MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Judiciary
Seventy-second Session
February 21, 2003
The Senate Committee on Judiciarywas called to order by Chairman Mark E. Amodei, at 9:30 a.m., on Friday, February 21, 2003, in Room 2149 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Mark Amodei, Chairman
Senator Mike McGinness
Senator Dennis Nolan
Senator Dina Titus
Senator Terry Care
Senator Valerie Wiener
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Senator Maurice E. Washington, Vice Chairman (Excused)
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Nicolas Anthony, Committee Policy Analyst
Bradley A. Wilkinson, Committee Counsel
Barbara Moss, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
R. Ben Graham, Lobbyist, Nevada District Attorneys’ Association-South
Chairman Amodei:
The hearing is open on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 10.
ASSEMBLY BILL 10: Repeals various crimes. (BDR 15-190)
Chairman Amodei:
Let the record reflect that nobody was interested in testifying on A.B. 10. There have been editorial opinions on the merits of this bill in terms of cost and the record should reflect this committee devoted little or no resources to consideration of it. Are there any questions on A.B. 10?
Senator Wiener:
I have a comment. The tasks created by an interim committee are taken seriously. I sponsored a bill that will be heard in the Senate Committee on Legislative Affairs & Operations next Tuesday, February 25, 2003, wherein every 2 years the Research Division of the Legislative Counsel Bureau will bring forward redundant or antiquated statutes in the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS), similar to A.B. 10. Should my bill pass, redundant or antiquated laws would be addressed every 2 years, and not in interim committees.
Senator Care:
I sat on the interim committee and after two or three meetings we felt we had to do something. At one point, we referred to it as the “Seinfeld Committee,” or the “committee about nothing.” After searching long and hard, we found some antiquated statutes which is the purpose of A.B. 10.
Chairman Amodei:
Senator McGinness, since A.B. 10 obviously targets rural Nevada, have you any response to Senator Care?
Senator McGinness:
To avoid other obsolescence, a public telephone is a telephone made available to the public upon deposit of a coin. Perhaps we should say “legal tender” because a debit card, or some such, is needed at the present time. You cannot get away with a quarter anymore.
Chairman Amodei:
I think that is an excellent idea. As a result, is there an appetite to move to amend and do pass A.B. 10? Mr. Wilkinson, is there a better phrase than “coin” to describe how public telephone infrastructure is accessed these days?
Bradley A. Wilkinson, Committee Counsel:
We could consider “legal tender” or “monetary unit” language. I will study the matter further, but I get the idea, the term “coin” is outdated.
Chairman Amodei:
Is there any further testimony on A.B. 10?
R. Ben Graham, Lobbyist, Nevada District Attorneys’ Association-South:
We participated with Senator Care and others and felt there were several measures that could be repealed in the interests of justice and brevity. Assembly Bill 10 is one of those bills.
Chairman Amodei:
Are there any questions for Mr. Graham? Seeing none, is there any more testimony on A.B. 10? Seeing none, the hearing is closed on A.B. 10. What is the pleasure of the committee? Senator Wiener, are you prepared to make a motion?
Senator Wiener:
I was working on my identity-theft bill last Friday. One of the issues addressed in the bill is similar to A.B. 10 in which, traditionally, the term “credit cards” is used and must be expanded to include “debit,” “prepaid,” and so forth. I think we came up with language; however, I do not want to go against the grain of this committee to offer amend and do pass.
Chairman Amodei:
In all seriousness, in our attempt to clean up and modernize, leaving the term “coin” in would not clean it up in an accurate “descriptional” sense, particularly since we discussed it on the record.
Senator Wiener:
Because it is appropriate, I will move to amend and do pass A.B. 10 and address the language of “coin” in order to become more contemporary and address the future needs of this legislation.
SENATOR WIENER MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 10.
SENATOR MCGINNESS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED. (SENATOR WASHINGTON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Amodei:
The hearing on Assembly Bill 38 is now open.
ASSEMBLY BILL 38: Ratifies technical corrections made to NRS and Statutes of Nevada. (BDR S-1027)
Mr. Wilkinson:
Assembly Bill 38 is a ratification bill introduced every session making changes to legislation from the previous session. They are non-substantive, technical corrections resulting from non-substantive conflicts because the conflicts were not resolved at the end of the Legislative Session when time was of the essence. The committee would merely be ratifying changes already made to the NRS.
Chairman Amodei:
Are there any questions on the non-substantive nature of that testimony? Thank you, Mr. Wilkinson. Is there any other testimony on A.B. 38? Seeing none, the hearing is closed on A.B. 38. What is the pleasure of the committee?
SENATOR MCGINNESS MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 38.
SENATOR WIENER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR WASHINGTON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Amodei:
We shall now move into the work session.
Nicolas Anthony, Committee Policy Analyst:
The committee has been provided the Work Session Document (Exhibit C). The first item is Senate Bill 43.
SENATE BILL 43: Adopts Uniform Child Witness Testimony by Alternative Methods Act. (BDR 4-378)
Mr. Anthony:
Senate Bill 43 was brought forth by the Uniform Law Commissioners. There was no opposition to the bill and no proposed amendments. The only concern was expressed by Madelyn Shipman, Deputy District Attorney, Washoe County District Attorney, Civil Division, who requested an extra week to review the bill.
Senator Care:
I received an E-mail from Ms. Shipman saying S.B. 43 was fine. I was approached by one defense counsel who never got back to me; therefore, I would move to do pass.
Chairman Amodei:
Let the record reflect the committee held off setting a hearing date on S.B. 43, awaiting input from concerned individuals regarding potential amendments. As Senator Care indicated, none were offered.
SENATOR CARE MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 43.
SENATOR WIENER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR WASHINGTON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Amodei:
Senator Care, please take care of this on the Senate floor.
Senator Care:
Certainly, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Amodei:
Mr. Anthony, please address Senate Bill 73.
SENATE BILL 73: Makes various changes to provisions governing juries. (BDR 1‑934)
Mr. Anthony:
Senate Bill 73 makes various changes regarding jury duty and compensation received for jury duty. During the hearing, Justice Gibbons and Justice Rose appeared in support of the measure, along with Dan Musgrove from Clark County. There were no opponents; however, concerns were raised by the committee and county clerks regarding the distance change from 1 mile to 65 miles. There are two proposed amendments. One amendment is to change the language from the current 65 miles. The second amendment, suggested by legal counsel, is to include a statement on the unfunded mandate aspect of this measure.
Chairman Amodei:
Is there any discussion on S.B. 73? Senator McGinness and I received E-mails from Barbara Reed, Douglas County Clerk/Treasurer, expressing concern about the mileage number in the proposed bill, and also what day a juror gets paid after a 1- or 2-day wait. A breakout was submitted by proponents indicating which counties they thought would save money and which counties would be revenue neutral, so I guess this is an abundance of caution in section 4 of S.B. 73. I think, on balance, it was actually a revenue saver.
I would be open to discussion on proposed amendment number 1, should anyone be more comfortable with a number less than 65 miles. Does anyone have strong feelings one way or the other?
Senator McGinness:
I thought the jump from 1 mile to 65 miles seemed a huge leap. In her E-mail, Ms. Reed mentioned many senior citizens in the county are on set incomes and should not have to incur travel expense, particularly with the current price of gasoline. This was considered when gasoline was 20 cents a gallon cheaper than it is at the moment. I wonder whether it should be set somewhere in the middle, such as 30 miles. Are there any other ideas? Obviously, it would make a bigger fiscal impact and drastically change the direction of S.B. 73.
Chairman Amodei:
Are there any other thoughts?
Mr. Anthony, should the amendment be adopted, the committee may also wish to amend page 3, line 31 of S.B. 73, to divert back to the previous language. It is 60 miles at present. Would you explain it, please?
Mr. Anthony:
Testimony during the hearing indicated the distance was moved to 65 miles, but it was moved to 65 miles in terms of an overnight stay. It is up to the committee to change the number, or leave it at the original language, which was 60 miles. I believe the bill was intended to be revenue neutral; therefore, should the mileage be changed, the fees will increase. The committee may wish to look at the fees.
Chairman Amodei:
What is the pleasure of the committee?
Senator McGinness:
I am reluctant to change it. A committee considered it and heard more testimony than did we in regard to the trade-off between adding the mileage and changing the pay to 36½ cents a mile, rather than 20 cents a mile. We could pass the bill out of committee and see what the Assembly might do.
Chairman Amodei:
There was testimony regarding the public service nature of jury duty. Assuming the Assembly feels no different about it, and it is a disaster, I suppose it could be revisited after 24 months.
Is there a motion to amend and do pass S.B. 73 with the amendment being addition of unfunded mandate language?
SENATOR CARE MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 73.
SENATOR NOLAN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR WASHINGTON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Amodei:
Senator Nolan, please handle this on the Senate floor.
Senator Nolan:
Sure.
Chairman Amodei:
The hearing is open on Senate Bill 91.
SENATE BILL 91: Removes element of knowledge from crime of selling, giving or furnishing alcoholic beverage to person under 21 years of age. (BDR 15-319)
Chairman Amodei:
Senate Bill 91 is the underage drinking bill heard earlier in the week in which we asked for input from concerned individuals. I have been assured by Alfredo Alonso, Lobbyist, who is working on a potential amendment, that it will be here Monday, February 24, 2003, for Mr. Wilkinson’s and Mr. Anthony’s receipt. Therefore, unless there is objection from the committee, it is my intention to move S.B. 91, as a work session item, to Wednesday, February 26, 2003. Should the majority of the committee wish to move the bill today, I would yield to the will of the committee.
Mr. Anthony, what else do we have in the Work Session Document (Exhibit C)?
Mr. Anthony:
That concludes the Work Session Document. Tab A and Tab B relate to S.B. 91.
Chairman Amodei:
Mr. Alonso, at your request your counsel will have a proposed amendment on S.B. 91 to Mr. Wilkinson and Mr. Anthony by Monday, February 24, 2003. Is our record correct in that respect? The record will indicate Mr. Alonso nodded affirmatively. If it is not here Monday, we could do a possible work session on S.B. 91 at the beginning of the meeting Tuesday, February 25, 2003. Thank you.
There are some cleanup measures in terms of introduction of bill draft requests (BDRs) and committee bill drafts. Monday, February 24, 2003, is the deadline for committee BDRs. If any members of the committee have a request germane for Senate judiciary committee jurisdiction, plan on having a short meeting at the bar of the Senate prior to floor session to clean up committee BDR measures on Monday, February 24, 2003.
I would like a motion to introduce Bill Draft Request 10-753.
BILL DRAFT REQUEST 10-753: Provides for allocation of utilities by landlord to tenant pursuant to ratio utility billing system. (Later introduced as Senate Bill 194.)
SENATOR NOLAN MOVED TO INTRODUCE BDR 10-753.
SENATOR MCGINNESS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR WASHINGTON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Amodei:
Mr. Wilkinson, please address committee requests for bill drafts to be considered by the committee.
Mr. Wilkinson:
The first request pertains to chapter 464 of NRS and pari-mutuel wagering. The proposal would make changes regarding the acceptance of wagers on off-track pari-mutuel gaming from places outside the United States, provide for adoption of regulations prescribing the implementation of border-control technology, and provide security concerning placing of wagers from those jurisdictions.
SENATOR WIENER MOVED TO REQUEST A BILL DRAFT TO MAKE CHANGES IN REGARD TO PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING.
SENATOR MCGINNESS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR WASHINGTON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Mr. Wilkinson:
The next committee bill draft request is to direct the Legislative Commission to appoint an interim committee to study judicial operations in rural counties.
SENATOR CARE MOVED TO REQUEST A BILL DRAFT TO DIRECT THE LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION TO APPOINT AN INTERIM COMMITTEE TO STUDY JUDICIAL OPERATIONS IN RURAL COUNTIES.
SENATOR MCGINNESS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR WASHINGTON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Amodei:
There are other requests for committee bill drafts, but I will hold off until Monday to accept any others. Therefore, the bill drafts already requested do not exhaust the committee bill drafts. Should there be something within our jurisdictional area desired by a committee member, please identify it by floor session Monday, February 24, 2003.
Senator McGinness:
I met with Mr. Titus and will invite him to the next rural caucus 2 weeks from today at 7 a.m. I called some rural judges who are doing a good job.
Chairman Amodei:
We are working on other matters affiliated with an amendment on S.B. 106. It is my intention to complete that matter at the same time Mr. Alonso comes forward with his long awaited amendment on S.B. 91 next Wednesday.
There being no further business to come before the committee, the hearing is adjourned at 10 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Barbara Moss,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Mark E. Amodei, Chairman
DATE: