. To my colleague from District 4 in Clark County, I think the emphasis that the bill places is not to take the decision away from local folks. It places the emphasis on resource availability. If you think about what is happening in our state with regard to school seats, when you think about the eight districts in Clark County and the four districts in Washoe County and indeed in my district, Carson City, Lyon County and Storey County, and you think about the number of empty seats that actually exist in schools, I think when you place the emphasis on resource planning as this bill does, you will see that the potential for a lot of changing of school districts or even attendance zones based on the availability of seats is in all actuality fairly slim. As a policy statement to say that if you do not want to attend a school in the zone where you live, that decision ought to be made on the basis of resource availability I think is a fair statewide statement.
With respect to the time limit mentioned by my colleague from District 4, I think you will see language in the bill that indicates that these applications must be made in a certain time to enable administrators to plan where students are going to be. Finally with respect to the transportation provisions, I think we passed a bill yesterday which would address some of those concerns as far as public transit. I would also point out for the record that the administrations; north and south, rural and urban, indicated that it was their preference to have the bill in a way that did not provide for any mandates as far as transportation goes.
Senator Washington:
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. I do not want to prolong this discussion but I think it is important to note the statements made about the “haves” and the “have-nots.” You have to understand that most of the people who are applying for a choice, have located in a certain residential area as a matter of choice. In that choice, they select the school in that residential area which they can afford. I have run across a number of people who have said that they bought a house in a certain area because they liked the school located in that area. Then they find that they have been rezoned and their children have to attend a different school. This causes them concern since they would prefer that their children attend the school for which reason they bought the house. One thing that concerns me is that we talked about parents making the choice, but I have a statement from a young lady who sits on the Board of the Washoe County School District as a student. Her name is Sayla Stitser, currently a student at McQueen High School. She writes “I feel, as a student, choice would be very effective. My suggestion would be to offer permanence at one school rather than making students reapply each year through either a minimum GPA program or other incentive program. I feel allowing students to choose their school allows for more competition and when students choose to be somewhere and have to work to stay here they take more pride in their school. I feel that the academic performance of schools would also rise since students would be working harder to stay.”
This is a student making this statement, not a parent. It is not based upon friendship, not based upon residency or anything else except the fact that it was her selection to be at that school based on academic performance, based on behavior and based on grade point average. I think we are asking for a simple policy change. We give people choice for all numbers of reasons except: (1) to select their own retirement plan; and (2) to select their own school of choice. This is a simple policy that would give that opportunity, not only to parents, but also to students themselves.
Senator Neal:
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. I do not want to prolong this discussion. Yesterday, when the Majority Leader was giving his report on the accomplishments in education, he mentioned three schools among a list of schools that were underachieving: Booker, Fitzgerald and Madison. As you may recall, I pointed out at that time that those three schools were in my Senate district. Those schools were once under the desegregation plan, but because of the Jenkins v. Missouri Case and other cases, all of those schools have been re-segregated. These children do not have the choice of going to another school. Also in my district is the A.T. Academy that is located adjacent to these three schools. The Academy has less than five or six students from the area attending that school. You talk about choice: choice is not working for Booker; choice is not working for Fitzgerald; choice is not working for Madison. We saw these schools go from segregated schools to desegregated schools and back to segregated schools. If we want to pass this measure on choice, it is not working here. I am opposed to any bill that comes through here that utilizes the public school system to give privilege to the wealthy and those who can afford to drive their children across town to other schools. I would always oppose that until we can take care of this type of situation. I understand that my friend comes from Reno, but I happen to be from Las Vegas. I live in that community, and I have seen what has happened to the school system there. I was a part of seeing, in the sixties, when we brought school desegregation cases to desegregate these schools. I have also seen that these schools are now totally black. They have gone from desegregated schools to segregated schools in a matter of seven or eight years based upon what we call a choice plan. Choices were not available to this and will not be under this bill. If we are going to deal with the subject of public education, then let it be public and not let it be privileged. We are creating a privilege by the passage of this measure. I would always oppose this. I don’t care if I am the lone vote against this measure because I happen to think that it is wrong. Black students cannot attend the Academy in my district because of a choice plan. Black people do not have the same choices available to them. Senator O’Connell spoke several days ago about the students at the Academy producing the constitution on the dollar bill. Yet, the students at the three schools I mentioned do not have that right; it is being denied to them because of choice. We don’t have the choice to attend medical schools in this state. This is at a college level. How does one think elementary and secondary schools would be any different.
Senator Washington:
If I may address these comments to my colleague from North Las Vegas.
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. I would like say to him that as we deal with this question of a matter of choice, I understand where he is coming from. Unfortunately, I was a child of the sixties and understand the hardships that had to bring about a change. I understand “Brown v. Kansas City.” But I want to tell him this morning that we are in a different era, a different time. Things have changed. People go to school because they make the choices for themselves. The reason it reverts back is not because the laws have changed, not because the policies have changed, it is the fact that people have changed. They go back to the schools that they are familiar with and where their friends are. What this bill does is to give me the opportunity to make a choice so I can better myself. If we are going to talk about bettering children and what is best for the children, then as a parent give me the right to make the decision to decide where I am going to put my child. Don’t tell me I have to comply with government standards. Don’t tell me that, because of the sixties, I am now relegated to a certain school and a certain standard. This is not true. Not true. It is my child. I’m the parent. Help me to do what is best for my child. We talk about standards and accountability. We passed S.B. No. 482 to raise the standards. We have people coming here and making presentations about the quality of teachers and how important it is for these kids to achieve. If you want them to succeed in this life, in this country, don’t indoctrinate them. Teach them. Teach them how to think for themselves. Teach them so that they can become engineers, lawyers and doctors. So they can sit behind these tables and make policies and regulations. But the point that I want everyone to understand that this is public choice. We are not talking about private choice. We are talking about public choice for going to public schools. We are not talking about siphoning money from anything else, but allowing these children to do something better with their lives instead of being housed in dilapidated school buildings and run down classrooms with no textbooks. As a parent, if I had to send my child to a school like that, if I could afford to, I would get him out of there. Even if I could not afford it, I would still try to get him out of there. Education is the fundamental principle for freedom. If you want to keep a people enslaved, you keep them uneducated.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 41:
Yeas—13.
Nays—Care, Carlton, Coffin, Mathews, Neal, Schneider, Titus, Wiener—8.
Senate Bill No. 41 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 57.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senator Wiener.
Senator Wiener requested that her remarks be entered in the Journal.
Senate Bill No. 57 expands eligibility for participation in the therapeutic communities in prison. The measure authorizes the Director of the Department of Prisons to determine which inmates should participate in the program, whether the inmate volunteers or not. The measure also deletes the requirement that an inmate be a first-time offender. Finally, Senate Bill No. 57 revises the time in which the inmate is eligible to participate to the year preceding the date on which he is reasonably expected to be released, as determined by the director.
The 1997 Legislature authorized the creation of therapeutic communities for substance abusers in prison. According to the sponsor of the 1997 and 1999 legislation, the current requirement for participation in the therapeutic communities have limited both the number of eligible participants and the program’s eligibility for federal funding. Witnesses stated that the program at Warm Springs is operating successfully. Three hundred random drug screenings of all 85 participants revealed zero positive results.
The sponsor stated that in therapeutic communities in other states, the prison director is able to assign inmates to the therapeutic communities with very high success rates, and an inmate’s willingness to volunteer does not influence the effectiveness of these programs. In addition, based on the experiences of therapeutic communities in other jurisdictions, it does not appear that prior criminal convictions will diminish the effectiveness of the program. Finally, it is difficult to determine when an inmate will be released because this decision is often made by the Parole Board. Therefore, Senate Bill No. 57 amends the law to provide more flexibility to the department in determining who is eligible to participate.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 57:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 57 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 74.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 74:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Not Voting—Coffin.
Senate Bill No. 74 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 80.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators O’Donnell and Neal.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 80:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 80 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 108.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators Neal, James and McGinness.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 108:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 108 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 159.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 159:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 159 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 177.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 177:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 177 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 191.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 191:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 191 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 227.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 227:
Yeas—21.
Nays—None.
Senate Bill No. 227 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senator Raggio moved that the Senate recess until 1:15 p.m.
Motion carried.
Senate in recess at 12:34 p.m.
SENATE IN SESSION
At 1:31 p.m.
President pro Tempore Jacobsen presiding.
Quorum present.
GENERAL FILE AND THIRD READING
Senate Bill No. 274.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 274:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 274 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 284.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senator Raggio.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 284:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 284 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 343.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 343:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 343 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 344.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators Neal and Rhoads.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 344:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 344 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 377.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 377:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 377 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 383.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senator McGinness.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 383:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 383 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 424.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 424:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 424 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 453.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators James and Neal.
Senator Neal requested that Senator James’s remarks be entered in the Journal.
Senator James:
Thank you, Mr. President pro Tempore. Senate Bill No. 453 ratifies technical corrections to the Nevada Revised Statutes and Statutes of Nevada of 1997. The measure is effective upon passage and approval. The Legal Division of the Legislative Counsel Bureau continuously looks for conflicting sections of different bills and technical errors in Nevada Revised Statutes and Statutes of Nevada.
In the case of conflicting language, changes are made only after careful consideration of legislative intent. This bill would ratify those technical changes. You notice that this bill is larger than it has been the last three legislative sessions. That is a function of the fact that we have been generating more work because we are becoming a bigger state, and we do more each session. In a state with a biennial session, we inevitably are going to have a greater number of technical ratification changes although all states do this. Because we only meet once every two years, these are compiled and saved up during that time. The Legal Division finds all these changes, and we receive them in one legislative measure.
The Judiciary Committee examined this bill and queried the people who made these technical corrections. You are given assurance that we are not making substantive changes here. The body needs to distinguish this bill from the reviser’s bill which does make what LCB deems to be substantive changes. Those are changes that, for whatever reason, they need us to make to actually revise Nevada Law instead of merely revising technical corrections.
In most of the Senate Bill No. 453 cases, these are references that were left out or conflicting references only. For example, we may be referring to a section that we eliminated. That needs to be changed. These are technical corrections that, in the judgment of our Legislative Counsel, do not change in any way the original legislative intent of any law that we passed in the prior sessions.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 453:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 453 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 454.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 454:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 454 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 456.
Bill read third time.
Roll call on Senate Bill No. 456:
Yeas—20.
Nays—None.
Excused—Schneider.
Senate Bill No. 456 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Bill No. 464.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Senators Titus and Townsend.
Senator Townsend moved that Senate Bill No. 464 be taken from the General File and placed on the Secretary’s desk.
Motion carried.
MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES
Senator Neal moved that Senate Joint Resolution No. 16 be taken from the General File and placed on the Secretary’s desk.
Remarks by Senator Neal.
Motion carried.
GENERAL FILE AND THIRD READING
Senate Joint Resolution No. 12.
Resolution read third time.
Roll call on Senate Joint Resolution No. 12:
Yeas—19.
Nays—None.
Excused—O’Donnell, Schneider—2.
Senate Joint Resolution No. 12 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed, as amended.
Resolution ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Joint Resolution No. 19.
Resolution read third time.
Roll call on Senate Joint Resolution No. 19:
Yeas—19.
Nays—None.
Excused—O’Donnell, Schneider—2.
Senate Joint Resolution No. 19 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Resolution ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Senate Joint Resolution No. 20.
Resolution read third time.
Roll call on Senate Joint Resolution No. 20:
Yeas—19.
Nays—None.
Excused—O’Donnell, Schneider—2.
Senate Joint Resolution No. 20 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Resolution ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
Assembly Joint Resolution No. 10.
Resolution read third time.
Roll call on Assembly Joint Resolution No. 10:
Yeas—19.
Nays—None.
Excused—O’Donnell, Schneider—2.
Assembly Joint Resolution No. 10 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. President pro Tempore declared it passed.
Resolution ordered transmitted to the Assembly.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Signing of Bills and Resolutions
There being no objections, the President pro Tempore and Secretary signed Senate Concurrent Resolution 27; Assembly Bill 174; Assembly Joint Resolution No. 14; Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 41.
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 the following students from Fritsch Elementary School: Franklin Anaya, Jennifer Atchian, Stephanie Benitez, Mats Boehnke, Ashley Brock, Caitlyn Carr, Kristin Charles, Ryan Eighenberger, Bradley Heidelberger, Stephen Hein, Zachary Hughes, Grant Jeppson, Megan Kilty, Dustin Knutson, Clifford McCraw, Bethany Perez, Mayra Rios, Anthony Roberts, Luis Rodriguez, Carey Smith, Casey Smith, Jennifer Sullivan, Shonna Thompson, Brenna Wakefield, Michael Warren, Danielle Williams, Ryan Baden, Ayla Bender, Dallas Colodny, Shannon Emmans, Christopher Fuchslin, Crystal Gordy, Samantha Gray, Caitlin Gunn, Yohannes Habtemicael, Beau Hughes, Danielle Judge, Sara Lindsay, Jason Mather, Daniel Neiman, Karol Ann Osborn, Brent Patterson, Veronica Peck, Abigail Pitts, Christopher Powell, Geoffrey Rodriguez, S. Schwartzenberger, Amanda Senn, Justin Shinn, Jaren Taylor, Tyler Thompson, Makala Tronson, Alex Updegrove, Jamie Wiest and teachers Mr. Soderstrom and Mrs. Spofford.
On request of Senator Care, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Jenny Care and Diana Care.
On request of Senator Carlton, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Peggy Fairchild and Margaret Fairchild.
On request of Senator McGinness, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Robert Kendall, William Harrigan and Italo Gavazzi.
On request of Senator Raggio, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Ron Fairchild, Laura Fairchild and former Senator Virgil Getto.
On request of Senator Rhoads, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Sharon Rhoads, Mildred Fairchild Hagstrom and Paul Hagstrom.
On request of Senator Titus, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Darla Martin and Bob Martin.
On request of Senator Washington, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Dianna Dorn.
On request of Senator Wiener, the privilege of the floor of the Senate Chamber for this day was extended to Anthony “Tony” Kendall and Judith Kendall.
Senator Raggio moved that the Senate adjourn until Tuesday, April 6, 1999 at 12:30 p.m. and that it do so with our prayers for the three brave young men who were captured in Kosovo and also in recognition of Easter and Passover.
Motion carried.
Senate adjourned at 2:10 p.m.
Approved: Lawrence E. Jacobsen
President pro Tempore of the Senate
Attest: Janice L. Thomas