Vetoingest Nevada governor adds one more notch to belt

As promised, Gov. Jim Gibbons today vetoed the bill which would have put state offices on a four-day, 10-hour work week saying the legislation appears to be a good idea but, in practice, is unworkable.

It was Gibbons' own administration which originally recommended the plan but he said he has since concuded it doesn't work.

"Instead of creating flexibility for the state's agencies to implement innovative work schedules that would save the state money, Senate Bill 3 will actually cost the state time, money and manpower to implement," he said in his veto message.

He said the bill would have created confusion, uncertainty and inequity among employees.

In addition, he said by giving the legislative Interim Finance Committee authority to control any exemptions from the mandatory day-a-month furloughs which are already in place, the legislative branch is violating separation of powers and infringing on the authority of the executive branch.

Gibbons also said the sections of the bill go beyond his proclamation setting the agenda for the special session by reinstating added compensation and salary differentials for certain state employees including prison workers. Gibbons said that would cost the state millions of dollars and was not authorized in the call of the special session.

But he said the veto shouldn't prevent implementing most of the elements in the bill.

"We will be able to do many of those things by executive order without having the restrictions put in by the Legislature," he said.

He said it will be up to each of his department heads to decide how best to meet the salary reduction targets set by himself and lawmakers and that each department may have to choose a different approach.

The four-day, 10-hour schedule for state agencies, he said, might fall by the wayside.

"We may not be able to do it but we're certainly not going to allow the Legislature to encroach on the executive branch," he said.

Comments

Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment