MINUTES OF THE
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
Sixty-seventh Session
June 24, 1993
The Assembly Committee on Ways and Means was called to order by Chairman Morse Arberry, Jr., at 7:07 a.m., on Thursday, June 24, 1993, in Room 352 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the agenda and 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
BUDGET CLOSINGS
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS - PAGE 373
Birgit Baker, Program Analyst with the Fiscal Analysis Division, explained this budget represented the worker's compensation budgets which had been held pending the passage of SB 316. She referred to the base budget and stated the microcomputer specialist position had been restored which was part of the unbundling of the data processing agency. Vacancy savings and reorganization savings had been adjusted--two positions had been targeted for reorganization savings, one a management analyst position which was to be assigned to the business and industry administrative account. Since the accounting positions had not been put into the business and industry administrative account, the management analyst position was restored. However, the value of the deputy director's position had been placed into vacancy savings.
Ms. Baker referred to the purchasing assessment which was eliminated and pointed out a transfer to business industry and administration had been approved to cover the director's office budget for the new department. The offset to re-establishing the micro-computer specialist was the transfer to the Department of Data Processing since that position had been placed back into the budget. A budget analyst had also been funded for the budget division.
The Quality Assurance Unit had been originally recommended in this budget. When the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) was to have been merged with the Department of Insurance under the reorganization, the Quality Assurance Unit had been placed in the Insurance Fraud budget. The Ways and Means Committee, in closing the Insurance Fraud budget, had reversed that recommended placement. The two fraud investigator positions would go to the new fraud unit under the direction of the attorney general. The four positions designated for the Quality Assurance Unit would be returned to the DIR. Those positions were a supervisor, registered nurse, compliance auditor and a worker's compensation technician. The associated operating and equipment costs would also be returned.
Ms. Baker remarked the fiscal note for SB 316 originally submitted by the agency had been somewhat larger, there had been a request for six positions. As a result of the subsequent injury fund responsibilities for the State Industrial Insurance System (SIIS) going back to SIIS, the agency would have two or three positions assigned to that function which could now be used to assist DIR with the additional responsibilities under SB 316. Therefore, the fiscal note had been reduced from six positions to four.
ENFORCEMENT FOR INDUSTRIAL SAFETY - PAGE 378
Ms. Baker said the only change in this budget was some reorganization savings which would have taken place had this agency been merged with the Department of Insurance under the proposed reorganization. However, since this did not take place, the reorganization savings had been adjusted out and the two positions targeted would be restored. In addition, there was a transfer to business and industry administration to fund the new director's office. A fiscal note of $20,000 would be used to assist the agency with anticipated increased activity dealing with fines. Ms. Baker believed the fine language in SB 316 had been changed from "shall" to "must." Therefore, the agency had anticipated having more appeals to those fines and wished to build in some additional contract service money.
Ms. Giunchigliani added there was a mandatory safety program for businesses which would have additional impact.
DIVISION OF PREVENTATIVE SAFETY - PAGE 382
Ms. Baker explained this was a new division created in SB 7 of the sixty-sixth session. This division was responsible for establishing training programs for workers. The agency requested some additional positions for the enhanced safety programs, two safety and health representatives in Las Vegas in 1994, one heath representative in Reno in 1994. These positions would increase in 1995 to three in Las Vegas and two in Reno.
One additional change in the budget, Ms. Baker pointed out, related to the OSHA grant for training funds going to the enforcement division. This division has access to those funds, which enabled the reduction of the allocation from the worker's compensation safety fund as the result of the availability of those federal OSHA training grants.
MINE INSPECTION - PAGE 386
Ms. Baker remarked this budget had no significant changes as a result of SB 316. However, the original testimony on this budget was whether the mine safety grant would be available. A work program had been processed through the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) and the mine safety grant would be brought in during FY 1993. The agency felt the grant would be available for FY 1994 and FY 1995. The recommended budget had funded some of the operating expenses since it was believed the grant might not be available. Therefore, based on the availability of the grant, there was a reduction in the base budget of $16,000.
Mr. Spitler referred to SB 7 of the sixty-sixth session and understood the agency had been late getting started with their advertising campaign and had requested a continuation and additional funding. Ms. Baker inquired if Mr. Spitler was referring to the informational and educational safety program. Mr. Spitler said yes. Ms. Baker commented the agency had appeared in front of IFC for approval of funding for that particular program. IFC approved $500,000 for the biennium; $150,000 for FY 1992, $350,000 for FY 1993. There had been an inquiry to the ethics commission on how that process took place, which delayed the program start until FY 1993. A brochure had been printed, billboards were in place, and an advertising campaign had been initiated. When the budget was built, the funding was placed in the Preventative Safety budget, page 383 of the Executive Budget, under Enhancement 799. Ms. Baker pointed out the agency had requested $616,628 for operating expenses; $500,000 of that in each year was the agency's request for the continuation of the program. The governor had not recommended funding the program at that time. Yesterday, during the Senate Finance hearing, Scott Craigie, representing the governor's office, asked the committee to consider continuing that program at $350,000 per year. The Senate Finance Committee had not yet closed that budget so the amount had not been decided. Therefore, there was no funding in the budget to continue the program.
Ms. Giunchigliani remarked during the hearings on SB 316, there had been no discussion of this program and she had not recommended funding. If the senate closed otherwise, the budget will have to be looked into. However, she did not feel $350,000 was necessary.
Mrs. Evans inquired if an evaluation had been made of the advertising campaign and its effectiveness. Ron Swirezek, Acting Assistant Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, advised in response to the question relating to the $350,000 figure, at this time, the total amount had been committed. The program would continue into September or October. Television coverage with public service announcements, radio and newspaper ads would also continue through September. Billboards would appear to reinforce the message beginning this week in Reno and in mid-July in the Las Vegas area.
Mr. Swirezek commented the original brochures had been mailed to all employers in the state of Nevada defining the rights and responsibilities of both employees and employers throughout the state. At this time, approximately 400,000 brochures have been distributed. From the response of this initial mailing, 3,600 employers had contacted the Division of Preventative Safety for follow-up brochures and documents which would be coordinated with training and consultation. Hopefully, Mr. Swirezek stated, because of this program, there would not be the excessive loss experienced by employers.
Mr. Swirezek remarked as far as work place safety, a poll had been conducted recently to determine if people were seeing and/or retaining the messages on the radio and television. The results of the poll came out and approximately 30 percent of the people statewide have recognized the message on television. The poll was taken approximately 90 days after the initial program was started. A follow-up poll would be conducted in about three months after the message had been out in hopes the message could be passed to the remaining 70 percent. All indications were the program was working and the next step would be to change behavior patterns.
Mrs. Evans commented this sounded good, the message was getting out and being received, but the effectiveness in changing behavior would be the difficult task. She hoped monitoring of the program would continue and evaluations made as to what worked and what does not. Mrs. Evans emphasized she was in favor of the concept, and she was in favor of extending such a program; however, the bottom line was results.
Chairman Arberry inquired how the program was evaluated. Mr. Swirezek stated the initial evaluation was directed at employers and employees and whether they were aware of the program. The second step would be carried out through training and consultation. If employers and employees were coming to the division to request assistance in work place safety programs, the division would go into the work place, evaluate or assess the work place safety loss record and then measure those who have requested services. Secondly, Mr. Swirezek explained the evaluation would take place on a statewide basis and whether the percentage of injury or accidents was going down. The work force would be increasing in absolute numbers, but the concern was whether the percentage of loss time, the number of medical treatments, was declining. This program alone would not accomplish those tasks, but combined with enforcement and all the provisions of SB 316, it was hoped a difference would be seen. The information would be brought before the legislature or IFC on a periodic basis. Obviously, if the program does not work, there would be no incentive to fund it.
Ms. Giunchigliani stated her concern was with the evaluation of the program. There must be separation between what was effective and what was not. The medical costs should go down automatically because of managed care, not because there would be knowledge of work place safety. If an individual knew about work place safety, there would be no recognition of safety until that individual himself was injured. She pointed out the thrust of the program was to make workers aware, but she did not believe an advertising campaign should continue past October. Ms. Giunchigliani recommended targeting the "misfortune 500" because just knowing about safety would not correct the problem. Inadequate training on the front end was the main problem. Revenue should be expended going into businesses which have an existing safety problem. Using the results as a measuring device would be more effective than an advertising campaign. A safety program should be mandated for every business in the state.
* * * * *
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO CLOSE THESE BUDGETS WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
BUDGETS CLOSED.
* * * * *
Chairman Arberry stated the committee must take a break to attend IFC to close the SIIS and SIIS Fraud budgets.
Chairman Arberry reconvened the hearing at 10:28 a.m.
STATE INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE SYSTEM - PAGE 1652
Ms. Baker summarized the closing actions in this budget restore the SIIS base budget to the original requested levels, implemented the combined tax audit proposal by increasing the SIIS audit penetration from 47 percent to 50 percent and allowing the Department of Taxation to perform approximately 4,700 audits in FY 1995. In addition, this closure restored the vocational rehabilitation counselors and nurses for placement into the claims team structure as recommended by Coopers & Lybrand. The revised cash flow projections were reflected as presented to the two labor committees as a result of the reforms approved in SB 316.
Ms. Baker referred to page 1654 of the Executive Budget, enhancements for other non-critical issues. When SIIS management testified before the money committees, they stated these enhancements were actually maintenance items and not enhancements and had asked the committee to approve those items as maintenance.
As the budget had been built by the governor, the premium income, investment income, claims expense and claims reserves were placed into this budget. For internal system purposes, the agency had requested these items not run through the budget, but rather be reported as informational items as had been done in the past.
Ms. Baker referred to the adjustments to expense which restored the 39 premium audit positions, effective July 1, 1993. The rehabilitation counselor and nurse positions were restored and funded for one quarter of FY 1994 for a $3.6 million adjustment in the first year and $5.3 million in the second. As a compromise on the tax audit proposal, Ms. Baker indicated SIIS would be able to increase their audit penetration from 47 percent to 50 percent by having the Department of Taxation assist in a number of those audits. There were approximately 3,500 excess audits when the calculations had been made. As a result, six premium audit positions would be relinquished in that compromise. Vacancy savings were adjusted as well as all operating savings attributable to the positions being returned to the budget.
There was an adjustment to Industrial Relations Assessment, a reduction due to SIIS maintaining their own subsequent injury fund. The assessment to DIR in the past had included funding for the subsequent injury fund.
Ms. Baker continued the adjustments of $14 million in the first year and $19 million in the second year, deleting the transfer to Benefit Services, was merely a reversal of the proposal to have the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation provide case services.
The adjustments to claims expense and claims reserve was based on the revised cash flow projections provided to the labor and management committees. At the end of FY 1995, the invested assets were projected to be $423 million. Page 1652 of the Executive Budget showed an estimated reserve of $214 million; therefore, as a result of SB 316, the agency would be building up its reserve by over $210 million over the original cash flow projections.
SIIS REHABILITATION CENTER - PAGE 1660
Ms. Baker remarked there was a similar situation with this budget and the SIIS budget. The agency indicated it felt the items reflected as enhancements by the budget office were actually maintenance items and had requested the money committees consider approval of those items as maintenance. This was summarized as a 5.5 percent increase in FY 1994 over the 1993 work program and 6.4 percent increase in FY 1995.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked if this budget related to the Jean Hanna Clark center. Ms. Baker replied affirmatively. Ms. Giunchigliani pointed out when she had discussed open bidding for managed care with Mr. Craigie, there had been a requirement to use the Jean Hanna Clark facility. She believed this increase was necessary in view of the increased utilization of the facility.
Ms. Baker identified the $3.2 million and $3.9 million figures which dealt primarily with the computer system which had just gone on line for the claims teams and the enhancement of the policy holder services and accounting systems.
* * * * *
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO APPROVE THESE BUDGETS ACCORDING TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
MR. PERKINS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE WITH MR. DINI ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGETS CLOSED.
* * * * *
Mr. Stevens advised with the closure of the DIR budget earlier this morning, closure of the entire Executive Budget was nearly complete. With regard to the preventative safety program and the presentation given by Mr. Craigie on the subject, the senate felt the program should be funded to some extent. Mr. Stevens remarked this would be an issue which must be resolved before full closure could occur. The only other remaining item was the SIIS Fraud Unit and staff would need guidance from the committee. Mr. Stevens indicated he would meet with the attorney general today if that was the pleasure of the chairman. Chairman Arberry stated if that could be done, the committee would meet late this afternoon to close that budget.
With reference to the capital improvement project (CIP) recommendations by the committee, Mr. Stevens stated a property tax rate must be determined to fund the bonds for the upcoming biennium. The rate was being calculated at this time and would be included in the CIP bill once the rate had been determined.
Ms. Giunchigliani referred to the bond issue and inquired if there was appetite in the committee to explore raising the bond debt limit from two percent to three percent of assessed valuation. Mr. Marvel pointed out the rate had been raised in 1989 for the university CIPs from one percent to two percent. Ms. Giunchigliani wondered if anyone had explored raising the rate or done a comparison with other states. She commented it would be a more responsible use of dollars. Chairman Arberry said the issue could be discussed at a later time.
Mr. Price pointed out there was a possible problem in some of the agencies where some deputies have a higher salary than the director of the agency. He believed this problem was in the Department of Motor Vehicles as well as the Department of Taxation. He asked if that issue would be addressed at some time. Chairman Arberry replied the issue had been discussed, but because of the time limit, it would have to be taken care of next session. A percentage rule had been discussed, but this was something which should have been discussed at the beginning of the session. It would not be feasible if there was an attempt to correct the inequity at this late time.
Mr. Stevens remarked the committee may want to discuss the preventative safety issue and there should be a resolution today if possible. Chairman Arberry suggested the committee make a determination when it reconvened to close the SIIS Fraud Unit budget. Mr. Stevens maintained the last input must go to the budget division this afternoon in order for them to have time to prepare the final figures so the appropriations act could be written.
Chairman Arberry recessed the committee until after the general floor session.
Chairman Arberry reconvened the meeting at 2:50 p.m.
PREVENTATIVE SAFETY - PAGE 382
Mr. Stevens pointed out the preventative safety program in the DIR budget was an issue which must be resolved. The agency requested $350,000 for the first year of the biennium with a like amount in the second year, if authorized by IFC. Senate Finance closed the budget under this scenario.
Chairman Arberry asked the pleasure of the committee.
Ms. Giunchigliani asserted she would prefer this account be closed with zero dollars. She felt it was a premium cost to the employer which would mandate an unwanted safety program. The awareness part of the advertising campaign was no longer necessary. Ms. Tiffany agreed with Ms. Giunchigliani--$350,000 for an ad campaign at this point was ineffective and she would support zero dollars in this account.
Chairman Arberry explained if the committee decided not to agree with the senate on this issue, he would have to meet with Senator Raggio and determine which committee would give.
Mr. Marvel pointed out the agency had funding until October. With the balance remaining, there might be enough time for an education program. If any funding was given at all, there would have to be IFC approval before any more was authorized. Mr. Stevens added the agency would have to come before IFC to prove the effectiveness of the program in order to obtain funding for the second year of the biennium.
Mrs. Chowning stated she liked the fact the brochures were done in English and Spanish. She inquired if the program was mandated to be bilingual. Ms. Giunchigliani contended there was no program, the agency was just given $350,000. Chairman Arberry stated that was correct, there was no program. Mrs. Chowning remarked it was important to have safety programs presented in a bilingual fashion. She concluded it was a good idea to have the agency appear in front of IFC to prove the effectiveness of the program in order to receive more funding.
Ms. Giunchigliani stressed in her opinion the agency could not prove their effectiveness by counting the number of people who called the agency after hearing or seeing one of the commercials. She said that part did not exist at this point and there was no true evaluation tool. She reminded the committee that under the auspices of SB 316, DIR was no longer under the budget act and was not required to appear before IFC. Chairman Arberry corrected Ms. Giunchigliani--she was referring to SIIS, not DIR. Ms. Giunchigliani pointed out DIR obtained their assessments from SIIS. However, she felt the agency did not need any additional funding for the safety program.
Chairman Arberry clarified the pleasure of the committee was to leave the budget as it was closed.
VERIFICATION OF INSURANCE - PAGE 1346
Mr. Ghiggeri explained the senate had closed the Verification of Insurance budget this afternoon. The assembly had closed the budget by reverting all reserves in excess of $150,000 in each year to the highway fund. The senate had closed the budget reverting all reserves in excess of $1 million to the highway fund. The senate had indicated that due to legislation, SB 371 and AB 357, the Department of Motor Vehicles had stated they would feel more comfortable with a $1 million reserve. Mr. Ghiggeri pointed out the difference would be approximately $1.5 million to the highway fund instead of $2.5 million. Prior to this session, there had been no provision at all for any money remaining in the Verification of Insurance budget to go to the highway fund. If the committee should decide to concur with Senate Finance, AB 730 which provided for the reversion of that balance to the highway fund, the bill would have to be amended from the current amount of $150,000 to $1 million. Additionally, some language would have to be cleaned up in Sections 1 and 4. Section 1 related to the state treasurer and Section 4 concerned the state controller.
Mr. Perkins indicated he was not concerned about the amount of reversion, but he was distressed because when the agency presented their budget, there was no mention of this issue. The problem should have been resolved much earlier.
Ms. Giunchigliani inquired what the true rationale was for this piece of legislation. Mr. Ghiggeri stated he had been in Senate Finance when the issue was discussed and they indicated the gist of the bills reduced the amount someone would have to pay to reinstate his/her drivers license upon verification of insurance. The agency testified that based upon this legislation, it may have an impact on the amount of money which flowed into the agency.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked the status of SB 371 and AB 357. Mr. Ghiggeri replied he did not know the status, however, the committee was against the wall trying to close budgets. Ms. Giunchigliani inquired if the agency could appear in front of IFC. Mr. Ghiggeri explained if nothing was done with the legislation, the full amount of money would go forward in that account in reserve. Action would have to be taken either for the $150,000 or the $1 million, otherwise $2.5-$3 million would be carried forward.
Mr. Dini suggested the committee go with the senate. Chairman Arberry pointed out the budget would have to be reopened to take this action.
MR. DINI MOVED TO REOPEN THE VERIFICATION OF INSURANCE BUDGET.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
Chairman Arberry stated he would like to talk to Senator Raggio about this matter before any action was taken by the committee. However, if the committee chooses to reopen a number of budgets, the appropriations act could not be completed in time.
MR. DINI WITHDREW HIS MOTION TO REOPEN THE BUDGET.
MR. MARVEL WITHDREW HIS SECOND.
ATTORNEY GENERAL - SIIS FRAUD UNIT
Mr. Stevens reminded the committee staff had been instructed to meet with representatives of the attorney general's office to discuss the SIIS Fraud Unit. Mr. Ghiggeri and Ms. Baker had done so over the lunch hour. The outcome of the meeting was the attorney general contended no funding could be removed from this budget. The entire amount was necessary for the operation of the unit, effective July 1, 1993.
Ms. Giunchigliani pointed out the attorney general had a commitment from the senate side. She asked if the need for ten camcorders had been discussed. Mr. Ghiggeri asserted that issue had been specifically addressed and accounted for. Ms. Giunchigliani remarked she had spoken to the attorney general and the feeling was the agency had not asked for the fraud unit, this was the minimum budget they could operate under and if the budget was reduced, they did not want the unit.
Ms. Giunchigliani suggested a letter of intent be sent to the attorney general.
* * * * *
MR. DINI MOVED TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SIIS FRAUD UNIT.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
VERIFICATION OF INSURANCE - PAGE 1346
Mr. Ghiggeri asked if the committee would like to revisit this budget to discuss how the senate closed the budget. He reminded the committee the senate had closed the budget reverting all reserves in excess of $1 million to the highway fund. The assembly would have to amend AB 730 to reflect the same and to make some adjustments to Sections 1 and 4.
* * * * *
MRS. CHOWNING MOVED TO REOPEN THE VERIFICATION OF INSURANCE BUDGET FOR AMENDMENT.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE WITH MS. TIFFANY ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET REOPENED.
* * * * *
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO AMEND THE VERIFICATION OF INSURANCE BUDGET BY REVERTING ALL RESERVES IN EXCESS OF $1 MILLION TO THE HIGHWAY FUND.
MR. HELLER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE WITH MS. TIFFANY ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
* * * * *
MR. PERKINS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS AB 730.
MR. HELLER SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE WITH MS. TIFFANY ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
* * * * *
PREVENTATIVE SAFETY - PAGE 382
Mr. Ghiggeri suggested the committee revisit the preventative safety issue for decision. The issue was $350,000 for the program and the senate felt the contract could be rebid if the funding was put into the first year. Funding for the second year would be contingent upon satisfactory performance.
Ms. Giunchigliani reiterated there was nothing to measure against. There was no measurement capabilities between a worker hearing a commercial and reduction of injury. What would be more effective would be to train employers. Using this funding for radio spots as had been suggested by testimony was irresponsible.
* * * * *
MR. HELLER MOVED TO REOPEN THE PREVENTATIVE SAFETY BUDGET TO CONCUR WITH THE SENATE CLOSURE.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION FAILED WITH MR. PRICE, MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI, MRS. EVANS AND MRS. CHOWNING VOTING NO. MS. TIFFANY WAS ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
Chairman Arberry requested the motion be made again.
MR. HUMKE MOVED TO REOPEN THE PREVENTATIVE SAFETY BUDGET TO CONCUR WITH THE SENATE CLOSURE.
MR. HELLER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED BY A SHOW OF HANDS. MR. DINI, MR. HUMKE, MR. MARVEL, MR. HELLER, MR. PRICE, MRS. WILLIAMS, MR. PERKINS, MR. SPITLER AND CHAIRMAN ARBERRY VOTED YES. MS. TIFFANY WAS ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET REOPENED.
* * * * *
MR. DINI MOVED TO CONCUR WITH THE SENATE.
MR. HELLER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED BY VOICE VOTE WITH MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI, MRS. EVANS, MR. PRICE AND MRS. CHOWNING VOTING NO. MS. TIFFANY WAS ABSENT AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE.
BUDGET CLOSED.
There being no further business before the committee, Chairman Arberry adjourned the meeting at 3:38 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
______________________________
Reba Coombs, Secretary
??
Assembly Committee on Ways and Means
June 24, 1993
Page 1