MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
Sixty-seventh Session
April 29, 1993
The Senate Committee on Finance was called to order by Chairman William J. Raggio, at 8:12 a.m., on Thursday, April 29, 1993, in Room 223 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator Diana M. Glomb
Senator William R. O'Donnell
Senator Matthew Q. Callister
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Thomas J. Hickey, Clark County Senatorial District No. 2
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Daniel G. Miles, Fiscal Analyst
Robert Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Steve J. Abba, Program Analyst
Joan McConnell, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
L. Scott Walshaw, Commissioner, Division of Financial Institutions, Department of Commerce
Carole Rankin, Program Assistant, Office of Protection and Advocacy, Department of Commerce
Judy Matteucci, Director, Department of Administration
Wayne R. Perock, Chief of Field Operations, Division of State Parks, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Senator Raggio opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 361. Copies of the corrected Amendment No. 395 (Exhibit C) were distributed.
SENATE BILL 361: Establishes office of science, engineering and technology within the commission on economic development.
Senator Rawson explained the corrected amendment (Exhibit C) at Senator Raggio's request. He added he did remove the test-site contractors' association. The panel must include members of NISET (Nevada Industry, Science, Engineering and Technology, Inc.), yet does not preclude other people from also being on the panel.
Senator Coffin asked if Senator Rawson had broadened the amendment to include more than just the Nevada Test Site.
Senator Rawson stated there is a broad perspective of what the responsibilities are, and quoted subsections 1 and 3 of section 3 and paragraph (b) of subsection 4 in Exhibit C.
Senator Coffin asked what the difference was between moving for cause and moving for good cause. Senator Rawson stated Senate Bill Drafting Adviser Jan Needham told him it was standard language.
SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO ADOPT AMENDMENT NO. 395 TO SENATE BILL 361 AND DO PASS AS AMENDED.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 361 and opened the hearing on S.B. 23. Proposed Amendment (Exhibit D) to S.B. 23 was distributed.
SENATE BILL 23: Establishes two-tiered system of forecasting future state revenues to assist in providing balanced state budget.
Senator Raggio stated the original bill is completely replaced by the proposed amendment. Exhibit D is the newer amendment following discussions in the committee. Senator Raggio explained the bill was changed to accommodate some of the concerns expressed. It establishes a technical committee, and the technical committee is all public-sector membership. He referred to page 5 of the amendment. Section 6 listed those who would be included as members of the committee and removed representatives from other agencies, such as the Department of Taxation or the Gaming Control Board. Their data base and figures would be available to the technical committee. It was felt elected officials such as the controller, treasurer, or agency heads should not serve as such on the technical advisory committee.
Senator Raggio noted in section 3 the economic forum has been increased to six members. The Governor would appoint two persons and two members would come from each house of the legislature. In each house, both the majority and minority would have a recommendation to make. He said this assures the Governor will always have at least a majority of his party on the economic forum which serves for 2 years.
Reference was made by Senator Raggio to page 4, section 5, paragraphs (b) and (d) with regard to the date (December 1) the economic forum will present the official forecast and projections, which is the month before the legislature convenes. Both the Governor and the legislature will be required to utilize that projection.
Senator Raggio stated section 5, paragraph (b) will make clear that revenue projections will provide an accurate estimate of the revenue that will be collected for general, unrestricted use, and not for special purposes.
Senator Raggio reiterated the forecast would be presented on December 1. Although the end of December will not be included in the revenue projections, Senator Raggio felt that should not preclude the preparation of the budget in a manner adequate for presentation.
In response to a concern voiced by Senator Rawson, Senator Raggio pointed out that any changes that need to be included in the budget would be available when a final revenue projection is made
available to both the Governor and the legislature on or before May 1 as cited in paragraph (d).
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 23.
SENATOR O'DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 23 and opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 377.
ASSEMBLY BILL 377: Makes supplemental appropriations to department of commerce for certain expenses.
L. Scott Walshaw, Commissioner, Division of Financial Institutions, Department of Commerce, testified on section 2 of A.B. 377 as follows:
This deals with a situation that occurred...in Fiscal Year 1988, where an employee of the Division of Financial Institutions was placed on administrative leave for less than a day, and apparently due to a later ruling by the Department of Personnel we had to pay that person [$33.76] retroactively. This represents a request to replace the money taken out of stale claims to do that.
Carole Rankin, Program Assistant, Office of Protection and Advocacy, Department of Commerce, testified on section 1 of A.B. 377. She said there had been an employee who started on August 15, 1988, and was supervising three staff people in the same job class. It was not until March 10, 1989, that an increase went into effect. She asserted it should have been made retroactive to August 15, 1988, but it was not done until March of 1992. She indicated the appropriation is requested to supplement the stale claims.
When queried by Senator Raggio to whom the bill applied, Mr. Walshaw admitted the funds had already been disbursed to the widow of the person alluded to in section 2. Ms. Rankin replied the employee referred to in section 1 was a former employee of the Las Vegas office.
Voicing his intention to abstain from any budget decisions regarding the university because of his employment, Senator Rawson asked if either employee had anything to do with the university budgets. Ms. Rankin assured him neither did.
Judy Matteucci, Director, Department of Administration, stated the above described situations occur frequently in the executive branch and are paid from the stale claims account. She averred the two agencies had overspent their budgets for those particular years and were obliged to request the extra money.
SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 377.
SENATOR CALLISTER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.B. 377 and opened the hearing on S.B. 280.
SENATE BILL 280: Creates account for Lake Tahoe Nevada State Park and authorizes expenditures for sewer and water systems.
Wayne R. Perock, Chief of Field Operations, Division of State Parks, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, testified in support of S.B. 280 after distributing a copy of a memorandum (Exhibit E) from John Richardson, Administrator, Division of State Parks, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, to Senator Raggio, dated April 27, 1993. A Legislative Counsel Bureau Bulletin No. 93-6, A Study of State Parks, (Exhibit F. Original is on file in the Research Library.) was also distributed.
Senator Thomas J. Hickey, Clark County Senatorial District No. 2, testified in support of S.B. 280, stating there had been nine members on the state park subcommittee. There had been three meetings, because of limited funds. He added:
We particularly were struggling over how to support the deterioration that was occurring within the park system. In my visit...to Tahoe, this particular bill [S.B. 280] crystallized the desperate need of some type of funding, especially with that sewage system.
Senator Raggio asked Mr. Perock to explain how the present procedure would be changed and what the anticipated available revenue would be.
Mr. Perock explained S.B.280 would set up a sewer and water system account, and it would be requested that the ongoing operation of the system, in addition to repairs and maintenance, be included. Maintenance was described as specific projects, whereas ongoing
operation would include testing and chemicals to run the plant.
Senator Hickey said funds had previously been taken out of the maintenance portion of the budget in order to maintain the sewer operation. He added there are major repairs to be done, such as inoperative water fountains.
Senator Raggio stated he would prefer not to amend the bill. Mr. Perock responded his division would be satisfied with the bill if maintenance would cover costs for chemicals and the other so-called ongoing operating expenses. He pointed out the bill would require the division to report to the Interim Finance Committee in any case. Senator Raggio agreed the wording, "repair, operation and maintenance" should suffice.
Senator Glomb asked why all the other parks should not have a separate account.
Mr. Perock replied the Lake Tahoe Park is unique amongst the other parks. The requirements of the Tahoe Regional Planning Association (TRPA) are more stringent for the sewer treatment plant. It does not mean the other parks are not in need of additional repair and maintenance funding as well, but there are some other bills before the legislature that will possibly address the problems of the other parks.
Senator Glomb asked if having a separate account for the Lake Tahoe Park would make it possible to address their problems more expeditiously.
Mr. Perock answered that because the Lake Tahoe Park sewer and water system is such an expensive operation, the separate account would allow a stable funding source so that repairs and maintenance would not be deferred. He added, "Presently, we're just at the final stages of doing major renovations of the plant after about a 10-year period [of delays]...." He said the budget for the renovations was $114,412, which can be deferred.
Mr. Perock stated this bill (S.B. 280) would also provide that remaining funds not expended each year would carry over into an account so that when major repairs are required there would be funds available. Then it would not be necessary to come before the committee and to list all the other things that should be taken care of in a routine fashion.
Senator Raggio asked what the fiscal impact would be.
Mr. Perock replied it was previously estimated the ongoing operations maintenance and repairs were about $20,000 year. The estimates have been revised to about $29,000. He voiced intentions to impose an assessment of an additional 50 cents per vehicle to be earmarked for repairs and maintenance regarding sewer and water. Those revenues would be added to the $4 fee currently being charged for entering the park during the period of heavy use to generate needed funds.
Mr. Perock stated nearly 60,000 vehicles enter Sand Harbor and pay the daily fee from Memorial Day through Labor Day. Using these figures, $30,000 could be generated annually. The estimate did not include the parks at Cave Rock and Spooner, which would add another 25,000 vehicles and generate an additional $12,500 for a total of $42,500 in anticipated annual revenues.
Referring to the surcharge, Senator Raggio asked, "Why did the park...subcommittee consider this opportunity or process available only at this particular park? Why wouldn't you want to do this at some other parks?"
Senator Hickey remarked S.B. 280 was intended to address a specific problem at a specific park (Lake Tahoe Park). He declared other parks do not have a facility in operation that needs the maintenance and ongoing operation costs that the Lake Tahoe Park's sewer/water system does.
Senator Raggio thought it would be appropriate to give all the parks general authority to create the same type of fund by charging an extra fee to be used for the same purposes.
Senator O'Donnell asked if the sewage from Sand Harbor was pumped. Mr. Perock acknowledged it is, but that it is treated right at the Sand Harbor treatment plant before it is pumped. The sewage is pumped into the Incline Village Improvement District export line so it must meet the same standards as theirs. He pointed out those costs are not found in a normal park operating budget. He said a septic system is used at all the other parks.
Senator Glomb commented on how badly in need the other state parks are for repairs and maintenance. Mr. Perock remarked part of an interim study had been intended to consider alternate funding sources for those needs.
Senator Jacobsen asked if a regular maintenance schedule exists. Mr. Perock answered there is a regular maintenance schedule, but a
problem occurs when there is an inadequate operating fund and the repairs begin to be deferred.
Senator Jacobsen asked how losing some employees will affect the agency. Mr. Perock replied the loss of employees puts extra burdens on the rest of the staff and requires some of the work to be contracted out. He acknowledged honor camp crews have been used to improve forest stands and other labor-intensive tasks. As far as using those crews at the sewer plant, he said they would not be used for ongoing operations, only for special projects such as scraping and painting.
There was no testimony in opposition to S.B. 280 and Ms. Matteucci voiced no concern.
The committee discussed amendments to the bill and whether each park should maintain a separate account in which additional fees collected would not revert at the end of any fiscal year. Daniel G. Miles, Fiscal Analyst, suggested each park could be given the authority to manage those fees through regulation.
Ms. Matteucci stated, "On this issue, it's clear from the record that they were going to increase the fees, but I'm not sure the way the bill reads...whether you want to clarify that that would be as the result of a new fee. Otherwise...you may have fees that they're currently collecting and moving them over into an account."
Senator Raggio recommended S.B. 280 be amended to add the word "operation" to line 5 to read "repair, operation and maintenance"; an addition that the park division be allowed to create a similar account for other parks where such a need is determined to exist; and that the language specifically refers only to the surcharge amount that would be for the purposes of repairs and maintenance.
Mr. Miles questioned whether a separate account should be established for each park. Senator Raggio offered the understanding each park would collect its own surcharge which would remain for use in that particular park only.
Senator Callister acknowledged many of the parks have extraordinary deferred maintenance and approved of the chair's decision to authorize all parks to charge an additional fee for the purpose of creating a separate account for repairs and maintenance of sewer and water.
Senator Coffin suggested the public be made aware of the reason for the increase in the fee. Senator Raggio suggested that notice be handled through a letter of intent. Senator Coffin voiced his concern over wording in an existing law that says no fees for special services may be collected from bona fide residents of the state who are more than 16 years old. Senator Raggio responded there is a bill in the Senate Committee on Government Affairs which specifically addresses that exemption.
Senator Glomb wondered why the fees could not be used for purposes other than for sewer and water systems. Senator Raggio said all fees collected go into the General Fund if they are not used. The surcharge would be earmarked so that there would be no harm to the General Fund. He stated there are other funds within the park budgets for use on ordinary repair and maintenance.
Senator Callister noted sophisticated sewer and water systems are required in the Tahoe basin as recognized in the interim study.
SENATOR CALLISTER MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 280 BY ADDING THE WORD "OPERATION" ON LINE 5 AND ADDING LANGUAGE WHICH SPECIFIES THAT THE FUND ESTABLISHED REFERS SPECIFICALLY ONLY TO THE SURCHARGE THAT IS AUTHORIZED FOR THE PURPOSES OF SEWER AND WATER SYSTEMS.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 280 and opened hearings on budget closings.
Plant Industry Fund - Page 459
The committee discussed the budget closing action for the Plant Industry Fund dated April 27, 1993, from Exhibit G (various budget closing actions for pages 459 through 575 and page 1512). (Original copy of Exhibit G is on file in the Research Library.)
Steve J. Abba, Program Analyst, described the Plant Industry Fund as the primary budget for the State Department of Agriculture, which currently includes the weights and measures operations. Those operations are scheduled to be transferred to the Department of Transportation under the Governor's reorganization proposal. He called attention to the first page of the packet (Exhibit G) which indicates what would happen if those operations were moved back into the State Department of Agriculture.
Mr. Abba said General Fund appropriations and a possible fee increase would be used to fund the weights and measures operation. The proposed fee increases are included as part of Exhibit G on pages 3, 4 and 5 with the estimates of the amount to be generated.
Mr. Abba confirmed Senator Raggio's query as to whether the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means had acted on the budget and their desire to retain the weights and measures in the Plant Industry Fund budget. There was some question as to how it should be funded.
Senator Raggio recalled significant testimony in favor of retaining the weights and measures operation in the State Department of Agriculture. He acknowledged the staff recommendation had been based upon the agreement of the committee to concur with the wishes of the testifiers.
Mr. Abba described the proposals in Exhibit G. He said the State Department of Agriculture had studied the feasibility of using fee increases to offset General Fund costs which are itemized in the exhibit. He ascribed the proposed fee raises to the complexity of the weighing and measuring device and the time and effort required to determine if the device was properly calibrated. He recalled the last fee adjustment had been made in 1989.
Mr. Abba indicated items which had been left out of the Plant Industry budget such as longevity costs and board and salary payments. He said the budget office notified him the costs should be added and made suggestions for revenue offsets to provide for the adjustments.
Senator Raggio reflected there had been some concern over the proposed board of agriculture. Mr. Abba responded information had been received from the budget office indicating the present and proposed structure of the board as depicted on page 6 of the
packet. He said some of the previous boards, such as the sheep commission and the Nevada Beef Council, would become advisory boards rather than stand-alone boards.
Senator Raggio stated the consensus of previous discussions were that the State Dairy Commission, the State Board of Sheep Commissioners and some others should not be subordinated to the proposed State Board of Agriculture "superboard."
Senator Coffin proposed the boards listed on pages 459 through 575 and page 1512 remain independent. Senator Jacobsen concurred. Senator Callister opined some strong arguments had been made for consolidation.
Ms. Matteucci spoke to the concern that the boards would become advisory. She indicated there may have been a misunderstanding that both the reconstituted State Board of Agriculture and State Dairy Commission would not remain regulatory. She said the only difference would be that the authority to appoint an executive director would go to the Governor or to the executive director of the Department of Business and Industry.
Ms. Matteucci stated the Department of Transportation did not believe a fee increase would be necessary for weights and measures because it could be financed out of the highway fund. She suggested that be considered during deliberations on fee increases.
Senator Raggio requested an overview of the duties of the various boards. Mr. Abba expressed concerns by the Nevada Beef Council, which is certified by the national board, that if the State Board of Agriculture was not comprised primarily of beef producers the Nevada Beef Council might not be recertified upon review. If certification failed, taxes collected on the sale of beef in Nevada would not stay in Nevada, they would go to the national board. Senator Raggio opined if only one cattleman was on the State Board of Agriculture if would be unlikely that the Nevada Beef Council could retain certification.
Ms. Matteucci interjected that there was a dairyman on the Nevada Beef Council and on the State Board of Agriculture. Senator Raggio pointed out that would be two out of 12 people. Ms. Matteucci stated, "Our proposal is that the beef council become advisory and be represented by...three beef people and they make their recommendations to the [State] Board of Agriculture which would have the final decision authority." She asserted, aside from having a beef council with five members, the beef production industry would have plenty of input if they had three on the board.
Mr. Abba distributed copies of a letter (Exhibit H) dated April 2, 1993, to Tammy Wright of the Nevada Beef Council from Monte Reese, Chief Executive Officer of the Beef Promotion and Research Board.
Mr. Abba said the dairy commission expressed concern over the regulatory issue and whether they would only be an advisory board. Senator Raggio asked for a reiteration of the intent. Ms. Matteucci said:
Our definition of advisory...has been misconstrued.... Advisory in our terminology meant that the executive directors would not be appointed by these boards. Part of the problem we have is these boards make their separate representations and selections and there is really no connection with the state. Other than that they are going to remain regulatory and they would be ex officio members of the board of agriculture, and the board of agriculture would remain regulatory.
Senator Raggio asked who would appoint the executive directors. Ms. Matteucci answered they would be appointed by the Department of Business and Industry or the Governor.
Mr. Abba said the State Board of Sheep Commissioners is responsible for assessing the sheep tax. Under the proposed reorganization the assessing responsibility would go to the State Board of Agriculture with one member on the agriculture board and an advisory committee on sheep consisting of two people experienced in the sheep industry.
Senator Raggio asked if there would be any cost to the General Fund if the boards were left as is and not moved under the State Board of Agriculture. Mr. Abba replied the only cost to the Plant Industry budget would be to include the board salaries, but they have already been included in the staff recommendation.
Senator Jacobsen remarked there is nothing better than self-control and much volunteer effort goes into the board activities. He averred, "Anytime you ask someone outside of the field to be a part of it you're asking for trouble." He recalled a period of time in which there were several lawsuits before the State Dairy Commission was completely controlled by the producers and manufacturers.
Mr. Abba stated there are reorganization savings built into both fiscal years of the biennium representing the salary values of the executive director and accountant positions of the State Department of Agriculture. He said it had been determined there would be no need for the accountant position. However, he alleged another action would be necessary if the committee decided to utilize reorganization savings. Senator Raggio asked, "If we wanted to devalue the reorganization savings, we would add to that also." Mr. Abba replied, "Correct."
Senator Raggio inquired what the consequences would be if the director and accountant salaries were removed from the budget. Ms. Matteucci explained under reorganization the department would become a division in which case no department director would be necessary. The accountant would not be necessary either because he would be transferred to an administrative services division.
Senator Raggio asked for clarification regarding the accountant position transfer. Ms. Matteucci responded the 20 accountant positions from various departments would be transferred into a pool in the administrative services division in the Department of Business and Industry, which she asserted would then be able to function with five less people.
Senator Raggio asked if any federal funding was available if the weights and measures program was left under the Plant Industry budget. In response Mr. Abba distributed copies of a memorandum (Exhibit I) to Dan Miles, Senate Fiscal Analyst, and Mark Stevens, Assembly Fiscal Analyst, dated April 23, 1993, from Judy Matteucci, regarding the weights and measures program. He stated approximately 70 percent of the weights and measures devices are related to highway activities and there is the possibility those could be paid out of highway funds in lieu of General Funds.
Senator Raggio asked if highway funds were being used at the present time. Mr. Abba replied there are some funds that are paid by contractors who contract with the Department of Transportation for building and maintaining roads for their highway scales which have to be tested by the weights and measures department. Other than those funds there is no direct transfer of highway fund money into the weights and measures program at this time.
Senator Raggio pointed out highway activities would benefit from the weights and measures program whether it was in another budget or remained in the Plant Industry Fund budget. He asked why highway funds could not be included in this budget for those purposes. Mr. Abba admitted that was a possibility. He said he had sought legal advice as to whether there was any legal prohibition on such a transfer. Senator Raggio requested an answer by tomorrow from Mr. Abba regarding the possibility of transferring funds from the highway fund into this budget. He then held the budget awaiting a response from Mr. Abba.
A brief recess was called at 9:30 a.m. The meeting resumed at 9:50 a.m. Senator Rawson did not return to the meeting.
Grade & Certification of Agriculture Products - Page 463
Mr. Abba stated the only changes recommended are the seasonal part-time salaries for agriculture inspectors which were not included in this budget. The modifications to the budget seen on the closing documents in Exhibit G add the part-time salaries and adjust the reserve category accordingly.
SENATOR GLOMB MOVED TO ADJUST THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS RAWSON AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Alfalfa Seed Research - Page 467
There were no changes proposed to the Governor's recommendation.
SENATOR GLOMB MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS RAWSON AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Agriculture Registration/Enforcement - Page 469
There were no major changes proposed to the Governor's recommendation by staff, but Mr. Abba said the department had requested a reduction in the Livestock Inspection budget's state cost-recovery category. That would be offset with increases in the Agriculture Registration/Enforcement and Grade and Certification budget's state cost-recovery categories. The increase in this budget could be taken out of reserve. He said the department felt the proposal would provide for a more equitable spread of state cost-recovery transfers to the General Fund between the department's non-General Fund budgets.
SENATOR GLOMB MOVED TO APPROVE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR BUT WITH THE ADJUSTMENT FOR THE COST-RECOVERY CATEGORY.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS RAWSON AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Apiary Inspection - Page 473
Mr. Abba stated the apiary budget would include the same adjustment. Senator Raggio noted the decrease would be a change of $7,500 for seasonal salaries for fiscal year (FY) 1995 which would decrease the reserve accordingly.
SENATOR GLOMB MOVED TO ADJUST THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED FOR THE SEASONAL SALARIES.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS RAWSON AND CALLISTER WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Livestock Inspection - Page 480
Mr. Abba pointed out a number of adjustments had been proposed. He said correspondence received from the budget office said those adjustments should have been included. He enumerated the adjustments as included in Exhibit G. There would be corresponding reserve decreases. He said the budget office also recommended an adjustment in the state cost-recovery plan requiring action similar to the previous budgets which would be spread out to the appropriate accounts.
SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO ADJUST THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Veterinary Medical Services - Page 484
Mr. Abba reported some items had been left out of the budget such as seasonal salaries and longevity pay which the Budget Division felt should be added back in. He said the amounts would be an increase in the General Fund. He pointed out there had been requests for equipment listed in Exhibit G, including vehicles.
Senator Glomb expressed concern that the funds would come out of the General Fund. Senator Coffin felt the first two items were necessary for safety, but not the vehicles. Senator Jacobsen felt the new vehicles were a necessity because of the danger an inspector could be stranded away from any assistance. Senator O'Donnell voiced agreement with Senator Glomb that other budget requests may take precedence.
In response to a question by Senator Coffin, Mr. Abba said the vehicles had been requested during the last biennium. He was unsure if those funds had been reverted during budget reductions.
SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO ADJUST THE BUDGET BY ADDING ITEMS A AND B, SAFETY HOOD AND BINOCULAR MICROSCOPE, $6,000 EACH, IN EACH OF THE FISCAL YEARS RESPECTIVELY, ADDING THE SEASONAL SALARIES REQUESTED BY THE BUDGET OFFICE, AND INCREASING THE REGULAR APPROPRIATION APPROXIMATELY $27,000 EACH YEAR.
SENATOR GLOMB SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR JACOBSEN VOTED NO. SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Insect Abatement - Page 488
There were no proposals to change the Governor's recommendation.
SENATOR GLOMB MOVED TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Predatory Animal & Rodent Control - Page 490
SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE BUDGET ACCORDING TO THE GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATION.
SENATOR O'DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Rural Rehabilitation Trust - Page 494
Senator Glomb asked if federal funds would be used for the budget. Mr. Abba believed she was correct.
Ms. Matteucci explained it included a revolving fund created to assist ranchers during the depression and now is used for youths who need a loan to buy livestock. She said the youngsters are obligated to repay the loans. Senator Jacobsen interjected there are 34 loans outstanding from the fund, repayable with interest.
Senator Raggio stated no General Funds are used in the trust. Senator Glomb asked if any of the trust funds could be used to help offset General Funds that are used to finance the rodeo. Ms. Matteucci responded the rodeo appropriation has nothing to do with starting youngsters in agriculture, and the trust funds are limited to assisting young people who have no other source of funds to get started in agricultural projects.
SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR GLOMB SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Grazing Control - Page 496
SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Woolgrowers Predatory Animal Control - Page 498
SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Sheep Certification - Page 501
Senator Raggio asked what effects there would be on the budget from cost-recovery modifications. Mr. Abba said the state cost-recovery would be reduced by a total of $3,873 over the biennium. Senator Raggio recalled a request that the cost-recovery be reduced to $1,000.
Ms. Matteucci said:
To get on the record, I too have had discussions with...Ms. Licht [representative of the Nevada Woolgrowers Association] about this. We explained to her the methodology behind the allocations. We did call our consultant who developed these numbers and asked if we could give the sheep commission a break in that the largest costs that they're seeing here are as a result of a legislative audit. ...We suggested that instead of paying it back in 2 years they could pay it back over 4 years.
Ms. Matteucci said if the committee reduced the payments for the audit others would follow suit and want their payments reduced too, which would reduce the amount of money flowing into the General Fund. She cautioned that could lead to having the federal cost-allocation plan rejected by the federal government because not all participants would be assessed equally.
Senator Raggio called attention to the fact the total resources, $20,000, are raised by the woolgrowers from a head tax on the number of sheep, from which the state wanted $4,000 for costs for the audit. Ms. Matteucci explained that was due to the cost of a legislative audit, and the figure will be reduced after the cost of the audit is repaid over 4 years.
Ms. Matteucci declared she had investigated the possibility of reducing the payment level but added, "You can't excuse it unless you want to excuse everybody's audit recovery costs."
Senator Raggio asked what the effect would be if the recovery was spread over a longer period. Ms. Matteucci replied, "...you want to memorialize that somewhere so that we can keep making notes as to how long you want to continue to pay for it...."
Ms. Matteucci said during one meeting with Ms. Licht and some of the sheep commissioners they had indicated they felt the recovery payments were fair. She suggested Ms. Licht had changed her representation to the Senate Committee on Finance when she argued against not only the audit charges but the other charges as well.
Senator O'Donnell was incredulous that the audit cost was the better part of $20,000. Ms. Matteucci reminded him not all the costs were attributable to the audit, and it was a one-time audit that occurs maybe once every 10 years.
Ms. Matteucci reiterated her warning that the federal government might reject all funding if one entity was removed from the cost-allocation for audits.
Senator Raggio asked if it would pose a major problem to spread the cost over 8 years. Ms. Matteucci replied, "If you'll give us a letter of explanation as to what you want us to do, we'll give it to the cost-allocation people..."
Senator Raggio suggested the payment for the audit taken in 1988 be spread over an 8-year period. A letter of explanation will be prepared by staff for the budget office.
Senator O'Donnell asked when the next audit would occur. Ms. Matteucci replied in about 8 years.
Senator Raggio stated the letter should indicate that "we have no alternative but to allocate the cost of the audit to the commission, but recognizing their limited revenue source we will deviate from the usual procedure and request that this be recovered over a period of 8 years."
Senator Raggio announced any decision regarding the board would be deferred.
Senator Coffin stated he could not find the cost-allocation in the 1991-93 budget. It had not appeared in the 1991 budget. Ms. Matteucci responded she had explained in 1991 she not been satisfied with the quality of the previous audit and she had put the audit to bid. She explained the same firm did the audit but with a different individual, and she was satisfied with the second audit. She said, "Essentially they had not gone through and done...as thorough a job in the '91 budget, which is why our numbers were only down about $1.9 million, now our recovery is up around $4 million."
Senator Raggio asked the committee to look at the original budget in order to make a motion on the adjustments.
SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO MAKE THE ADJUSTMENTS INDICATED BY STAFF WITH THE ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENT THAT THE COST OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDIT BE ALLOCATED OVER AN 8-YEAR PERIOD, AND AN APPROPRIATE LETTER OF EXPLANATION BE SENT.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Nevada Beef Council - Page 575
Mr. Abba said the staff concurred with the Governor's recommendation on the budget. He pointed out there was a note included in Exhibit G regarding the issue of the beef council.
SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET SUBJECT TO THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION ON THE REORGANIZATION OF THE BOARD.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Glomb requested clarification that the motion was according to the Governor's recommendation. Senator Raggio affirmed her query.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Dairy Control - Page 475
Mr. Abba said the staff was recommending that the budget be closed as recommended by the Governor. Again he called attention to a notation regarding the dairy commission board and its proposed inclusion in the State Department of Agriculture.
Senator Raggio asked if the budget would still be appropriate if the legislature decided to leave the State Dairy Commission board as presently constituted and not fold it into the proposed agriculture board. Mr. Abba replied in the affirmative.
SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET ACCORDING TO THE GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATION SUBJECT TO THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION ON THE REORGANIZATION OF THE BOARD.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
Gas Pollution Standards - Page 1512
Senator Raggio asked Mr. Abba to report on a question concerning a laboratory facility in Las Vegas. Mr. Abba explained the State Department of Agriculture had made a proposal to establish a laboratory in Las Vegas. He said the budget as presented includes the appropriate testing equipment but no funds are included to refurbish the space in the building where the laboratory would be housed. After consulting the Budget Division they agreed the refurbishing should be included.
Mr. Abba said the improvements to the structure in the amount of $44,500 are included with the modifications proposed by staff. The reserve would be reduced accordingly.
Mr. Abba said the Executive Budget included the Gas Pollution Standards Program within the proposed Department of Environmental Protection under reorganization plans. He said the program is currently run by the State Department of Agriculture where space is shared with the pesticide and fertilizer laboratory.
Senator Raggio acknowledged the Department of Environmental Protection does not have the capability for the program. He suggested an appropriate recommendation would be for the program to remain with the State Department of Agriculture which can retain oversight and quality control.
SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE STRUCTURES, AND TO RETAIN THE FUNCTION IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WHERE THE GASOLINE LABORATORY WOULD REMAIN CO-LOCATED WITH THE PESTICIDE FERTILIZER LABORATORY IN BOTH RENO AND LAS VEGAS.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RAWSON WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
There being no further business before the committee, Senator Raggio adjourned the meeting at 10:33 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Judy Jacobs,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Finance
April 29, 1993
Page 1