MINUTES OF THE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
Sixty-seventh Session
June 11, 1993
The Assembly Committee on Ways and Means was called to order by Chairman Morse Arberry, Jr., at 8:10 a.m., on Friday, June 11, 1993, in Room 352 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. EXHIBIT A is the Meeting Agenda. EXHIBIT B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Morse Arberry, Jr., Chairman
Mr. Larry L. Spitler, Vice Chairman
Mrs. Vonne Chowning
Mr. Joseph E. Dini, Jr.
Mrs. Jan Evans
Ms. Christina R. Giunchigliani
Mr. Dean A. Heller
Mr. David E. Humke
Mr. John W. Marvel
Mr. Richard Perkins
Mr. Robert E. Price
Ms. Sandra Tiffany
Mrs. Myrna T. Williams
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst
Gary Ghiggeri, Deputy Fiscal Analyst
AB444Makes various changes relating to hospitals.
Ms. Paula Treat, representing Desert Springs Hospital, testified AB444 did not have a fiscal note. She indicated the bill's primary purposes as included in section 1, lines 11-14 stated, "Hospital bills will reflect the charge to the payor when the amount due is not affected by billed charges. This means that PPO, Medicare, Medicaid and other contract and governmentally arranged patients will receive a bill which will not have an itemized list of items and services used by the patient, but instead will receive a bill which will reflect only the amount which is to be paid by the payor(s)." She explained there had been problems in the area of complaints to Pat Jarman related to contracts with contracted rates for certain services, but not listed on the charge. She emphasized the legislation would relate to fairness and honesty in billing and would cause less complaints to Ms. Jarman's department.
Ms. Treat indicated the second issue would be the lack of managed care program for the purposes of hospitals. She explained Desert Springs Hospital had a significantly different hospital operation with no obstetrics or pediatrics, smaller bed capacity and lower patient charges. The hospital anticipated financial difficulties brought on by circumstances beyond the corporation's control and was requesting the charge master to be changed. This change was addressed in Subsection 9, Section 2.
Mr. Arberry asked how the up to 4 percent increase in the charge master was determined. Ms. Treat replied the financial difficulties anticipated would be probably between 3.2 and 3.8 percent loss to the hospital over the next biennium. The hospital believed four percent would be a fair amount. She emphasized it would affect only between 10 and 15 percent and most of those would be out-of-state patients because most were contracted individuals.
Chairman Arberry requested a motion on AB444.
* * * * *
MRS. WILLIAMS MOVED DO PASS.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MR. DINI, MRS. EVANS, MS. TIFFANY AND MR. HELLER WERE ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
* * * * *
AB747Increases certain fees imposed by and makes appropriation to real estate division of department of commerce.
Ms. Joan Buchanan, Real Estate Division Coordinator, testified AB747 would provide for increasing land filing fees which were not included as part of The Executive Budget. She explained the bill came as a result of questioning by Vice Chairman Spitler in March as to whether the revenues generated from this activity paid for the cost of administration, which they did not. She discussed the fees which would be increased.
Vice Chairman Spitler asked if the proposed increased amounts would then recover the costs to provide the services. Ms. Buchanan indicated that was correct. Mr. Spitler requested Ms. Buchanan discuss Section 10.
Ms. Buchanan indicated Section 10 would provide funding for computer equipment and the programming to link the Carson City and Las Vegas offices.
Mrs. Williams inquired on page 4 the cost for permits changed from $5 per page to $100 total fee and wondered how many pages were usually involved. Ms. Jane Snedeker, Administrative Assistant, stated permits average 15 pages.
Ms. Buchanan emphasized all fee changes were researched and compared to what other states charge for the same or similar services.
Chairman Arberry requested a motion on AB747.
* * * * *
MR. HUMKE MOVED AMEND AND DO PASS.
MR. SPITLER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MR. DINI, MRS. EVANS, MS. TIFFANY, AND MR. HELLER WERE ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
* * * * *
AB646Exempts certain purchases by specified state agencies from provisions of State Purchasing Act.
Assemblyman Kathy Augustine, District 12, indicated the Purchasing Division budget account would not be impacted by this bill. Mr. Tom Tatro, Acting Administrator for the Purchasing Division, concurred there would be no impact on the budget.
Vice Chairman Spitler inquired if the division supported AB646. Mr. Tatro replied the division supported what the bill would do and noted it addressed an area of operating procedures which the division had intended to correct administratively. He did not believe a change in statutes would have any significant impact on the operations. Vice Chairman Spitler asked if AB646 failed, would the division deal with the situation administratively. Mr. Tatro indicated the division would deal with the situation administratively whether the bill passed or not.
Mr. Perkins asked how AB646 would affect the administrative charges from other agencies. Mr. Tatro replied changes in the administrative manual would negate any fiscal impact on the division's budget. He explained any purchase under $100 not under contract would be exempted from state purchasing. Mr. Perkins commented previous testimony had indicated one reason to maintain the warehousing-type of distribution versus contractor warehousing was that buying in bulk would save the state funds. He asked if AB646 would be contrary to that testimony. Mr. Tatro replied no, this bill would affect agencies which were not able to meet the minimum order specification or where an immediate need existed. The agency would be responsible for tracking the yearly aggregate to assure compliance. Mr. Perkins voiced his concern that adequate controls would need to be in place in order to assure agencies would not circumvent the system.
Ms. Augustine noted most agencies were in support of AB646 and did not see any tracking problems.
Mr. Spitler commented since the division did not know who was already exempt or who would exercise this option on the AC charge to build the division's budget, did the division see any negative impact in not having the distribution of smaller purchases. Mr. Tatro replied it would be very difficult to identify the exact number, but did not believe it would be a significant amount.
Vice Chairman Spitler wondered if the division would still be responsible for auditing agencies which made purchases outside the division's system. Mr. Tatro replied it would be the responsibility of the agency to audit. He emphasized the Purchasing Division did not have direct audit responsibilities. Mr. Spitler questioned if this process would exempt the Purchasing Division from any accountability related to this type of purchasing. Mr. Tatro indicated the agency itself would be accountable for purchases outside the Purchasing Division.
Mr. Perkins commented the budget process had attempted to provide more flexibility to agencies and moved away from micromanaging portions of the state government. He suggested it would be more appropriate to have this function handled at the administrative regulation level rather than statutory level which would require action every two years.
Vice Chairman Spitler closed the hearing on AB646.
AB200Requires divisions of department of motor vehicles and public safety to exchange information from applications for driver's licenses to identify persons who may have unlawfully failed to register motor vehicles in this state.
Ms. Augustine indicated she had discussed with Chairman Arberry the removal of the fiscal note on this bill in order to expedite moving the bill out of this committee.
Vice Chairman Spitler stated the amendment would be addressed by Chairman Arberry at a later time.
SB422Increases license fees for real estate brokers, broker-salesmen and salesmen.
Mr. Stevens explained the bill would raise real estate fees which were built into The Executive Budget. It was a recommendation from the administration and if passed, line 18, page 1, should be changed from $65 to $85 and line 20 from $50 to $65.
* * * * *
MRS. WILLIAMS MOVED AMEND AND DO PASS.
MR. SPITLER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MR. DINI, MRS. EVANS, MS. TIFFANY AND MR. HELLER WERE ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
* * * * *
BUDGET CLOSINGS
PAROLE AND PROBATION -- PAGE 1480
Mr. Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Division, stated under Fines and Forfeitures, The Executive Budget had recommended utilizing the funds to operate the agency. He emphasized this was not allowable through statutes. Through discussions with the Budget Division, staff recommended increasing the vacancy savings to cover the difference. He explained Publications and Periodicals was reduced by $3,970 in FY95 because the expense was for FY94 only. He noted the dictation unit was not needed for FY95 and a number of items in the maintenance budget were adjusted because staff would not be hired until October 1993. He indicated closing action recommendations were based on placing Parole and Probation with the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety.
Mr. Spitler requested clarification of the residential confinement program as it related to this budget. Mr. Ghiggeri indicated the Governor recommended $50,000 for FY94 and FY95 to continue the program.
Mr. Humke asked what would be left in fines and forfeitures. Mr. Ghiggeri indicated approximately $26,000 per year.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PAROLE AND PROBATION BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
MS. TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MRS. EVANS WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
PAROLE BOARD -- PAGE 1487
Mr. Ghiggeri stated, based upon the action taken on the Facilities Capacity Act legislation, the Parole Board would require approximately $16,000 additional in each year of the biennium for in-state travel and approximately $3,100 in each year for contract services for hearing representatives. He stated approximately $4,300 would be required in FY95 for non-state owned building rent until the Adams Building was completed in Las Vegas. No non-state owned building rent was provided in The Executive Budget and this would fill the seven-month void. He concluded approximately $19,000 for FY94 and $22,000 for FY95 additional funds would be required.
* * * * *
MR. HUMKE MOVED TO CLOSE THE PAROLE BOARD BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MRS. EVANS WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION -- PAGE 287
Mr. Ghiggeri stated, based on the actions of both money committees, the closing action for this account recommends the deletion of the reorganization savings which was recommended in the Public Works Board. He clarified the reorganization had originally planned to delete the Secretary Manager of the Public Works Board and the position would resurface in the Department of Administration as the Director of the department. The Management Assistant I which was filled was slated to be moved to the Department of Administration and switched with the Administrative Aid position. The closing recommendation would reflect this action. He indicated the building Construction Inspector was added as a result of action taken by the committees on not approving FCA.
Mr. Ghiggeri explained in The Executive Budget no funding was recommended to mothball the Lovelock Correctional facility. The Budget Division had provided correspondence from Bond Counsel who had agreed to utilize bond proceeds to fund the mothballing for the 1993-95 biennium at a cost of $806,000 in FY94 and $482,000 in FY95.
He emphasized if would be staff recommendation to consider retaining the Public Works Administration and Inspection in two separate accounts as it currently exists and not commingle funds.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO SPLIT THE BUDGETS OF PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTION AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
MR. PRICE SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked what the split would do. Mr. Ghiggeri clarified previously general fund and inspection funds had been separate. The Governor's recommendation had been to commingle the funds. This action would keep the funds in separate budget accounts.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MRS. EVANS WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
* * * * *
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
MR. PERKINS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MRS. EVANS WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES -- PAGE 304
Mr. Ghiggeri indicated the recommended closing deleted the Director of Administration which would be budgeted in the Budget Division account and funded with general fund dollars. He explained there would be adjustments in personnel and reorganization savings through operating savings related to the personnel adjustments. He stated the Purchasing Assessment would be adjusted related to the closing of the Purchasing account.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
MR. HUMKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION -- PAGE 205
Mr. Stevens noted there were a number of options which could be taken with this budget account. One issue was related to the tax audit teams. As a result of committee discussions there were three options related to tax audit teams.
Mr. Stevens explained Option I would be to adopt the Governor's Recommendations which would retain the auditors in the ESD and SIIS budgets until September 30, 1993 versus July 1, 1993. This option would eliminate 4 of the 14 auditor positions in the Department of Taxation. He noted one auditor would be added to perform SIIS desk audits and ESD would be provided 12 positions to conduct non-payroll audit functions. This would have no general fund impact.
He indicated Option II would retain the status quo in both ESD and SIIS. This would retain a total of 19 positions in ESD and 39 positions at SIIS with audit functions conducted independently. He stated 14 positions recommended for consolidation of the tax audit teams would be eliminated in the Department of Taxation budget and would result in a general fund impact of approximately $3.5 million over the 1993-95 biennium. He pointed out there was an alternate to Option II which would eliminate the 12 additional auditor positions which were not tied to the tax audit team approach. These auditors would provide additional audit penetration in the sales tax area as well as provide additional services for SIIS. This would soften the impact on the general fund to $2.5 million. However, he stressed for the committee Option II would reduce audit coverage and sales tax audit recoveries would probably suffer. Mr. Stevens elaborated the Department of Taxation estimated approximately $1.4 million in FY94 and $2.6 million in FY95 was expected in sales tax recoveries from the 12 new positions which would go to the general fund and distributive school account.
Mr. Stevens explained Option III would be a middle-ground option. There would be a consolidation of the functions in the Department of Taxation and a reduction in the audit coverage for ESD accounts. If Option III were taken, a number of assumptions would be made. The combined average hours per audit would be 23 at an hourly cost of $33.53 and an overhead factor of approximately 21 percent would be included. He stated approximately 2,346 audits were expected in FY94 and 4,708 in FY95. He indicated a three percent audit coverage was chosen in ESD for calculating Option III. The Department of Labor would fund a two percent audit coverage and The Executive Budget provides for a higher than three percent audit coverage rate. The number of hours charged for an ESD audit would be reduced from 6 to 5.5 hours and the transfer from ESD to Taxation would be approximately $160,000 in FY94 and $222,000 in FY95. The impact on the general fund would be approximately $632,000 in FY94 and $897,000 in FY95.
Mr. Stevens addressed the alternative of raising the audit coverage above the three percent level and as the audit coverage increases there would be a greater chance of receiving an audit exception from the federal government. He emphasized staff did not know where the line was drawn by the federal government. He indicated the Department of Labor did set the audit coverage it deemed appropriate as two percent. He pointed out an increase in audit coverage could be done by utilizing ESD's penalties and interest account or the ESD special fund. This was a second alternative for Option III. This would reduce the general fund impact to $471,000 in FY94 and $675,000 in FY95.
Mr. Stevens explained Option III, on the SIIS side, would result in 6.5 average hours per audit rate and 4,708 audits in FY95. The general fund impact for SIIS would be $306,000 in FY94 and $64,000 in FY95.
Mr. Stevens summarized Option III for both SIIS and ESD would result in a general fund impact of approximately $1.5 million over the 1993-95 biennium.
Chairman Arberry stated he had discussed this issue with the Governor and asked him if he had received a letter from the federal government regarding the workability of Option III. The Governor had indicated a letter had not yet been received. Chairman Arberry urged the committee to strongly consider Option III because it was middle of the road and would give the agency some time to work into the process.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CHOOSE OPTION III USING PENALTY AND INTEREST FUNDS FOR THE TAX AUDIT TEAMS.
MRS. EVANS SECONDED THE MOTION.
Speaker Dini questioned if, under Option III, the penalty and interest monies could be used for the purposes intended. Mr. Stevens responded he had discussed this issue with the Legislative Counsel prior to formulating the Option III alternatives, and Mr. Malkiewich had indicated he would research it more prior to providing a formal opinion. Mr. Stevens did not believe it would be an issue, however Legislative Counsel indicated if a problem did arise it would be with state, not federal, law. He stated the statutory language could be revised if there was a problem.
Mr. Perkins commented the largest concern when the budget was presented had been taking people who were classified as auditors out of positions where only 15 percent of their responsibilities were actually audit functions. Mr. Stevens explained with the adoption of Option III, the payroll audit function which comprised 15 to 20 percent of ESD's time would be transferred over to the Department of Taxation and the payroll audit functions would be provided by the Department of Taxation on behalf of the ESD. It would be recommended, for non-payroll audit functions, to provide 12 compliance investigator positions to perform those non-payroll audit functions currently provided by ESD.
Mr. Heller voiced his concern over the U.S. Department of Labor letter which had not yet been received whether the concerns have been diminished. Mr. Stevens explained Option III would set audit coverage at 3 percent out of ESD administrative funds. He emphasized by taking the estimated number of audits the Department of Taxation believes it would perform in the second year of the biennium and dividing it by the number of ESD anticipated accounts, the audit coverage recommended in The Executive Budget would be 14.2 percent. Mr. Stevens stated Option III would be based on 3 percent audit coverage. He stated other states have reported audit coverage slightly over the threshold of 2 percent established by the government.
Mrs. Williams wondered if the 12 new positions would actually replace the staff already providing services in ESD. Mr. Stevens was not sure on the logistics. He presumed some of the staff auditors would be transferred. Nineteen positions would be eliminated from ESD and transferred out while 12 positions would be added to provide the non-payroll audit functions.
Mr. Stevens clarified Option III for SIIS retained desk audits at SIIS, but the Department of Taxation would provide an estimated 4,708 payroll audits for SIIS in FY95.
Ms. Giunchigliani stated her opposition of Option III as related to juggling things around to accommodate a budget shortfall. She emphasized ESD would be adversely impacted by this and another bill in Labor and Management which would provide insurance cards and would result in a man-hour drain on the divisions. She stated this did not make good business sense to her. She remarked there had been no argument made by the Budget Division and that an auditor was not an auditor just because it appeared so on paper.
Mr. Price remarked on the efficiency of an auditor performing ESD audits on one day, then SIIS audits another day. He stressed, according to the professional consultants, this would not be a good use of people. He asked if Option III would propose utilizing the same people for shared functions. Mr. Stevens replied the Department of Taxation would send auditors to a business and would, on ESD, SIIS and Business Tax side, audit the company's payroll. He clarified one auditor would audit in all three areas.
Chairman Arberry indicated it was his understanding the staff hired would be familiar enough with the auditing procedures to be trained to perform all three area functional audits. Speaker Dini concurred that training the staff was the key. He asked if there was enough funding in the account to retrain the staff which would be moving over to the Department of Taxation.
Mr. Hataway commented the Department of Taxation provides an ongoing training program for their auditors and would be an integral part of the proposed transfer process.
Mr. Dini inquired if the existing staff in ESD would be given priority in rehiring auditors at the Department of Taxation. Mr. Hataway stated it was his understanding existing employees would have the first opportunity to stay in the newly created positions in either ESD or Taxation if they met the minimum qualifications. Speaker Dini asked if there would be a salary differential. Mr. Stevens indicated there would be a 5 percent differential between the auditor series and the compliance auditor series with the new positions classified at one grade less.
Ms. Giunchigliani clarified Mr. Comeaux's testimony indicated it would take four to six months for the staff to be up to speed with the new responsibilities. She stressed this translated to money lost and was irresponsible.
Mr. Price commented there were problems in the Department of Taxation where it has not been providing audits or tracking the use tax. After these issues were brought up there would be hundreds, if not thousands, of businesses attempting to track the use tax. He speculated on what affect this would have on the work load of the audits. He commented the committee had not received testimony on this issue because it was just discovered recently, but he believed it should be considered even at the last minute. Chairman Arberry pointed out the budget could always be reopened if there was a problem.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MRS. WILLIAMS, MR. HELLER, MR. PERKINS, MR. PRICE, MRS. CHOWNING AND MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI VOTED NO.
* * * * *
Speaker Dini commented the vote was with the understanding this must be investigated further to see how the people would be affected by Option III. Chairman Arberry stated the intention would be to reopen the issue if necessary.
Mr. Stevens indicated other issues within the Department of Taxation which needed committee review as recommended by the subcommittee include: (1) restore local government finance; (2) restore two-year ratio study cycle; (3) adjust insurance premium tax proposal; and (4) restore demographic survey contract. He pointed out the first two items were not recommended by staff.
Mr. Price clarified in item (1) the two local government positions were the people who checked the local governments to assure compliance with spending caps and other state regulations. Mr. Stevens stated that was correct. He explained local government budgets were transmitted to the Department of Taxation and analyzed. Mr. Price pointed out unless the state removed the requirements on local governments, the state Department of Taxation should have adequate staff to check for compliance. Mr. Stevens replied statutory changes would be necessary if these positions were not restored.
* * * * *
MR. PRICE MOVED TO RESTORE THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE, RESTORE THE TWO-YEAR RATIO STUDY CYCLE, ADJUST THE INSURANCE PREMIUM TAX PROPOSAL AND RESTORE THE DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY CONTRACT.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mr. Dini emphasized it was very important to retain the local government positions. He stated the function was put in place when there was a large amount of trouble at the county level and with the turnover of elected officials, the state should have the expertise to assure county compliance with the state budgeting laws. This would be a good safety valve so there were no local or city governments getting in trouble.
Mrs. Williams stated she was in favor of restoring the local government finance and the two-year ratio study cycle.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE.
* * * * *
Mr. Stevens stated the last issue under the Department of Taxation related to administration charges. He indicated for the various administrative charges which were made by the Department of Taxation for cigarette tax, motor fuel tax, state tax, net proceeds, etc., the department took a portion of an administrative fee. He stated the fee needed to be adjusted based on the committee's action.
Mr. Price indicated AB697 was in the Committee on Taxation and dealt with administrative fees and asked if the Ways and Means action would negate the bill. Mr. Stevens indicated the action taken by Ways and Means assumes AB697 would pass. He indicated if the bill does not pass, the Department of Taxation budget would not be fully funded and the committee would need to adjust the budget with general fund dollars.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO ADJUST THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE AMOUNTS AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
MR. PERKINS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
* * * * *
MR. SPITLER MOVED TO CLOSE THE DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
MR. HUMKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
CLAIM AND EMPLOYMENT FUND -- PAGE 1065
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE CLAIM AND EMPLOYMENT FUND BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
MS. TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI AND MR. ARBERRY WERE NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPARTMENT -- PAGE 1074
Mr. Stevens stated three areas would need to be adjusted based on the previous action by the committee. First, the 39 positions recommended for elimination and consolidation into the data processing area would need to be retained within the ESD budget. Second, dues and registration amounts which were reduced based on the data processing consolidation would be added back into the ESD budget. Finally, the transfer of $2.4 million to the Department of Information Technology would be eliminated. He indicated miscellaneous maintenance adjustment would also occur. These actions would unbundle the data processing recommendation.
Mr. Stevens indicated the second adjustment would occur in the Tax Audit Team recommendations. He stated the revised Governor's Recommendation reflected the 19 audit positions to be included in the ESD account through September 30, 1993. During the three-month period, the 19 positions were added back to the budget. The 12 positions which would perform the non-payroll audit functions as of October 1, 1993 would be added to the budget. There would be an adjustment for the cost of the payroll audit activities transferred to the Department of Taxation.
Mr. Stevens indicated in all budgets the reorganizational savings have been eliminated and the amount was included under vacancy savings. He pointed out the purchasing assessment was eliminated based on prior committee action and the data processing planning adjustment assessment has been included.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE EMPLOYMENT SECURITY BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
MS. TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI VOTED NO.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
EMPLOYMENT SECURITY SPECIAL FUND - PENALTIES AND INTEREST ACCOUNT -- PAGE 1081
Mr. Stevens indicated the only adjustment which would be recommended was the inclusion of a transfer to the Department of Taxation for 3 percent audit coverage under Option III chosen by the committee.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE PENALTIES AND INTEREST ACCOUNT BUDGET ACCOUNT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
MS. TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI VOTED NO.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
Mr. Price asked if the educational benefits at a cost of $18,000 included in the Military Budget could be considered for restoration. Mr. Stevens clarified the National Guard benefits, after budget reductions, would require $45,000 to restore educational benefits. Mr. Price indicated the educational benefits were a major incentive for getting people to join the Guard.
* * * * *
MR. PRICE MOVED TO RESTORE $45,000 FOR EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS TO THE NATIONAL GUARD BUDGET ACCOUNT.
MR. HUMKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mrs. Williams commented while the committee had gutted the Committee to Help the Handicapped and the Deaf Resources Center and she recognized the validity of Mr. Price's comments, she would not be able to vote in favor of the motion.
Mr. Humke stated he supported this motion and had received a number of letters from Guard members on the issue. He concurred with Mr. Price, explaining when someone signed up for the relatively thankless job of being a Nevada Army or Air National Guard member, education benefits should be part of the package. If it was taken away, some people would say it was not fair. He pointed out this was a part-time job and mostly paid for from federal dollars. He emphasized including the cost of educational benefits was a small price to pay for the state.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY VOICE VOTE. MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI, MRS. WILLIAMS, MS. TIFFANY AND MR. SPITLER VOTED NO. MR. MARVEL AND MRS. EVANS WERE NOT PRESENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
* * * * *
Chairman Arberry adjourned the hearing at 10:35 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
_________________________
Kerin E. Putnam
Committee Secretary
??
Assembly Committee on Ways and Means
June 11, 1993
Page 1