THE EIGHTEENTH DAY
Carson City (Thursday), February 22, 2001
Assembly called to order at 11:02 a.m.
Mr. Speaker presiding.
Roll called.
All present except Assemblymen Humke and Ohrenschall, who were excused.
Prayer by the Chaplain, Reverend Albert Tilstra.
Our Father, we come before You today and we would not want to come to weary You with our constant begging. We thank You for lessons to learn and for work to do. May we apply ourselves to both. As Your servants here sincerely seek to do right, make it plain to them. Knowing that criticism will come, help them to take from it what is helpful and to forgive what is unjust and unkind. In the middle of all the pressures brought on them, may they ever hear Your still small voice and follow Your guidance for the good of all the people, that Your will may be done in this state, through these Your servants. In Your Name we pray.
Amen.
Pledge of allegiance to the Flag.
Assemblywoman Buckley moved that further reading of the Journal be dispensed with, and the Speaker and Chief Clerk be authorized to make the necessary corrections and additions.
Motion carried.
MESSAGES FROM THE Senate
Senate Chamber, Carson City, February 21, 2001
To the Honorable the Assembly:
I have the honor to inform your honorable body that the Senate on this day passed Senate Bills Nos. 7, 29, 37.
Mary Jo Mongelli
Assistant Secretary of the Senate
INTRODUCTION, FIRST READING AND REFERENCE
By Assemblymen de Braga, Gibbons, Neighbors, Parks, Bache, Beers, Carpenter, Cegavske, Chowning, Claborn, Collins, Goldwater, Koivisto, Lee, Marvel, McClain, Oceguera, Parnell and Price:
Assembly Bill No. 211—AN ACT relating to elections; removing the requirement that a candidate who receives a majority of the votes in a primary election under certain circumstances must be declared the sole nominee for such an office; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman de Braga moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Elections, Procedures, and Ethics.
Motion carried.
By Assemblymen de Braga, Gibbons, Neighbors, Manendo, Bache, Beers, Buckley, Carpenter, Chowning, Claborn, Collins, Giunchigliani, Goldwater, Koivisto, Lee, McClain, Nolan, Oceguera, Parks and Parnell:
Assembly Bill No. 212—AN ACT making an appropriation to Churchill County for the expenses related to the operation of a veterans’ field service office in Churchill County; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman de Braga moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Education:
Assembly Bill No. 213—AN ACT relating to pupils; authorizing school districts to enroll pupils who are deemed habitual disciplinary problems in alternative programs of instruction; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Williams moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Education:
Assembly Bill No. 214—AN ACT relating to education; requiring the department of education and the board of trustees of each school district to adopt a plan setting forth procedures concerning the security of certain examinations; providing for the enforcement of those procedures; requiring the department of education to enforce certain provisions of certain contracts relating to the timely delivery of the results of examinations; prohibiting retaliatory action against an official of a school district or charter school who discloses information regarding irregularities in testing administration or testing security; providing that a teacher or administrator who willfully neglects or fails to observe and carry out the provisions of a plan for test security is subject to disciplinary action; providing a penalty; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Williams moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education.
Motion carried.
By Assemblymen Williams and Leslie:
Assembly Bill No. 215—AN ACT making an appropriation to the City of Las Vegas for the continued support of the Child Care Improvement Grant Program; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Williams moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Motion carried.
By Assemblymen Berman, Angle, Arberry, Bache, Beers, Brown, Buckley, Carpenter, Cegavske, Chowning, Claborn, Collins, de Braga, Dini, Freeman, Gibbons, Giunchigliani, Goldwater, Gustavson, Hettrick, Humke, Koivisto, Lee, Leslie, Manendo, McClain, Mortenson, Neighbors, Nolan, Oceguera, Parks, Parnell, Price, Tiffany and Von Tobel; Senator Rawson:
Assembly Bill No. 216—AN ACT making an appropriation for costs relating to the coordination of efforts to attract biotechnological companies to this state; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman Berman moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Commerce and Labor:
Assembly Bill No. 217—AN ACT relating to industrial insurance; repealing certain provisions that prohibit the payment of a death benefit under industrial insurance to a surviving spouse who remarries; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Dini moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Commerce and Labor:
Assembly Bill No. 218—AN ACT relating to public works; authorizing certain public bodies to contract with a design-build team for certain public works projects; changing the requirements for providing notice of certain hearings and advertising for preliminary proposals from design-build teams; changing certain requirements relating to the qualification and selection of a design-build team; extending the date for the expiration of provisions relating to the use of design-build teams on public works projects; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Dini moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor.
Motion carried.
Mr. Speaker announced if there were no objections, the Assembly would recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Assembly in recess at 11:10 a.m.
ASSEMBLY IN SESSION
At 11:12 a.m.
Mr. Speaker presiding.
Quorum present.
Assemblyman Dini moved that the action whereby Assembly Bill No. 218 was referred to the Committee on Commerce and Labor be rescinded.
Remarks by Assemblyman Dini.
Motion carried.
Assemblyman Dini moved that Assembly Bill No. 218 be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
By Assemblymen Buckley, Cegavske, Anderson, Arberry, Bache, Beers, Berman, Brown, Carpenter, Chowning, Claborn, Collins, de Braga, Dini, Freeman, Gibbons, Giunchigliani, Goldwater, Gustavson, Hettrick, Humke, Koivisto, Lee, Leslie, Manendo, Marvel, McClain, Mortenson, Nolan, Oceguera, Parks, Parnell, Perkins, Price, Smith, Tiffany, Von Tobel and Williams; Senators Titus, O'Donnell, Neal, Wiener, Carlton, Amodei, Care, Coffin, James, Schneider, Shaffer, Townsend and Washington:
Assembly Bill No. 219—AN ACT relating to state emblems; designating the mustang as an official state animal; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman Buckley moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Judiciary:
Assembly Bill No. 220—AN ACT relating to law enforcement; revising provisions governing the duties of certain peace officers in larger counties when a felony is committed or attempted in their presence or in an area that is within their jurisdiction; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Anderson moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Education:
Assembly Bill No. 221—AN ACT relating to education; authorizing the Department of Education to spend from the state distributive school account money for programs of remedial study and tutoring for allocation to certain schools and school districts; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Williams moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Education:
Assembly Bill No. 222—AN ACT relating to education; increasing the membership of the commission on professional standards in education; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Williams moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Education:
Assembly Bill No. 223—AN ACT relating to educational personnel; authorizing the commission on professional standards in education to adopt regulations that provide an exemption from the examinations required for initial licensure for certain teachers and other educational personnel with previous experience; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Williams moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education.
Motion carried.
By the Committee on Education:
Assembly Bill No. 224—AN ACT relating to education; revising provisions governing the contents of an application to form a charter school and a written charter of a charter school; revising provisions governing the requirements of a charter school to provide special education; clarifying provisions governing the reassignment of employees of a charter school upon revocation of the written charter; providing that a charter school may offer independent study in accordance with the regulations of the state board of education; specifying that charter schools are included within a school district’s program for the statewide automated system of information concerning pupils; making an appropriation to the legislative fund for a consultant to conduct case study evaluations of certain charter schools; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblyman Williams moved that the bill be referred to the Concurrent Committees on Education and Ways and Means.
Motion carried.
By Assemblymen Freeman, Anderson, Gibbons, Williams, Chowning, Arberry, Bache, Beers, Berman, Buckley, Collins, Giunchigliani, Goldwater, Humke, Lee, Leslie, Manendo, Nolan, Parks, Parnell, Price, Smith and Tiffany; Senators Rawson, Schneider, Neal, O'Connell, Townsend, Amodei, Mathews and Shaffer:
Assembly Bill No. 225—AN ACT relating to meetings of public bodies; defining the term “deliberate”; revising the definition of “meeting” to include certain serial gatherings; revising the definition of “public body” to include certain corporations and limited-liability companies; providing a civil penalty; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman Freeman moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Motion carried.
By Assemblymen Angle, Berman, Cegavske, Hettrick, Lee and Price; Senator Washington:
Assembly Bill No. 226—AN ACT relating to education; prohibiting an employee or agent of a school district from taking certain actions with regard to pupils who engage in disruptive behavior; authorizing certain employees of a school district to take certain actions with regard to pupils who engage in disruptive behavior; requiring a principal to take certain actions to encourage use of methods for managing pupils who engage in disruptive behavior that do not involve medication; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Assemblywoman Angle moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 7.
Assemblywoman Buckley moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 29.
Assemblywoman Buckley moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
Senate Bill No. 37.
Assemblywoman Buckley moved that the bill be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion carried.
SECOND READING AND AMENDMENT
Assembly Bill No. 7.
Bill read second time and ordered to third reading.
general file and third reading
Assembly Bill No. 128.
Bill read third time.
Remarks by Assemblymen Bache, Buckley and Arberry.
Roll call on Assembly Bill No. 128:
Yeas—40.
Nays—None.
Excused—Humke, Ohrenschall—2.
Assembly Bill No. 128 having received a constitutional majority, Mr. Speaker declared it passed.
Bill ordered transmitted to the Senate.
Assemblywoman Buckley moved that the Assembly recess until 4:45 p.m.
Assembly in recess at 11:26 a.m.
ASSEMBLY IN SESSION
At 4:56 p.m.
Mr. Speaker presiding.
Quorum present.
MOTIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND NOTICES
Mr. Speaker appointed Assemblymen Arberry and Von Tobel as a committee to invite the Senate to meet in Joint Session with the Assembly to hear an address by Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice A. William Maupin.
The members of the Senate appeared before the bar of the Assembly.
Mr. Speaker invited the members of the Senate to chairs in the Assembly.
IN JOINT SESSION
At 5:02 p.m.
President of the Senate presiding.
The Secretary of the Senate called the Senate roll.
All present except Senators Coffin, Matthews, Porter and Townsend, who were excused.
The Chief Clerk of the Assembly called the Assembly roll.
All present except for Assemblymen Freeman, Manendo, Ohrenschall and Tiffany, who were excused.
The President of the Senate appointed a Committee on Escort consisting of Senator Amodei and Assemblyman Anderson to wait upon the Honorable Chief Justice A. William Maupin and escort him to the Assembly Chamber.
The Committee on Escort in company with The Honorable Nevada Supreme Court Chief Justice A. William Maupin appeared before the bar of the Assembly.
The Committee on Escort escorted the Chief Justice to the rostrum.
Mr. Speaker welcomed Chief Justice Maupin and invited him to deliver his message.
Chief Justice Maupin delivered his message as follows:
Message To The Legislature Of Nevada
SeventY-First Session, 2001
Governor Guinn, Lieutenant Governor, Mr. Speaker, Constitutional Officers, members of the Nevada State Senate, and members of the Nevada State Assembly:
It is my privilege to address you tonight on the State of the Nevada Judiciary and I thank you for this opportunity. In this I speak on behalf of my colleagues on the State Supreme Court, our 56 colleagues around the state who serve in our district courts, our 97 colleagues around this state who serve as municipal court judges and justices of the peace, and our colleagues who serve in the capacity of administrative law judges.
As many of you know, certainly those of you with whom I campaigned in two consecutive elections, the entirety of my adult life has been devoted to the Nevada legal system, either as a practicing lawyer or as a member of the judiciary. Never have I been more proud of the men and women who serve the people of this state as judges and lawyers than I am at this moment. When you hear what these dedicated public servants have accomplished since Chief Justice Bob Rose spoke to you two years ago, I am quite confident you will join me in that sense of pride.
Also, as I intend to make quite clear, the vast majority of these accomplishments could not have occurred without the partnership that I believe the Nevada judiciary has formed with the legislature, the executive branch, and with the various county and city governments in this state. These partnerships have served this state well and I can now say without reservation that the people working in your judicial system have made every effort to maximize available resources to improve the delivery of formal dispute resolution to our citizens.
In terms of general administration of the court system I would point out the following:
In December, we published the judiciary’s first‑ever annual report containing uniform caseload statistics for every district, justice, and municipal court in Nevada. This report contains information that you have requested, information that we are happy to provide, and information that is important in management at every level of the Nevada court system; Last year, we established the strong chief judge requirement in the urban districts. Working with local judges, we also adopted comprehensive case management rules in the large districts, which have already paid great dividends in increased productivity and accountability to the people of Nevada;
We have upgraded the Nevada Judicial Council by developing uniform standards for judicial administrative performance, court security, and court facilities;
The Supreme Court formed a committee of judges, law enforcement representatives and family advocates to develop standards, including forms, to be used in domestic violence cases, and we have ordered all courts to use the new forms;
We developed a manual for trial courts to improve collections on all levels;
With the help of the private bar, we are now nearing completion of an Appellate Practice Manual to aid lawyers and their clients with the complex process of appellate litigation;
We also created a blue ribbon committee to revise and modernize the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure so that litigation in our trial courts will become more user-friendly;
We have enacted rules to implement the Short Trial Program passed as part of the Nevada Arbitration Act by the 1999 Legislature; and
We continue to review and improve the Court Annexed Arbitration System in place since July 1, 1992. This program regularly diverts a substantial percentage of the litigated damage cases out of the district courts of Washoe, Clark and Douglas counties, and Carson City.
In the Supreme Court itself, we are managing our caseload to maintain quality and to reduce one of the most serious backlogs of any appellate court in the country. That backlog developed as a result of a tremendous increase in case filings during the early and middle 1990s. Because Nevada has no intermediate appellate court and was comprised of only five justices with a relatively modest support staff of lawyers, the 1997 session allowed us to expand the court to seven justices and provided us with generous increases in our staff. I believe that our statistics, since then, demonstrate excellent use of these resources.
At the close of calendar year 1997, our pending case inventory was 2521 cases, certainly one of the five largest inventories in the country. Three years later, at the end of calendar year 2000, 1720 cases remained pending, a reduction of 801 cases. In non-governmental accounting terms, this is a reduction of 32 percent. Our own internal case management measures have contributed to this as well. The Civil Settlement Program, which you have also funded, is still resolving between fifty and sixty percent of the civil appeals lodged with the court. The Fast-track Program for processing criminal appeals has substantially increased the speed with which we are disposing of those cases. Finally, with the resources provided to us by you, we have made significant headway in the reduction of the backlog of prisoner litigation.
Long term, we will continue to advocate for an intermediate appellate court. Although recognizing we now operate both as an intermediate appeals court and a court of final appeal, and recognizing that we can justify an intermediate court system based upon the shear size of our caseload, we have determined not to press for the second leg of the legislative process that would lead to the intermediate appellate court being placed on the general election ballot in 2002. This is reflective of the fact that, as of now, we continue to reduce the backlog. I must emphasize, however, that this trend cannot continue indefinitely given the growth picture of this state, particularly in southern Nevada. Thus, we will be asking you to again re-submit the resolution for creation of the intermediate appeals court in a form that would, if passed by two consecutive legislative sessions, result in the new court being placed on the ballot for approval by the voters in the year 2004.
Turning to the Eighth Judicial District, our largest district court system: Last year, over 62,000 civil, criminal, family, and juvenile matters were filed in the Eighth Judicial District. Of these matters 17,489 were civil cases, 8,266 were criminal cases, and 36,584 were family and juvenile cases. Thus the upward trend in filings across the board continues in that district;
In calendar year 2000, 7657 civil filings in Clark County were routed through the court annexed arbitration program. Of these, 2268 cases were settled prior to an arbitration hearing; 2510 resulted in formal awards; and 1242 cases proceeded into district court on requests for trial de novo. Since this program was enacted in 1992, over 30,200 cases have gone through the program. Less than one percent of these have actually gone to trial. We are therefore very satisfied with the enormous success of the program. And most recently, we conducted training of over seventy-five additional arbitrators statewide.
