ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

MINUTES OF THE meeting

of the

ASSEMBLY Committee on Ways and Means

Seventy-First Session

April 13, 2001

The Committee on Ways and Meanswas called to order at 8:10 a.m., on Friday, April 13, 2001. Vice Chairwoman Chris Giunchigliani presided in Room 3137 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Ms. Chris Giunchigliani, Vice Chairwoman

Mrs. Barbara Cegavske

Mrs. Vonne Chowning

Mrs. Marcia de Braga

Mr. Joseph Dini, Jr.

Mr. David Goldwater

Mr. Lynn Hettrick

Ms. Sheila Leslie

Mr. John Marvel

Mr. David Parks

Mr. Richard D. Perkins

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

Mr. Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman (Excused)

Mr. Bob Beers (Excused)

Ms. Sandra Tiffany (Excused)

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst

Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst

Andrea Carothers, Committee Secretary

Kathryn Fosnaugh, Committee Secretary

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the hearing on A.B. 230.

Assembly Bill 230: Makes various changes relating to protection of cultural resources. (BDR 33-600)

The Vice Chair recognized Assemblyman Harry Mortenson, District 42. Mr. Mortenson stated that previous to the session there had been a meeting at the Desert Research Institute (DRI) in Las Vegas attended by 22 people from the DRI, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forestry Service, and the State Historic Preservation Office, as well as archeological professionals and others. Mr. Mortenson stated that there were many entities interested in this bill. The meeting lasted for three hours, during which the bill was crafted so that all parties involved were in agreement. The bill had been heard in the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Mining, where all testimony had been in favor of the bill. Mr. Mortenson stated that there had been amendments suggested for the bill, and the amendments had been incorporated in the bill that was now before the committee.

Mr. Mortenson explained that the purpose of the bill was to protect the flora, fauna, archeological, paleontological, and other non-renewable cultural resources for the state. It created a stewardship program in which people who were interested in this area could participate in protecting cultural resources. Mr. Mortenson prepared to read from a written statement by Alan O’Neill, Executive Director, Outside Las Vegas Foundation (Exhibit C). Mr. Mortenson explained that the Outside Las Vegas Foundation was 30 organizations in the south, headed by the Chairman Thalia Dondero. The organizations included law firms, Mandalay Bay, banks, resorts, Clark County Parks and Recreation Department, Clark County Chamber of Commerce, and others. Mr. Mortenson opined that there were tens of thousands of people who would like to see this bill passed. He introduced Mr. Ronald James, State Historic Preservation Officer, and Alice Baldrica, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer. Mr. Mortenson read from Mr. O’Neill’s testimony,

On behalf of the Outside Las Vegas Foundation, it is my pleasure to speak in strong support for Assembly Bill 230 to further protect our State’s cultural heritage and establish a site stewardship program. This is an outstanding piece of legislation and a wonderful complement to what our foundation is trying to accomplish in southern Nevada. The Outside Las Vegas Foundation is a private non-profit organization made up of prominent community and business leaders and private citizens that work hand-in-hand with the four federal land managing agencies to improve the long-term stewardship of the seven million acres of federal land surrounding Las Vegas and to enrich the experiences for those who visit.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if one of the testifiers would be discussing the differences between the original bill and the amended bill. Mr. Mortenson explained that the difference was small, and regarded the Indian tribes’ desire to have the language of the bill changed from a representative from the Indian tribes to a member of the Indian tribes.

Ms. Baldrica stated that the changes were diction changes. Indian was changed to Native American and based on the recommendations a member of the mining and ranching industry was added to the advisory committee.

