He said, she said, he said - that’s how a bill gets lost in the shuffle

By Emily Richmond (contact)

Sunday, May 27, 2007 | 7:12 a.m.

The legislative process in Carson City can sometimes grow so murky, a bill can drop off the radar into oblivion simply out of confusion.

Take, for instance, the Teachers' Bill of Rights and Protection Act, which died in the current session behind its sponsor's back.

The bill sought to give teachers more avenues to defend themselves against allegations of misconduct or poor performance, and to set severe limits on involuntary transfers. It was opposed by local districts and the Nevada Association of School Administrators as an unnecessary piece of meddling legislation.

The bill - which had a questionable future in any event - may have been prematurely killed by mistake.

We know this much: Sen . Maurice Washington, R-Sparks, chairman of the Human Resources and Education Committee, withdrew the bill at a May 16 work session.

Washington said that, before the work session, he spoke separately with the bill's lead sponsor, Assemblyman Richard "Tick" Segerblom, D-Las Vegas, and Assemblywoman Bonnie Parnell, D-Carson City, chairwoman of the Education Committee.

"They requested that we not act on the bill, and we didn't," Washington said.

But Segerblom and Parnell say they did not ask Washington to withdraw the bill.

Parnell said she requested only that an amendment she had proposed, calling for districts to create an office for teacher advocacy and school climate, be allowed to move forward even if the rest of the bill did not survive the work session. Asking that a bill be withdrawn "is not my role at all," Parnell said. "My role is to say what I thought was good (in the legislation) and what everybody could live with."

After the work session, Parnell looked up the bill's status on the Legislature's Web site.

"I was surprised when I saw the use of the term 'withdrawn,' " Parnell said. "Usually if the chair decides a bill is not going to be acted on or not go out of committee, it doesn't even come up for discussion."

Segerblom said he doesn't recall even speaking with Washington in the week before the bill was withdrawn.

Segerblom's and Parnell's comments surprised Washington, who said it was possible he misunderstood their positions. But Washington said he would not have withdrawn a bill without speaking first to the sponsor.

"Things move at a fast and furious pace up here - I'm not going to count that out," Washington said. "I know it wasn't anything done maliciously to try and sabotage a sponsor's bill. We don't operate that way."

If the bill had not been withdrawn, Segerblom said , he still didn't think it would have mustered enough support to become law. So, he said, he doesn't plan to resurrect it.

"I've learned it's a lot easier to kill something than it is to pass something," said Segerblom, who is completing his freshman session.