Turning to the Family Division of the Eighth Judicial District: In the calendar year 1999, the Family Division of the Eighth Judicial District closed almost 17,000 matters. Further, the Clark County family court partnered with Clark County Commissioner Myrna Williams, Assembly Majority Floor Leader Barbara Buckley and Clark County Legal Services in the implementation of the Children’s Attorney’s Project. This innovative new program provides legal representation to children in the court system, giving priority to abused and neglected children. According to the first annual report on this project, some 1400 children per year are taken from their parents in Clark County due to abuse and neglect. District Judge Gerry Hardcastle, who played a pivotal role in obtaining grant funding and in the implementation of the program, advises that some 70 private attorneys have already volunteered to participate in the representation of these children. Some 9300 hearings were conducted in fiscal year 1999-2000, on 6543 child support cases. The Clark County District Court Administrator advises me that over $100,000,000 in child support payments were collected over a two-year period through the combined efforts of the family court, the district attorney, and the Nevada State Welfare Division. The Clark County Family Mediation Center provided mediation services to 3275 families with a success rate of 78.4 percent in child custody matters. The Clark County Family Court processed over 14,500 new applications for protective orders against domestic violence; issued 4200 emergency orders; implemented use of new forms approved by the Administrative Office of the Courts for statewide use; and made possible electronic transfer of protective order information to the state and criminal records repository through the use of Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety grant funding. Finally, the Family Division of the Eighth Judicial District has drafted a comprehensive set of local case management rules. Since our approval of these measures last year, the productivity and quality of resolutions at the Family Division continues to improve. I think that presiding Judge Dianne Steel and her colleagues have done everything possible to maximize the resources provided to them. I note that Judge Steele is in the audience tonight, a former colleague of yours, and I think that a round of applause for the efforts of this court is in order.
Like their counterparts in Las Vegas, our Washoe County district judges of the Second Judicial District have taken aggressive measures to improve the management of their very serious criminal, civil and domestic caseloads.
Since your last session, the Second Judicial District, as part of its Strong Chief Judge System, has adopted a no-continuance policy in civil cases. This means that no trials are being cancelled or postponed due to court calendar congestion. This, of course, has increased the number of settled cases and maintains the local practice of having a vast majority of matters resolved within one year of the commencement of the civil litigation process. In a prime example of this, Judge Jim Hardesty advises that a complex medical products case with multiple defendants and thirty-five plaintiffs was resolved within ten months of filing under the new case management regimen adopted in Washoe County.
In criminal cases, the Second Judicial District Court is currently working on new local rules for processing cases and has adopted a policy that allows the parties to agree to short postponements in pre-trial motions up to the end of business hours the day before hearings to save costs and avoid unnecessary security problems of transporting inmates from the county jail.
Turning to the Family Division of the Second Judicial District, presiding Family Division Judge Scott Jordan has instituted the SAFE program, which stands for special Advocate For Elders. This program—a collaborative effort of the District Court, the Nevada Division for Aging and others—is designed to recruit community volunteers to work with elderly persons who may have court appointed guardians. Volunteers assist in gathering information to assist the court in making decisions on the welfare of elderly clients of the program.
Along with every other judicial district in the state, the Second Judicial District is in the process of improving automation technology and improving its transmission of statistics to the Supreme Court and ultimately to you through the Uniform System for Judicial Records.
Moving to the statewide picture we are working with interim committees of the legislature and local district judges, instituting business court dockets in Clark and Washoe counties on an experimental basis. We believe this new docket management technique will enable us to more ably handle sophisticated business matters at no sacrifice to the management of other cases. Incidentally, Nevada is the first state west of the Mississippi River to do this.
The family divisions of the Eighth and Second Judicial Districts are in the process of implementing the one judge, one family legislation; including the current ongoing development of sophisticated software to accommodate the legislative mandate. This has made the system much more efficient and has significantly reduced the fragmentation of services and internal conflict in court orders. This is again a prime example of how the partnership formed between the legislature and the court system has successfully served the citizens of this state.
Courts in Carson City, Storey, Churchill, and Lyon counties have, with assistance from the administrative office of the courts, implemented a multi-county justice information system to streamline the collection and sharing of information in criminal cases. The Administrative Office of the Courts has also been coordinating with other rural courts to acquire a case management system for more than thirty of the smaller courts with insufficient resources to implement computer technology on their own.
The experiment with adult, family, and juvenile drug court programs continues to flourish and expand. Without question, our drug court judges throughout the state are demonstrating national leadership in this area. Judges Jack Lehman, Dianne Steel, and Jessie Walsh in Las Vegas and Judges Peter Breen, Chuck McGee and Deborah Schumacher in Reno continue to excel in these endeavors. I am now advised that Judge Mike Griffin, Carson City, and Judge Archie Blake, Yerington, are in the process of instituting drug court dockets in Carson City, Storey County, Lyon County, and Douglas County. There is also another important experiment with alcohol and drug related offenses going on in Judge Larry Sage’s courtroom in Sparks. In this connection, I would like to additionally mention that District Judge Deborah Schumacher recently received a national award for her work in this area, and that one of her graduates received the Youth of the Year Award from the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. Going further, the Second District and several of our rural judges are now exploring the creation of mental health courts.
Last but not least in my incomplete list of the accomplishments of my colleagues, during the fiscal year 1999-2000, our justices of the peace and municipal judges have with great success wrestled with caseloads totaling over 890,000 criminal, civil and traffic related matters.
One last comment about our family court judges. I would like to express our appreciation for each and every one of these judges because, without question, they have the toughest assignments that exist in our state judicial system.
An important component of many of the accomplishments mentioned is volunteer service by members of the Nevada State Bar. These include pro bono representation of disadvantaged citizens, representation of children in the Family Court Child Representation Project, participation in the Habitat for Humanity project, committee work to revise procedural rules at all levels of the court system, service as mediators and arbitrators, and other roles too numerous to mention. Certainly, our Nevada lawyers have responded overwhelmingly to the call to participate in public service without expectation of compensation. Thus, I can state here tonight that our public is being well served by the Nevada legal profession.
I believe that the true state of the judiciary statewide is capsulized in a paragraph from a letter I recently received from Chief Judge Gene Porter of the Eighth Judicial District:
“While striving to maintain the highest standard of justice, the court is committed to finding creative and responsible solutions that improve public access and speedier dispute resolution for citizens. In pursuit of its vision and the healthy development of the court in the longer term, the judiciary, court administration, and staff hold fast to a steady course of meeting these needs through hard work, dedication, and innovation. This evolution is formed by an ever-growing public need and is served by creation of special courts and calendars, changes to local court rules, and development of special programs and enhanced services. Other on-going projects are gaining momentum that find solutions by merging technology with creative thought, resulting in the court’s ability to better manage existing workloads, report performance, and achieve the ultimate goal of speedier justice for our citizens.”
Interestingly ladies and gentlemen, until about five years ago, the court system was simply trying to deal with day-to-day survival. Now, it is clear to me that all your Supreme Court justices, district court judges, municipal court judges, justices of the peace and our administrative tribunals are thinking in terms of systems to manage and not simply reacting to the problems of burgeoning caseloads.
Before I conclude, let me say that our lawyers and judges continue every day to work together to provide access to the justice system for our people. Let me also say that our attorneys and judges, almost without statistical exception take pride in the fact that our democracy depends on lawyers and judges to make sure rights of redress are speedy, fair, and competent. But we cannot do that vital work without your assistance. In this, over the last several years, the members of this Legislature have stepped up to the plate and given us the essential tools to do this important work. On behalf of my colleagues, I thank you for this. Again, I say, the great strides of our judiciary I have enumerated here tonight could not have happened without the partnership formed between you and us.
I ask that you continue to embrace this very important partnership. In that partnership we will make this great state a much better and safer place for our fellow citizens.
Senator O’Donnell moved that the Senate and Assembly in Joint Session extend a vote of thanks to Chief Justice Maupin for his timely, able and constructive message.
Seconded by Assemblyman Oceguera.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Committee on Escort escorted Chief Justice Maupin to the bar of the Assembly.
Senator Shaffer moved that the Joint Session be dissolved.
Seconded by Assemblywoman Parnell.
Motion carried.
Joint Session dissolved at 5:29 p.m.
ASSEMBLY IN SESSION
At 5:30 p.m.
Mr. Speaker presiding.
Quorum present.
GUESTS EXTENDED PRIVILEGE OF ASSEMBLY FLOOR
On request of Assemblywoman Berman, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Maury Astley and Marolyn Mann.
On request of Assemblyman Carpenter, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Joe Chicoine and Mark Nichols.
On request of Assemblyman Hettrick, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Marilyn Koschella and Lisa Beasley.
On request of Assemblywoman Von Tobel, the privilege of the floor of the Assembly Chamber for this day was extended to Karen Pearl.
Assemblywoman Buckley moved that the Assembly adjourn until Friday, February 23, 2001 at 10:30 a.m.
Motion carried.
Assembly adjourned at 5:31 p.m.
Approved:Richard D. Perkins
Attest: Jacqueline Sneddon