MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Transportation
Seventy-second Session
April 15, 2003
The Senate Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman Raymond C. Shaffer, at 1:42 p.m., on Tuesday, April 15, 2003, in Room 2149 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. The meeting was videoconferenced to the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Room 4412, 555 East Washington Avenue, Las Vegas, 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 Raymond C. Shaffer, Chairman
Senator Dennis Nolan, Vice Chairman
Senator Mark Amodei
Senator Warren B. Hardy II
Senator Michael Schneider
Senator Terry Care
Senator Maggie Carlton
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Assemblywoman Vonne Stout Chowning, Assembly District No. 28
Thomas (Tom) J. Grady, Assembly District No. 38
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Marsheilah Lyons, Committee Policy Analyst
Lee-Ann Keever, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Teamsters Local 14
Martha Barnes, Administrator, Central Services and Records Division, Department of Motor Vehicles
Bonnie L. Parnell, Lobbyist, Nevada PTA
Lisa A. Foster, Lobbyist, California State Automobile Association (dba AAA Nevada)
James F. Nadeau, Lobbyist, Washoe County Sheriff’s Office
Dave McKenna, Sergeant, Henderson City Police Department
Clay Thomas, Administrator, Field Services Division, Department of Motor Vehicles
Chairman Shaffer opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 19.
ASSEMBLY BILL 19 (1st Reprint): Provides for issuance of "United We Stand" special license plates. (BDR 43-217)
Assemblywoman Vonne Stout Chowning, Assembly District No. 28, explained A.B. 19 provided for a license plate with a special United We Stand design. Assemblywoman Chowning had a prototype license plate for the committee members’ inspection. The license plate would have a replica of the American flag with the phrase United We Stand. The lettering and background would be red, white, and blue. The license plate was expected to raise millions of dollars for Nevada.
Assemblywoman Chowning said her office had been receiving telephone inquiries about the availability of the United We Stand license plate. The special license plate program had been in operation since 1985. The license plates issued under the program generated money for Nevada. She reviewed some of the special license plates issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The Lake Tahoe license plate had raised approximately $2 million to date and had been the most profitable special license plate issued. The Arts license plate had raised approximately $100,000. The revenues from the Arts license plate funded art education for children. The Professional Firefighters’ license plate raised approximately $75,000 and funded the burn center in Clark County.
Assemblywoman Chowning said she was proud of the special license plates as they provided another source of revenue for Nevada’s programs without placing an additional financial burden on the citizens of the State. People wanted the special license plates to demonstrate their interest in occupations, locations, or events. The United We Stand license plates would help all Nevadans. The State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) would receive all proceeds from the sale of the license plate. The SERC would channel the proceeds to local emergency response commissions, fire and police departments. The bill stated those groups would have to use the money for training purposes, purchase of equipment, and emergency-based situations or reasons.
Assemblywoman Chowning said the State’s Homeland Security resources were great. The State needed to find all possible sources of revenue to defend the United States and Nevada. The United We Stand license plates would allow Nevadans to demonstrate their pride in being an American citizen.
Senator Nolan said the United We Stand license plates was a great idea and the first special license plate design he liked. The Senator appreciated the fact the proceeds would fund emergency workers in Nevada.
Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Teamsters Local 14, said he was representing both the Teamsters Local 14, and the Nevada Highway Patrol Association. Mr. Wolff stated the United We Stand license plates would be a way for patriotic Nevadans to demonstrate their pride in their country without having to place a bumper sticker on their vehicles. The Teamsters Local 14 and the Nevada Highway Patrol Association supported A.B. 19.
Martha Barnes, Administrator, Central Services and Records Division, Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), said there was a fiscal note in the amount of $15,707 attached to A.B. 19. There would be no appropriation requested due to an account previously established which covered the expenses associated with the production of a new license plate.
Assemblywoman Chowning said:
If I might, something that I forgot. I’m sure that you know or you are aware, of the new digital processing and this, hopefully, will be one of the very first license plates to be produced using this flat processing. You can see the clarity is absolutely stupendous as well. I just wanted you to know that. And, of course, the design will be in unison with the Highway Patrol, with the Department of Motor Vehicles and with the Emergency Response Commission. And, so this is an example. The U S is wonderful because, of course, it stands for the United States and stands for United We Stand. And, then the letters, there would be four numerals. But, of course, they made this license plate number AB19 just like the bill. But, I just wanted to put that on the record. Thank you.
SENATOR NOLAN MOVED TO DO PASS A.B.19.
SENATOR HARDY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS AMODEI AND SCHNEIDER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Senator Nolan said he understood the committee members would be receiving testimony on an Assembly bill providing for standardization of the license plates. Under the Assembly bill, one-third of the license plate would be reserved for the license plate’s design and two-thirds would be reserved for the letters and/or numbers used on the license plate.
Assemblywoman Chowning said the bill Senator Nolan referenced would not affect the United We Stand license plate. The standardization bill would be approved after A.B. 19. The standardization bill limited the number of special license plates issued by the DMV to 25. Currently, there are 16 special license plates in use by Nevada drivers.
Chairman Shaffer closed the hearing on A.B. 19 and opened the hearing on A.B. 58.
ASSEMBLY BILL 58 (1st Reprint): Revises provisions governing prohibition against driver of motor vehicle allowing person to ride upon or within certain portions of motor vehicle under certain circumstances. (BDR 43‑668)
Assemblyman Thomas (Tom) J. Grady, Assembly District No. 38, said the first version of A.B. 58 had been passed during the 70th Legislative Session. At the time, the provisions of the bill applied only to counties with a population base greater than 100,000. Assemblyman Grady said the rural areas in Nevada had problems with people riding unsecured in the beds of pickup trucks. He mentioned a 2002 accident in Silver Springs, Lyon County involving seven children. The accident resulted in two fatalities.
Lyon County residents asked ex-Assemblyman Joseph Dini to introduce A.B. 58 on their behalf. The requested legislation would prohibit people from riding unsecured in the back of vehicles. When ex-Assemblyman Dini retired in 2002, he asked Assemblyman Grady to guide the measure through the 72nd Legislative Session. Assembly Grady agreed to do so. The Assembly passed A.B. 58.
Assemblyman Grady reviewed the changes made to the bill by the Assembly Committee on Transportation. Section 1, line 4, replaced the phrase “paved highway within a county with a population of a 100,00 or more”, with the word “highway.”
Section 1 subsection 2, paragraph (b), subparagraph (1), deleted the phrase “not being operated on a freeway or other road that has two or more lanes for traffic traveling in one direction.” Section 1, subsection 3 replaced the phrases “the bed of flatbed truck” and “the bed of a pickup truck” with the word “vehicle”. Section 6 used the statutory definition of highway as contained in 484.065. The bill would include all counties in Nevada.
Senator Nolan asked Assemblyman Grady for additional information on the Silver Springs accident. Assemblyman Grady said five children were riding in the bed of a pickup truck and two children were riding in the cab of the pickup truck. The accident resulted in five children being injured and two children being killed.
Senator Care referred to section1, subsection 5, paragraph (b), subparagraph 1, which said a violation of the bill could not be considered a “negligence or causation in a civil action.” An individual who violated the provisions of A.B. 58 could be fined, but no further action could be taken against that individual.
Assemblyman Grady said the Assembly raised the same point. He stated he understood there was civil action brought against the driver of the vehicle involved in the Silver Springs accident. The driver was currently incarcerated for her reckless driving.
Senator Care said it was not clear to him whether section 5, subsection (b), paragraph 1, referred to the act itself or being cited for the act. However, as long as the Assembly had discussed the matter, he was comfortable in voting on the measure.
Senator Carlton asked why the word “truck” had been replaced with the word “vehicle.” Assemblyman Grady said the Legislative Counsel Bureau’s Legal Division suggested the language. The suggested language included any vehicle which might carry passengers in the rear of the vehicle.
Senator Carlton said she thought the suggested language was very good as it addressed one of her concerns. She had been worried about people who failed to secure the children they were transporting in the rear of cargo vans. It was just as dangerous for an unsecured child to ride in the rear of a cargo van as it was for an unsecured child to ride in the bed of a pickup truck.
Senator Nolan asked about section 1, subsection 4, which addressed a truck with a camper shell or slide-in camper. He wanted to know if the language would remain intact despite the modifications made to section 1, subsection 3, replacing “truck” or “pickup truck” with “vehicle.” Assemblyman Grady replied, “yes,” adding law enforcement officials had testified before the Assembly Committee on Transportation about the difficulty in determining if a person was secured in the back of a camper shell or slide-in camper. Assemblyman Grady said the Assembly committee members felt they had to be careful with the bill’s language and left the language intact.
The language in section 1, subsection 4, resulted from testimony received during the 71st Legislative Session. Senator Nolan said he remembered testimony indicating agricultural workers in rural areas used their pickup trucks to transport their families. Senator Nolan said testimony indicated people were not thrown from vehicles with a camper shell or slide-in camper shell.
Bonnie L. Parnell, Lobbyist, Nevada PTA, said she supported the bill. The National Parent-Teacher Association, the Nevada PTA, and the Academy of Pediatrics have individual policy statements prohibiting children from riding in the back of open-air truck beds.
The policy statements were based on two criteria: 1) documented fatalities and injuries children received while being transported in the back of an open-air truck bed, and 2) the severe degree of injury children received when they were ejected from open-air truck beds.
The current statute acknowledged the danger to children being transported in such vehicles by prohibiting their transport in the bed of a truck or pickup in Nevada counties with a population of 100,000 or greater.
The Nevada PTA believed all children in Nevada should be given the protection offered by A.B. 58. Ms. Parnell said the Nevada PTA urged the committee members to support the bill.
Lisa A. Foster, Lobbyist, California State Automobile Association (dba AAA Nevada), said she supported A.B. 58 and provided the committee members with supporting statistics (Exhibit C). Those statistics showed cargo occupants were eight times more likely to die in the cargo area of a pickup truck than the occupants who were properly secured in the cab area of a pickup truck; one‑fourth to two‑thirds of pickup cargo injuries received by children occurred during non‑crash events such as stopping, swerving, or falling out. The youth represented a disproportionate share of truck bed fatalities for their age group. Studies had shown that truck bed fatalities were more common in summer, during daylight or dusk hours, and on paved roads in rural areas.
Ms. Foster said she felt it was important to extend the protection provided by A.B. 58 to all of Nevada’s young citizens. Ms. Foster urged the committee members to support A.B. 58.
Senator Care asked if neighboring states had similar provisions in their statutes. Ms. Foster said she thought it was illegal to transport passengers in the cargo area of trucks or pickup trucks in California. There were no exceptions for camper shells or slide-in campers in the California statute.
James F. Nadeau, Lobbyist, Washoe County Sheriff’s Office, said he supported
A.B. 58.
Mr. Wolff said he supported A.B. 58.
SENATOR CARE MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 58.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS AMODEI AND SCHNEIDER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Shaffer opened the hearing on A.B. 42.
ASSEMBLY BILL 42 (1st Reprint): Requires drivers of motor vehicles to stop in obedience to direction or traffic-control signal of school crossing guard and not proceed until highway is clear of all persons. (BDR 43-109)
Dave McKenna, Sergeant, Henderson City Police Department (HPD), said he had managed the HPD’s Traffic Division for the past 3 years. In his current job assignment, Sergeant McKenna worked with the school crossing guards assigned to the Henderson schools. Currently, NRS484.325 provides the only protection for school-crossing guards. Crossing guards usually entered the crosswalk in advance of the children and then allowed the children to cross. By statute, vehicles could cross on either side of the crossing guard standing in a school cross walk. In 1999, a crossing guard was killed in Henderson while standing in a crosswalk.
The City of Henderson employs 145 school-crossing guards with an average age of 69 years. One of the most dangerous jobs in law enforcement is traffic control. School-crossing guards are tasked with traffic control while watching the children. Sergeant McKenna stated when the school crossing-guard permitted children to enter the crosswalk, all children did not enter the crosswalk at the same time.
Sergeant McKenna said A.B. 42 would protect both school-crossing guards and the children by not allowing vehicles to enter the crosswalk as long as the school crossing guard was in the crosswalk with the proper signs in plain view. Children and school crossing guards were struck and sometimes killed while using crosswalks. When a driver went through a school crosswalk, Sergeant McKenna said the school-crossing guard was sometimes able to remember the license plate number of the offending vehicle. In those instances, a letter would be sent to the vehicle owner informing him or her of the offense. In 2001, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department sent out 275 letters to drivers who illegally drove through a school crosswalk; in 2002, 298 letters were sent. Sergeant McKenna added those individuals receiving letters were the known offenders. Sergeant McKenna said he wanted to protect both the children and the school-crossing guards while they were in the crosswalks.
Senator Care asked about section 1, subsection 2, which stated a violation of the bill would be considered a misdemeanor. He asked if the section applied to a driver speeding through a school zone who almost hit the school-crossing guard. Senator Care said he thought such an action should be more than a misdemeanor.
Sergeant McKenna said the penalty imposed in such a situation depended on circumstances. A person driving in an inattentive manner would be charged differently than a person whose reckless driving endangered the crossing guard’s safety. In Nevada, most traffic violations were misdemeanor in nature unless death or substantial bodily injury resulted from a traffic accident.
Senator Care asked about the portable sign provision contained in section 3 of A.B. 42. He said in the 1950s and 1960s, school employees would put a portable sign in the middle of the road warning motorists to slow down in a school zone. Senator Care asked if the bill contemplated such portable signs. Sergeant McKenna said the HPD only provided school-crossing guards for elementary schools, not the junior or senior high schools. The HPD wanted to allow school employees to assist with crossing-guard duties. Those school employees would act in the same role as a school-crossing guard, but would not be HPD employees.
Mr. Nadeau, Lobbyist said Washoe County schools often placed barricades in the middle of the road in front of a school. Washoe County school officials were unsure if such action was legal. Section 3 would permit schools to legally use barricades in school zones. Mr. Nadeau said he supported A.B. 42, and reminded the committee members of the traffic confusion in the mornings and afternoons at schools. He said he thought the bill would protect both the children and the school crossing guards.
Ms. Parnell said:
I’ve been asked to speak not only on behalf of the Nevada PTA on this bill, but also on behalf of the Washoe County School District and the Carson City School District. They were all here this morning for the iNVest bill and had to leave. So, they asked if I would please make sure that, on the record, they supported it as well. Assembly Bill 42 really does create a safer environment in and around our school zones. Therefore, making it a safer place for both our students and our crossing guards. And, for that reason, we are all in support. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wolff said the Nevada Highway Patrol supported A.B. 42.
SENATOR CARE MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 42.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Shaffer opened the hearing on A.B. 177.
ASSEMBLY BILL 177: Makes various changes concerning registration of motor vehicles and special plates, placards and stickers issued to certain disabled persons. (BDR 43-1032)
Clay Thomas, Administrator, Field Services Division, Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), said the DMV had submitted the bill with the intention of identifying those areas of service within existing statutes which could be amended to expedite the DMV’s processes. By expediting certain services, the DMV would be able to make its customers’ lives easier.
Mr. Thomas said the current wait time for a DMV customer, in areas other than Las Vegas, averaged 71 minutes while the DMV customer in Las Vegas experienced an average wait time of 80 minutes. Mr. Thomas reiterated the DMV’s intent to identify those areas where statutory processes could be expedited. Some of the statutes might be amended so the DMV’s customers would not have to go into a DMV office to transact business.
Mr. Thomas said A.B. 177 impacted four major areas of DMV service: 1) insurance verification; 2) driver’s license and registration time frames; 3) lost, mutilated, illegible or stolen license plates; and, 4) persons with disabilities.
Sections 2 through 8 pertained to the areas impacted by the bill. Mr. Thomas said section 9 dealt with insurance verification. When an individual moved to Nevada and went to register his or her vehicle at the DMV, they submitted what they considered to be the required paperwork. As requirements differed from state to state, another state’s requirements might not be identical to Nevada’s. The individual might not have his or her insurance verification card due to the differing requirements. Currently, the individual would have to leave the DMV to obtain a hard copy of the insurance verification or have one faxed to the DMV office.
Under the provisions of A.B. 177, individuals would not have to obtain copies of their insurance verification cards prior to registering their vehicles. Instead, they would be allowed to sign a declaration of insurance and proceed with the registration process. The declaration would be later checked against insurance records provided to the DMV by insurance companies. If a person’s insurance could not be verified after signing a declaration of insurance, he or she would have his or her registration suspended. Once the DMV suspended registration on a vehicle, reinstatement fees would have to be paid by the vehicle’s owner before the registration could be reinstated.
Senator Carlton asked whether the DMV had a grace period for insurance or if the insurance had to be in effect when the vehicle was registered. Mr. Thomas said vehicle insurance had to be in force and in effect at the time of registration. A person could not operate a vehicle on Nevada’s roads unless it was properly insured.
Senator Carlton said some individuals made direct payment to their insurance company through their checking accounts. She asked what would happen to such an individual should a direct payment not be made resulting in the cancellation of their vehicle insurance. Mr. Thomas said the DMV had an appeals process for such instances. People presented their cases to the DMV and if the DMV officials felt the insurance cancellation was beyond an individual’s control, the DMV would waive the reinstatement fees.
Senator Carlton wanted to know whether the declarations of insurance would be printed bilingually. Mr. Thomas said the DMV had not made such a determination. Mr. Thomas stated the DMV was attempting to place bilingual Queue‑Matics in Las Vegas. As the need arises, the DMV would be happy to add additional languages to any forms or documents it issues.
Section 10 addressed the time frame for changes of address. It aligned the 30‑day time frame for driver’s licenses as contained in NRS483.390, with the 10‑day time frame for registrations contained in NRS482.283. When a person needed to file a change of address on his or her driver’s license and vehicle registration, the change could be done at one time, saving the person an additional trip to the DMV.
In NRS482.285, section 1, replaced the phrase “ownership” with the word “title.” Currently, a vehicle’s title is identified as a certificate of ownership, certificate of title, or title. The DMV wanted the word title used consistently throughout the statutes. By using the same word, confusion could be avoided. Section 1, also addressed lost, mutilated, illegible, and stolen license plates. Under the current law, when a person reports their license plate lost, stolen, mutilated or illegible, he or she signs an affidavit and, when possible, surrenders the license plates to the DMV. When a person opts to sign an affidavit, the registration on his or her vehicle carries forward for another 12-month period. The disadvantage being the time frame during which some individuals want to renew their vehicle registration. Mr. Thomas stated some individuals timed their renewal around certain specific financial events in their lives, such as receiving a tax refund. Section 11 would allow a person to keep his or her current registration date without being financially inconvenienced.
The carry-forward provision applied to stolen plates. Mr. Thomas said the DMV would not reissue stolen license plate numbers as those were entered into law enforcement databases. If a stolen license plate were reissued, there was the chance the driver of the vehicle could be pulled over by law enforcement officers during a felony car stop. Substitute plates were offered for stolen license plates with the vehicle owner selecting the registration date he or she would like. The vehicle owners could keep their existing registration dates or carry the date forward 12 months. The bill also allowed an individual to keep his or her current emission certificate when reporting a lost, mutilated, illegible, or stolen license plate.
Section 13 provided for an additional type of handicapped license plate or placard. Currently, State law provides for two types of handicapped plates, temporary and permanent. A temporary license plate or placard is issued to an individual with a temporary disability for a 6-month period. The license plate or placard can be renewed every 6 months. A permanent license plate or placard is issued to an individual with a nonreversible, permanent disability.
The DMV was requesting a temporary license plate or placard for individuals with a disability of moderate duration not to exceed 2 years. All three categories of the temporary license plate or placard could be used by individuals or organizations who transport handicapped individuals. A doctor’s certificate is required for any of the handicapped license plates or placards issued by the DMV.
SENATOR NOLAN MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 177.
SENATOR HARDY SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Care suggested amending section 10 of the bill to read “30 days after the effective legal date of the change of the name.” He said he did not know what the phrase “30 days after the change of the name” meant.
Mr. Thomas said section 10 allowed the DMV database to capture an individual’s true name and address. If section 10 were not passed, the DMV would have problems linking names and addresses. Senator Care asked if the 30-day time frame was critical. Mr. Thomas answered “yes,” adding there were individuals who were not consistent when obtaining a driver’s license, vehicle registration, or automobile insurance. The DMV wanted individuals listed by true name as the DMV computer system would have trouble linking names to addresses if section 10 were not passed. Senator Care said he could vote on the motion as it stood.
Senator Carlton asked what the fine would be if a person signed a declaration of insurance under false pretenses. Mr. Thomas said an individual who signed a declaration of insurance when he or she did not have insurance on his or her vehicle would be subject to potential perjury charges. Senator Carlton asked what level of felony a perjury charge would fall under. Mr. Thomas was not sure of the felony classification for perjury charges. He said the declaration of insurance would not be not signed under oath, thus, signing it under false pretenses might not rise to the level of perjury. Individuals who did not maintain insurance on their vehicles were fined $250.
Senator Carlton said she thought it might be easier for vehicle owners to provide proof of insurance to the DMV by facsimile transmission or electronic means instead of requiring a person to sign a declaration of insurance. Senator Carlton was concerned there could be individuals who did not understand the declaration of insurance, especially if English was not their native language. Senator Carlton thought the declaration of insurance should be printed in multiple languages due to the potential of felony convictions and/or fines.
Senator Carlton said she did not see what the problem would be if people kept their proof of insurance in their vehicles. Mr. Thomas said some states do not require proof of insurance to be kept in vehicles. When individuals from those states moved to Nevada, they often did not understand Nevada’s requirements and would not have the paperwork required by the DMV. In such instances, the DMV did not want to send the person away, but wanted to facilitate the registration process. The DMV thought the declaration of insurance would be one means to facilitate the registration process. Insurance coverage would be verified through the DMV’s insurance verification program.
Chairman Shaffer asked whether Senator Carlton would be comfortable should the committee members hold A.B. 177 for further consideration. Senator Carlton said she would abstain from voting on the measure.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR CARLTON ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE.)
*****
There being no further business, Chairman Shaffer adjourned the Senate Committee on Transportation at 2:37 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Lee-Ann Keever,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Raymond C. Shaffer, Chairman
DATE: