Okay… What About SB 41?
A time-line of SB 41 was offered today by the Desert Beacon. Here it is:
November 2, 2010 Sandoval elected Governor of the State of Nevada
December 14, 2010 Sandoval’s bill to end collective bargaining for Nevada public employees sent to the State Senate, received by the Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections
January 3, 2011 Sandoval takes the oath of office
January 24, 2011 Sandoval gives State of the State remarks, without mentioning collective bargaining legislative proposal.
February 24, 2011 Sandoval tells Anjeanette Damon of the Las Vegas Sun “In regard to collective bargaining, there may be a bill,” Sandoval said. “I’ve not seen that bill. I’m watching the progress of such bills and waiting to see if they arrive here at the Capitol.” The comments are repeated to a reporter from the Las Vegas Review Journal, on February 27, 2011. (emphasis added) Yes, indeed, there “may be a bill” — and it was the Governor’s very own bill. This raises a question: If there was a bill eliminating collective bargaining for local employees in Nevada, and it was not seen by the Governor before being sent to the State Senate — then who wrote the bill, and why didn’t the Governor read it prior to having it transmitted?
from the post called: “It’s All In The Timing? Sandoval suggested SB 41 ending collective bargaining before inauguration“, Desert Beacon, March 2, 2011
The key sentence for me is: “I’m watching the progress of such bills and waiting to see if they arrive here at the Capitol.” This shows Sandoval was expecting something about collective bargaining at that time, something he would approve of when it arrived in his office in the Capital building in Carson City. It shows he may have been clueless about Gibbon’ pre-filed BDR 23-412 (September 1, 2010). That is not good or he was just playing sneaky politics.
Therefore a piece should be added to the timeline:
September 1, 2010 Gibbons submits BDR 23-412 which eliminates mandatory collective bargaining for all local governments. Becomes SB 41.
This is based on LCB’s BDR information page which shows:
| 23–412 SB41 |
Governor, Office of the Eliminates mandatory collective bargaining for all local governments. |
9/01/2010 |
Questions and concerns remain however:
The pre-filed BDR should have been something he knew about. His staff should have discussed with him and if they did not then there are deep problems there.
But then, if he knew about the bill, he was obviously holding things “close to the vest” and shows is lying about his intentions regarding ending collective bargaining rights.
He may have known about the bill but was expecting something different from someone outside of his office. But then, the Governor can propose legislation and does not have to reply on someone else except for political cover.
Though the bill was submitted by Gibbons last year, it was not withdrawn and therefore has Sandoval’s approval.
The question remains, “What did the governor know and when did he know it?” Sounds like a conspiracy worthy of Watergate.
Nevada State Employee Focus 
Part of the answer to why the bill wasn’t withdrawn may have to do with the rules associated with NRS218D.585 (?) which provides for the introduction of pre-filed bills in the legislature. It seems that the Governor was stuck with this holdover from the Gibbons Administration. However, I too am still wondering what the Governor meant by “I’m watching the progress…” when he’d apparently told staff to direct committee chairs to deep six SB 41.
I read NRS 218D.585 and it seems just a basic procedural thing, but BDRs can be withdrawn like those below:
23–75 W Assemblywoman Parnell
Makes various changes relating to the Public Employees’ Benefits Program. 4/26/2010
96 W Assemblyman Munford
Revises provisions relating to funding for substance abuse services. 5/24/2010
53–129 W Assemblyman Oceguera
Revises provisions governing workers’ compensation. 6/28/2010
I would feel better about all this if Sandoval just said publicly he does not want SB 41 considered and says he has his own bill to introduce. That would be the “up front” thing to do. The bill can die anywhere along the process but as it stands right now, it is a go.. at least from what I can see.
Also, if he doesn’t like that bill where is the alternative one he DOES support?
Yes. The September 1, 2010 BDR 23-412 has been inserted in the original post as an update. And, yes, you’re asking pretty much the same questions I am. What did the Governor know and when did he know it. Given all the BDRs from former Governors and former members of the Legislature that simply disappear into the horizon, why was this one on eliminating collective bargaining for local public employees, allowed to advance as far as a committee assignment?