Mr. John Marvel inquired as to whether the amendment affected the fiscal note. Mr. James explained that the amendments had not affected the fiscal note. He noted that the State Historical Preservation Office tried to, “fly under the fiscal radar.” The office was subsidized by a federal grant, and the fiscal note attached to A.B. 230 was allowable under the federal grants. Mr. James commented that he and Ms. Baldrica had been hoping to open a southern Nevada office and were looking for the appropriate budgetary opportunity. The office had attempted to accommodate programming requested by the legislature with existing staff, but the office would not be able to complete the proposed program with the existing staff. This bill would give the office the opportunity to open a southern office, and Mr. James stated that the office was willing to examine all possibilities to make that happen. This included federal funds for the fiscal note, which called for $74,369 in the first fiscal year, and $77,692 in the second fiscal year. The office would be able to fund all of the fiscal note, except for $30,000 in the first fiscal year and $31,300 in the second fiscal year.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani confirmed that the General Fund impact would be $30,000 in the first fiscal year, and $31,300 in the second fiscal year. She asked if the federal grant was dependable. Mr. James stated that there was a recommendation from the current Bush administration to cut the grant to levels similar to two years previous. If the bill was passed, then the office would utilize all resources to apply the federal grant. Mr. James explained that the federal grant had been consistent during the 18 years he had been with the office.

The hearing on A.B. 230 was closed and Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the hearing on A.B. 504.

Assembly Bill 504: Makes appropriation to State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources for State of Nevada’s share for carrying out Truckee River Operating Agreement. (BDR S-1389)

The Vice Chair recognized Michael Turnipseed, Director, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Mr. Turnipseed stated that A.B. 504 requested funding for $80,000 over two years. The Public Law 101-618, which was Senator Reid’s bill to settle all litigation on the Truckee River, passed in 1998. The final piece of the legislation that needed to be implemented was the Truckee River Operating Agreement. The Truckee River Operating Agreement had been negotiated over the previous years and was nearly complete. Mr. Turnipseed stated that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process and the Environment Impact Report process through California was expected to begin when the final elements of the agreement were negotiated. Mr. Turnipseed commented that all water in the Truckee River would be accounted for. In addition to historic water rights on the Truckee River, California, the Native American tribes, Fernley, and the historic users would receive a portion of the extra water. There was credit water for each of the entities including, Truckee Carson Irrigation District, Fernley, and the Truckee Meadows Water Authority. Mr. Turnipseed said that it would be a large accounting task to account for every drop of water. Jeff Boyer, who worked for the Federal Water Master in Reno, had been selected as the implementation coordinator, and was developing, in connection with Colorado State University, an operations and accounting computer program that would track all the water. The $40,000 per year requested would be matched by the federal government, the Pyramid Lake Tribe, and Washoe County. The total requested was one-fifth the cost of the implementation of the computer model.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani confirmed that the $80,000 was for the development of the computer program to track the water. She opened the hearing for public comment.

Susan Reeder, Lobbyist, Sierra Pacific Resources, testified in support of A.B. 504. Ms. Reeder noted that there had been a number of parties that had spent time and money working toward negotiating the Truckee River Operating Agreement. Sierra Pacific had invested over $5 million in the negotiations process with attorneys and engineers.

Mr. Marvel asked if Sierra Pacific Power Company was still involved despite the fact that they had sold the water company. Ms. Reeder stated that Sierra Pacific was involved, and escrow on the water company had not closed. There were attorneys that were working on this issue on a daily basis, and Ms. Reeder was working with the California legislature. Mr. Marvel wondered whether the new owners had provided any money. Ms. Reeder answered in the affirmative, and reiterated that the new company was putting in one-fifth of the total cost.

Ms. Shelia Leslie inquired as to the projected finishing date. Mr. Turnipseed answered that the Truckee River Operating Agreement was expected to be finished and ready to go the EIS process in the coming two or three months. The process would finish within two years, and would be ready for implementation. This was why the computer model needed to be in place when the operating agreement became effective.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani closed the hearing on A.B. 504 and opened the hearing on A.B. 510.

Assembly Bill 510: Makes appropriation to Division of Forestry of State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources for equipment for suppression of forest fires. (BDR S-1397)

The Vice Chair recognized Steve Robinson, State Forester Firewarden, Division of Forestry. Mr. Robinson explained that A.B. 510 was to fund the Caliente Youth Center Summer Fire Program. This was the companion to the Elko school program. The bill requested $39,698. The division and the youth training center operated two fire crews during the summer months for fire suppression in the western United States. Mr. Robinson stated that this was the fourth year that a crew of boys had been available and the third year for the girl’s crew. The crews were supported through a cooperative agreement between the Division of Forestry and the Department of Human Resources. Training was provided to support the program, and included 40 hours of classroom training in fire suppression, which was what adult crews would receive to become basic fire fighters. Currently the program was supported with two older model gasoline buses that were received through the excess property program. The program was also utilizing used clothing, tools, sleeping bags, and fire equipment. Mr. Robinson explained that the bill would upgrade the equipment, and would assist in continuing a successful program.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani closed the hearing on A.B. 510 and opened the hearing on A.B. 522.

Assembly Bill 522: Makes appropriation to Buildings and Grounds Division of Department of Administration for moving expenses of various agencies to and from Grant Sawyer State Office Building. (BDR S-1356)

Mike Meizel, Chief, Buildings and Grounds Division, stated the bill requested an appropriation to move agencies out of the Sawyer Building and to expand agencies within the Sawyer Building. The plan was to move the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources out of the Sawyer Building. The department occupied approximately 6,100 square feet, and removing the department would allow an expansion of the Secretary of State, the Office of the State Controller, and the Gaming Control Board offices, as well as the transfer of the Unclaimed Property Office from the Bradley Building. Essentially what was happening was that the constitutional offices within the building were being expanded along with a small expansion for gaming, explained Mr. Meizel. The appropriation included $136,354 for the moving costs of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and included $84,000 for office renovations. The remodeling cost was based on $50 per square foot, which was obtained from the Public Works Board, and took into account wall moving, data lines, and other items. The moving costs were based on actual costs from past moves.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani requested written verification of which offices were moving. She asked how the State Controller had gotten office space in the Sawyer Building, because there had been nothing regarding that in the budget. Mr. Meizel explained that currently the State Controller had a “cubby hole” on the first floor that was shared with the Capitol Police. Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated that travel had been justified for the move, but the legislature had not known that there was an office in the south. She asked who had control over offices in state office buildings. Mr. Meizel stated that the Buildings and Grounds Division had that control. Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if the division had been involved in the opening of the southern office. Mr. Meizel stated that there had been conversations with the State Controller. The bill would move the State Controller from the “cubby hole” on the first floor to 400 square feet on fourth floor with the other constitutional offices. He explained that he could provide the breakdown of square footage, moving costs, and other information. Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani reiterated that the committee needed that information. She then confirmed that the moving process was controlled by the Buildings and Grounds Division. Mr. Meizel stated that moving offices was based on available space, and other issues. In the State Controller’s case there had been no available space in the Sawyer Building for a permanent office, but there had been a small space for a temporary office. Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated she would like the information regarding why the different agencies felt they needed an office in the southern portion of the state.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani closed the hearing on A.B. 522 and opened the hearing on A.B. 523.

Assembly Bill 523: Makes appropriation to Motor Pool Division of Department of Administration for purchase of additional vehicles. (BDR S-1357)

The Vice Chair recognized Frank Revell, Chief, State Motor Pool, who stated the bill was a one-shot appropriation request for $2,046,227 for additional vehicles for the agencies that had requested them for the biennium.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked for backup information for the committee. Mr. Revell stated that he would provide that to the committee.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani confirmed that the request was for $2,046,227 and Mr. Revell clarified that that was for 102 additional vehicles. The Vice Chair mentioned that no decision had been made on privatization.

The Vice Chair closed the hearing on A.B. 523 and opened the hearing on A.B. 598.

Assembly Bill 598: Makes appropriation to Department of Human Resources for enhanced health clinic for Jan Evans Juvenile Justice Center. (BDR S- 1405)

The Vice Chair recognized Leonard Pugh, Director, Washoe County Department of Juvenile Services. He read from his prepared testimony (Exhibit D). The bill requested $250,000 for the Department of Human Resources for an enhanced health clinic for the Jan Evans Juvenile Justice Center. The breakdown on the money was $234,000 for construction costs, and $16,000 for equipment. Mr. Pugh noted that currently medical services were provided to any juvenile detained at Wittenberg Hall by one full-time pediatric nurse practitioner and a contract physician who provided on-site services four hours monthly. The Jan Evans Juvenile Justice Center was currently in the design phase, with construction scheduled to begin in the spring. The $250,000 appropriation would double the size of the current clinic, and would allow enhanced medical services to be provided to additional juveniles. It would also include an improved on-site laboratory, and would enhance medical services by providing preventative and follow-up care to juveniles. Mr. Pugh noted that currently the average daily population was 70 children and the facility would house 108 with the ability to expand to 144 children. All the support areas were being built to the 144 maximum number. The Wittenberg facility was currently a “padded cell” which was converted into a medical clinic where the nurse, supplies, and files were housed, as well as where exams took place. In the new facility there would be two separate exam rooms, a separate office for the nursing staff and doctor, a medical supply room with a small laboratory, a restroom, and a waiting room.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked why the Department of Human Resources was involved when the bill was about a Washoe County clinic. Mr. Pugh stated that at one point in time the Governor’s Office had asked for ideas for surplus monies, and this was presented as one of those ideas. Mr. Pugh stated that he was aware this was a bill, but had been unaware it would be heard until earlier in the week. He stated that Michael Hillerby, Director, Department of Museums, Library and Arts, was supposed to provide testimony in support of the bill. Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani thanked Mr. Pugh for his testimony and stated that the committee would take into consideration the fact that the clinic would be named after Jan Evans, but would also consider the fact that it was located in the northern portion of the state.

Ms. Leslie stated that she had brought the idea of this bill forward through the Assembly Committee on Health and Human Services when the Governor had asked for ideas on how to spend the previously projected $50 million surplus. She was unaware of why it was going through the Department of Human Resources. Ms. Leslie explained that this was a needed bill, and expressed her hope that the new juvenile justice center was built without an addition to the medical clinic. She stated that she understood that an additional benefit was that if the clinic was expanded, services would be offered to not only children who were incarcerated, but also to those who were on probation. Mr. Pugh stated that this was correct. The clinic was currently in the design phase, and it was designed with the purpose of increasing the population served. The final cost was undetermined, and cuts might have to be made. The money in the bill would preserve the size of the clinic. Mr. Pugh explained that the clinic would be positioned in the facility so that it was next to the intake area so that medical situations could be addressed immediately, and children on probation could go to the clinic without entering the secured detention portion of the facility.

Ms. Leslie asked if the enlarged space was gained, would the county be willing to fund the increased staffing costs. Mr. Pugh stated that the staffing would be a progressive enhancement. There was currently one nurse, and alternative-funding sources would be pursued in order to increase the staff. There had been conversations with the county management about the fact that as the number of patients increased the staff would have to increase.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there was any match money other than what the county was giving to build the facility. Mr. Pugh stated that there was $20 million in county funds that had been used in the planning and building of the facility.

The Vice Chair closed the hearing on A.B. 598 and opened the hearing on A.B. 527.

Assembly Bill 527: Makes appropriation to Legislative Counsel Bureau for new and replacement equipment and various maintenance projects. (BDR S- 1361)

Lorne Malkiewich, Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB), stated that A.B. 527 was a one-shot appropriation of $861,585. He explained that the LCB had submitted their budget through the normal process of the budget review committee, and legislative commission approval. When it had been presented to the committee previously in the session the budget contained decision units E‑710, E-720 and E-730 for replacement equipment, new equipment, and maintenance of buildings and grounds, so the committee had information regarding the bill. The bill took those enhancements from the LCB budget and paid for them with a one-shot enhancement from the current fiscal year, instead of paying for the appropriations to the LCB in FY2002 and FY2003. The decision units were a part of the budget that had been submitted. He explained that the total of $861,585 was split in the budget over two fiscal years and five divisions and was approximately 2 percent of the total budget. This amount was approximately the same amount as was received in the last biennium. Mr. Malkiewich stated that decision unit E-730 was the same from session to session, and was shown as an enhancement due to budget directive. He noted that in previous hearings the division chiefs had spoken about the items that would be purchased, and he would not go through the information again. When the LCB budget closed, because the decision units were included, if there were adjustments to the E-710, E-720, E-730 areas then the appropriate thing would be to adjust A.B. 527.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated that as the LCB looked at equipment if a desk with a proper level typing drawer could be found it would be appreciated.

The Vice Chair closed the hearing on A.B. 527 and opened the hearing on A.B. 658.

Assembly Bill 658: Makes appropriations to Budget Division of Department of Administration for continuation of development and roll out of Integrated Financial System. (BDR S-1355)

Perry Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration, explained that the department was requesting a one-shot appropriation in the amount of $12,303,000 from the General Fund and $2,664,000 from the state Highway Fund for the continuation of the development and roll out of the Integrated Financial System (IFS). A total of $42 million had been appropriated for the IFS project, $25.3 million from the General Fund and $16.7 million from the Highway Fund. In 1999 the IFS went into production, processing all state payment claims and payroll for central payroll agencies and the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). In addition, a Web-based financial data warehouse was implemented in order to improve financial management reporting. Mr. Comeaux commented that over the past two years the project team had implemented additional business functions, including fixed asset controls, custom invoicing, accounts receivable control, grants management, project and other costs accounting, and a core Web-based human resources data warehouse. In addition, the team stabilized the application, improved the cycle time for the payroll system, developed and provided additional user agency training, and documented personnel procedures.

For the upcoming biennium the project team planned to implement federal grants management, automated work flow, journal entries, tracking of employee training, grievance incident tracking, and employee evaluations, as well as complete the system roll out, document the financial procedures, and expand both the financial and human resources data warehouses. The project team was currently in contract negotiations for a time data collection system that would allow the larger agencies to scan time sheets as opposed to keypunching. The NDOT had agreed to pilot the project beginning in August. If successful the scan option would be provided to all the larger agencies. Mr. Comeaux said that by June 30, 2003, the IFS would be complete. Although there would be ongoing maintenance and support costs in future bienniums, this bill represented the final appropriation request for the development and implementation for the system. Mr. Comeaux presented the committee with a project budget recapitulation that showed that the IFS project was estimated to finish $313,000 under the original projection developed in November 1996 (Exhibit E). He introduced Edward Perry, Project Manager, IFS.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if the supplemental appropriation was still needed. Mr. Comeaux said that the supplemental was not needed, but he did not believe it had been formally withdrawn yet. The Controller’s Office had discovered an alternative way to comply with the requirements of Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) 34, for an approximate $500,000 savings.

Mrs. Vonne Chowning inquired about the funding for a personal vehicle under the out-of-state travel budget line, which was $1,440 per year of the biennium. Mr. Perry stated that the travel amount was for training costs to send technical staff for training at in-state and out-of-state sites. A significant portion of the rollout phase was adding to the technical abilities of the staff, because the Unix operating system was new to the state. He reiterated that the division had been adding training in order to master the techniques needed for the new technical programs. Mrs. Vonne Chowning reiterated that the question was regarding the personal vehicle. Mr. Perry stated that the personal vehicle was a line for reimbursement for mileage costs.

Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani commented that there were PCs included in the request. Mr. Perry explained that one principle of the IFS was that if the IFS was going to require agencies to have new equipment because the old PCs were not compatible with the system, then new equipment would be provided. The Vice Chair asked for a list of the agencies that were receiving the new PCs. Mr. Perry explained that during the rollout it would be decided which agencies would receive the computers, so that information was not available at the current time. He explained that in the past there had not been as many computers used as were expected. Vice Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked for a list of the agencies that would possibly be affected.

The Vice Chair closed the hearing on A.B. 658 and opened the hearing on the A.B. 604.

Assembly Bill 604: Makes various changes relating to awards for state employees. (BDR 23-1307)

Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst, explained that there were proposed amendments that had been received from Jeanne Green, Director, Department of Personnel. The only area that would be changed in the bill was the language regarding service awards for “continuous and faithful service in state government for a period of 5, 10, 20, 30, or 40 years by a state employee.” This language would be changed to “faithful and exceptional public service.” Mr. Stevens explained that the “service award” in the bill would be a non-monetary object. The wording that the department had suggested was “exceptional public service.”

MR. MARVEL MOVED AMEND, AND DO PASS AS AMENDED A.B. 604.

MRS. CHOWNING SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED. (Chairman Arberry, Mr. Beers, Mrs. de Braga, Mr. Perkins, and Ms. Tiffany were absent at the time of the vote.)

The Vice Chair adjourned the meeting at 9:00 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Andrea Carothers

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, Vice Chairwoman

DATE: