MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
Sixty-seventh Session
June 21, 1993
The Senate Committee on Finance was called to order by Chairman William J. Raggio, at 8:10 a.m., on Monday, June 21, 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 Lori Brown, Clark County Senatorial District No. 7
Assemblyman Douglas Bache, Clark County Assembly District No. 11
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Dan Miles, Fiscal Analyst
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Dee Crawford, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Deanne Blazzard, President, Foster Parents of Southern Nevada
Judy Matteucci, Director, Department of Administration
Robert Rose, Chief Justice, Nevada Supreme Court
Bob Gagnier, Executive Director, Nevada State Employees Association
Senator Raggio announced Senate Joint Resolution 1 has been withdrawn and therefore will not be heard in the interest of time and practicality.
...It is vitally needed. Congress is making life difficult and has for a decade or more for states by mandating these services and putting the burden heavily on the states without providing any funding. I think we share the same goal, but I just don't think it likely this resolution is going to have much effect on Congress. I would hope, when you find it does nothing in the next few sessions, you might come back here and suggest a stronger way to send a message to Congress....
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION
(S.J.R.) 1: Calls for constitutional convention to prohibit unfunded federal mandates.
Senator Raggio opened the hearing on Senate Bill 56.
SENATE BILL (S.B.) 56: Provides cost-of-living increases for reimbursements paid to family foster homes.
Senator Glomb distributed Exhibit C, written testimony, and Exhibit D, letter from a foster parent, to the committee and testified in support of the measure. She testified the bill envisions to provide an annual increase to foster families comparative to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). She pointed out that 4 years have elapsed since the last cost-of-living increase of less than 2 percent was awarded to Nevada foster parents. At an annual CPI rate of 4.5 percent, it would require an additional $209,000 per year, she asserted.
Deanne Blazzard, President, Foster Parents of Southern Nevada, distributed Exhibit E, letters of support, to the committee and testified in support of the bill while referencing those documents.
Senator Raggio asked Ms. Matteucci what kind of precedent would passage of this measure set with other budgets if a mandate was adopted to provide cost-of-living increases.
Judy Matteucci, Director, Department of Administration, testified:
...My response would be speculative....The State of California has built in CPI increases for a number of their social programs, most notably welfare and Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) payments. Certainly if this were to pass, then I suspect other groups, particularly ADC payments and perhaps aged and blind, would follow next time with a request to build in the CPI. A CPI to automatically build in an increase is certainly one way of being sure the costs are ratched up as the cost of living goes up for each one of these kinds of providers. However, I do know that California...has reversed that in view of their current financial strait. Despite that reversal, theirs is still probably about double what we pay for our ADC payment. There are some states that do this. They are generally eastern states that have a built-in CPI increase. The impact of that is...that your budget will automatically progress over time and you have to keep that in consideration as you look to the future to build your budgets.
Senator Glomb drew the committee's attention to Exhibit C, page 2, and stated the fiscal note was based on a 3 percent CPI calculation, which amounts to an additional $l53,000 in l994, and $l6l,000 in l995.
Senator Lori Brown, Clark County Senatorial District No. 7, testified in support of the measure and urged:
I would like the committee to please not compare this to ADC because we have to pay ADC to a family, no matter what. This money we either pay for a foster parent or we pay to an institution. I see this as a no-win situation because if we invest in these foster parents, we save money in the institutions....
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 56 and opened the hearing on Assembly Bill 328.
ASSEMBLY BILL (A.B.) 328: Provides that number of years of judicial service required for justice of supreme court or district judge to qualify for pension benefit be the same as for member of public employees' retirement system.
Robert Rose, Chief Justice, Nevada Supreme Court, testified in support of this measure. Chief Justice Rose distributed Exhibit F, supporting documents to A.B. 328, to the committee. Presently, he testified, a judge or justice in the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) is vested with pension rights at 5 years, while the other judges in the Nevada judicial retirement program vest at l0 years. He summarized the purpose of the bill is to equalize the vesting time for pensions among judges and justices in Nevada.
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.B. 328 and opened the hearing on Assembly Bill 8.
ASSEMBLY BILL (A.B.) 8:Requires, upon request, granting of leave of absence without pay for state employees to care for newborn or newly adopted children.
Bob Gagnier, Executive Director, Nevada State Employees Association, testified the purpose of this measure is to provide an unpaid leave of up to l6 weeks for a parent of a newborn or newly adopted child. He stated:
....In our opinion there is no fiscal effect to this bill, but I would like to address the fiscal note because...it would lead you to believe there is a $l84,000 fiscal impact. Although the Budget Division indicated that the cost impact of the proposal would be minimal, regardless of the method of replacing employees, they agreed to leave that amount in the bill for planning purposes. I don't know the logic they used on page 4 of the fiscal note determining how many women in state government are going to have babies each year. We think it's a little high, seeing as how there are only l,700 women in state government we believe to be of normal child-bearing age, which is 36 [years] and under....There have been questions raised why don't we just settle for the federal legislation that will go into effect. The federal legislation has some limitations in it that would be particularly harmful to Nevada because the federal legislation would virtually eliminate all rural parts of Nevada. So the only place where employees would be eligible for this benefit would be in Las Vegas, Carson City and Reno....If you work in an area with fewer than 50 employees in your agency, and there are not 50 employees within your agency within 75 miles, it is not applicable.
Senator Rawson asked Mr. Gagnier if it posed a problem if the duration of leave was changed from l6 weeks to l2.
Mr. Gagnier said it would not pose a problem.
Senator Glomb distributed Exhibit G, written testimony of the American Association of University Women of Nevada, and Exhibit H, Women's Legal Defense Fund, to the committee and testified in support of passage of the measure.
Senator Raggio announced Assemblyman Vivian Freeman is in support of the measure but was unable to appear to testify.
Senator Jacobsen queried Mr. Gagnier regarding how many Nevada women are estimated will be affected by this bill.
Mr. Gagnier responded:
...The Department of Personnel estimated 2l8 a year. We think that's high when there are only l,700 women of normal child-bearing age in state government....
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.B. 8 and opened the hearing on Assembly Joint Resolution 8.
ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION
(A.J.R.) 8: Urges Congress not to require states to provide services or benefits unless it provides related funding.
Assemblyman Douglas Bache, Clark County Assembly District No. 11, testified briefly in support of A.J.R. 8.
Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.J.R. 8.
There being no further action to come before the committee, Senator Raggio adjourned the meeting at 8:55 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Dee Crawford,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Finance
June 21, 1993
Page 1
Senate Committee on Finance
June 21, 1993
Page 1