The Senate Committee on Finance was called to order by Chairman William J. Raggio, at 8:15 a.m., on Monday, March 29, 1999, in Room 2134 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman

Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman

Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen

Senator William R. O’Donnell

Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.

Senator Bob Coffin

Senator Bernice Mathews

GUEST LEGISLATORS:

Senator Maurice E. Washington, Washoe County Senatorial District No. 2

Senator Mark A. James, Clark County Senatorial District No. 8

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst

Steve Abba, Senior Program Analyst

Larry L. Peri, Senior Program Analyst

Rick Combs, Program Analyst

Birgit Baker, Program Analyst

Mary A. Matheus, Local Government Budget Analyst

Patricia Hampton, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

May S. Shelton, Lobbyist, Washoe County

Frances M. Doherty, Court Master, Family Division, Second Judicial District Court

Senator Raggio announced there are several bills to consider before closing budgets. He said that on March 24 it was voted to amend and do pass Senate Bill (S.B.) 15.

Senator Raggio noted Amendment No. 280 changes from 9 to 10 the number of people on the advisory committee for the school proficiency examination, adding a teacher as one of the members and deleting the appropriation in section 5 of the bill.

Senator Raggio opened the hearing on S.B. 303. He said this is a companion bill to the one heard involving the National Judicial College.

John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration, stated this bill affects the National College of Juvenile and Family Law effective June 30, 1999. He said the state controller would transfer the $2.5 million endowment fund for the college to the General Fund. He explained section 1 of the bill includes an appropriation of $303,600, which is the equivalent to the interest the college would have earned on the $2.5 million if the endowment fund had been left in place. He stated it is the intention of the Governor to replace the $2.5 million endowment when the state’s financial condition allows.

Senator Raggio recalled a mechanism was discussed in 1993, when money was taken from the endowment for the National Judicial College and when the endowment would be replaced. He said he does not disagree with the reason for transferring the endowment funds, but rather the method by which it will be replaced. It was his understanding that when the fiscal condition of the state improves, the endowment fund would be reinstated under the same conditions that have existed in the past. Mr. Comeaux said that is correct.

Senator Raggio pointed out that when this previously occurred the college was not given the interest, as is being done this time. Senator Neal insisted the reason the fund was established was to encourage the National College of Juvenile and Family Law to stay in the state. Senator Raggio remarked that is why he is recommending a methodology be established for reinstating the endowment when the fiscal condition of the state improves. He recalled that previously there was uncertainty as to how the reinstatement would be done, and the Interim Finance Committee prevailed upon the budget director to present criteria for the reinstatement. He asked fiscal staff to research the issue.

Dan Miles, Senate Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, said the statute governing the fund says "the State Board of Examiners with the approval of the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) can take the trust money back to the state General Fund." He said that was the action recommended by the State Board of Examiners in 1993 and the IFC approved it contingent on the funds being replaced when state funds became available. Mr. Miles pointed out that at that time the return of the endowment was all handled through the board of examiners because there was not a statute in place. He concurred there was no interest replacement at that time.

Senator Raggio said that to provide the college a degree of certainty regarding the continued funding of the endowment, there needs to be some agreement as to how and when the funds will be returned.

Louis W. McHardy, Dean, National College of Juvenile and Family Law, University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), said he was very grateful for the interest and concern about the organization. Noting the college has been on the university campus since 1969, he said funds have been raised for construction of the Midby-Byron Building and offices have been provided for the Continuing Education program at UNR. He pointed out about 5,000 people came to Juvenile and Family Law programs last year. He said that in May 1999 a significant program will be conducted in Las Vegas which will have approximately 300 participants.

Mr. McHardy stated he has worked closely with the new dean of the law school in Las Vegas during recent months in an attempt to develop a liaison and to utilize the law school faculty in some programs. He pointed out there has been a close working relationship with the Nevada judiciary. He stated the college provided the initial domestic violence training for all the judges in the state of Nevada. He said the college helped develop the domestic violence task force in the state and works closely with the human services agencies in the state in developing permanency planning programs for children in Nevada.

Mr. McHardy said he was seeking support for the continuation of funding. He explained most of the funding comes from federal and other grants which are very restrictive. He said the endowment money can be used to support the core operation and to help secure more funding, most of which is spent in the state of Nevada. He pointed out that this year approximately $12 million will be spent in Nevada. He thanked the committee members for their past support, urged continued support, and expressed gratitude for the partnership the college has had with the state over the past years.

Steven G. Riddell, Director of Advancement, National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, stated more than 25,000 judges and court-related personnel from all over the nation have been trained in Nevada. He said this has enabled the college to spread the name of Nevada throughout the world. He called attention to the .5 million pieces of literature distributed during the past year which note Nevada is the headquarters for the council. He said that when there are openings in programs an attempt is always made to bring in Nevada judges, court-related personnel and law enforcement officers to participate at no cost to the state or their counties.

Carol Guarino, Comptroller, National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, thanked the committee for continued support, She said the funding is very important to the operation of the council.

Mr. Riddell pointed out 1999 is the centennial year celebration for the founding of America’s juvenile courts. He said celebrations will be held throughout the United States, including a reception and program on April 19 in Reno and one in October with former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as a keynote speaker. Senator Raggio pointed out Ms. Thatcher is coming because of Mr. Riddell’s personal acquaintanceship with her.

James Richardson, Lobbyist, Nevada Faculty Alliance, testified in support of S.B. 303 on behalf of Joseph Crowley, President, UNR. He encouraged support of the bill. He said the university has a "wonderful and fruitful" relationship with the national council. He pointed out the university shares a degree program with the college which has been very successful. He noted there are times the state has to take back the endowment, but this bill tries to make up for the problem such action would cause.

Senator Raggio stated S.B. 303 and S.B. 304 will probably not be processed until the additional language is inserted to provide for the reestablishment of the endowment fund.

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 303 and opened the hearing on S.B. 399.

Senator Jacobsen thanked the committee for sponsoring the bill as a committee bill. He said that over the past several years he has made it a point to visit all of the honor camps and prison institutions. He pointed out the institutions have not been visited by legislators. He said this points out that occasionally the establishments need to be visited because they are one of the state’s major concerns. He suggested an interim committee would be the best way to handle institutional visits and to solve some of the problems.

Senator Rawson inquired whether oversight of the prison industries would be a function of the committee on correctional institutions. Senator Jacobsen pointed out there is a prison industries committee chaired by Assemblyman John Marvel and voiced the opinion it is not necessary to have two committees overseeing the prison industries. He said it might be well to consult Mr. Marvel. He maintained there are some areas prison industries can work in and not be in competition with the private sector and provide a revenue source.

Senator Jacobsen said the fire crew and the honor camps in the inmate program are a valuable resource and more should be done with them. He pointed out no one incarcerated for a capital crime is placed in an honor camp. He said the inmates who stay in camp and are "sick, lame and lazy" should be made to do something.

Senator Raggio asked the senator to comment on section 5 outlining the parameters and authority of the oversight committee. Senator Jacobsen said this would be a standing committee with the authority, not to make any major changes, but to more or less act as an advisory committee. Senator Raggio said the bill seems rather broad and asked what the proposed committee would be doing. Senator Jacobsen answered he had not thought out what the responsibilities of the committee might be, he had just recognized a need.

Senator Raggio asked who would have the right to appeal a policy rule or regulation of the institution. Senator Jacobsen replied he does not see the committee having anything to do with rules of the institution. Senator Raggio said section 5(a) seems to indicate that would be the case. Senator Jacobsen stated he agrees it does indicate that but has not had time to think out the details. He said an amendment might be called for but the general idea is excellent.

Senator Raggio indicated S.B. 399 is written broadly. He said, for example, section 5(a) says "it will review any administrative policy rule or regulation and comment on it" and section 5(b) says "conduct investigation and hold hearings without limitation, investigating the effect of programs, policy, rules, regulations involving either the state residents or persons incarcerated." He expressed concern an additional review process would be opened up for an inmate, which he was not sure should be the function of a legislative committee. He said the parameters need to be defined before the bill is passed. Senator Jacobsen agreed. He said it was not his intent to have the committee as involved as called for in the bill.

Senator Neal said it appears S.B. 399 would establish a committee with oversight of the Prison Industry committee and the reporting relationship would change. Senator Jacobsen stressed it was not his intent to supersede the Prison Industry committee in any way. He said he saw the proposed committee as drawing together the "work ethics" of the Department of Prisons and the Division of Forestry. He noted that when there is dual responsibility on a job, it is somewhat difficult to determine who has the real authority.

Senator Raggio suggested Senator Jacobsen work with staff on defining a more limited definition of responsibilities for the proposed committee. He pointed out section 3 would create an imbalance in the number of representatives from each house of the Legislature.

Ed Flagg, Lobbyist, Nevada Corrections Association, testified in support of S.B. 399 (Exhibit C). He stated the Nevada Department of Prisons (DOP) budget is a large and growing percentage of the state budget and continuing public review, through legislative oversight, is appropriate. He said the proposed committee could conduct interim studies and could provide a forum for the discussion, review and resolution of problem areas within the department.

Mr. Flagg said the association is opposed to privatization of the prison medical services and he suggested the committee in S.B. 399 could be used for oversight with the medical department to ensure that department medical costs continue to decrease.

Senator Raggio asked what the authority of the committee should be. Mr. Flagg answered it should have much involvement in regard to the inmates but maintained it would be a way to hold the DOP accountable. He said he regards S.B. 399 as an overview for the entire DOP.

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 399 and opened the hearing on S.B. 288.

Maurice E. Washington, Senator, Washoe County Senatorial District No. 2, testified there are some suggested amendments to S.B. 288 (Exhibit D). Senator Raggio stated the amendment has not been prepared. He asked what the bill will accomplish and what is being proposed in the way of amendments. Senator Washington answered S.B. 288 seeks to answer a question concerning the bifurcated system between Washoe and Clark Counties and the state, in this case Child Protective Services in both counties and the Division of Child and Family Services at the state level. He said the issues are the continuance of care for children in the custody of foster care providers moving from the county to the state level, dealing with the parent payment problems for those providers who are licensed by the state, working with services that have been contracted by the state to the county, and also case management of the children moving from short-term to long-term programs, whether there is reunification with biological parents or termination of parental rights.

Senator Washington stated that what this bill seeks to do with the amendments is to create a pilot program between Washoe and Clark Counties and the state to address the issues of providing continuance of care in case management, creating parity in the reimbursement structure between foster care providers from the county to the state level, and working out a system that will create a permanent placement so a child who is moved from the county program to the state program will not have to change foster parents.

May S. Shelton, Lobbyist, Washoe County, testified in support of S.B. 288. She provided a chart showing the bifurcated child welfare system (Exhibit E). She stated that since 1960 Clark and Washoe Counties have investigated child abuse and neglect, and if the children could not be reunified with parents within a reasonable period of time, the counties went to court and transferred the case to the state. She said that in 1985 the Legislature passed a bill called the Protection of Children from Abuse and Neglect. At the same time the Legislature said counties with more than 100,000 would continue to be responsible for the initial investigation of cases, keeping the bifurcated system.

Ms. Shelton said that in October 1998, Congress mandated states adopt the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA). She pointed out this is being heard in the current Legislature in the form of A.B. 158.

Ms. Shelton pointed out the federal act requires a permanency hearing within 12 months. She said if a child has been out of his or her home for a period of 15 of the last 22 months, permanency placement must also be established. Senator Raggio asked what "permanency" implies. Ms. Shelton answered it could be adoption or guardianship with relatives or others but is not normally foster care unless there are extenuating circumstances. She said the extenuating circumstances are spelled out in the statute. She noted it will become more difficult to work under the bifurcated system, so Washoe County has a joint permanency project in process and S.B. 288 would enable the county to more easily effectuate this plan.

Ms. Shelton said the hope is to have a joint permanency unit in Washoe County composed of Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) workers and county workers. She explained that perhaps the state would provide three social workers and the county would provide two social workers, a supervisor and a paraprofessional. She said approximately 100 cases a year would be selected after meeting certain criteria and require joint custody with the county and the state. She stated the workers would work toward permanency and have a caseload of approximately 18. She said the cost for foster care placements would be split between the state and the county.

Ms. Shelton said the county pays $40 a day for homes under contract and the state, under normal circumstances, pays $13 to $15 a day for regular foster care. That is why the disparity arises and a child is moved from one home to another. Ms. Shelton stated that under the new project, children can stay in the same foster home, reducing the number of times a child is moved, allowing for continuity of case management, and reducing the number of caseworkers a child would be involved with. She said there would also be family support services. She explained that currently the county pays private providers approximately $360,000 for counseling and other services. She said both the county and state resources would be used with the pilot project.

Senator Raggio asked whether the amendment leaves the language that is in the bill and adds a new section. Senator Washington replied the amendment seeks to replace the language currently in the bill with the new language proposed in the amendments. Senator Raggio noted there is a preamble in the bill that creates a pilot project. Senator Washington remarked that is correct and it is found in section 3, subsection 1 of the proposed amendment. Senator Raggio questioned whether a pilot program will be sufficient for what is mandated under the ASFA.

Frances M. Doherty, Court Master, Family Division, Second Judicial District Court, provided testimony in support of S.B. 288 (Exhibit F). She stated the problem the court system is dealing with is that under federal and state law, the courts review the appropriateness of care and permanency planning of every child in the care of the county or the state. She explained that at each review there are certain determinations to make: whether or not the county is making reasonable effort to reunify the family, and whether or not the state agency is using reasonable effort to accommodate access to a permanent plan within 12-months. She noted the latter now has greater emphasis under the new federal law.

Ms. Doherty emphasized the bifurcated system has been absolutely detrimental and harmful to the children who are in the care of the agencies although this is not due to any ill will or inappropriate behavior by the agencies themselves. She pointed out the children are victims of abuse, neglect or abandonment who are first placed by the county, because state law gives the county initial responsibility, in an emergency shelter. She explained that if the children cannot then go home, they are placed in a foster home or may be placed with relatives. She maintained the initial displacement from a family home, regardless of the environment, is devastating to the child.

Ms. Doherty stated research indicates the children experience trauma lasting a lifetime. She said that in the bifurcated system, after 3 to 6 months the case is transferred to the state. The children are taken from the foster home and given new treatment providers and may experience a change in school 3 or 4 times in 1 year. She stressed that once again the child is experiencing fear and isolation, and these emotions have been documented as a condition of attachment disorder. She pointed out the bifurcated system adds to the challenges in a child’s life. Ms. Doherty insisted the bifurcated system must be replaced as soon as possible, regardless of ASFA. She said children come into court crying and pleading not to have their case transferred to the state because they have finally reached some stability within their "county home."

Ms. Doherty stressed the issue must be addressed. Senator Neal asked at what point the system bifurcates and what effect this has on each structure. Ms. Doherty explained the county has, under state law, the primary obligation to investigate allegations of abuse or neglect and to take custody of those children who are in jeopardy of experiencing further abuse and neglect. She said that when the children are removed from the home, the county takes custody and makes a significant, reasonable effort to bring the family together as soon as possible. Longer-term cases presenting greater challenges to reunification are then transferred to the state. Ms. Doherty said cases continuing for 3 to 6 months are typically considered long-term.

Senator Neal asked what the problem is arising from the current system. Ms. Doherty replied the problem is that a child might have to change home environments a number of times and the treatment providers are frequently different. She explained the court reviews the cases every 6 months to make the determination as to whether reasonable efforts are being made by the county or the state and the appropriateness of planning. Under the old law the county and state had 18 months to make a permanent plan for the child. Ms. Doherty stated the 18 months have now been reduced by the federal law to 12 months. This will cause the bifurcated system to become condensed and more efficient than it currently is, which will enable the courts to better assess, at the 12-month review, whether reasonable efforts were made to place the child in a timely and efficient manner and whether the permanency plan is appropriate.

Senator Raggio asked how joint custody resolves the problems that emanate from the bifurcation system. Ms. Doherty answered the ideal system is the unified system. She pointed out S.B. 288 attempts to "unbifurcate" the system, but because the system is so large and intricate it is unlikely it can be "debifurcated" all at once. She said the pilot project will hopefully be able to bring the two agencies together on a more solidified basis to create within the project a unified system where all of the issues of bifurcation can be addressed on a smaller scale. Ms. Doherty noted it is hoped the pilot project will be used as a prototype to unbifurcate the entire system.

Senator Neal asked whether the intent is to create a system by which permanency, in terms of placement of the child, is the end result. Ms. Doherty replied yes and added that during the process the child’s life would not be disrupted by multiple placements. Senator Neal concluded that what is being looked for is a permanent placement for the child during the 12-month period of time required by ASFA. He said the present law, as he understands it, does not permit a permanent placement to occur. Ms. Doherty stated no language in the law has to change; what has to change is the underlying system to accommodate the new expectation of ASFA. She insisted the split system will create greater challenges to the ability of the agencies to comply with federal law and greater difficulty for the court to make a finding of reasonable effort. Ms. Doherty reiterated the desire is for the end result to be permanency.

Senator Rawson inquired whether the intention is to initiate the project in Washoe County. Ms. Doherty replied meetings have started in Washoe County. Senator Rawson asked whether Clark County has shown interest in the project. Senator Washington responded yes. Senator Rawson asked whether processing the bill would stop Clark County from proceeding in the same direction if the county so chooses. Senator Washington answered no.

Senator Raggio wondered whether there is a fiscal note for the county or the state for creating the unified protective services system. Ms. Shelton replied that Washoe County is fortunate because the county is appropriately funded and caseloads for each worker are reasonable. She said that in the investigation and assessment of families with children under the age of 6, the ratio of caseworkers to cases is 1 worker to 12 cases. For other families it is 1 to 16. Ms. Shelton explained that for ongoing cases it is 1 to 18. She said that unfortunately for the state and for Clark County, their caseloads are much larger. She noted the Joint Subcommittee on Human Resources/K-12 is contemplating 19 additional positions statewide in the DCFS budget. However, this increase would not be just for the purpose of the unified system.

Ms. Shelton stated she is requesting 2 additional positions be considered for DCFS so the special project unit can carry a per-worker caseload of no more than 18 cases.

Senator Neal asked whether the federal funding is contingent upon the fact the system has to be changed to meet the 12-month timeline. Ms. Shelton answered the regulations are not yet out, but some penalties are being discussed regarding the funds the state receives under Title IV-E, reimbursements. Senator Neal wondered why, if that is the case, the program is a pilot program. Ms. Shelton said the program needs to be tried on a smaller basis to see how it would work and what the problems would be. She said the current system involves hundreds of employees and it would be better to try the program on approximately 100 to 150 cases a year.

Senator Neal asked whether the county would be required to pay penalties if it is not in compliance by a specified date, once the federal law comes into effect. Ms. Doherty explained the 12-month provision is being incorporated into state law this current legislative session as required by the federal law. She said federal funding is connected to the legislation but is also conditioned on court approval of the agencies’ efforts as reasonable within the new, shortened time frames. She stated federal funding is jeopardized for any case where the court finds reasonable efforts have not been made. She emphasized the system should be overhauled. Ms. Doherty said that in the court’s view, the pilot project is the first significant, substantial step towards dismantling a system that is interfering with the lives of children and families with federal funding. She said the court recognizes the agencies’ dilemma in supporting S.B. 288 with the expectation the system will ultimately be fully unified.

Senator Washington added he attended a conference in Washington, D.C. regarding the ASFA. He said this bill is the result of his attendance at that conference to deal with bifurcated systems in both Washoe and Clark Counties.

Ms. Doherty stated the amount of funds allocated to DCFS for 2 additional staff is so much less than the amount of funds which could be jeopardized if the county and state cannot get the 12-month track going within the next year, regardless of what is done in any other legislative bills. She said the state will need more help to go into court and provide the documentation the new law requires to show that reasonable efforts have been made.

Senator Raggio asked the nature of the 2 new positions. Ms. Shelton responded the suggestion was actually that DCFS provide 3 social workers who are experienced case managers. They would handle the cases involving children in out-of-home placements and the families working towards a permanency plan for these children.

Senator Raggio recalled it was previously indicated there would not be a fiscal note related to the revision of S.B. 288. Stephen A. Shaw, Administrator, Division of Child and Family Services, Department of Human Resources, commented on the bill as a whole, as amended. He said this bill is the first major attempt in 40 or 50 years to undo something that is hurting children. He said Washoe County conducted a study for 12 months showing the average number of moves for children under 3 years of age was 3.2, because of bifurcation. He stated a similar study has not been performed in Clark County. Senator Raggio inquired whether the study covered a 1-year period. Mr. Shaw answered it covered an 11-month period. He said Washoe County is different from Clark County in that Washoe County has a parallel system of foster care, supported by county dollars, that pays substantially more than the state. He pointed out that because the county pays substantially more than the state for foster homes, those providing foster care for the state quickly become county foster homes and are paid $40 a day as opposed to $12 a day.

Mr. Shaw said there is not a parallel system in Clark County and most of the care is provided at Child Haven. He stated while Kirby Burgess, Director, Clark County Family and Youth Services and the staff are interested in looking at the pilot project in Washoe County, it is much preferred that the project take place in northern Nevada. He said he does not want to run any pilot project in Clark County, simply because the numbers are overwhelming. He maintained the issue is most critical in northern Nevada. He said this is a way a pilot project can be done so the effects of the bifurcated system can be nullified for a minimum amount of money or no money.

Mr. Shaw stated he believes children can progress through the system faster and into permanent placement and out of high-priced placement with almost no cost to the county or state. He said he would like to see more positions dedicated to the project but the funding for this is not in the Governor’s budget. He stated he can run the pilot project with the additional staff requested in the original budget. Mr. Shaw remarked he does not want to see the project fail to be initiated because of 2 or 3 staff positions not being approved.

Senator Raggio asked whether Mr. Shaw endorses the proposed amendment to S.B. 288, which is the pilot project. Mr. Shaw insisted he wholeheartedly endorses the amendment. Senator Raggio inquired whether the project can be done without the addition of full-time-equivalent (FTE) staff. Mr. Shaw answered yes. He stated he would like one amendment to the current amendment. He said the current amendment states "such a program may include provisions for joint case assessment and planning" and he recommended the word "custody" be included after the word "joint." Senator Raggio stated his copy of the amendment reads "joint custody case assessment and planning."

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 288 and opened the hearing on S.B. 404.

Mark A. James, Senator, Clark County Senatorial District No. 8, testified in support of S.B. 404, which would provide paid health and accident life insurance benefits for the surviving families of Nevada state police officers and firefighters killed in the line of duty. He said that presently the only coverage available is through the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA), which must be paid immediately after the death of the officer and lasts only 24 months. He pointed out the cost of paid benefits would be minimal, due to the fortunately small number of officers lost in the line of duty. He said 8 officers lost their lives on duty over the past 6 years.

Senator James said the changes in the statutes would assure the survivors have insurance coverage and would prevent the added stress and turmoil which comes with the uncertainty that exists under current circumstances. He stated the bill is cosponsored by every member of the Senate and gives testimony to the feelings legislators have for the officers who risk their lives on a daily basis.

Senator Raggio noted all costs would be borne by the respective employing agencies. He inquired about continuing benefit coverage. He said the question is, Should the coverage continue for the duration of the surviving spouse’s life or should it also be terminated by remarriage? Senator James responded he has been requested to change the wording to include "termination by remarriage" and he is not opposed to the change.

Senator James called attention to Carole Hashimoto, in attendance at this hearing. He reminded the committee Mrs. Hashimoto’s husband Keith was killed 3 years ago today in a training accident which occurred in the line of duty.

Senator Jacobsen said his concern is whether the volunteers who serve in law enforcement or firefighting would be covered. Senator James stated if the volunteers were on the state insurance program they would be covered, but those who were not on the program would not be covered.

Ronald R. Dreher, Lobbyist, Peace Officers Research Association of Nevada, urged passage of S.B. 404. He said the amendment to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 287 is warranted. He asked Mrs. Hashimoto to give testimony on what happened in her case. He said he was assigned to assist Mrs. Hashimoto in determining what survivor benefits were available to her. He found there was no coverage for survivors except COBRA coverage. Officer Dreher pointed out the premium had to be paid 3 days after Mr. Hashimoto’s death. Failure to pay would have resulted in there being no insurance coverage for the family. Officer Dreher stated Mrs. Hashimoto had to pay more than $400 a month for approximately 2 years.

Officer Dreher said the family did receive an offer for Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) insurance coverage that would have cost more than $538 a month, a substantial sum for a widow with two children. The association asked the City of Reno Insurance Committee, which is self-funded, to review the matter. Officer Dreher said the City of Reno agreed to retroactively cover Mrs. Hashimoto and the children. He stated the city also agreed to cover future line-of-duty deaths and to provide paid insurance coverage to surviving family members.

Officer Dreher said that when Washoe County sheriff’s deputy Frank Minetto was killed in the line of duty in 1997, the County discovered it did not have benefit coverage either and made the same changes the City of Reno made. However, in 1998 when UNR police sergeant George Sullivan was brutally murdered, his wife Carol and their four children were left with no state insurance coverage. Officer Dreher said that fortunately Mrs. Sullivan had her own insurance. She must pay more than $130 each month to provide insurance for the family. Officer Dreher insisted that is wrong. Noting that Mrs. Sullivan’s husband gave his life to protect the people of the state, he requested this committee not only implement the steps taken by the City of Reno and Washoe County but also provide paid benefits retroactively to Mrs. Sullivan and her children if possible.

Officer Dreher said the cost is minimal and a small price to pay for the state to show support for what the police and fire personnel do for the state. He requested each senator support S.B. 404 and put the law into effect immediately.

Senator Neal said the bill seems to cover only the state insurance program. He asked what would happen if a county were to choose to be self-insured. Officer Dreher answered what would happen is what happened in Reno. He said Reno’s self-insurance program incorporated insurance coverage for people killed in the line of duty and Washoe County did the same thing. He stated Clark County is self-insured and it would be up to the county to make similar changes. Senator Neal asked Senator James whether S.B. 404 would require other cities and counties to provide coverage to surviving families. Senator James answered it was his understanding that is the case.

Senator Raggio asked whether the term "police officer" is broad enough to include law enforcement officers from all agencies referenced. Officer Dreher responded yes, NRS 617.135 covers all police officers in the state of Nevada. Senator Raggio recalled Mr. Minetto was a federal officer and could not be covered by the state. Officer Dreher affirmed the Minetto case would be covered by the federal government.

Carole Hashimoto, private citizen, testified her husband Keith Hashimoto died 3 years ago in a Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team training accident. She stated she was a full-time housewife and mother of two children aged 5 and 8 at the time. She said the family’s financial well-being was totally dependent on Officer Hashimoto’s salary and medical and dental benefits. Upon his death, combined income received from various sources amounted to approximately half of Officer Hashimoto’s annual salary and did not cover the monthly expenses. Mrs. Hashimoto said that additionally, the only way she could continue the medical and dental benefits through COBRA was to make the monthly payment of $400. She emphasized the added cost of the insurance, combined with the loss of income, created a financial hardship at a time when it was hard enough to keep things stable emotionally, let alone financially.

Mrs. Hashimoto said that after paying COBRA for 2 years, the City of Reno eventually agreed to make the insurance benefit available to the family as a result of Officer Dreher’s perseverance. She said:

Senator Raggio said S.B. 404 only refers to insurance. He said other benefits are not involved. Officer Dreher agreed.

Senator Neal asked what benefits were available at the time of Officer Hashimoto’s death. Mrs. Hashimoto said the benefits included her husband’s retirement through PERS, social security, and money from the City of Reno’s self-insurance, which is similar to a risk management fund that covers workers’ compensation-type injuries.

Senator O’Donnell asked whether the children will receive a college education. Mrs. Hashimoto replied that has not been arranged. Officer Dreher said there is a program through a group called Concern of Police Survivors (COPS) that is trying to get legislation to provide college education for surviving children. He said the legislation has been approved at the federal level. Senator O’Donnell said he was under the impression the legislation passed in Nevada in 1997. Senator Mathews agreed that it did pass in the Senate. Senator O’Donnell asked whether the legislation failed in the Assembly. Officer Dreher answered he did not know.

Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Nevada Highway Patrol Association, testified Senator O’Donnell submitted a bill for college education benefits last legislative session but the bill never progressed through the Senate. He recalled that time ran out last session. He stated this type of legislation should be brought back before the Legislature. Senator Raggio pointed out the issue might be covered by the Millennium Scholarship program if it is approved. In conclusion, Mr. Wolff stated the Nevada Highway Patrol Association fully supports S.B. 404.

Mr. Flagg said the Nevada Corrections Association is in support of S.B. 404.

Senator O’Donnell asked whether there would be a desire to bring back the bill approved last session and perhaps attach it to S.B. 404. Senator Raggio stated the bill will not be processed today but this possibility can be discussed later.

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 404. He said he has been advised Senator Care would like to reschedule the hearing on S.B. 261 because witnesses who had planned to testify were not contacted. However, he invited anyone present who wishes to testify on S.B. 261 to do so.

Ed Gobel, Lobbyist, Council of Nevada Veterans Organizations, testified he does not oppose the concept of a "spouse house" but said there are several areas of the bill that the council, by resolution, opposes. He pointed out section 1, paragraph 3 does not specify the size of the house, how many units it will have or who pays for it. Senator Raggio remarked the committee has nothing on the bill other than the request to have the hearing rescheduled.

Mr. Gobel stated the council always opposes any bill where one person has exclusive discretion over anything. He said it is of tremendous concern that one person would have exclusive discretion over who would get into the spouse house and how long the person would be able to stay. He indicated the need for other alternatives to be addressed or explored including, perhaps, the donation of hotel rooms in Boulder City. He pointed out hotels in Boulder City might be willing to donate more rooms than can be built, or at least to offer the rooms at a reduced cost to the spouse or the state.

Mr. Gobel stated S.B. 261 is not one of high priority for the Council of Nevada Veterans Organizations. He said if there is a desire to pass a bill, passage of S.B. 33 would be appreciated. He commented S.B. 33 would provide the first veterans’ property tax exemption increase in 46 years.

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on S.B. 261 and said the bill will be rescheduled.

Senator Raggio inquired whether the committee would be interested in requesting a formal amendment to S.B. 288. Senator Neal recommended an amendment be requested.

Senator Raggio said he would refrain from taking action on S.B. 303 and S.B. 304 to see if language can be developed on a mechanism for restoring the endowment funds.

Senator Raggio opened the hearing on S.B. 159.

Senator Raggio said the bill was heard on February 22, 1999, and would restore the balance in the emergency account.

Senator Raggio stated Senator Wiener testified on S.B. 57 when it was heard on March 22, 1999. Senator Raggio said it sounded like the program is working quite well. He said Robert Bayer, Director, Department of Prisons, also indicated he did not see any fiscal note that could not be taken care of through the present arrangement in the prisons.

Senator Rawson thought that as much as $165,000 may have been provided for this purpose in the past for a 1-year period. He pointed out there is a 3-to-1 match but said "it may not be the same area." Senator Raggio remarked:

Senator Raggio pointed out the Governor said he was quite content the money in the budget could be used. The senator said he did not know whether the committee has to footnote the funding because he did not know what the mechanics would be.

Dan Miles, Senate Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, said there are two ways to do this. One suggestion was to designate the money for these programs in a separate category within the Governor’s budget and that would set it out as being a match. The other suggestion was to add a clause within the General Appropriations Act, similar to what has been done for the nutrition budget in the Nevada Department of Education, stipulating that certain state monies can be used as a match.

Senator Rawson said he would recommend a motion. Mr. Comeaux indicated he agreed.

Boards and Commissions – Budget Pages BOARDS 1-57 (Volume 3)

Senator Raggio called attention to the budgets for the boards listed in Exhibit G (Original is on file in the Research Library). He asked whether there are any boards the members would like to call before the committee. He said he would like to call the State Board of Contractors. Senator Jacobsen asked whether there is some assurance the boards are active. Senator Raggio replied there is not, unless the boards are called before the committee. He said he reviewed the list and did not recall there were staff adjustments on any of the boards’ budgets.

Senator Rawson indicated he is a licensed dentist and the State Board of Dental Examiners controls his license. Senator Mathews added she is a nurse licensed by the State Board of Nursing.

B&I, Rural Rehabilitation Trust Fund – Budget Page B&I-173 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 643-4553

Rick Combs, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, testified this account funds the Nevada Junior Agricultural Loan Program and the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Mediation Program. He said the loan program funds loans to persons under the age of 21 for agriculturally related projects. The USDA program mediates disputes that arise between farmers and ranchers in Nevada and the USDA. Senator Raggio asked whether the funds are federal funds available for the purposes indicated. Mr. Combs replied the mediation program is funded entirely through USDA funds. He said the loan program funds itself with the interest on the loans, which makes the program self-perpetuating.

Senator Raggio asked what the default record is on the loans. Mr. Combs answered he has no information on defaults. He said it appears the amounts collected are the amounts that have been projected from the previous year. Senator Raggio noted there may have been one loan mediation resolved, which would indicate a low default rate. Mr. Combs clarified the loan mediation refers to the USDA program.

Senator Rawson said he does not know whether there are any figures on the number of Africanized honey bees found in and spreading throughout southern Nevada. He pointed out it would not be hard to adjust this budget to allow more inspections and disruptions of the bee colonies.

Mr. Combs stated this account funded the Africanized honey bee grant from the federal government in past years. He said the grant provided funds for the Division of Agriculture to track the movement of the bees and to perform inspections to survey and identify whether or not the bees had arrived in Nevada. Now that the bees are here, he remarked, this account would probably not be used to fund expenditures related to Africanized honey bees. Instead the funding would be included in the Division of Agriculture’s Plant Industry account. Mr. Combs said there are two agriculturists recommended in The Executive Budget and a budget amendment has been submitted by the Budget Office to provide that one of the agriculturists would serve as the Africanized honey bee specialist in the state beginning July 1.

Mr. Combs said an agriculturist position is currently being funded with funds provided from weights and measures inspection fees to address the honey bee problem for the remainder of FY 1999. As proposed in the budget amendment, the new position will become effective beginning in FY 2000.

Senator Raggio asked whether ranchers using bees for pollination pay the permit fees into this account. Mr. Combs responded anyone having bee colonies pays a registration fee and the ranchers can request an inspection to determine whether or not there is any disease.

Senator O’Donnell said the Africanized bees are a southern Nevada problem at this point. He pointed out that some of these bees have lasted through the winter and have become acclimatized so the bees will stay in Nevada for a while. However, he noted, the northern Nevada individuals who own bee plants for pollinization of fields are the ones paying into the fund to pay for the inspection and eradication of the Africanized bees. He suggested it was unfair for northern Nevadans to pay for the problem that exists in the southern part of the state.

Senator Rawson said the issue is that the line is drawn where needed. He pointed out the line will continue to move and citizens must do all that can be done or children and pets will succumb to the bees eventually.

Senator Raggio pointed out that originally the Apiary Inspection budget had nothing to do with the Africanized honey bee. He said the apiary permit is the one that is issued when colonies of bees are imported into the state for the purpose of pollination. Mr. Combs explained that when the Africanized honey bee grant became available from the federal government it was logical to place the funds from the grant in this budget. He said the new position is proposed to be funded through General Fund dollars now that the grant is being eliminated. Mr. Combs noted there may be some offsets from other fees.

Senator Raggio said there are a number of contagious bee diseases having nothing to do with Africanized honey bee colonies. Mr. Combs pointed out The Executive Budget deleted all the expenditures for the Africanized honey bee federal grant but failed to delete the revenue in the first year of the biennium, so there is an adjustment to remove the revenue from the budget.

Senator Neal asked what the motion means. Senator Raggio explained there is no money now from the federal government because the bees have become established in Nevada and the state no longer qualifies for the federal grant. Mr. Combs added that basically the federal grant is being phased out because it is known where the bees are and where they are most likely going to stay because of the climate.

Senator Neal asked whether the grant was to be used to eradicate the bees. Mr. Combs answered there is no way to eradicate the bees. He added there are "educational things to be done" to help prevent problems caused by the Africanized honey bee.

Senator O’Donnell pointed out there has been testimony that once an Africanized honey bee colony has been identified the colony is eradicated. Mr. Combs said that is correct, but it has been indicated to him it is difficult to control the spread once they are found and they will most likely never be totally eliminated.

Senator O’Donnell said testimony was heard in the Joint Subcommittee on General Government there was not enough funding to take care of the eradication of bee colonies. Mr. Combs said there was no funding. Senator O’Donnell said this has been addressed by the Budget Division. Mr. Comeaux said the Division of Agriculture has agreed one of the agriculturist positions recommended in budget account 101-4540 should be used to work on the bee problem. He stated nothing additional to what is in The Executive Budget is recommended.

Senator O’Donnell stated the problem is that a lot of people on fixed incomes are finding swarms of bees in their yards. He said he understands only a few companies are certified to remove Africanized honey bees and if individuals own the property they have to pay to have the bees removed. If the individual does not have the money he asked, what do they do? He inquired whether there is contingency money that can be tapped into if individuals become the victims of a bee colony. Mr. Combs said he was not aware of how the new position will be used but the division is scheduled to return to the Joint Subcommittee on General Government to discuss budget account 101-4540. He stated an issue to be addressed is how the position will be used based on the budget amendment.

* * * * *

B&I, Minerals-Bond Reclamation – Budget Page B&I-217 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-4220

Senator O’Donnell and Senator Mathews favored closing the budgets as the Governor recommended.

Senator Raggio stated he would like some discussion on this budget because there is a sizable amount of money in the Reclamation Bond Pool. He noted the forfeiture contingency will be approximately $885,000. He asked what activity occurs in this budget. Mr. Combs said the program is an account that helps mine operators comply with their bonding requirements. Senator Raggio said his concern is what occurs when the bonding requirements are not complied with. He asked where the funding comes from. Mr. Combs explained the money comes from premiums paid by the mine operators and the funds are placed in this account. After a mine performs the reclamation activities it receives a refund. Mr. Combs pointed out mining operations take a long time and the funds are not returned until the operation is completed. He said the fund has never had to pay out for a reclamation that was not performed properly.

* * * * *

B&I, Nevada Junior Livestock Show Board – Budget Page B&I-235 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-4980

SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.

Senator Raggio asked how these funds are used. Mr. Combs answered the money is used to conduct livestock exhibits and shows and provides other educational opportunities for 4-H and Future Farmers of America (FFA) members. He said this account is funded entirely from the General Fund in the amount of approximately $33,000 each year of the biennium.

* * * * *

Health Resources Cost Review – Budget Page HCF&P-27 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-1010

Senator Raggio requested an explanation of the budget. Steve Abba, Senior Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, said this is a pass-through budget. He explained that three different fees collected by the Division of Health Care Financing and Policy come into the budget. He said the first fee is one assessed on private hospitals with 200 or more beds and is collected biannually. He pointed out there is a biannual audit required of these types of hospitals. The specific requirements for the audit are outlined in the Nevada Revised Statutes. Mr. Abba said the division assesses the hospitals a certain amount based upon the anticipated cost of the audit. Senator Raggio asked whether the audit reviews a hospital’s level of indigent care. Mr. Abba replied yes. He said the audit includes a review of whether hospitals have discounted rates for indigent clients, whether the lease agreements with physicians associated with the hospitals are appropriate, and what contractual-type arrangements they may have. He maintained a number of different types of audit standards are reviewed. He stated the division collects the assessment and hires the firm to perform the audit and the funds pass through to the firm actually performing the audit.

Mr. Abba said the second type of fee collected is the one assessed when there is a problem with a private hospital not meeting the indigent-care requirements. If the requirements are not met, the hospital is assessed a penalty. Senator Raggio asked whether this applies to all hospitals. Mr. Abba answered it applies only to private hospitals. Senator Raggio inquired whether private hospitals with less than 200 beds are affected. Mr. Abba responded the audit fees apply to larger private hospitals only. He said the hospitals assessed are Desert Springs, Sunrise, Valley, Washoe Medical Center, and Saint Mary’s.

Mr. Abba pointed out the third fee collected in this account is the one usually used to reimburse to the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) Center for Public Data Research. He said the center handles much of the research information and data used by a number of different entities tracking health care costs throughout Nevada. He stated the division handles a number of private requests for the information and the center charges for the services. He noted the division acts as a payer for the services and gets a reimbursement from those requesting the information from the center.

Senator Neal inquired about the fee going to the UNLV Center for Public Data Research. He asked the name of the publication produced by the center. Mr. Abba answered that a number of different types of data publications are produced at the center. He said the Division of Health Care Finance and Policy produces a number of publications. The Center for Public Data Research produces the data used for the publications. Mr. Abba was not aware of specific publications published by the center itself. Senator Raggio believed Health Choices to be one of the publications. Mr. Abba maintained Health Choices comes from the Health Division, but the data used is generated from the Center for Public Data Research.

Senator Neal asked what other agency uses the data. Mr. Abba replied a number of private agencies use the data. He said the Health Division’s biostatistician would use the center for Women Infants & Children USDA Special Supplemental Food Program (WIC) types of publications and the division’s Maternal and Child Health Services (MCH) annual grant application.

Senator Neal asked where the .06 percent comes from relating to the fee collected from penalties against hospitals of more than 100 beds for not providing sufficient indigent care. Mr. Abba answered the percentage is set in the Nevada Revised Statutes. The .06 assessment is applied to a hospital’s net operating revenue received for a particular fiscal year, and the funds from this source are used to determine whether sufficient indigent care has been provided. He added that if, when audited, the hospital does not meet the standard, it is assessed a penalty "making up the difference from what was provided in terms of services for indigent care up to the .06 requirement." He said the monies are then collected by the Division of Health Care Financing and Policy and remitted to the county health department in the county where the hospital is located.

Senator Neal asked whether any hospitals in the state operate with fewer than 100 beds. Mr. Abba replied there are a number of small rural hospitals having significantly fewer than 100 beds. Senator Neal asked whether those hospitals pay fees. Mr. Abba answered no.

SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.

Senator Rawson asked whether funding for the Legislative Committee on Health Care comes from this budget account. Mr. Abba answered no. He explained the revenue for that committee comes from the Division of Health Care Financing and Policy’s main administrative account.

* * * * *

Mr. Abba said staff recommends the budget be closed as the Governor has recommended.

Senator Raggio asked the purpose of this account. Mr. Abba said the Welfare Division acts as an agent to pass through Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) monies to local agencies. He explained the ESG is a grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The ESG’s are used by local governments for the provision of homeless services and include maintenance and repair, shelter facilities, payment for motel rooms, car repairs, insurance and homeless-prevention efforts. Mr. Abba stated the division retains a small amount of money to cover administrative costs, but the majority of the funds are passed on to participating local entities.

Mr. Abba pointed out Clark County is not included in the expenditure as a pass-through agency. He explained Clark County is a large enough metropolitan area that the county gets the ESG directly from the federal government. The Welfare Division acts as the agent for the remainder of the state.

Senator Raggio asked how the City of Reno uses the money received from the ESG. Mr. Abba responded he knows only that the funds are used for the homeless shelter. Senator Raggio stated the city does not have a homeless shelter. Mr. Abba said there are a number of programs that apply for funding directly to the City of Reno.

Senator Neal referred to decision unit E-350 in which there is an increase for the ESG to $280,000 providing additional in-state travel for the non-state-employee members of the "homeless board" and out-of-state travel for two division staff to attend specialized training. He asked whether this amount of money is necessary. Mr. Abba answered the board makes recommendations on how the pass-through funds should be used and on how they are to be distributed. He explained the out-of-state travel funds requested would enable the two staff members to attend a specific conference on the new requirements of the ESG.

* * * * *

Senator Raggio acknowledged the presence of visitors from the Job Opportunities In Nevada (JOIN) Alternative School in Fallon, Nevada.

Senator Neal introduced members of his family in attendance at this meeting.

HR, Energy Assistance-Welfare – Budget Page WELFARE-53 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-4862

Mr. Abba explained the Low Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEA) program is designed to help eligible households maintain heating and cooling in their homes during the winter and summer months. He said the program provides a onetime heating payment during the winter months for eligible households in central and northern Nevada. In southern Nevada the payment is split between a winter heating payment and a summer cooling payment. Mr. Abba stated the payments range from $90 to $540.

Mr. Abba pointed out there is one small adjustment in the first year of the biennium to reduce the software costs in the budget to the levels now suggested by the state Purchasing Division. He explained the reduction will be placed in the benefits category to be used for additional payment assistance. Senator Raggio noted the software costs will be reduced by approximately $209.

Senator Neal inquired how using money from utility accounts, addressed in pending legislation, could be applied in the area of energy assistance. Mr. Abba replied the LIHEA grant has held steady at the federal level for several years and if the pending bills pass, the money would be brought directly into this account as a new funding stream and administered in the same manner as the LIHEA block grant is currently administered. He said the funds would be used directly as services to clients and the eligibility criteria would remain the same. Mr. Abba stated the Welfare Division has indicated this would be a welcome new source of funding and no additional staff or expenses would be required to administer the program.

Senator Neal asked whether the federal monies would be jeopardized. Mr. Abba answered no. In fact, he said, the budget can be closed, and if the bills do pass, the work program can be processed at a later date to bring in the new monies and properly place the funds in the appropriate revenue and expenditure categories.

Senator Rawson asked whether there are restrictions preventing an endowment fund from being set up with the federal funds. He pointed out it would not take long to generate interest and the account could continue forever. Mr. Abba agreed but stated the current problem is that there is not enough money to fund all of the applications for energy assistance. Senator Raggio remarked there are 10,000 applications each year. Mr. Abba pointed out there is a database of individuals qualifying for the program each year and the program runs until all of the funds are expended.

Senator Rawson said he would recommend when the bills are processed that action be taken to start an endowment or trust fund which would pay out so much money from the utility accounts. He maintained if this were done for 7 years the fund would carry itself. Senator Raggio asked whether the federal government would allow the state to keep the money. Mr. Abba said yes, because the endowment fund would be a different revenue fund that is now supported by the state. He explained the money could be reserved in this budget and allowed to be carried forward each year.

Senator Mathews asked whether, after the revenues are used, the utility company has a program to provide energy assistance. Mr. Abba replied his understanding was that the utility companies do have various programs the companies operate themselves. Senator Mathews inquired whether the overflow lists from the LIHEA program are provided to the utility companies. Mr. Abba answered the information is shared.

* * * * *

HR, Chapter I & II Education Programs – Budget Page DCFS-56 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-3286

Senator Raggio pointed out this account is funded entirely by the federal government. He said it is used at the Nevada Youth Training Center (NYTC). Larry L. Peri, Senior Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, said this is the remedial education program in place at the youth training center in Elko. Senator Raggio asked why there is a reduction in funding from the work program. Mr. Peri said his understanding is the amount from education has held constant, however, there are more organizations and entities receiving the funds so the Nevada Youth Training Center’s proportion has been reduced to the point the budget cannot be entirely supported. He said approximately 1.51 FTEs can be supported. Senator asked whether these funds are used in connection with other funding for remedial programs. Mr. Peri answered they have not been, in the past.

Mr. Peri stated The Executive Budget recommends this budget account be eliminated and the positions transferred into the main NYTC account which would then support the program. Senator Raggio noted decision unit E-225 replaces the loss of federal education funds with money from the General Fund and transfers the funds to the main budget account. Mr. Peri said that is correct and all of the academic teachers will be in the main budget account under the education module. He pointed out there are many academic teachers currently funded in the main NYTC account, but the 2 special education teachers have always been separate. Senator Raggio asked whether there is a federal requirement that there has to be a separate account. Mr. Peri replied no.

* * * * *

HR, Farm Account-Youth Training Center – Budget Page DCFS-66 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-3277

Mr. Peri stated this budget account supports the raising and sale of chukar and the collection of revenue on behalf of the sales.

* * * * *

Commission for Women – Budget Page ELECTED-14 (Volume 1)

Budget Account 101-1029

Birgit Baker, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, testified the commission has not been active for the past year. She stated 4 of the 10 memberships expired on June 30, 1998, and the Governor has not appointed anyone to fill the vacancies. She said the Governor’s budget recommends the commission generate its own funding from gifts and donations. No general funds were recommended for this program. Senator Raggio asked whether state funding has ever been provided for this program. Ms. Baker answered a one-shot appropriation was provided in 1995. Senator Raggio inquired whether the commission has been able to generate any contributions. Ms. Baker responded that when the commission was first established there were a significant amount of donations. She said currently there is approximately $3,000 from donations in the budget account.

* * * * *

State Unemployment Compensation – Budget Page PERSONNEL-8 (Volume 1)

Budget Account 101-1339

Mary A. Matheus, Local Government Budget Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, explained the adjustments to the account as shown on page 2 of Exhibit H . She said this is basically a holding account that accumulates unemployment assessment contributions for agencies that are paid through the central payroll system. She stated an assessment of .13 percent is charged against gross payroll for FTE positions and deposited in the account. She said the Employment Security Division bills the account quarterly for actual unemployment compensation benefits paid.

Ms. Matheus noted the first adjustment is to the balance forward from FY 1998-99. She said staff is recommending the balance forward be reduced by $158,011 to reflect the actual payments being made this fiscal year. She pointed out another adjustment in the amount of $74,126 in FY 2000 and $95,115 in FY 2001, which amounts are added to the assessment collected. She said this is an adjustment reflecting the revenue in this account to match the expenditures reflected in the central payroll account. Senator Raggio asked whether all employees other than elected officials are covered by unemployment insurance. Ms. Matheus answered yes.

Ms. Matheus explained that at the .13 percent of gross payroll recommended in the Governor’s budget, with the adjustments made to reflect the revenues, the reserve balance in this account increases in the first year of the biennium to $309,081 and to $424,551 in FY 2001. Ms. Matheus said discussions with the Budget Division and the Department of Personnel indicate the reserve level is higher than needed. She pointed out a reserve of more than one quarter’s anticipated costs is an acceptable level.

Ms. Matheus stated the committee may wish to consider reducing the assessment level from .13 percent of gross payroll to .11 percent. She said if the assessment level were reduced to .11 percent the reserve level would be reduced to approximately $200,000 in each year, which the agency feels would be adequate to pay the benefits. Senator Raggio noted the agency has been paying slightly less than $600,000 a year. Ms. Matheus stated that amount has remained consistent for the past 10 years. Senator Raggio asked whether these benefits are payable to those leaving state employment either voluntarily or involuntarily. He asked when someone leaving voluntarily would start collecting unemployment.

Mr. Comeaux said he was not sure when benefits could be collected. Senator Raggio asked whether the same rules apply as in private employment. Mr. Comeaux said he believed the rules are exactly the same. Senator Raggio asked who controls the assessment for the purpose of unemployment benefits. Ms. Matheus replied the state Department of Personnel controls it.

* * * * *

HR, Child Welfare Trust – Budget Page DCFS-33 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 645-3242

Mr. Peri reviewed the recommended adjustments to the budget shown on page 3 of Exhibit H. He said this budget account can be termed a holding account within the Division of Child and Family Services that receives various sources of revenue including Social Security benefits, Supplemental Security Income, Veterans Administration benefits and court-ordered child support payments. He explained this account holds the funds and makes transfers throughout the fiscal year to the Child Welfare Trust (Youth Community Services) budget account on behalf of the children and goes towards the cost of their care.

Mr. Peri said accounts are established individually for each child and when care is terminated, if there is any balance in the child’s account, it is refunded to the child upon his or her release from the division’s care. Senator Raggio asked whether all of the money accumulated for the child’s benefit goes to the child when he or she is released from this program and goes to permanent placement. Mr. Peri responded that is his understanding.

Senator Neal said he noticed the FY 1997-98 actual amount shown in this account for total resources and total expenditures is $1.425 million (budget page DCFS-33). Mr. Peri concurred. Senator Neal asked why the interest-bearing account "seems to be less than the actuals." Mr. Peri answered that child support payments, which normally came directly into this budget account, will now go directly to the child welfare budget. He said this amounted to approximately $98,000 in FY 1998. Also, there was a onetime analysis of this account in FY 1998 which resulted in approximately $250,000 coming out of the reserve, resulting in much larger interest earnings in the base year. Mr. Peri pointed out the interest is projected at $3,750 in FY 2000 and $4,027 in FY 2001 in the Governor’s recommended budget. He said one adjustment staff is recommending is that the amount of interest expected be increased by $4,000 each year of the biennium to yield closer to $8,000 in interest. Mr. Peri stated this is still quite a difference, but it is mostly due to the fact the support in the base year was considerably larger than in the 2 out-years.

Senator Raggio asked Mr. Comeaux whether he concurred with the adjustments. Mr. Comeaux replied yes.

* * * * *

HR, Victims of Domestic Violence – Budget Page DCFS-35 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-3181

Mr. Peri testified this budget is funded by a $50 fee on each marriage license sold in the state of Nevada. He said the monies are collected and subgranted to community nonprofit organizations. He stated all of Nevada’s 17 counties receive some of these funds in some way. Mr. Peri said the distribution is based on a population formula. He provided a list of the various grant recipients shown on page 5 of Exhibit H. He said the staff concurs with the Governor’s recommendation in decision unit M-200, which projects additional revenue based on population increases projected by the state demographer.

Senator Raggio asked what the difference is between the per-biennial report information and the per-3.0 report information shown on page 6 of Exhibit H. Mr. Peri explained there is a statutory requirement that the Division of Child and Family Services provide to each session of the Legislature a biennial report. The report contains some figures that were slightly different. Mr. Peri pointed out the 3.0 report is the state’s financial reporting system and the true accounting. He said the 3.0 report might have categories with slightly different titles or distribution than what the printed report contained.

Senator Raggio asked what the "Nevada Network" is. Mr. Peri was not sure. Senator Raggio noted the 3.0 report shows $70,179 goes to "Nevada Network." Mr. Peri pointed out that was not included in the printed version provided to the Legislature. Senator Raggio requested Mr. Peri provide the committee with information on what the "Nevada Network" is.

* * * * *

HR, Children’s Trust Account – Budget Page DCFS-37 (Volume 2)

Budget Page 101-3201

Mr. Peri stated this account is funded by a $3 fee on each birth or death certificate issued in Nevada and also from a federal Community-Based Family Resource and Support grant. He pointed out a listing of the grant awards made in FY 1998 is shown on page 9 of Exhibit H. He said these grants go to political subdivisions of the state and to nonprofit community organizations or educational institutions, and they provide services for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.

Senator Raggio asked whether this is supplemental funding for domestic violence programs or whether the funding is for other purposes instead. Mr. Peri answered the funding is specifically for child abuse and neglect programs. He said that because domestic violence often leads to child abuse and neglect, some of the programs may parallel one another; however, this budget is for a somewhat different objective.

Senator Raggio noticed Ridge House received a small award. He said he was under the impression Ridge House was a transition facility.

Senator Rawson said the Governor’s recommendation for the reserve is $107,000 higher in the first year of the biennium than the agency had requested. He asked whether it would be reasonable to reduce the reserve. Mr. Peri replied he thinks the reserve shown in the agency request may have been understated when the budget was developed. He pointed out if one looks at what the budget contemplates, there is a $200,000 reserve in FY 2000 reduced to $100,000 because the committee overseeing the funds wants the reserve reduced so more of the funds can be used for grants. Senator Raggio asked whether $100,000 is a sufficient reserve. Mr. Peri responded the division seems to think so, as does the committee overseeing the distribution of the funds. He said when this budget has been closed in the past with large reserves there have been comments by members of the Senate Committee on Finance and the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means that there is no need to carry such a large reserve and more money should be put into programs.

* * * * *

HR, Child Abuse and Neglect – Budget Page DCFS-40 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-3271

Mr. Peri said this account is funded entirely by a federal grant and provides family support services and training in child abuse and neglect, prevention and treatment to Division of Child and Family Services’ staff and to children and their families. He pointed out a statewide task force is funded through this account and the federal grant requires the task force. He said several adjustments are recommended in the budget and staff concurs with the recommended adjustments. One is a change in funding status from the federal grant to another federal source that is entitled Federal Title IV-B Subpart II. Mr. Peri stated the division came to IFC on June 25, 1998, and received permission to make the change for the current fiscal year.

Mr. Peri said the budget recommends one position be transferred out of this budget to the division’s main administrative account so the position will be grouped with all of the existing social workers within the division. Senator Raggio asked whether this will help the division better track grant funding. Mr. Peri stated that is what is indicated.

Senator Neal question the need for the Nurse Case Manager position in this program. Mr. Peri speculated that when there is an instance of suspected abuse or neglect in Clark or Washoe Counties, those counties initially handle the child protective services’ investigations. The Division of Child and Family Services initially handles the investigations for the remaining 15 counties. Mr. Peri said the Nurse Case Manager position has most likely been funded by the grant for some time. Senator Neal noted the position was funded by the IFC June 25, 1998. Mr. Peri pointed out that was a change in funding. The request to the IFC simply changed the source of federal funding from one grant to another source of federal money because the regulations of the original grant funding required that more of the money be spent on training and that it not be used to pay for the Nurse Case Manager position. Mr. Peri maintained the position has been in this budget account for at least 2 bienniums. Senator Neal inquired when the last audit was performed. Mr. Peri did not know.

* * * * *

DETR, Research & Analysis – Budget Page DETR-23 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-3273

Ms. Baker said the Governor’s recommendation supports the agency’s request to create a separate budget account for the Research and Analysis Bureau of the department. The bureau is currently included in the Information Development and Processing (IDP) Division. Ms. Baker explained the purpose of the new account is to allow for more efficient and accurate accounting of the funding sources used to administer a variety of U.S. Department of Labor cooperative programs.

Ms. Baker referred to an organizational chart shown on page 13 of Exhibit H. She said the positions shaded would make up the Research and Analysis Bureau staff and would be transferred to the new account. She pointed out this would be a bureau, not a new division. The expenses and programs associated with the 28 positions were broken out to better account for the funds. Senator Raggio asked whether this is for labor market information. Ms. Baker answered yes. The senator asked where this program previously resided. Ms. Baker said it was on page 22 of The Executive Budget.

Ms. Baker stated no adjustments are recommended at this time. She said the budget from which the positions are being transferred is currently under review by the Joint Subcommittee on General Government, and staff would request making any changes the committee would make to the budget that would affect this transfer. Senator Raggio confirmed that if adjustments are made to any of the umbrella budgets, other adjustments will have to be made to any of the corresponding budgets being closed.

* * * * *

DETR, Vocational Assessment Centers – Budget Page DETR-81 (Volume 2)

Budget Account 101-3264

Ms. Baker stated this budget was created in the 1997 Legislative Session. She explained a separate budget account was authorized because the centers wanted to begin marketing their services outside the department. She pointed out the recommended adjustments shown on pages 14, 15 and 16 of Exhibit H were requested by the agency. She said the hope was to expand the program in the current biennium, but the expansion has not occurred so the agency has asked that all the enhancements originally requested be eliminated from the budget and the revenue projections revised. Ms. Baker said this gives a more accurate picture of what is happening in the account and also provides a reasonable reserve.

Senator Raggio asked whether it was anticipated there would be a lot of demand for services and the agency would receive payment for the services. Ms. Baker explained that services used to be provided exclusively for the Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation, and the Bureau of Services to the Blind, work assessments for the Welfare Division, and situational assessments for the workers’ compensation clients, as well as for other private referrals. She said the agency has been successful in expanding the centers to a certain extent, but they have not expanded as quickly as hoped. She noted that if additional requests for assessments materialize, the agency could go to IFC to expand the budget.

Senator Raggio asked whether the requests come from the private sector. Ms. Baker said there are a number of possible sources.

* * * * *

Senator Raggio said there are four budgets dealing with the Colorado Commission: budget account 296-4496, Fort Mohave Development Fund; 296-4497, Colorado Commission Research and Development; and 501-4501, Power Delivery System. He asked whether the committee had any specific questions on any of these budgets.

Senator Coffin remarked he was not suggesting any changes but felt "that on the Fort Mohave Development Fund it should be considered the land owned there, and the money earmarked for the sales of the land, be spent in Laughlin and statutory change in the future should be considered."

Adjutant General Construction Fund – Budget Page MILITARY-8 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-3652

Dan Miles said that on page 21 of Exhibit H there are some recommended revisions to the budget to add authority to the budget account. He pointed out this was at the request of the agency and a list of anticipated projects over the next 2 years is shown on pages 22 and 23 of Exhibit H. He said that since the closing information was developed the question has arisen as to whether all of the projects will become active during the coming biennium, so the fiscal division would like to review the list with the agency. Senator Raggio said this budget would be held for future consideration.

Senator Raggio announced he had asked staff to go through all of the bills in this committee to determine which ones would be considered exempt and which would need to be processed before the deadline for passing bills out of committee.

Mr. Miles said the under the Joint Rule 14-6, certain bills will be exempt if they are under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on Finance or the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means and contain an appropriation or authorization, or impact revenues negatively or if the bill contains a significant fiscal liability to the state. He provided a list of bills in the Senate Committee on Finance as of March 24 and said a notice of exemption will be issued today for the bills on this list.

Senator Raggio explained the bills on the exempt list, Exhibit I, do not have to be processed by the deadline for the disposition of bills. He noted some committee members are sponsors on the listed bills. He said it is obvious all of these bills are not going to be funded, and if members can suggest any of the bills be removed from the necessity for hearings, the committee can be saved a lot of time.

The meeting was adjourned at 11.30 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Patricia Hampton,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman

DATE: