Ms. Chris Giunchigliani, Chairman

Mr. Richard Perkins, Vice Chairman

Mrs. Vonne Chowning

Mr. Bob Price

Senator Lawrence Jacobsen, Chairman

Senator Joseph Neal

Senator William O’Donnell

Gary Ghiggeri, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst (Assembly)

Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst (Senate)

Debra King, Fiscal Analyst

Jim Rodriguez, Program Analyst

Christina Alfonso, Committee Secretary

Chairman Giunchigliani said the meeting would start as a subcommittee of the subcommittee since the Assembly did not yet have a quorum. Therefore, public testimony would be given first and would conclude no later than 8:30 a.m. Chairman Giunchigliani turned the meeting over to Senator Jacobsen to act as Chairman because she had a bill in Government Affairs. After public testimony, Office of the Military would present its budgets, followed by Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV/PS).

Ed Gobel introduced himself as President of the Council of Nevada Veterans’ Organizations, National Director of Veterans and Politics, and a member of Disabled American Veterans, Vietnam Veterans of America, and a number of other veteran organizations. He said he primarily represented the Council of Nevada Veterans’ Organizations. Mr. Gobel said he would be testifying on the Commissioner for Veteran’s Affairs, Budget Account 101-2560, and Veterans Home Account, Budget Account 101- 2561. He said he only became aware of the meeting the previous day and was not as prepared as he would have otherwise been. He asked if it would be possible to submit the documents he would be referencing within 7 days because he did not presently have them. Senator Jacobsen said that would be acceptable.

Mr. Gobel stated the budget did not address veterans’ needs, and in fact misspelled "veterans’" on every page of The Executive Budget. Mr. Gobel said he did not understand why the projected Fiscal Year (FY) 1998 numbers were all zero, yet were the same as 2 years ago. He thought in 2 years there should have been some way to measure what the projections were versus the actual. Regarding the primary veterans’ budget and the veterans’ home, he noted staffing was maintained at 21 with no provision for additional staff for the 15 to 20 percent increase in the number of burials. He said he had a friend who passed away February 7, 1999, and explained how difficult it was to get a burial. There was currently an average of 37 burials per week in the Southern Nevada Veterans’ Memorial Cemetery, yet there were no provisions in the budget for additional groundskeepers. The overall increase of burials was 10 percent, with a 15 to 20 percent increase in the Southern Nevada Veterans’ Memorial Cemetery.

Mr. Gobel explained that in the 1997 Legislative Session NRS 417.090 Section 5, required the executive director to "serve as a clearinghouse and disseminate information relating to veterans’ benefits." No request for funds was made by the executive director to communicate with the over 212,000 Nevada veterans. In the last budget there was money requested, but it was inadequate. Just one mailing to veterans would cost a phenomenal amount, so they needed new and innovative ideas in order to communicate. Also passed in the 1997 Legislative Session was NRS 417.090 Section 8, which required the executive director, as a result of Assembly Bill (A.B.) 188, to "pay to each county that creates the office of coordinator of services for veterans, from state money available to him, a portion of the cost of operating the office in an amount determined by the executive director." There was no request to cover that need, but that was one of the things fought for by the executive director. There was also a 12 percent increase in personnel compensation requested for the first year and Governor Guinn raised the amount by $2,000. Mr. Gobel said he assumed the money wasn’t for increases, but was mostly for "step increases."

Mr. Gobel said there were a number of other items in the budget where the function of service offices were best performed by the veterans’ service organizations. If the state chose to help the organizations, provided those people had experience and understood what veterans were going through, that would be acceptable. He requested that the state no longer hire and maintain claims representatives at the state level, because it was not working and was not a worthwhile venture. The money could best be used to the state’s benefit if it was used to inform veterans about federal benefits. Veterans could then take advantage of available health benefits, which were not well known.

Regarding the veterans’ home, Mr. Gobel said he was deeply concerned and in some ways disgusted because he presented hundreds of pages of documentation to legislators in the 1997 Legislative Session, and to the executive director of Veterans’ Affairs. Yet, the numbers in the budget for the veterans’ home account were "almost like child’s play." There was over $4 million requested for the operation of the veterans’ home in a year in which the veterans’ home would not even be open. It was cut by the governor down to $691,000, but he was not sure why.

Mr. Gobel said he checked with Clark County and there was also reimbursement of $2,581,837 from the county indigent fund, but Clark County had never been contacted. He checked with the deputy county manager and two county commissioners on February 8, 1999, and no one from the state had contacted the county. He said he would like to know where the state was getting its figures and why they were in the budget.

Mr. Gobel was also concerned about Medicaid reimbursement. The national average of cost per bed per day was approximately $123. Assuming $125 per bed per day, and the number of days the hospital would open be open, in three phases, there was an operating cost of $6,135,000. The governor recommended $8,226,000. Mr. Gobel said he did not understand how that figure was derived. There was no reason any veteran should have to go on Medicaid and have to divest himself of all his assets and have all his money taken away. He had submitted numerous documents from other states and said he would submit them again with updates. The documents showed the cost was covered by Veterans Administration (VA) per diem, by aid and attendants from the VA, and by Medicare which qualified each bed. That gave an average reimbursement of $180 per bed per day. Assuming $125 per bed per day, a residual of $55 per bed per day would be left that could be used to fund capital improvements or additional veterans’ homes. That was done in Mississippi, South Carolina, Alabama, and about 15 other states.

Mr. Gobel requested in the future the budget be discussed with veterans. Even though the law required it, it had not been done for the current budget. The current budget represented very few of the veterans’ needs, and required veterans who went into the veterans’ home to be on Medicaid instead of Medicare. Studies showed that even though eligibility requirements had still not been set, all veterans going into the veterans’ home would be eligible for Medicare, and it was the beds that were qualified, not necessarily the veterans.

Mr. Gobel said he had been told that morning that the $2,581,000 from the county indigent fund was really a co-payment from the veterans, which was an even bigger disgrace than he previously thought. Fiscally it did not match 30 times the Medicaid reimbursements. He said that did not make sense and would appreciate an understandable explanation from the committee that he could give to veterans. Unfortunately, many veterans would not be able to attend the Veterans Commission meeting on Saturday, February 13 because it was a 3-day weekend. In addition the women marines had their birthday celebration, and almost every organization had a meeting.

Senator Jacobsen thanked Mr. Gobel for his comments and said some of his observations were correct. He apologized for the misspelling and informed him the committee had not had an opportunity to discuss the budget. He said one of the failures of the system was that the governor put the budget together and the legislators were not involved. Senator Jacobsen said he would appreciate it if Mr. Gobel would list all his concerns and submit them to the committee. He noted the Veterans Commission meeting would be held in Las Vegas on February 13, 1999. He said he might have a conflict of interest because he chaired the commission and also sat on the Cemetery Board.

Mr. Gobel asked if the budget presumed private operation of the veterans’ home because that decision had not been made, yet the executive director put together a budget apparently not based on private operation. He said he thought the consensus was that it would be a private contract. Senator Jacobsen said the decision had not been made, mostly because the bids for construction were just opened the previous week and there were 14 bids returned below cost. The first challenge was to find a location for the veterans’ home, which they had done. A positive aspect was that Mrs. Gibbons had been appointed to the national veterans’ committee. Senator Jacobsen said the first priority was to get the building built and operational, which was expected to be completed mid-2000.

Mr. Gobel noted the Veterans Affairs subcommittee would be meeting in Las Vegas over the summer and all the congressmen would be there. Senator Jacobsen said members of the commission, including the executive director, the assistant director, and himself, had toured a number of veterans’ homes. They looked at the new veterans’ home in Barstow to see how it operated, so they could learn from someone else’s mistakes instead of creating their own. Mr. Gobel added that Barstow would be a great place to learn from mistakes. Senator Neal said, as he understood, The Executive Budget anticipated state employees would operate the veterans’ home.

Senator Jacobsen said the meeting would continue with the Veterans Affairs budget. Chuck Abbott introduced himself as the executive director for the Nevada Commission for Veterans Affairs. Mr. Abbott said the commission’s primary goal for the next biennium was to oversee the opening of the state veterans’ home in Boulder City. Another goal was to keep up with the demands of the two state veterans’ cemeteries. A major issue the commission saw for the future was the increasing number of veterans in Nevada, as well as the average age of the veterans. He said their budget was submitted to the governor’s office with no significant changes made by the governor with which the commission did not agree. There were three capital improvement projects (CIPs) underway that were funded in the 1997 Legislative Session: the construction of a chapel at Boulder City, the expansion of burial grounds in Boulder City, and the veterans’ home in southern Nevada. There was one CIP pending in the current budget, which was an expansion of the Fernley cemetery.

Mr. Abbott addressed some of the issues Mr. Gobel raised. He reiterated that an additional groundskeeper was not requested for the Boulder City cemetery. He was aware the cemetery was growing quickly and business was good. There were 29 burials 2 weeks ago and in the previous week there were 31, which was the highest they had ever had in 1 week. He discussed having an additional groundskeeper with the cemetery superintendent and they agreed if they could fill the one position granted by the 1997 Legislative Session, the superintendent could get by with assistance from the prison labor force. The superintendent was also working on a program where people doing public service for a local court would assist the cemetery. Mr. Abbott said the position approved in the previous session was caught in the hiring freeze and a budget payroll-savings plan, which precluded him from filling the position until recently.

Regarding information management, Mr. Abbott said the Nevada Commission for Veterans Affairs had done quite a bit in the last 2 years. They produced some brochures, had an email network, a fax network, and had established quarterly commander’s meetings. He agreed it would be very expensive to send monthly mailings to the veterans, so they decided to use brochures and electronic media instead.

Regarding the fact that the commission requested no funding in Churchill County veterans’ service officer program, Mr. Abbott stated it was an experimental program. The first office was opened in Fallon in November 1998 on an all-volunteer basis. The commission agreed with the county that they would operate the program for 1½ to 2 years and see what the program benefits were. If the benefits justified funding the program, it would be proposed in the 2001 Legislative Session. Without having background and data, it did not make sense to propose funding the program. The commission was currently assisting the program by conducting a training seminar later in the month.

Mr. Abbott agreed there were many things that needed to be done in the veteran community, and noted the commission was a very small agency with a small staff. If the commission was required to do more, it would need more staff.

Mr. Abbott said the state veterans home was a skilled nursing facility established especially for veterans who were disabled by age, disease, or were otherwise unable to take care of themselves. The 180-bed facility would be located in Boulder City and would be built to skilled nursing facility specifications. There would be 24 beds dedicated to Alzheimer patients. The project had been under design since July 1997 and the bids, opened on February 5, 1999, were currently under advisement by the State Public Works Board (SPWB). SPWB estimated it would take 12 months to complete once the project was started, which would mean an opening in March 2000. Originally, it was hoped that the veterans’ home would open in January 2000, which gave them the first 6 months of the biennium to fund the operation. Looking at the revised SPWB estimates, and discussing the matter with the Budget Office, it was decided the veterans’ home would open in July 2000, thereby reducing the operating costs significantly and allowing them to operate the home more efficiently.

Mr. Abbott explained that in developing the budget, the Nevada Commission for Veterans Affairs took detailed financial reports from five private homes in the Las Vegas area. They itemized each expense in the financial report, and equated that cost for a 180-bed facility. The commission’s expense items compared fairly close to the private sector and with other state veterans’ homes. The commission developed staffing requirements based on many documents from other state veterans’ homes and requirements established by state licensing. The documents were then adjusted to ensure there was 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week coverage. The startup plan required several key personnel to be hired prior to the opening of the home. Those people would be essential to getting the required licensing. The startup plan also required the home open in 60-bed wing phases, which would allow them to adjust their staffing to the needs of the home.

Mr. Abbott said the veterans’ home would be partially funded by the U.S. Department of Veterans’ Affairs, which would pay a per diem of about $45 per day. He said he just received notice that the amount for FY 1999 would be $50 per day. In addition, the veterans eligible for the home would also qualify for veterans’ benefits, as Mr. Gobel mentioned. The remaining funds needed to operate the home would be derived from either Medicaid or the General Fund. Regarding Medicaid payments, less than 10 to 15 percent of the patients in the veterans’ home would be required to go on Medicaid because most of them would qualify for additional veterans’ benefits, including aid and attendants, and per diem.

Mr. Abbott stated that the committee did not program any funding for Medicaid. It was no longer possible to put a veteran into a Medicaid bed for 89 days, then move him out and put another veteran in the bed. Recent changes in the law precluded them from doing that, and it was also marginally unethical. The commission preferred not to look at Medicaid reimbursements as a primary funding source. Another issue was that the first-year expenses for the veterans’ home would probably have a higher operating cost than expected. The national average for a state veterans’ home was approximately $137 per day per patient. Mr. Abbott then asked for questions regarding the veterans’ home.

Senator Neal asked how receiving Medicaid benefits would affect the status of veterans in the home. Mr. Abbott replied that a veteran who was not eligible for VA benefits could be eligible for Medicaid. If he were eligible for Medicaid, there would be certain requirements, such as having minimal personal assets. Senator Neal asked if in order to qualify for those particular benefits, a veteran would have to meet a Medicaid standard. Mr. Abbott said if the veterans’ home looked for Medicaid reimbursement, then yes he would have to meet Medicaid qualifications.

Senator Neal asked if the veterans’ home did not seek Medicaid reimbursement, would the veteran not receive the benefit of the home. Mr. Abbott said that was an issue that would have to be answered in the session, as eligibility requirements had not yet been established. He said he would prefer to think they could take care of every veteran in Nevada who needed to be in the home. If the funding level did not come up to what was needed to operate the home, then Nevada would have to do as other states had done and limit the personal income requirement.

Senator Jacobsen said at the last three meetings eligibility had been discussed and one of the members of the Veterans Commission, Kathie Levenberg, would actively take on the issue. The commission hoped to add more to the discussion of the issue at the meeting in Las Vegas over the weekend. Senator Jacobsen emphasized that this was only a subcommittee meeting and not the final say, but the committees involved voted separately and would take their recommendations back to their respective full committee. He said this was just the beginning of the discussion.

Mrs. Chowning said she was a little nervous because the veterans’ home was scheduled to open in March 2000, yet the committee’s material indicated it would not be until July 2000. She said if the eligibility requirements were not known, then how were they going to build them into their funding. Mr. Abbott said the home construction was scheduled to be completed in March 2000, but the opening would be in July 2000, giving them 3 months to get the staffing, state, and federal licensing. Any veteran eligible for VA benefits should be eligible for the home, regardless of income. If it turned out the funding necessary to operate the home was not received, it was possible admission would be limited to wartime veterans, or only veterans below a specified income level. Two privatized homes were recently opened in Oregon and Salt Lake City, which only allowed veterans below a certain income level to be admitted. Given the choice, he preferred not to use Medicaid because he did not think veterans should have to be put on welfare. However, if it became necessary to use Medicaid for some non-wartime veterans, they would.

Mrs. Chowning said legislators would need to know when the eligibility requirements would be decided because they could not make budget decisions on a wide-open criterion. Mr. Abbott said the budget would authorize any honorably- discharged U.S. veteran to be accepted into the home, regardless of income or any VA benefits he was receiving. He said one of the major features of the home was that the majority of the veterans coming to the home would qualify for VA pensions, aid and attendance, as well as per diem payments.

Mrs. Chowning asked if that was what Governor Guinn recommended. Mr. Abbott said they submitted that budget to the Budget Office, and it was based on the cost of similar types of homes in the Las Vegas area. The staffing was based on similar types of veterans’ homes. Mrs. Chowning asked Mr. Abbott if he thought there was enough money in The Executive Budget to take care of the wide-open criteria. Mr. Abbott said he did. Mrs. Chowning said she thought the issue was unclear to a lot of people and needed to be clarified. As she understood, there was X amount of dollars and they did not know how many people that would accommodate. If there were more people paying no money of their own, the home could accommodate fewer people. But, if some veterans in the home had more of their own funds or VA benefits, the home could admit more people.

Mr. Abbott replied there was currently a need for 450 beds, established by the US Department of Veterans Affairs using 1990 statistics. He was certain the home could be filled within 1 year, regardless of eligibility requirements. Filling the home would not be a problem, but the particular patient mix would be determined by the funding the home received.

Senator Neal asked for a clarification on the veterans’ home. He said his question could be considered selfish because he was an Air Force veteran. The Chief Financial Officer of the home would be offered a salary of $37,000, while the director would be offered a salary of $55,000. He asked where they were going to find people who would accept those salaries. Mr. Abbott said they arrived at those figures after taking a survey of state veterans’ homes in Washington, Oregon, and Utah. The salaries offered were within the surveyed income range. He said he had approximately ten people who had already indicated they were willing to move to Nevada to take those jobs. Senator Neal asked, regarding eligibility, would admission be restricted to only retired or disabled veterans. Mr. Abbott replied the home would accept any eligible veteran.

Senator Jacobsen said he would like to discuss the two cemeteries. He said he felt proud of them, but acknowledged there were also problems with them. In northern Nevada they proposed closing in the pavilion in a 1999 CIP, which should have been done initially. There was currently a bill that would do that. He said he met frequently with Mr. Abbott and Eric Raecke of SPWB and they had a good relationship. Mr. Raecke would be at the meeting in Las Vegas over the weekend. He noted the groups had combined so the two cemetery groups now met together on occasion, which had been a benefit. A recent issue was prison crews. If it wasn’t for the inmate crews, he doubted if the cemetery could survive. One of the concerns was that some people felt inmates should not walk on veterans’ graves. Senator Jacobsen thought that was meaningful in a sense, but they were providing a service and there were some inmates who were also veterans. The women from Silver Springs Conservation Camp took care of the cemetery in Fernley and the inmates from Jean Conservation Camp worked on the cemetery in Boulder City, and both camps did an excellent job. He commended the caretakers at both cemeteries for also doing an excellent job.

Senator Neal said he understood there were 37 people buried in a week, and asked when the cemeteries would reach capacity. Mr. Abbott responded there were just under 80 acres in Boulder City and 24 acres had been improved for burial purposes. There was currently a project with SPWB to expand, giving them an additional 4 acres of burial space, which was expected to take them through 2003. They were also looking at aboveground columnburiams, but had enough space in Boulder City to last for at least another 20 years.

Senator Jacobsen indicated work was in progress on phase two of the Fernley cemetery, where burials were also increasing. He said there were other projects at both cemeteries. They were building a chapel in Boulder City that had received considerable public donations. In Fernley outside restroom facilities were being constructed because there was no one in attendance over the weekend, but the cemetery was still open to visitors.

Mrs. Chowning said having attended a few services at the cemeteries, she appreciated all that was being done and thought the chapel would be a wonderful addition. Returning to the veterans’ home budget, Mrs. Chowning noted in E-375 there was a governor recommendation of $250,623 for equipment. She said there had been equipment and furnishing provided in the CIP, and asked what the CIP and enhancement money would be spent on, because it seemed like there was duplication in funding. Mr. Abbott said he would provide those figures to her.

Senator Jacobsen said Mr. Abbott mentioned the service officer that was provided for Churchill in the previous session. Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga sponsored that bill and the Nevada Commission on Veterans Affairs was waiting to see whether it worked. If there was not enough activity to warrant an officer in each county, two or three counties would be combined into one office. He said he asked the Douglas County commissioners and they said they were waiting to see how well the program worked in Churchill County. The commissioners felt most Douglas County veterans were close enough to Mr. Abbott’s office to accommodate their needs.

Mike Nolan identified himself as a Fiscal Analyst with the Budget Division and said he would like to make a few comments about the veterans’ home. He apologized for the misspelling of "veterans’" and said no disrespect was intended. Regarding the comments from Senator Neal, new positions were always funded at step one, as was the basic policy. That did not limit the hiring of the individual to that step. Many times positions were funded at step 1, but due to market competition the state ended up hiring them at step 15, for example. The state ends up paying whatever they had to, but there was flexibility. Generally, they hired some people at step one and some people even lower. Mr. Nolan noted nursing care was increased because nurses could not be hired at step one, given the economy in Las Vegas. The Nursing Board was consulted to get the range of salaries in Las Vegas. For example, nurses were paid $17,000 to $25,000 per year, and the Budget Division chose a salary at the 66^th percentile--$23,000. Consultations were held with the Medicaid division in Human Resources, which provided the Medicaid reimbursement estimates. He added there was a typo, and the county indigent money was client co-pay from the veterans who had the resources to pay.

Senator Jacobsen asked Tony Clark to present the budget for the Office of the Military and noted in the previous session his department was transferred from DMV/PS to Office of the Military. He said there was currently a bill to have "our" agency stand-alone. Due to the advent of the veterans’ home, he felt "we" should have "our" own agency and still be responsible to the governor.

Tony Clark identified himself as the Adjutant General of the Office of the Military. He said he appeared before the Legislative Commission’s Budget Subcommittee approximately 18 days prior, and provided the committee with written information in answer to specific questions that arose in that meeting. He sent to each member of the legislature their biennial report which identified all the agency’s missions, locations, and staffing situations. Therefore, he refrained from making opening comments and said he would like to go right to the budget.

General Clark referred to Military-3, Decision 200—the demographics and caseload changes. The department requested, and the governor recommended, three additional positions: a Maintenance Repair Worker II, a Building Custodian II, and a Grounds Maintenance Worker II. The three positions were related to the construction of a readiness center and headquarters facility in Carson City. He anticipated the construction would conclude near the end of 2000 or the beginning of 2001. They had federal funds for the construction, and the state’s portion of the funding for construction was in the governor recommends portion of the CIP.

General Clark referred to Military-4, Decision 177, which provided funding for a Management Assistant II to provide clerical support to the Adjutant General and the rest of the command group. There were four people in the command group who required clerical assistance, but there was only one secretary, who was a federal employee. The department did not have the authority to hire any more federal employees who were not dual-status, meaning they had a full-time job as a technician, were also in the military on the weekends, and held a military position in one of the units. They were limited to those types of positions and did not currently have any dual-position secretaries. The governor recommended they be authorized to hire a Management Assistant II to support the Adjutant General.

General Clark moved to page 5, Decision 225, which was Project Challenge, a program in which 12 students were sent to each of two 5-month in-residence programs to get them a GED, teach them life skills, self-control, and respect for authority. After the program was completed and the student had their GED, they were matched to an adult mentor in their home community for 1 year who guided them in choices about additional education, jobs, and life skills. The Federal Government had stopped funding the program at 100 percent and would continue to fund it at 60 percent. The money requested in the budget was the 40 percent required of the state in order to keep the program operating.

Mrs. Chowning stated Project Challenge was a program that had been proven successful in helping young people by enriching their lives and getting them back on track. The work program showed $87,000 for 1999, but funds were decreasing to $22,000 in FY 2000 and FY 2001 in the base budget. Mrs. Chowning questioned whether that would be a significant decrease in the number of children the program could reach. General Clark said the $22,000 was a separate figure that took care of the recruiting and the transportation and the drug testing. It had nothing to do with the children who attended the program. John Orr identified himself as the Administrative Services Officer for the Office of the Military, and said pages 2 and 5 had to be added together to determine total funding.

Moving on to budget account 3652, the Construction Fund, General Clark said he did not think there would be any questions on it because it was a pass-through fund. When it was available, the Office of the Military would accept federal money for construction, the environment, and repair of buildings and grounds. The Construction Fund did nothing but allow them to accept federal funding to repair or construct buildings.

The last account was 3653, the National Guard benefits account. It would be funded to provide up to 50 percent of the tuition for guardsmen to attend either of the state universities or the community colleges. That was used as a recruiting and retention tool.

Chairman Giunchigliani asked if the engineering positions had been discussed in the other budget in her absence. General Clark said they had not and Chairman Giunchigliani asked him to do so. General Clark said the Office of the Military had authorization from the Interim Finance Committee to hire two engineering positions, funded 75 percent by the Federal Government and 25 percent by the state. The positions would assist the Office of the Military in the planning and engineering of the base relocation of the Air National Guard base in Reno. They would move from the present location immediately south of the terminal facilities, down to the southwest quadrant of the airport. That was subject to condemnation for the people who were there who had not yet chosen to sell their land to the airport authority. They were approaching 35 percent design and needed to do project books for each of the new buildings at the relocated site. That was the purpose for hiring the two engineering positions. The Office of the Military’s engineering department was about 20 positions short, as it currently existed at the Air Guard base, and did not have enough people to handle all the work required to get that job done. The two engineers would stay on for approximately 7 years: the 2 years required to complete the plans, and the 5-year build-out until the base was totally completed so the move to the southwest quadrant of the airport could be made.

Chairman Giunchigliani asked if the engineers’ positions would be eliminated after 7 years, and General Clark said he anticipated they would. Chairman Giunchigliani asked General Clark if he had a list of project priorities, because it appeared to the committee the engineering positions could be deferred and they were not sure what, besides the design, the engineers would do in the interim. General Clark said the current priorities were the project books for each one of the five facilities, but it depended on what the airport authority of Washoe County decided. They would continue with the condemnation and there was no question they would get the land. The question was whether the airport authorities would ask the Office of the Military to slow down a year or two before the airport authority put in its funds to make the relocation occur. If that were to happen, the Office of the Military would be forced to build two new facilities at their current location, for which they already had the federal funding. Then the two engineers would assist them in project books and the construction of the two facilities. The two facilities were necessary to continue the unit’s mission.

Chairman Giunchigliani said as she understood it, the two facilities were in the big project, but the Office of the Military would be upfronting them, pending what occurred with the Washoe Airport situation. General Clark said that was correct. If the Airport Authority decided to go forward with the base relocation, then those would probably be the first two facilities that would be constructed on the new site. Chairman Giunchigliani asked if the two engineers’ salaries would be paid by a 25 percent state match. General Clark said yes, their salaries would be paid 75 percent by federal funding and 25 percent state funding. Chairman Giunchigliani asked General Clark to provide the committee with a list of Office of the Military priorities, including how the staff would be used if one scenario did not occur as planned. General Clark said he would do so.

Chairman Giunchigliani asked if General Clark had discussed Project Challenge in her absence. He said he had. Chairman Giunchigliani told General Clark she would like to have a better idea of what direction he wanted Project Challenge to take. She said she thought many committee members supported the program because of federal funding, but now that federal funding was decreasing she did not want to create or enhance other programs that bound the committee’s hands, especially given the budget situation. She did not want to kill the program because there was valid intent to it, but she did not know that the committee wanted to expand it in the way General Clark did. She asked General Clark to show his plan for the future of Project Challenge, including where the financing would be found for those changes. He agreed to submit that information to the committee.

Mr. Price declared he may have a conflict of interest because his wife was a member of the Air Guard, Chief Master Sergeant Nancy Price, although she belonged to a California unit.

Senator Jacobsen noted as shown on page 4, there was not a lot of funding to replace or recharge the fire extinguishers. He asked if that was a matter that could be handled in-house. He said he was not against private enterprise, but wanted to know if, with the number of extinguishers they had, this project could be handled in-house. Mr. Orr said the previous summer they canvassed all the facilities the Office of the Military had across the state and found that only about 20 percent of the required fire extinguishers were in place. By in place, he meant that the proper type of extinguisher for the type of facility. That was due to a number of factors. During drill activities when guardsmen had to go into the field in vehicles, they were required to have a fire extinguisher in every vehicle. They would just take a fire extinguisher off the wall and it was not replaced. The intent of the request was to remedy the situation and bring their compliance up to 100 percent. The responsibility would then be put on facility managers to be responsible for maintaining the fire extinguisher inventory.

Roy Slate introduced himself as Chair of the State Board of Fire Services, and said he was also the Truckee Meadows Fire Chief, and was formerly with the City of Elko Fire Department. Mr. Slate said he would also be representing the interest of some of the rural areas. In 1981, the legislature asked for a report from the Fire Service about issues related to the State Fire Marshal’s Office and the Fire Service in general. That was SCR-23, and that report was done. Some of those issues were accomplished over the years, but in the last session, the State Fire Marshal’s Office was asked to review that report and convey what had been accomplished and what had not. The State Board of Fire Services and the State Fire Service Standards and Training Committee met in Tonopah in March 1998 to review the report and found there were a number of things that were still pending. They came up with some initiatives for the state’s fire services to attempt to agree on and bring before the Governor’s Office and the legislature in the 1999 Legislative Session. Those initiatives, in essence, were to boost the support for the State Fire Marshal’s Office, to improve the level of training within the state, especially in the rural areas with the volunteer fire service, and to look at the mission and organization of the State Fire Marshal’s Office.

Mr. Slate said the current budget for the State Fire Marshal’s Office was their best attempt at reflecting those initiatives. They had received a vast degree of support from all the major state fire service agencies and organizations. To paraphrase a quote from Abraham Lincoln, "the government is here to do for the people what they could not do themselves." The State Fire Marshal’s Office fell under that category, especially in the rural counties where fire and life safety protection of businesses and homes, investigations, hazardous materials inspections, and training were important things with which the state was obligated to assist. It was a necessary governmental service to the entire state and provided all the previously mentioned services that, in many cases, could not be provided by local entities, especially in rural counties. These included basic firefighting training, pre-planning for hazardous building occupancies, and regulating the hazardous materials industry. Mr. Slate explained the budget contained a request for additional hazardous materials inspectors, and that request was part of the initiative of the state Board of Fire Services and Fire Service Standards and Training Committee. The budget was reconfirmed by General Clark’s Commission on Workplace Safety and Communication, which was commissioned by the governor subsequent to the Sierra Chemical explosion incident, where it was found that the hazardous materials industries in Nevada were not adequately regulated. The State Fire Marshal’s Office, along with some other agencies, had an obligation in that respect and the funding for the State Fire Marshal’s Office was not adequate to fulfill that obligation. He felt the budget was effective in trying to accomplish those statutory requirements and that the State Fire Marshal’s Office would find a way to fund those inspector positions, by virtue of fees that were already statutorily established.

Dave Drew introduced himself as a Deputy Chief with Eastfork Fire and Paramedic District in Douglas County, and said he was also the Chairman of the State Fire Service Standards and Training Committee. He agreed with Mr. Slate on everything he said in his presentation. He thanked the committee for its consideration of the training budget and the benefits they generated for Nevada’s fire service, especially in the rural areas. He added the current proposal was limited to the essential items that were needed, especially for the rural areas.

Mr. Drew said as was indicated in the joint resolution of the Service Standards and Training Committee and the Board of Fire Services, a section dealing with contract instructors needed to be added. That would allow a cost-effective method for them to transfer information to those who had it to those who lacked that information, including people who lacked travel funds or time to go to schools or other training forums. Mr. Drew suggested any additional revenue beyond what was contained in the budget would be directed to this area and that the proper indicators be generated.

Mr. Drew said Mr. Slate brought up a point regarding hazardous materials inspectors. There was a study done that found there were several businesses in Nevada that were not reporting, and were not being inspected for hazardous materials. It was his understanding that funds that might be derived from such inspections could be directed towards training. That would help hire some contract instructors to spread information around the state, especially to the rural areas. Not only would there be the possibility of additional revenues, but clearly those inspectors would be able to pay for their own costs. To get inspectors into the rural areas would be a tremendous benefit.

Richard Brenner introduced himself as a member of the Clark County Fire Department, and said he was also on the Board of Fire Services and sat on the State Emergency Response Commission. He said he wanted to reiterate what Mr. Slate and Mr. Drew had spoken about. The Clark County Fire Department supported what the State Fire Marshal’s Office was doing for the State of Nevada. They had worked together with them for many years and the current budget was something they had worked on together for a long time.

Senator Jacobsen declared a conflict of interest, as he was the senior member of the Douglas County Engine Company with 53 years of service. He said if training would not be possible through the State Fire Marshal’s Office, because that was their most important asset in the rural areas, maybe inspectors could also be used as trainers. They could cover the state on a schedule so everyone would know when the training would be, instead of trying to provide a training officer that would cover the state. He said it might be a realistic approach to try to tie in the Division of Forestry, realizing that the rural areas could not survive without their neighbors.

Mr. Drew agreed that the more services could be combined, or increase the effectiveness of an employee out in the field, the better off they all would be. Mr. Slate said that had been a habit of the State Fire Marshal’s Office for the deputies, which were more enforcement-related employees, to try to offer training when they were in rural areas. If the deputies were able to accomplish all their duties, there would be no time for training, but certainly an effort was made to provide some training while they were in the rural communities. Mr. Slate said he forgot to add that he had been a member of the Board of Fire Services for 5½ years, and had tried, with Mr. Drew and his committee, to bolster the abilities of the State Fire Marshal’s Office. The State Fire Marshal’s Office had been dramatically underfunded in the past, and now the committee had the opportunity to bring them up to a reasonable level and provide service. With the addition of Chief Carr as a State Fire Marshall, there had been some dramatic improvements in the productivity of the State Fire Marshal’s Office in the last year, and he would like to see that continue. He said he had taken "this dog and pony show" around the state to the Fire Service, rural communities, and metropolitan communities, and the budget was the unified voice of the fire services of the State of Nevada, and that was what they needed.

Senator Jacobsen said over the years he had the opportunity to look at Las Vegas and realized it had the best of both worlds. Most of its firefighters were paid and the city had training sites that could accommodate that kind of need. The rural areas often had to combine efforts and travel for training, which was somewhat difficult for volunteers. It was owed to the volunteers to have them properly trained, not only for their own protection, but for public protection as well. He said he was disappointed because many years ago the State Firemen’s Convention was held while the legislature was in session, and it almost overloaded the chamber in the old building with firemen, so the firefighters usually got everything they needed. Senator Jacobsen said the duties of firefighters had changed and informed the committee that training in the rural areas was absolutely necessary, as was the State Fire Marshal’s Office because they could provide services that volunteers could not, such as fire investigations.

Senator Neal asked what effect the fire sprinkler law had in the Las Vegas area. Mr. Brenner said it had a tremendous effect. He noted most of the runs in the southern Nevada area were Emergency Medical Service related, with very few fires. One of the areas they were trying to get into was the residential area because they loose a lot of people in house or apartment fires. If sprinklers were installed in residential areas, the loss of life would be "almost nil." Senator Neal said he was pleased to hear that because he was a sponsor of that bill.

Vice Chairman Perkins asked if consolidating the two Fire Marshall budgets had been considered. Mr. Drew said that had been discussed, but Fire Marshall Carr could address that better. Speaking from the Standards and Training Committee standpoint, they were neutral on that issue. However, they wanted to make sure the funds that were identified for training remained on the training side, regardless of how the budget system worked.

Mrs. Chowning said it seemed to be logical to combine the budgets, because there was training in both and it did not make sense to separate them. The committee wanted the most efficient service to the state as possible. Regarding fire sprinklers, she said she remembered the tragic fire at the former MGM hotel, which was now Bally’s, when people had to jump from multi-story buildings onto Las Vegas Boulevard and Flamingo Street. She said she sensed the tragedy and the difference whenever she went into that building. Had there only been fire sprinklers in the building, the tragedy could have been avoided. She expressed her gratitude to Senator Neal for the sprinkler law.

Mr. Slate thanked Mrs. Chowning for her comments, and said that law still had relativity. As an example, when he was the Assistant Chief and Fire Marshall in Elko, what they referred to as the life safety retrofit law, had been applied throughout the state by the State Fire Marshal’s Office and local inspectors. One of the findings he had as a new Fire Marshall in 1991 was that the law had been applied, but had not been enforced. He found numerous buildings within his jurisdiction where they had to enforce the retrofit law, making sure stairwells that were needed were constructed and smoke alarms and fire sprinklers were installed. The legislature could enact any law they wanted, but without enforcement, it meant nothing. Part of the operations budget was to ensure, not only on the hazardous materials side, but for ordinary buildings as well, that inspections took place so that people were safe and the laws were enforced.

Mr. Slate said in budget account 3416, the training line-item was devoted to the employees of the State Fire Marshal’s Office for their training, in contrast to the training budget being established for the fire service in general. He said the Board of Fire Services was also neutral on that point, as long as training functioned properly. He noted Chief Carr had taken over supervision of the training budget, and he was authorizing all expenditures, whereas in the past a subordinate had done so.

Marvin Carr introduced himself as a State Fire Marshall and apologized for "getting the cart before the horse." He clarified that the additional inspectors to inspect hazardous materials businesses were neither a part of Budget Account 3816, nor were they part of budget account 3834. The budgets presented to the committee did not include additional personnel. Mr. Carr said the recommendation of the board was that additional inspectors be put on at some time, and prove through research that they would pay their way by generating revenue from businesses that had not been inspected. He clarified the budgets currently did not include new programs or new personnel. Budget Accounts 3816 and 3834 maintained the status quo.

Frank Siracusa introduced himself as Chief of the Division of Emergency (DEM) Management. He said the mission statement of DEM was to coordinate statewide emergency management programs to reduce or eliminate the impact of emergencies or disasters on persons and property.

Mr. Siracusa noted on the performance indicators listed, there was a change in item 5—significant emergency incidents per year. The actual number for FY 1998 was 62 incidents. The projected incidents for the biennium was their best guess based on past records. Moving to page 122, he said budget account 3601 supported their statewide planning, training, and exercise initiatives. The source of revenue for the budget was 32 percent state funding and 68 percent federal funding. He said the base budget reflected actuals less nonrecurring and one-time expenditures.

Mr. Siracusa explained the maintenance modules on page 123 reflected existing automatic inflation and any occupational salary increases. Enhancement module E-375 had been established due to a funding formula change in their state and local assistance program. In the past the program was funded 100 percent federally, but was now requested at 50 percent state match. The module was developed and took six full-time positions along with their operating expenses out of base, and placed them in the enhancement module to handle the state funding requirement increase. Also within the budget were enhancement modules E-900 and E-901, which were developed for the purpose of consolidating that budget in conjunction with Budget Account 3659, into a new Budget Account—3673. The purpose of the consolidation was to better manage their personnel and resources.

DMV, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT – BUDGET PAGE DMV – 112

Mr. Siracusa said the budget supported administrative and logistic functions within the division. As in Budget Account 3601, the base budget only reflected actuals less any nonrecurring one-time costs. DMV pages 113 and 114 showed the maintenance module, which only reflected inflation and occupational salary increases. Enhancements were found on DMV pages 114 and 115. Enhancement module E-375 was for the purpose of the funding formula change for the hazard mitigation assistance grant program. That module was developed to accommodate a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding formula change, which was originally 100 percent funded, but now requested 25 percent state funding. The module moved one full-time position, along with related operating expenses, out of base into the enhancement module for the additional 25 percent state funding required.

Mr. Siracusa explained that modules E-904 and E-905 were also developed to consolidate the budget account with Budget Account 3601 into a new Budget Account—3673. He said the budget did not reflect the National Guard CIP for the development of a new National Guard facility. Presently the DEM co-located with the National Guard at 2525 South Carson Street in Carson City. He said when and if the National Guard moved, money in the budget was strictly for rent. If they had to move as the result of the sale of the building, for example, they would probably need additional funding. Mr. Siracusa noted he had contingency plans in place and had met with the State Public Works Board. There was a possibility they would stay in their current location, and then be able to acquire federal FEMA money to assist them in renovating the existing building.

Vice Chairman Perkins asked Mr. Siracusa to remind the committee of places where federal funding was decreased or eliminated, and the state would have to replace that funding from the General Fund. Mr. Siracusa said in Budget Account 3601, six full-time positions were currently funded 100 percent federally. With the FEMA funding formula changes, E-375 asked for 50 percent state funding to offset that change. In Budget Account 3659, E-375 asked for 25 percent state funding for one position that was currently funded 100 percent federally.

Vice Chairman Perkins asked without the state match dollars, what functions those positions would have, and what services would be lost without state funding. Mr. Siracusa said those positions provided statewide planning, training, exercise, and mitigation activities. Without state funding for those positions, they would be unable to provide those vital services to local emergency management public safety communities, particularly in rural communities. It would be devastating to the citizens of Nevada not to be able to provide those services.

Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Siracusa to address the accounting positions in the budget and indicate whether there had been an audit over the previous biennium. Mr. Siracusa said there was currently an emergency management program supervisor in his office who handled his accounting functions and also served as his assistant. Senator Jacobsen asked if there were some positions transferred out of the DEM budget. Mr. Siracusa said there were two accounting-type positions that were transferred out of the DEM budget two sessions ago, prior to his position with the department. They were transferred to the administrative services division to work on grants and budgets at a time when there were serious problems with budget management within DEM.

Mr. Siracusa reiterated Budget Account 3673 was a newly created account they were hoping to have in place that would consolidate Budget Accounts 3601 and 3659. The purpose was to better manage their staff and resources out of one budget account. If the sources of revenue were totaled for Budget Account 3673 based on biennium requests, it would be 39 percent state funded and 61 percent federally funded.

Vice Chairman Perkins asked Mr. Siracusa if he had any contingency plans if the state was not able to support those positions with General Fund dollars. Mr. Siracusa said they would always do whatever they could to provide services. Since he took over the position a year-and-a-half ago, he made a commitment that DEM was a service-oriented organization and would provide services to Nevada’s citizens and local governments. Losing those positions and funding would drastically curtail DEM’s efforts to provide services. Vice Chairman Perkins said that sounded like a long way to say no. Mr. Siracusa said he did not want to say no, but losing funding would drastically hurt DEM’s operation and the services it provided, and could restrict future funding if they were ever to receive another presidential disaster declaration.

Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Siracusa for the status of the disaster relief fund appropriated as a result of the northern Nevada flood in 1997. Mr. Siracusa said he had a spreadsheet that clarified the situation. The $3.5 million that was appropriated in Assembly Bill 224 in March 1997 had been exhausted. There were currently approximately 100 damage survey reports still open that were considered small projects. A small project was calculated by FEMA as any project under $47,000. There were approximately 80 large projects that were still open. He guessed, based on current statistics, there was approximately $437,000 in outstanding claims to local governments that DEM would pay if they had the funding. The damage survey reports that were still open might close at a higher or lower cost than originally written.

Senator Jacobsen asked what would happen if there was a disaster tomorrow, realizing the disaster relief fund was exhausted. Mr. Siracusa said if there was a disaster of the magnitude of a presidential declaration tomorrow, DEM would negotiate with the Federal Government for grant funding for the state. In the 1997 flood, Nevada received 25 percent state match against 75 percent federal dollars. He said that was a negotiable amount and based on the financial condition of the state, could go as high as 90 to 100 percent federal funding. As a result of lessons learned from the 1997 flood, DEM was in the process of completing a new state plan, which would be presented to Governor Guinn in April 1999. The plan had recovery and financial modules that clearly identified how the process worked and how they would go about getting the money needed. Senator Jacobsen asked if that process began with a declaration from Governor Guinn, and Mr. Siracusa said yes, it was progressive.

Senator Neal said he noticed there was an oversight for coordinating the emergency preparedness for the state. He asked if those emergency plans were in effect across the state, with threat assessments included in the plans. Mr. Siracusa said the plans DEM proposed and supported were comprehensive emergency plans that primarily addressed mitigation activities and hazard analysis statewide. They developed response and recovery modules to plans, and they were trying very hard to standardize those plans statewide. Much of DEM’s efforts were spent in rural counties because in the larger counties they had very good, sophisticated, and comprehensive emergency plans.

Senator Neal asked if DEM was notified when the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was investigating the anthrax scare. Mr. Siracusa said they were notified, but there was not a lot of coordination between the FBI, Public Safety, and Emergency Management in the first anthrax situation in southern Nevada. As a result, there were now additional plans and procedures developed with the FBI, Emergency Management, and Nevada law enforcement. A similar anthrax situation later occurred in the Reno/Washoe County area and there was much better cooperation. Currently there was integration, cooperation, and coordination between the FBI and Emergency Management on all aspects of counter-terrorism and consequences of terrorist acts.

Senator O’Donnell said with the advent of the current storm, as of a few weeks ago, Washoe County was at 125 percent of precipitation. With Lake Tahoe at record levels, the last time that situation occurred, there was a tremendous amount of rainfall and the lake was full. As he understood, the Federal Government controlled the level of Lake Tahoe, and in 1997 the lake could not hold any more water so they let it out through the Truckee River, causing a flood in Reno. He asked if Emergency Management had taken any steps to mitigate a possible repeat of that disaster. Mr. Siracusa replied there had been several coordinating meetings among the various federal agencies in regard to opening dams and letting water out into low-lying areas. He noted during the 1997 flood, one of the biggest resources needed was sandbags. Prior to December 1997 there were 65,000 sandbags strategically located throughout the state, and as a result of the floods, there were now in excess of 4 million sandbags. Throughout Washoe County, through the Association of General Contractors, there were almost 2 million sandbags that could be brought out very quickly to mitigate flooding problems.

Mr. Siracusa said he received an update on February 8, 1999 from the National Weather Service and the water was at 125 percent, but they assured him they were nowhere near the risk of the kind of problems of 1997. However, if it rained for the next 2 weeks, that situation could change. He felt confident they were not at risk because they had a good network of emergency managers and there were plenty of sandbags if they were needed.

Chairman Giunchigliani said part of the reason for the flooding was the release of water from Lake Tahoe. But, as she understood, the other reason was that the state was supposed to take care of the riverbanks and had not done a good job of keeping them cleaned out, which was part of the subsequent plan. Mr. Siracusa said that was correct; that was part of some mitigation projects that were generated as a result of the flood, and those banks had been cleaned.

Chairman Giunchigliani asked Mr. Siracusa if it was his contention that the state should not write the plans for local governments, but review them to make sure they had the proper coordination. Mr. Siracusa answered yes, State Emergency Management’s role was to assist local government in the development of their plans and procedures. If a political subdivision came to Emergency Management and said they did not have the capability to write a plan, then they would write it for them.

Chairman Giunchigliani asked Mr. Siracusa to address the Disaster Relief Fund that was established the previous year. There was a huge push for the request for funds that would be needed there. She asked what had been expended and what local governments had requested. Mr. Siracusa said the Disaster Relief Fund, Senate Bill 218, was used to provide funding for Douglas and Lyon Counties to offset some matching requirements from the 1997 floods. Subsequently, in August 1997 some flooding occurred, and consequently state declarations and local declarations in Henderson and Boulder. Those communities applied to the Disaster Relief Fund and were given funds. Emergency Management was working with those communities reviewing their requests for reimbursement, because that particular fund was for reimbursements only. In the last few weeks Henderson had provided claims for work done, and Emergency Management was in the process of reviewing those claims, which would then be submitted to the Legislative Counsel Bureau for consideration of payment. There had been no other claims since those, so there had been approximately $200,000 paid.

Chairman Giunchigliani asked if that was where the grant kicked in from the local government or was that state-funded, with the secondary portion where the local governments could come back if there was a match. Mr. Siracusa said there were two parts to S.B. 218. The first part was the $4 million fund where local governments could apply for a grant to recoup costs as the result of a disaster. The second part was where a local government could access mitigation dollars as a loan. Chairman Giunchigliani said she wanted assurance that especially under the mitigation portion, there were not localities mitigated from the Federal Government and then local governments would try to use state funding as their match, because she did not feel that was the intent of S.B. 218. Mr. Siracusa said that obviously did not occur in Henderson or Boulder because they were not part of a presidential declaration. Money from S.B. 218 was used as a match for Douglas and Lyon Counties, and he would provide information that broke down every disaster survey report (DSR) that was written.

Chairman Giunchigliani commended Mr. Siracusa because his first budget was very good. She appreciated him breaking out the enhancements as it should have been properly done. She noted in Budget Account 3673 he doubled what was projected, but did not understand how he got that figure. Mr. Siracusa reiterated Budget Account 3673 was a consolidation of Budget Accounts 3601 and 3659. He took the performance indicators from each of those budgets and added them together. He explained while she was out of the room, that in their performance indicators, they identified significant incidents they managed and had projected 50 incidents. In FY 1998, it was actually 62 incidents. He hoped he could come back and tell the committee that Emergency Management managed less than 50 incidents over the biennium, but he had no way of knowing.

Senator Jacobsen said communication seemed to be the biggest problem in an emergency and asked Mr. Siracusa to go over what Emergency Management’s capabilities were. Mr. Siracusa said in an emergency they typically depended on telephones, but telephones were usually the first mode of communication to go. The second mode of communication would be VHF and UHF radio frequencies. DEM had those communication capabilities and co-located with the National Guard. DEM was also a member of DMV/PS, and were able to maintain their VHF and UHF communication capabilities quite effectively. The third mode of communication was the amateur radio network. There was a vast and very well tuned amateur radio network throughout the state. DEM did not currently have amateur radio capability, and with all their communication capabilities, that was there one weakness. Unfortunately amateur radio was often the only form of communication available in a true disaster.

Chairman Giunchigliani asked, regarding the staff that had been transferred to the administrative services division, if they were to be moved back, would DEM be able to fund those positions through their federal grant and thereby save General Fund money. Mr. Siracusa said he would get back to the committee on that point.

In closing, Mr. Siracusa said he thought DEM’s budgets were fair and only requested funding to continue the kind of service they were currently providing. He added, regarding the Governor’s Recovery Task Force, FEMA representatives would be going in the field to negotiate with subgrantees for those existing large and small projects to negotiate final closure of those projects. He said that would give DEM bottom-line figures so they could follow through and reimburse those projects to closure.

Ken Johnson introduced himself as Chief of Nevada Capitol Police. He noted Capitol Police was transferred from Dept of Admin to DMV/PS in 1995. Capitol Police’s primary source of funding was The Buildings and Grounds Division. They had an additional source of funding for two positions to provide security for the new implementation of two justices as the Las Vegas operations of the Nevada Supreme Court. Capitol Police’s statutory authority was located in NRS 481.0171 and NRS 331.140.

Mr. Johnson referred the committee to page 196, E-197, and said the majority of that training money was for ammunition used in training. Under A.B. 229 of the 1997 Legislative Session, Capitol Police converted to 40-caliber weapons. The money was spent for the conversion, purchase of the weapons, and related equipment. There was no provision for additional ammunition needed for ongoing training, which was required by POST, DMV/PS, and Capitol Police policies. E-375 was requested as an adjustment to the base budget. The additional operating costs also listed under E-375 were new to Capitol Police’s budget, including their share of the evidence vault locker system, which was maintained by DMV/PS. Other divisions of the department previously absorbed that cost. Capitol Police now built into their budget their share of the maintenance for batteries for portable radios, duty ammunition replacement, and medical situations such as hepatitis inoculations and antibody testing, to maintain the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements of first-line responders. In addition, the funds would be used for drug screening and psychological testing of new Capitol Police recruits.

Mrs. Chowning said in A.B. 229 there was $27,500 for the equipment and training. She asked Mr. Johnson what was accomplished with that money. Mr. Johnson said he would provide the committee with a breakdown of how that money was spent.

Mrs. Chowning said under Capitol Police’s performance indicators, which included fire, burglar, and panic alarms, there were 170 actual, but they were projected to increase drastically. She noted the police reports and arrests were also projected to increase. She asked what those figures were based on, because she did not see any requests for new positions. Mr. Johnson said Capitol Police revised their performance indicators, as shown in Exhibit C, "Revised Performance Indicators FY 2000/2001." He said the revised projections better reflected an indication of Capitol Police’s mission and goals. Their request for additional staffing was an unfunded portion of the budget. The revised projections were extrapolations from increases Capitol Police had already experienced due to increased workplace violence throughout the country.

Mrs. Chowning asked if the Supreme Court administrative office moved into the Regional Justice Center, would the two additional positions requested still be necessary. Mr. Johnson said the court indicated to him that those positions would continue. His understanding was that the Supreme Court would be located on the 16^th floor of the Regional Justice Center. The court felt that the distance between the first floor (where security was located) and the 16^th floor would justify having two officers continue to be present. Mrs. Chowning said she would like the rationale explained to her, because if floors 1 through 15 had adequate security, she did not understand why floor 16 would feel differently. Mr. Johnson said the request was in direct response to the court.

Senator O’Donnell said he noticed on DMV, page 196 there was an unfunded decision unit category, and the agency request was $232,000. The Governor gave Capitol Police nothing in that category and Capitol Police gave no explanation for the requested funds. Mr. Johnson said those were unfunded positions requested by Capitol Police. Senator O’Donnell asked how many positions were requested and for what purpose. Mr. Johnson said under M-200, Capitol Police requested three additional officers for Carson City to provide 24-hour coverage for the Capitol. Currently, Nevada Capitol Police were operating at approximately 75 percent coverage. The three positions would be used to bring the coverage rate up to approximately 92 percent, which was a much more acceptable figure. In addition, they requested computer hardware and software necessary for Y2K compliance, to bring the agency up to speed with other law enforcement agencies, to allow Internet communication among Capitol Police’s various deployments, and for automation of their report-writing systems and record keeping.

Mr. Johnson said under E-378, he requested a Capitol Police Lieutenant. They now had a Chief, an Administrative Assistant who worked with the Chief, and the first-line supervisors who were sergeant-level. But, they had no Administrative Assistants to handle things such as policies and procedures, routine personnel matters, and various administrative duties. Senator O’Donnell asked Mr. Johnson if all those positions were absolutely necessary, or was he coerced into cutting the budget. Senator O’Donnell said he did not want a repeat of the Washington, D.C. Capitol shooting to happen in Nevada. He asked Mr. Johnson whether or not he felt comfortable with the budget recommended by the Governor. Mr. Johnson said he was prepared to go forward with the budget, but said he would be unable to increase any service to state government.

Senator Neal asked how many vehicles were under Capitol Police’s control and Mr. Johnson replied there were five. Senator Neal said as he looked at Capitol Police’s projected mileage and there was an actual in 1998 of 44,728 miles, but for 1999 the mileage was projected to increase to 84,000. For 2000 it was 89,500 miles, and for 2001 was 94,300 miles. Mr. Johnson said those figures needed to be adjusted according to the approved budget, and Capitol Police had not yet had an opportunity to do so. Those figures were factored using the unfunded enhancements they had requested. Senator Neal asked since there would be no new positions, would the mileage remain at 44,700 across the board for the next biennium. Mr. Johnson said he thought the mileage would increase somewhat, but not at the rate shown.

Senator Jacobsen said the Stewart facility was one of his favorite projects and nothing upset him more than the vandalism that occurred there on an almost daily basis. He said he had not seen that Capitol Police had apprehended anyone yet, which was disappointing. He said Capitol Police had been given a building to exercise in, but it seemed it was given very little protection. Mr. Johnson said the Stewart facility was patrolled on a nightly basis, but depending on staffing and allocations, there were many hours of the day it was not patrolled.

Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Johnson if he thought there was anything that could be done in-house for surveillance of the facility. Mr. Johnson said they requested Building and Grounds maintain the lighting as a deterrent. Capitol Police also tried patrolling as a deterrent. Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Johnson to furnish the committee with some suggestions on how to remedy the vandalism situation at the facility. Mr. Johnson said he would do so.

Regarding the $44,000 for the radio one-shot, Mrs. Chowning asked if Mr. Johnson could provide a timeline since his goal was not yet accomplished. Mr. Drew said the request for proposal (RFP) for the radio one-shot was released in November 1998. He expected to have a vendor selected within a few weeks of the closing date for the proposals, February 22, 1999. Under the RFP, the bulk purchase of generic items such as mobile and portable radios would be purchased in FY 1998. Work on the infrastructure of the radios would begin in the next biennium.

Chairman Giunchigliani reiterated the items the committee still needed from Mr. Johnson. First, nothing in Capitol Police’s performance indicators dealt with efficiency or effectiveness of the department. She hoped Mr. Johnson would come back to the committee with information on what Capitol Police did and how well they did it. Second, if the Regional Justice Center was not opened, and currently it was not projected to open until 2001 or 2002, then the two staff positions Capitol Police requested for that building would not be needed. When the committee heard the Supreme Court budgets they would determine whether the court would move, because the court had not yet decided whether they would move into that building or another. Chairman Giunchigliani told Mr. Johnson if he really needed those two positions for the 16^th floor, he needed to provide adequate justification. If the Supreme Court felt those positions were necessary, perhaps they could be funded by court assessments instead of the General Fund.

Dick Clark introduced himself as Chief of Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST). With him was Dennis Kollar, Academy Commander of the Nevada Law Enforcement Academy. Also present were a few Nevada law enforcement agency heads who might want to address the committee after the POST budget was presented. Mr. Clark said POST was a statewide regulatory agency that governed law enforcement standards and insured quality training for law enforcement for the state. POST also provided a regional basic training academy for service training and professional certification services for approximately 131 criminal justice agencies and 9,000 peace officers. Although the Governor-appointed seven-member POST Committee was defined in NRS 481.053, the support staff and structure had been a source of concern and confusion. In response to the concerns and questions raised by many of the stakeholders regarding the POST program, the legislature urged DMV/PS to complete a study of POST funding, responsibilities, and staff structure. DMV/PS, in collaboration with the Sheriffs and Chiefs Association, completed the study and made several recommendations, which was the foundation for Senator Jacobsen’s S.B. 68.

Mr. Clark stated POST was funded primarily through court assessments, with a small amount of funding from the basic academy registration fees. However, a significant amount of POST’s budget (approximately one-third of the cost of running the program—just over $500,000) came from other budget accounts, including DMV/PS, Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP), and the Director’s Office. POST was asked to construct their budget as if there would be no changes in their structure. S.B. 68 only affected the clarification of POST duties and responsibilities, POST structure, and to whom POST reported. DMV/PS Training Division was a separate issue and could cause significant changes in POST basic training responsibilities. POST’s budget proposal included a contingency module, E-391, should the DMV/PS Training Division be approved. POST’s requested enhancements, totaling approximately $40,000, were necessary to maintain quality training and ensure an adequate level of service to law enforcement communities, which would help them maintain quality public safety for the citizens of Nevada.

Dennis Kollar introduced himself as the Academy Commander of the Nevada Law Enforcement Agency. Calling attention to DMV page 200, he noted E-197 would provide funding to allow staff to attend an annual out-of-state training seminar.
E-275 requested funding for out-of-state and in-state travel for the purpose of networking with other POST agencies, observing model programs, conducting training-needs assessments, and participating in law enforcement organizations and committees. It also requested funding for uniforms for POST training officers and one ergonomically-correct workstation for existing staff. E-391 was a contingency module that contained the necessary adjustments to the POST budget, should the DMV/PS Training Division be approved. In as much as it was linked to that proposal for the training division, POST would like to defer discussion of that module until the proposed DMV/PS training budget was discussed.

Mr. Kollar said E-710 requested funds to replace antiquated audiovisual equipment, provide two used NHP vehicles for driver training, two 32-inch monitors, and three computers to replace non-Y2K compliant computers. E-720 requested funding for three cellular phones to be used when conducting training at remote locations in areas where safety was a concern. It also requested a Scantron machine, which would automatically grade examinations and interface with their computers to allow item analysis to determine the effectiveness of POST training. In addition,
E-720 requested funding for a high-quality paper shredder. And finally, E-800 was a cost allocation for the information services used by POST.

Chairman Giunchigliani noted POST’s performance indicators did not reflect the potential separation of the training modules. She asked Mr. Kollar if his intent was, after the testimony from DMV on how they would construct their training, to adjust POST’s training budget. Mr. Kollar replied that was his intent.

Chairman Giunchigliani said she wanted to discuss the study that was done on SCR-21. She thought the study was also supposed to look at how to fund POST, but she did not see that information in the study, other than the suggestion of taking 17 percent of court assessments. She asked what the 17 percent (of the 49 percent DMV/PS and victims of crime shared) was projected to earn POST over the biennium. Mr. Johnson thought the recommendation was actually 14 percent. Mr. Kollar explained S.B. 68 contained a provision that POST would receive not less than 14 percent of the entire amount of court assessments, not 14 percent of 49 percent. With the projections POST received from the Administrative Offices of the Courts, he thought the court assessment revenue for FY 2000 was estimated to be $9.8 million, of which POST would receive 14 percent.

Mr. Kollar said, as he understood the question, if POST received additional funding, over and above their proposed budget, how would POST use that money. Chairman Giunchigliani said that was her question, because that would be a doubling of POST’s budget and she no longer saw that directly equating to the needs or use of POST. That would be the debate as far as the entire training issue was concerned. Whether or not the certification and licensing was collected to help pay for part of POST also needed to be taken into consideration, because that was how most boards functioned.

Chairman Giunchigliani said POST’s cadet training was decreasing and she still had concerns about that, as she did in the 1997 Legislative Session. The tuition for officer training at community college was closer to $2,000, but POST was still about $7,200. She said there was increasing use of community colleges for training, and asked how POST justified their cost-effectiveness.

Mr. Kollar explained POST provided lodging and food for the cadets, whereas community college costs were generally associated with registration fees, which offset the cost of their program. If the community colleges included the cost of per diem and lodging in addition to the registration fees, the cost would be closer to the amount it cost POST to put a cadet through the academy. Chairman Giunchigliani said she understood and appreciated that, but wanted POST to be effective and to be able to serve people in the rural counties. However, the committee had an obligation to look at the budgetary impact to make sure state funds were used as effectively as they could be. She thought the committee tended to protect POST, rather than look at the changing needs for cadets. If there was a place that started to train better than POST, maybe the committee should consider directing resources and finances to that place. Chairman Giunchigliani acknowledged the issue would not be resolved that day, and explained that the committee had an obligation to spend the state’s money efficiently, while making sure the cadets were getting the training they needed. From what she heard, there had been no criticism of the community college training. The issue was starting to come down to the dollar amount, especially concerning how court assessment fees should be spent.

Senator Jacobsen agreed with the majority of Chairman Giunchigliani’s comments, but because the state was large and the population was spread out, Nevada deserved the best POST money could buy. He said perhaps Clark County did not have a need for POST because they had their own in-house capabilities, but the rural communities had to band together. He indicated he was a supporter of the "boot camp" operation of POST because people who train, fight, and sleep together formed a more cohesive unit. He liked the aspect of all the counties coming together to the POST academy. If POST training was not adequate, he would blame POST. He visited the POST academy the previous week and noticed they were retiring the flag, which one did not see very often anymore. The respect they showed for the flag would show in their operations. If there were problems with POST, they should be fixed.

Senator Jacobsen said he was concerned when he read the budget and noticed community college was a cheaper operation. He knew people who had been through POST and people who had been through the community college training. He said the training was probably equal, but the camaraderie formed in POST was important and necessary in rural communities, such as Pershing County, where a patrolman was shot and killed for no apparent reason. He said it was difficult to know what types of training to include. He noted NHP had a different responsibility, which had been accommodated. In summary, Senator Jacobsen supported uniform training and reiterated, if there was something wrong with POST, then it should be fixed.

Senator O’Donnell said he believed he was the only member of the committee who had been through a police academy. Although he appreciated the comments regarding cost-effectiveness of community colleges, one of the major aspects of going through a police academy was the disciplinary training, which cadets did not receive in a classroom situation. Discipline came from an overall aspect of academy training. In an academy, the cadet was mentally brought down to nothing and then built up according to police officer standards. He did not think the disciplinary training could be integrated into the community college training situation. Officers had to be under the command and control of a lieutenant or commander and do exactly as they were told, and if they did not, the public was at risk.

Chairman Giunchigliani said the dilemma raised by Senators Jacobsen and O’Donnell needed to be dealt with. She felt the issue was that various jurisdictions were choosing community colleges over POST. The legislature did not make them choose community colleges; they chose it because of the cost-effectiveness and because they felt the training was at least commensurate. She appreciated the camaraderie POST offered. It was a nuance that was needed and built as the cadets developed rapport. However, in the changing world, she felt the committee had not recognized that there was a change in how training occurred, and the reason behind that change. She said it was fine to choose POST, but perhaps someone else ought to pay the cost difference. Even though that was the only budget hearing on the matter, the differences would not be resolved that day. She said the change in training was a policy change that could be seen in many different departments and divisions. She explained that her points were not criticisms of POST and she did not want to discontinue POST, but the committee needed to recognize the changing needs as well as the responsible fiscal needs.

Chairman Giunchigliani stated at some point POST considered the POST Committee creating additional requirements for training. She hoped that POST would include plans on how they planned to pay for those additional requirements. There had to be budgetary impacts as new requirements were put in.

Mr. Kollar said there were agency heads present who used POST academy that may want to comment. He introduced Sheriff Gene Hill of Humboldt County as a longstanding member of the POST committee. He said Mr. Hill could address some of the concerns about the fiscal impacts and unfunded mandates. In addition, Mr. Hill used POST academy and was the newly-elected president of the Sheriffs and Chiefs Association for the state.

Mr. Hill thanked Chairman Giunchigliani for the opportunity to address the committee. He felt community college training was adequate for some areas, but it would not work in Humboldt County because it was not offered through their community college. Elko and Truckee Meadows Community Colleges were the nearest colleges that offered officer training. Currently he was stuck in not only the tuition, but the per diem as well. That would cost too much and the Humboldt County Commissioners would not approve that much money for training. The same emphasis that was put on children in Nevada’s school system to be educated, he put on his deputies. Educated law enforcement personnel were the best personnel to protect and serve Nevada.

Mr. Hill said he made it very difficult to get hired into his agency. He had had two vacancies for the last year-and-a-half in his patrol division, which consisted of only 14 deputies. None of the applicants could pass all the tests he gave. He put more of a requirement on his officers than POST did. As Senator O’Donnell said, the camaraderie established in a structured academy truly built good character and a good peace officer. That was not to say that community colleges did not, and some of his deputies had put themselves through community college programs prior to working for him.

Chairman Giunchigliani said she recognized the need for rural accommodations because not every county in the state fit into a "cookie-cutter design." She emphasized the need to look at different ways to offer officer training to make sure the public was secure in the knowledge that Nevada’s law enforcement officers were properly trained. However, as it was a money committee, they had to look at where the financing came from. She told Mr. Hill maybe there were some partnerships that could be explored on how to merge some of those dollars. She appreciated that the county commissioners would not fund community college training, but that was the dilemma the committee had as well.

Rocky McKellip introduced himself as Sheriff of Mineral County and said he had some concerns about funding officer training because Mineral County was economically strapped, to put it mildly. He had a department of 32 people and his entire training budget was only $10,000 per year. His department had no training budget the previous year and had to "ad lib" everything. As Mr. Hill stated, he could not afford the per diem to send a person to community college. There were a lot of people who were going to college and getting a police science degree or going to the POST academy. Unfortunately, some of those people could not be hired by a regular department for a variety of reasons; perhaps they could not pass the psychological examinations, for example.

Mr. McKellip explained that many rural communities had to rely on people who already had a POST certificate and had gone to college somewhere else, who really did not want to work "in the boonies" where they would be paid a lower wage than in a larger county. He preferred to hire people from his community and had never had a problem with the POST academy. All the officers who came out of POST were exemplary and had done an excellent job. His main concern was that he wanted to hire his local people, and most of them could not afford to go to college and live in Reno. Further, if they excelled in the college training program, often the larger departments would hire them before they returned to Mineral County.

Chairman Giunchigliani said she appreciated Mr. McKellip’s concerns and said the committee may have to look at a mix of revenue sources. She thought law enforcement was the only department that did not contribute anything toward their training, so the committee needed to be innovative and come up with ways to assist the rural counties to make sure they were getting the training they needed.

Mr. McKellip said the only problem he currently had with POST was the overcrowding and the long wait to get his people into the academy. Hopefully Senator Jacobsen’s bill would partially resolve that issue.

Chairman Giunchigliani thanked everyone for their testimony. She apologized to the agencies, but due to lack of time, the budgets for DMV, Training Division and DMV, Hazardous Materials Training Center would be heard on February 23, 1998.

There being no further business before the committee, Chairman Giunchigliani adjourned the meeting at 10:55 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

___________________________

Christina Alfonso,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, Chairman

____________________________________________

DATE: _____________________________________

APPROVED BY:

Senator Lawrence Jacobsen, Chairman

___________________________________________

DATE:_____________________________________