MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY committee on Ways and Means AND
SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION/CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Seventy-First Session
April 17, 2001
The Joint Subcommittee on Higher Education/Capital Improvements was called to order at 8:11 a.m. on Tuesday, April 17, 2001. Chairman Morse Arberry Jr. 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.
ASSEMBLY SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman
Mr. Joseph Dini, Jr.
Ms. Chris Giunchigliani
Mr. John Marvel
Mr. Richard D. Perkins
SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator William J. Raggio
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator Bernice Mathews
Senator Raymond D. Rawson
SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Mr. Lynn Hettrick, Excused
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gary Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst
Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Rick Combs, Program Analyst
Connie Davis, Committee Secretary
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS DETAIL BY PROJECT – APPENDIX-18
UNIVERSITY AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM OF NEVADA
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING COMPLEX, UNLV (CIP 01-C15)
Chairman Arberry announced that capital improvement projects for the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) would be held pending the arrival of the president of the University.
FURNISHINGS/BUILD-OUT, REDFIELD CAMPUS, BUILDING 1, UNR/TMCC/WNCC (CIP 01-C16)
Chairman Arberry recognized Daniel O'Brien, Manager, Public Works Board (PWB). Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C16 as a request to fund furnishings, equipment, and additional off-site costs associated with CIP 99-C13 for the Redfield Campus, Building 1, a joint venture involving the University of Nevada Reno (UNR), Truckee Meadows Community College (TMCC), and Western Nevada Community College (WNCC). The costs for furnishings and equipment, data technology and telephone systems, as well as the construction of a parking lot extension, purchase of water rights, additional county and Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) requirements, and additional landscaping had been deferred to the 2001 CIP. Mr. O'Brien advised that the Governor's recommendation for funding included $2.5 million in state funding and $2.5 million in donations.
Mr. Marvel asked whether the $2.5 million in donated money had been received. Stephen C. McFarlane, Interim President, UNR, indicated a committee was in place and there were donors "lined up." It was anticipated that information on the donations would be available during the latter part of the month, and in response to a question from Mr. Marvel, Dr. McFarlane indicated the University had "a partial commitment" of about $1 million. Mr. Marvel asked whether the entire $2.5 million would be received and if so, whether it would be received by the end of the legislative session. While Dr. McFarlane indicated he was certain the $2.5 million would be received, he was uncertain that it would be received by the time the legislative session ended.
Chairman Arberry asked the PWB representatives to address the project's off‑site costs. Mr. O'Brien advised the Chairman that the $683,000 was for the additional county and NDOT requirements, and he said the PWB would obtain specific information concerning the off-site costs and provide it to staff.
Senator Raggio also addressed the off-site costs, which he indicated were more than anticipated, and asked if there was a better way to determine such costs before the design and construction of a project was completed. Mr. O'Brien agreed that when the programming of a project was started, NDOT and county or city officials needed to be involved so that the off-site costs could be determined. Chairman Raggio strongly advised the PWB that off-site costs for any project "should be ascertained with some degree of certainty" and built into the process of design and construction.
Mr. Marvel addressed the $879,795 cost for furnishings and equipment and asked if a list of the furnishings and equipment had been provided to staff. Mr. O'Brien agreed to provide the information to staff. Chairman Arberry questioned how the estimate was calculated without a list. Mr. O'Brien indicated the cost for furnishings and equipment was usually based on a percentage of the size of the project. Mr. O'Brien indicated he had just been informed the list of furnishings and equipment would be provided to staff the following afternoon.
FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT, PENNINGTON MEDICAL EDUCATION BUILDING, UNR (CIP 01-C19)
Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C19 as a request for furnishings and equipment for the Pennington Medical Education Building for the University of Nevada at Reno Medical School. Mr. O'Brien advised the members that the request for furnishings and equipment would complete the project for full occupancy. The list of furnishings and equipment referred to by Mr. O'Brien included:
"Buzz" Nelson, P.E., Assistant Vice President, Facilities Management Department, UNR, told the members the project was scheduled for completion on May 30 and the detailed lists for all furnishings and equipment had been prepared and was ready to go to bid. Chairman Arberry requested that a copy of the list of furnishings and equipment be provided to staff, and Mr. Nelson agreed to do so.
Senator Raggio recalled that the legislature had approved $4 million in state funds and $6 million in university funds for the project, and asked if a large portion of the funding had come from the Pennington's. Stephen C. McFarlane, Interim President, UNR, responded that a large donation had been received from the Pennington's and also expressed appreciation for the state's participation. Dr. McFarlane advised that the combined funding for the project provided the opportunity for:
Senator Raggio reiterated the Chairman's request for a list of the equipment and furnishings, which he said would address the subcommittee's concerns.
NEW UNIVERSITY LIBRARY, UNR (CIP 01-C24)
Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C24 as a request for funding to implement the design and construction of a new 326,000 square-foot library at the University of Nevada Reno campus. Mr. O'Brien indicated the program to select a consultant had been initiated and discussions had taken place concerning the program and refinement of the square footage. The project's furnishings and equipment were to be deferred to the 2003 capital improvement projects program. Mr. O'Brien also indicated the project request included the remodel of the Getchell Library, which was approximately 170,000 square feet. Project cost estimates were noted and included costs for:
· Construction;
· Architectural and engineering design and supervision costs;
· Utility off-site; and
· Data and telecommunication needs.
Chairman Raggio addressed the project cost estimate and indicated his understanding was that the estimate for the library had been projected several sessions ago and that revised cost estimates were being developed by the PWB. Additionally, Senator Raggio indicated he understood that the project did not envision remodeling the Getchell Building, and the funding request was solely for the new library that would be located by the "education" building. Dr. McFarlane referenced page 3 in the University of Nevada Reno "Campus Improvements Request" document (Exhibit C), and indicated the new library would be constructed about a third of the way going north on the campus between the Judicial College and the Lawlor Events Center. Additionally, Dr. McFarlane said the library was planned as a 326,000‑square‑foot facility and since it had been on the docket for several sessions, there were several versions in circulation. Dr. McFarlane advised that administrative staff was working in conjunction with university staff in developing the final figures, which included an automated book retrieval system.
Senator Raggio recalled the Governor's recommendation for the project was for approximately $22 million while the total cost of the project was approximately $63 million. Dr. McFarlane advised the cost was closer to $64 million for the 326,000-square-foot facility. Senator Raggio indicated the project cost would be compared to the cost of the Lied Library, and he said he hoped that the same type of problems experienced with the Lied Library would not be encountered with the new library.
Senator Raggio questioned whether the PWB was working with the university staff on a revised cost estimate for the library minus the funding for remodeling the Getchell Library. Mr. O'Brien advised that the Governor's recommendation included the remodel of the Getchell Library. While Senator Raggio understood the Getchell remodel had been included in the Governor's request, he indicated that portion of the remodel "could wait." Mr. O'Brien advised that the PWB had been requested to review whether the Getchell remodel had been pulled or deferred to a future time. It was Senator Raggio's opinion the Getchell remodel needed to be pulled and a revised cost based on the correct cost per square foot for the new library should be provided to staff as quickly as possible. Mr. O'Brien agreed and indicated that the PWB had pulled the Getchell remodel to take a look at what the costs would be and expressed some concern in reference to the $126-per-square-foot cost associated with the project. Mr. O'Brien indicated the original 1996 cost for the Lied Library was $128 a square foot; the 1999 proposed cost based on a $42 million project was around $142 a square foot, and actual costs for a $44 million project, including the change orders, was approximately $147 a square foot. Mr. O'Brien indicated the difference between the $126 projection and the $147 cost would be reviewed and a revised budget would be provided to staff. Senator Raggio suggested that the PWB submit a revised project cost estimate based on Mr. O'Brien's testimony.
Chairman Arberry addressed the $1.00 increase in student fees in each year of the 2003-05 biennium that would be required to meet the projections for revenue bond financing for the project and asked if the Board of Regents had approved the increase. Dr. McFarlane explained that the increase would be approved in increments of $1.00 in each of the years of the biennium to a maximum of $4.00, which would cover one-third of the cost, and the first increment had been approved. Senator Raggio recalled that the university testified in a previous hearing that the increase of $1.00 at the universities and $.50 at the community colleges was intended for capital improvement projects and not just for the new library project.
In response to a question from Mr. Marvel, Dr. McFarlane reiterated that the Board of Regents had approved the first increment of the student increase, which he explained was $1.00 per credit hour and $.50 for the community college.
Chairman Arberry addressed the issue of furnishings and equipment for the project and indicated that the estimates originally provided to the 1999 legislature had increased significantly in the 2001 CIP program. Chairman Arberry asked the PWB if the estimate for the furnishings and equipment was based in FY2003 dollars. Mr. O'Brien responded that the PWB had included the costs based on FY2000 dollars, and that costs deferred to FY2003 would have to be adjusted for inflation.
Assuming approval for construction of the new library, Senator Coffin requested information on what the master plan was for the Getchell location. Dr. McFarlane responded that the plan was to convert the facility into office space for new faculty and up to three large classrooms for lecture halls. With a 23 percent increase in freshman enrollment for the current year and a similar projection for the following year, Dr. McFarlane indicated there was no office space available on campus for new faculty. Dr. McFarlane advised that one of the reasons a new library was necessary was because the Getchell Library was not built to accommodate compact shelving; however, the library did meet the need for a large lecture hall.
Senator Coffin discussed a recent committee meeting during which problems with the Lied Library were highlighted, and one of the problems, outlined by the PWB, was the lack of university participation in the construction process. Senator Coffin inquired whether any procedures had been developed to provide more involvement by university management who could assist in an effort to avoid costly construction mistakes as well as change orders, which drove up the construction cost.
Buzz Nelson, Assistant Vice President, Facilities Management Department, UNR, identified himself for the record and reported that he had assigned Lyle Woodward, the Director of the Facilities Management Department, a project architect and a former member of the PWB staff, as the key participant in directing the design and project team. Additionally, Mr. Nelson advised that the Facilities Management Department's certified building inspectors and mechanical engineers would provide support during the construction process as well. Mr. Nelson further advised that his office maintained a cooperative working relationship with the PWB and took pride in ownership of the facility as they did with every facility. Mr. Nelson discussed his recognition of the importance of being a part of a design construction management team and said that weekly coordination meetings were held on each project to which a member of his staff was assigned.
Senator Coffin asked if engineering faculty was involved in weekly coordination meetings. Mr. Nelson advised that mechanical engineers from the Facilities Management Department were involved in the process. Senator Coffin asked whether faculty engineering expertise was available. Mr. Nelson responded that currently a faculty engineer was not assigned to the team; however, that assignment could be considered. Senator Coffin suggested that a "great lesson" could be learned from the Lied Library project that perhaps UNR could avoid repeating. Mr. Nelson agreed that UNR would "like not to learn that lesson a second time."
FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT, SCIENCE BUILDING, CCSN (CIP 01-C20)
Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C20 as a $3,502,062 funding request to provide furniture, equipment, data, video, and telecommunication connections for the new 74,772-square-foot science complex at the Community College of Southern Nevada (CCSN) in Las Vegas. Mr. O'Brien advised that a list of the furnishings would be provided to legislative staff.
Chairman Arberry asked that the planetarium portion of the project be addressed. Michael H. Meyer, Interim President, Community College Southern Nevada, identified himself for the record and advised the members that the college had "a donor in place ready to consider the planetarium." While dialogue with the prospective donor had ensued for a period of 17 months, Mr. Meyer advised that the donor preferred to defer the donation until the appointment of a permanent president.
Chairman Arberry questioned whether the project costs had been reduced because of design changes. Mr. O'Brien expressed uncertainty in reference to the question. Rick Combs, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, LCB, identified himself for the record and indicated there had been some concern that the project bids would be higher than the funding available for construction. Additionally, Mr. Combs indicated there had been some discussion concerning whether the project needed to be redesigned or value engineered. Mr. Meyer advised that meetings had taken place; the project had been re-engineered; CCSN representatives felt the project was ready to go, and it was anticipated ground would be broken within 90 days.
In response to a question from the Chairman, Allen D. Ruter, Vice President, Finance and Administration, CCSN, advised that the project had been bid and was being finalized through the PWB. Mr. Ruter advised ground would be broken in 60 days.
Mr. Marvel requested information concerning the date the new president would be appointed. Mr. Meyer advised it was anticipated the new president would be "on board" by July 1, or August 1, 2001. Mr. Marvel questioned whether any definite information on the donation would be known before the end of the legislative session. Mr. Meyer clarified that the project for the planetarium and the furnishings and equipment for the science building were two separate projects, and there would be no information on the donation until the new president was appointed. Additionally, Mr. Meyer advised that the $7 million donation would be the largest donation to a community college in Nevada and the college respected the donor's wishes to meet with the new administration concerning the donation.
Chairman Arberry called attention to the cost estimate for furnishings based on a $15-per-square-foot estimate that he compared with the furnishings for the Desert Research Institute (DRI) Science Center based on an estimate of $7‑per‑square‑foot and asked that the cost difference be addressed. Ward Patrick, Deputy Manager, Professional Services, PWB, identified himself for the record and described CIP 01-C17 for the DRI/Science Center as an "office build‑out" for which the agency was considering a certain amount of existing furnishings. Project 01‑C20 required equipment and furnishings for the higher technology use associated with a science building, which, Mr. Patrick said, justified the increased cost. Mr. Patrick clarified for the record that CIP 99-C14 for the construction of the science building had not been bid to date. Mr. Ward advised that:
· The target date for opening the building was September 15, 2001;
· A 13-month construction period was anticipated by PWB;
· The project would be advertised and bids let within the next several months.
NEW HEALTH SCIENCES/BIOTECH BUILDING, CCSN (CIP 01-C21)
Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C21 as a recommendation for the construction of a 90,000-square-foot science classroom and laboratory building for health sciences and biotechnical education on the campus of CCSN. Mr. O'Brien addressed the $18 million for construction, which included site work, a state‑funding request for $20 million, and university funding of $5 million. Chairman Arberry asked the PWB to explain why the construction costs for the health sciences and biotech building at $190 per square foot were so high compared with $171.35 per square foot for the John S. Wright Hall addition at UNLV and only $148.90 per square foot for the proposed Nevada State College at Henderson. Mr. O'Brien indicated he believed the difference was in the type of buildings being constructed; however, advised he would research the issue and provide the specifics to legislative staff.
Chairman Arberry requested that the $5 million in "university funding" be addressed. Michael Meyer, President, Community College Southern Nevada, advised that $1 million had been committed to the $5 million match and work was being continued on a plan to look at the next $4 million.
Senator Raggio expressed some concern in reference to the uncommitted balance in university funding and recalled the legislature had committed funding for university projects in the past only to learn in the following session the university was unable to acquire the portion to which they had committed. Senator Raggio indicated that without a more significant commitment, it would be difficult to approve the project for the new science classroom and laboratory building. Indicating the $5 million commitment had been ongoing for some time, Senator Raggio said he would rather trim the project back than commit to funding that could be used for other purposes. Senator Raggio reiterated that more assurance would be needed than what the subcommittee was hearing.
FURNISH AND BUILD-OUT, SCIENCE CENTER, DRI (CIP 01-C17)
Dan O'Brien identified CIP 01-C17 as a recommendation for $1,211,055 in state funds for the furnishings and equipment for the DRI Southern Science Center and to complete the 10,000 square feet of "shelled space" on the third floor. The requested funding would complete the construction portion of the project approved by the 1999 legislature for $1.5 million in obligation bonds as well as the issuance of up to $8.6 million in revenue bonds for the project.
Senator Raggio assumed temporary duties of the Chair. In reference to a question from Senator Raggio, Stephen Wells, Ph.D., President, Desert Research Institute, identified himself for the record and indicated the project under discussion would complete the 10,000 square feet of "shelled space" on the third floor of the facility that would primarily house the newly created Center for Arid Lands Environmental Management (CALEM). Additionally, Dr. Wells advised that the completion of the space was a part of DRI's redesign "to grow their activity" and during the first year of operation of the CALEM, $2.5 million was raised. Senator Raggio indicated that the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) provided authority on September 12, 2000, for the 10,000 square feet of "shelled space," and questioned whether the project had been completely designed. Mr. O'Brien indicated the project had been completely designed. In reference to a question from Senator Raggio concerning the costs outlined for architectural and engineering (A/E) and design supervision, Mr. O'Brien indicated that the design had been completed for the "shelled space;" however, the $38,588 was for the design of the tenant improvement area.
Senator Raggio addressed the $154,350 project cost estimate for a conference center and requested additional information on the reasons for the conference center line item. Peter D. Ross, Director of Campus Planning and Facilities Management and Project Engineer, identified himself for the record and explained that the $154,350 for the conference center was for equipping the room with videoconferencing as well as other systems. Senator Raggio questioned whether the cost estimate included all the necessary furnishings and equipment. Mr. Ross responded that all the furnishings and equipment were included in the line item for the conference center. Senator Raggio requested some assurance that the DRI would not return to the next session to request additional funding for furnishings and equipment. Mr. Ross stated that the funding listed in the line item for the conference center was based on DRI's experience at the recently completed Northern Nevada Science Center and added that DRI had "great faith in the numbers." Additionally, Mr. Ross confirmed that the $154,350 was for a "turn key" conference center.
Senator Raggio noted that project cost estimate included $141,230 for furnishings and equipment of the building and requested that a list of the furnishings and equipment items be provided. Mr. Ross referred to the project cost estimate for CIP 01-C17 (Exhibit D) and pointed out the furnishings for 18,300 square feet at $7.00 per square foot totaled $128,100, plus inflation. Mr. Ross indicated the square-foot cost was also derived from DRI's experience at the Northern Nevada Science Center.
Mr. Marvel questioned whether "double dipping" had occurred on the requests for the furnishings. Mr. Ross assured the members of the subcommittee there was no "double dipping" involved and reiterated that the estimates were based on the recently completed facility in northern Nevada.
FURNISH AND BUILD-OUT, LIBRARY AND STUDENT CENTER, WNCC (CIP 01 C18)
Senator Raggio reported that the 1999 legislature approved $6,176,514 for the design and construction of the new library (CIP 99-C17) and deferred the funding of $886,518 for furnishings and equipment to the 2001 legislature. Senator Raggio noted the funding request was more than the amount deferred by the 1999 legislature for furnishings and equipment.
Carol Lucey, Ph.D., President, Western Nevada Community College (WNCC), Carson City, identified herself for the record and advised the members of the subcommittee the funding request was more than the amount deferred because of an escalation in costs over the last biennium. Senator Raggio asked when the furnishings would be purchased. Dr. Lucey advised that construction of the library would begin late in summer 2001 with construction completion planned for spring 2002, and the furnishings would be purchased in summer 2002.
Senator Raggio also noted the recommendation for funding in the amount of $688,482 to remodel the existing library space on the WNCC campus and asked for comments concerning the request. Dr. Lucey advised that a number of offices and conference rooms were targeted for that remodeled space which would create storage space. Dr. Lucey explained that the college had limited storage space because they had given up their rented storage space at the Stewart facility for which $395,000 a year had been expended.
Senator Raggio inquired whether asbestos abatement would be necessary for the remodel of the WNCC library. Bill Knight, Director, Facilities Management and Planning, responded that asbestos abatement was not necessary for the remodel.
Senator Raggio requested some assurance that the request for funding the remodel of the old library on the WNCC campus for $688,482 was all-inclusive and a "turnkey" project. Mr. Knight assured Senator Raggio the funding request of $688,482 was the total cost.
STUDENT SERVICES CENTER, PHASE II, TMCC (CIP 01-C22)
Senator Raggio reported that CIP 01-C22 was a recommendation in the amount of $11 million to complete the addition and a renovation to the Red Mountain building on the Dandini campus of Truckee Meadows Community College (TMCC). Senator Raggio further reported that the 1999 legislature approved funding in the amount of $5,003,002 provided from the issuance of general obligation bonds, and $3 million donated from the Reynolds Foundation.
Rita Huneycutt, Ph.D., Interim President, Truckee Meadows Community College, Reno, identified herself for the record and clarified that the Reynolds Foundation grant funds had not materialized and had created some confusion concerning the first phase of the project. Dr. Huneycutt advised that the original request was for the design and completion of the student services building with the belief that grant money would be received from the Reynolds Foundation. However, without the grant money, Dr. Huneycutt advised the design had to be cut back so that the first phase of the project for $5 million only provided for the schematic design and the shell.
Senator Raggio questioned what CIP-01-C22 would provide if approved. Dr. Huneycutt referred to the TMCC handout (Exhibit E), which had been provided to the members of the subcommittee, and turned to the executive summary sheet on page 1. Dr. Huneycutt indicated a major concern was a $1 million reduction in funding by the Governor's Office.
Dr. Huneycutt reported that the first phase of the project and the $5 million approved in the 1999-01 biennium budget provided for:
Moving to the second phase of the project, Dr. Huneycutt reported that the complete renovation to the Red Mountain building would expand some of TMCC's important programs, such as the Occupational Culinary Arts Program and Arts and Sculpture. Dr. Huneycutt explained that some of TMCC's occupational programs and major math and science areas were capped which hindered their nursing and culinary arts programs. The renovation of the Red Mountain building would double the existing space for the culinary arts program.
In response to a question from Senator Raggio, Dr. Huneycutt explained that the $5 million for Phase I of the project was approved by the 1999 legislature and ground breaking was scheduled to occur in late summer 2001. The request for $11 million covered completion of the building. Dr. Huneycutt explained, however, that the Governor's recommendation reduced the funding by $1 million, which precluded the renovation to the Red Mountain building and expansion of TMCC's culinary arts and math and science programs.
Senator Raggio asked Dr. Huneycutt to clarify what the $11 million, if approved, would provide. Dr. Huneycutt advised that approval of the request for funding of Phase II would complete the student development center. Additionally, Dr. Huneycutt said that in relocating the student services to the new student development center, portions of the Red Mountain building would be renovated to allow "for development of faculty offices and instructional areas to accommodate the expanding educational programs, student population, and an increased number of faculty positions." Additionally, Dr. Huneycutt advised that the traditional student services building was a concept no longer being used and that the new student development center would include a cafeteria, expanded culinary arts program, a student lounge, bookstore, student government area, career center and learning hub, and a general access lab that would provide students access to computers.
Senator Raggio asked that TMCC representatives discuss the location of the proposed new plant and facilities/central receiving warehouse structure. Jimm Groshong, Director, Plant and Facilities, TMCC, advised that "plant facilities had been relocated from one portion of the Red Mountain building to a portion that would be impacted by the project in order to accommodate some additional instructional programs and office space." Mr. Groshong explained that plant facilities would be moved once again to a facility adjacent to the Red Mountain building and that space for the facility was not added but was "simply repositioned."
Senator Raggio questioned when the project would be completed, if approved. Mr. Groshong advised that Phase I of the project would be completed in mid‑year 2002, and Phase II was targeted for completion in mid-year 2003.
Senator Raggio questioned what the requirements would be to complete Phase II of the project. Dr. Huneycutt responded that the total package was being requested for $11.5 million. Senator Raggio restated his question and asked if the funding for the $11 million request was approved, what the requirements would be to complete the project. Dr. Huneycutt responded that the $11 million included everything, and that TMCC would not be returning to the legislative body for additional furnishings. However, Dr. Huneycutt emphasized that the total package had been decreased by the Governor's recommendation.
Senator Raggio advised that staff had indicated clarification was required concerning the TMCC handout (Exhibit E). Dr. Huneycutt explained that originally, $12 million was recommended for the project, and if the $1 million reduced by the Governor was not restored, the third-floor office, combined student services area, and classroom improvements and furnishings would be eliminated. Dr. Huneycutt indicated the combined student services area would have to remain in the existing building prohibiting the expansion of the space targeted for the culinary arts, arts program and math and science classes. Senator Raggio indicated it was unlikely the legislative body would add to the Governor's recommendation. Dr. Huneycutt reiterated her earlier emphasis that the $1 million reduction would cap enrollment in workforce-placed development classes.
Senator Raggio pointed out that staff's review of the project cost estimates indicated $1.5 million for the third-floor renovation and questioned why the renovation would not take place if $500,000 of the $1.5 million was for plant and facilities. Jimm Groshong advised that faced with the challenge of trying to reduce the project by $1 million, TMCC was confronted with reducing the quality of the furnishings and some of the "niceties" of the project as well. Senator Raggio suggested that in order to save time and avoid miscommunication TMCC submit, "as soon as possible," a revised project cost estimate that covered the items. Dr. Huneycutt agreed.
In response to a question from Senator Rawson, Dr. Huneycutt indicated the completion date, if all the funding was received, was targeted for 2003. Senator Rawson brought up an option and asked whether deferral of the funding for the furnishings to the 2003 session would still allow TMCC to move into the building by September 2003. It was Senator Rawson's premise that deferring the furnishings would allow for the full scope of the project. Senator Rawson indicated that the legislative body would not fund the construction of a building and then not furnish it. With a legislative commitment that the project would be finished, Senator Rawson indicated that TMCC should be attempting to get as far on the project as they could go with the available funding. Senator Raggio expressed disagreement and indicated the subcommittee had been advised in a previous hearing that the capacity to fund CIPs in FY2003-04 would be extremely limited.
Senator Coffin discussed the Hancock Decision and its effect on the state's bonding capacity. Gary Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst, advised that the Governor's recommended CIP program provided for the issuance of general obligation bonds in an amount equal to what could be repaid through the $.15 ad valorem tax rate. It was Mr. Ghiggeri's opinion the Hancock Decision would not affect the $.15 ad valorem tax rate.
In response to a request from Dr. Huneycutt concerning clarification of his directive, Senator Raggio requested that TMCC provide a revised project cost estimate that included adjustments for the $1 million reduction. Dr. Huneycutt agreed.
NEW ACADEMIC & STUDENT SERVICES BUILDING, NSC (CIP 01-C25)
Senator Raggio identified CIP 01-C25 as a request for $26 million, $16 million in state funds and $10 million in donations, to fund the design and construction of the first building on the campus of the proposed Nevada State College in Henderson. The building would include general classrooms, lecture rooms, faculty offices, support areas, admissions, records, financial aid, counseling, and other student services. Senator Raggio called on representatives of the proposed college to comment on changes that had been brought to the subcommittee's attention.
Richard Moore, President, Nevada State College, identified himself for the record and introduced Bonnie Rinaldi, Henderson City Manager. Dr. Moore reported a site change for the proposed college, which he indicated Ms. Rinaldi would address, and a revised budget, which he would address.
Bonnie Rinaldi, Henderson City Manager, reported that in order to identify a site large enough to accommodate the college and future expansion, the City of Henderson had proposed a site that combined land owned by the City of Henderson and by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The city filed an application for a recreation and public purposes lease (R&PP) on the BLM land, which Ms. Rinaldi reported was in two parcels. The first parcel of approximately 235 acres would be available in six months and an additional 320 acres west of that parcel would be available to the University System in approximately 18 to 24 months.
Ms. Rinaldi further reported that the City of Henderson proposed to commit to the University System a minimum of 47 acres with an additional 26 acres that would be held in reserve or in an escrow account. Ms. Rinaldi explained the additional 26 acres was located adjacent to neighborhoods and would provide buffers and mitigating land uses for those neighborhoods. Ms. Rinaldi said the city was willing to provide the 26 acres as assurance that there would be a college site with a minimum of 308 acres of land if, for any reason, the second phase of BLM land was not obtainable. If the second phase of the BLM land was obtained, Ms. Rinaldi advised that the 26 acres held in escrow would be returned to the City of Henderson, leaving a 47-acre commitment of land by the City of Henderson.
In addition to the land, Ms. Rinaldi reported that the City of Henderson had an adjacent building, which was not being fully utilized by the city, that they were willing to provide to the University System, primarily for offices. Ms. Rinaldi indicated the city would make the renovations to the building necessary to accommodate office space and also indicated a commitment to "shepherd" the processing of the BLM land, including the provision of approximately $100,000 to $200,000 in studies that were required to be completed in the BLM process. In summary, Ms. Rinaldi indicated that Henderson would pay the processing fees, provide the lease for the building, and commit a minimum of 47 acres of land to the process for the Henderson campus.
Senator Raggio referred to the site map (Exhibit F) and asked that the acreage proposed by the city be identified. Senator Raggio also requested information on the total number of acres from the city. Ms. Rinaldi responded that the total acreage from the city would be a minimum of 47 acres with an additional 26 acres held in escrow, if necessary, to guarantee a minimum college site of 308 acres. In response to Senator Raggio's request to identify the city land on the map, Ms. Rinaldi pointed to the site boundary outlined in red and indicated that the land south of the white line dividing the boundary lines was the BLM land and the land above was owned by the City of Henderson.
For clarification purposes, Senator Raggio asked what the cost would be, if any, or conditions, if any, on the contribution of land from the City of Henderson. Ms. Rinaldi advised that no cost or significant conditions were anticipated for the land contribution. Senator Raggio asked if the land was an "outright contribution." Ms. Rinaldi responded affirmatively. Senator Raggio questioned the portion held in escrow. Ms. Rinaldi explained the land was not currently in escrow but that the city proposed that 47 acres be dedicated to the University System with an additional 26 acres held aside to guarantee a minimum college size of 300 acres should the second phase of the BLM land not be available.
Senator Raggio referred to the revised budget document (Exhibit G) and asked that the revised budget be addressed. Dr. Moore explained the revised budget:
In response to a question from Senator Raggio, Dr. Moore clarified that the property, contributed by the city to which utilities had been extended, was valued at $650,000. In response to a question from Senator Raggio on who placed the $650,000 value on the city's contribution, Dr. Moore advised the value was placed by the city. Senator Raggio requested additional explanation on how project costs would be reduced. Dr. Moore explained that the improvement of utilities on the new site reduced the total project cost by $2.6 million for a new total cost of $23.4 million. In response to a question from Senator Raggio, Dr. Moore confirmed that the $2.4 million request for new utility/off-site costs would not be reduced by $650,000; however, the original project cost of $26 million would be reduced to $23.4 million.
Senator Raggio suggested that a revised project estimate be submitted defining the use of the $23.4 million. Dr. Moore deferred to Orlando A. Sandoval, Vice President for Planning and Administration, Nevada State College, Henderson. Mr. Sandoval identified himself for the record and stated, "The only difference from the PWB's project cost estimate was the $2.6 million for the new utility extension to the original property site." Mr. Sandoval explained that in determining the budget with the original property, the cost of new and oversized utilities was anticipated and included in the utility costs. However, he explained that the new property would only require $2.4 million in utility costs reducing the original $5 million for utility/off-site costs by $2.6 million leaving $2.4 million for the existing utilities on the new site. Senator Raggio reiterated his request that a revised project cost estimate be submitted as quickly as possible.
Senator Raggio addressed the existing building on the property and questioned what covered the cost or usage of a building on the city property and how that affected the cost of the project. Ms. Rinaldi stated she did not believe the building affected the cost of the project. Ms. Rinaldi explained that the city proposed the use of the building on an interim basis for the start-up faculty and the academic planning required during the construction period. Dr. Moore explained that if funding for the project was approved, a planning team of administrators and faculty would be required and the city offered to provide "free use" of a building on the property. While Dr. Moore indicated the existing building did not influence the cost of the project, he said it reduced a contribution that needed to be found for the first year. Additionally, Dr. Moore indicated he would be negotiating with the city for use in the second year or until a permanent building was on the site. Senator Raggio asked if the use of the city building would affect the proposal in the budget for operating money. Dr. Moore advised that use of the city building would not affect operating money.
Mr. Marvel addressed the proposed state funding of $16 million and $10 million in donations and asked if the state's responsibility had been reduced. Dr. Moore advised that the state's responsibility remained the same at $16 million.
Senator Mathews asked if the building the city offered for interim use was actually on the property on which the college would be located. Ms. Rinaldi advised the building was immediately adjacent to the property on which the college would be located and was not considered a part of the property. Additionally, Ms. Rinaldi advised that the city was not proposing to give the building to the University System.
Mr. Dini reviewed the revised project estimate and noted it appeared:
Mr. Dini indicated it appeared that the $2.6 million had been deducted twice. Dr. Moore explained that the $2.6 million was deducted from the total cost of the project reducing the original $26 million to $23.4 million, which reduced an obligation of a donor.
Senator Raggio asked whether the revised estimate was consistent with the original proposal that there was an actual $10 million contribution anticipated to offset the costs. Dr. Moore advised that the Board of Regents had originally recommended $26 million in state funding and $10 million in donated funds. When the state's contribution was reduced from $26 million to $16 million, the donated funding of $10 million was not changed. In response to a question from Senator Raggio, Dr. Moore advised that when the state's portion was reduced, he tried not to reduce the $10 million contributions and would not have if the site had not changed.
Senator Raggio asked Dr. Moore to be aware that the subcommittee had received a copy of a letter from Regent Tom Kirkpatrick (Exhibit H) expressing opposition to the proposal to establishing a state college and that the letter would become a part of the record. Senator Raggio provided an opportunity for NSC-H representatives to respond to the letter. There was no response to Regent Kirkpatrick's letter.
Senator Coffin referred to the site map (Exhibit F) and questioned how College Drive, off an I-515 exit, was zoned on the approach to the college and the length of the approach. Ms. Rinaldi indicated the length of the approach was about two miles and pointed out that at the current time College Drive did not continue through. Ms. Rinaldi explained that the map did not indicate which roads existed and which were proposed, and that existing roads were off the further eastern extension of I-515 from Dawson Avenue. Ms. Rinaldi indicated that the entrance to the college would be off Dawson Avenue.
Senator Coffin questioned how the railroad tracks would be handled. Ms. Rinaldi explained that while a railroad grade crossing existed, the railroad was not used except as a spur to service industrial properties. Ms. Rinaldi suggested the railroad could be used as a rail service to the college site in the future.
Senator Coffin assumed future plans would extend College Drive to the campus noting lines on the map indicating avenues within the boundaries. Ms. Rinaldi pointed out that a road connected Foothills Drive on the right to College Avenue located farther north. Ms. Rinaldi explained that the connecting roadway was moved away from the neighborhood farther to the south and was seen as the double line on the map. In response to a question from Senator Coffin, Ms. Rinaldi advised that the most direct access to the college from west Henderson and the Green Valley areas would be from Dawson Avenue. Ms. Rinaldi pointed out that the west half of the property, shown on the map, was BLM land that would be available within 18 to 24 months and was not expected to be the first area developed. Ms. Rinaldi advised that the utilities were all located to the eastern end of the college site, and it was anticipated the first few years of development would be on the east area of the property. In response to a question from Senator Coffin concerning the exit at Dawson off I-515, Ms. Rinaldi explained that the existing exit at Dawson was indicated on the map by two black‑gray lines. Senator Coffin noted elevation changes, which appeared toward the southern half of the land within the boundary lines. Ms. Rinaldi advised that while the land was primarily flat, the very southwestern portion illustrated significant slopes. Ms. Rinaldi explained that the roadway that would eventually connect to College Drive would come through a pass around a significant slope. In response to a question from Senator Coffin, Ms. Rinaldi advised that the mountains surrounded the property and did not anticipate there were any roads that would be built going through the mountains.
In response to a question from Senator Coffin concerning the original intent for use of the land, Ms. Rinaldi indicated there was a wide-range of interest for development from gravel pits to golf courses. In response to a question from Senator Coffin, Ms. Rinaldi advised that the long-term plan would be to extend College Drive. Senator Coffin discussed complaints from residents near Dawson Avenue concerning traffic and indicated it might be best to try and move traffic to College Drive. Ms. Rinaldi indicated there were no residents near Dawson Avenue, but there were residents near College Drive. Senator Coffin indicated there were many homes near Dawson Avenue shown on the aerial map. Ms. Rinaldi agreed, however, pointed out the resident homes shown on the map did not have access from Dawson Avenue because the property was lower and would be in the buffer area.
Senator Raggio asked if the present community college location was on the aerial map. Dr. Moore responded that it was not shown on the aerial map, however, pointed out that Foothills High School was right above the I-515 marker at the top of the map and the community college was located directly above the high school on College Drive. Dr. Moore commented that the community college, high school, and city park to the south were attractive amenities, and it was anticipated that College Drive would become an entry into the campus.
Senator Raggio stated that since the concept had changed, an updated revised project cost estimate was required. Senator Raggio emphasized that specific detail was required on the revised project cost estimate for construction of the building.
Senator Mathews requested that the detail provided by the PWB include the railroad and indicated that even a spur could become a problem.
Jane Nichols, Ph.D., Chancellor, University and Community College System of Nevada, identified herself for the record and advised that the University System was still in negotiations with the City of Henderson for exactly what the gift to the University System might look like. Dr. Nichols indicated that discussion concerning the state college during the hearing was "approximately correct," however, negotiations had not been finalized and a final action by the Board of Regents concerning the site was anticipated on May 10.
Chairman Arberry recessed the meeting for a ten-minute break. The meeting was reconvened at 10:05 a.m.
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING COMPLEX, UNLV (CIP 01-C15)
Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C15 as a request for funding in the amount of $8,832,152 in state funds for the advanced planning, design, and utility infrastructure of a new 230,000-square-foot Science and Engineering Complex on the University of Nevada Las Vegas' (UNLV) main campus. Mr. O'Brien reported:
Chairman Arberry requested clarification on the projected time line for completion of the project.
Carol C. Harter, Ph.D., President, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, identified herself for the record and reported that if funding for the planning and infrastructure was approved, the Science and Engineering Complex was anticipated to be completed in 2005.
Chairman Arberry asked whether non-state funds would be available to fund a portion of the project. Dr. Harter indicated that $15 million in non-state funds had been identified to be contributed to the project.
Senator Rawson requested comments concerning the need to bridge the existing science facilities with the new science complex. Dr. Harter discussed the limited space availability at the UNLV and the difficulty in housing the additional science and engineering faculty who had been hired to meet the needs of the growing student population and professional programs at the UNLV. Dr. Harter reported that some of the UNLV's scientists and engineers had no laboratories, which limited their ability to conduct research and placed them in jeopardy of being able to attain tenure. Additionally, Dr. Harter indicated that the UNLV had recently lost several new faculty members and attributed the loss to limited space.
In a discussion concerning the dental school, Dr. Harter explained that the students and the largely science‑based faculty would also require laboratories. Dr. Harter indicated that the UNLV would be "grateful to have a transitional piece of a facility" that could be added to their current biology building to provide a bridge between the current science facilities and the future engineering and science complex. Dr. Harter explained that the transitional facility would allow the UNLV to house the dental school's basic science faculty as well as the cancer institute. Additionally, Dr. Harter explained that $2.7 million in federal dollars would be used to help build the transitional facility, $1.8 million of which would be used for the cancer research center and $900,000 for the biotechnology center. State funding, in the amount of $5 million, for the transitional facility was requested by Dr. Harter, which she indicated could be substituted for the $24 million previously requested for the dental school. Dr. Harter assumed the dental school could be bonded to build the final $36 million facility. Dr. Harter indicated UNLV representatives believed they could bridge between the time being and the final dental school and the science and engineering technology building "with a $5 million transitional building."
Chairman Arberry asked UNLV officials to indicate the location of the new science and engineering complex and also expressed concern in reference to limited parking availability and the possible loss of parking spaces. Dr. Harter responded that the new facility would be on the main campus and a parking garage was in the process of being built adjacent to where the building would be located. Dr. Harter advised the members that the new facility would be the last major building that could be built on the main campus. Dr. Harter referred to the UNLV folder (Exhibit I) and turning to pages 1 and 2 pointed out that the Juanita White Biology Building was located next to the engineering building, and a building that would physically bridge those two buildings on the north side of the campus would combine interdisciplinary studies in science and engineering. Dr. Harter indicated the facility would provide shared classroom, research, and administrative space, which was a more modern way to deal with interrelated academic disciplines.
Senator Raggio discussed the capital improvement projects being heard by the subcommittee and requested clarification on the requested $5 million for a transitional building. Dr. Harter explained the $5 million request was on the Board of Regents' approved capital budget list. Senator Raggio indicated the subcommittee could only review the projects listed on the subcommittee agenda. Dr. Harter clarified that her discussion concerning the $5 million transfer was in reference to the regents' approved budget of projects rather than to The Executive Budget, which did not recommend the transitional building. Senator Raggio pointed out he thought Dr. Harter's request was to revise some of the recommended projects and transfer funding for the bridge facility. Dr. Harter clarified that a transfer of funding in The Executive Budget for the bridge facility was not being requested. Senator Raggio stated there was no "extra money" for funding the project. Dr. Harter stated that the UNLV had a short‑run problem they could not solve of getting between the present time and the time the facility was available in 2005.
JOHN S. WRIGHT HALL ADDITION & RENOVATION, UNLV (CIP 01-C23)
Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C23 as a request for funding in the amount of $18,792,181 for the renovation of the 22,547-square-foot John S. Wright Hall on the UNLV campus and the construction of a new 56,000-square‑foot addition. Mr. O'Brien outlined the proposal for the three development steps that would be required for the placement of students and faculty during the construction process:
Mr. O'Brien advised that while the project's design was funded by a previous CIP, a change in scope had occurred which would be addressed by UNLV representatives. Mr. O'Brien pointed out that CIP 01-C23 would complete the design of the full project as well as the construction, and significant issues concerning access to the entire facility would be resolved by moving the project forward.
Chairman Raggio asked why the project had been expanded from a 37,000‑square-foot addition to a 55,989-square-foot addition. Mr. O'Brien confirmed that the original scope of the design in CIP 99-C23 was 37,000 gross square feet to which design funding was associated. Mr. O'Brien explained that the first phase of the project was to demolish the existing auditorium to build the new learning center, a 37,000-square-foot addition to Wright Hall for classrooms, a teaching center, and a 200-seat auditorium.
Juanita Fain, Ph.D., Vice President for Administration, UNLV, identified herself for the record and advised the members there had been a total change in the scope of the project from the time it was initially requested. The initial project was to raze the auditorium and construct a 37,000-square-foot technologically‑advanced auditorium and the second phase was to renovate the existing building. Dr. Fain advised that when the request was first submitted, there was neither a complete in-depth investigation of the existing facility nor a complete understanding of the suitability of remodeling the existing facility. Dr. Fain explained that during FY1999-01, UNLV received $600,000 for Phase I planning that was used to contract with KGA Architecture to conduct a full analysis. KGA determined a phased approach was inappropriate because of the state of the existing facility. Dr. Fain advised the members that CIP 01‑C23 was for a single project based on the architect's analysis.
In response to a question from Chairman Arberry, Mr. O'Brien affirmed the demolition costs were included in the project cost. Chairman Arberry noted that the Governor had recommended a $5 million reduction on the cost of the project and questioned how the project would be affected by the reduction. Dr. Harter responded that three of the eight departments that were slated to move into the facility would not be accommodated. Dr. Harter advised the members that the UNLV was in the process of trying to assess exactly how they would build an $18 million facility as opposed to a $23 million facility.
Senator Coffin expressed an inability to understand the reason for the reduction and asked for specifics on where the "shaving was done." Additionally, Senator Coffin asked why an $18 million project would be built if it could not accomplish what was needed. Mr. O'Brien explained it was his understanding the scope of the project had increased and the actual definition of changes and new requirements were not transmitted to the Governor. In response to a question from Senator Coffin on where the reduced $5 million would be expended, Mr. O'Brien indicated the reduction was basically just $5 million less in the CIP program.
Senator Coffin called attention to the problems the UNLV had in attempting to supervise the Lied Library during construction and asked that the PWB look at the CIP 01-C23 project as a way to reestablish a connection between the PWB and the UNLV. Mr. O'Brien indicated it appeared that that problem had been resolved on the current project because UNLV staff had been working with the architect. Senator Coffin wanted to know where UNLV's place would be once ground was broken and work started with contractors and subcontractors. It was Mr. O'Brien's feeling that UNLV representatives would have to be on site with the PWB, and he called attention to the importance of communication between the PWB and the user agency. Mr. O'Brien stated the PWB would not approve changes or make or deny pay requests without having agency involvement. Senator Coffin asked at what level in his office an unresolved work issue would be resolved if a University representative disagreed with work being done by the contractor. Mr. O'Brien reiterated the PWB would not be making or dictating changes to the agency and that it would be very important with any project that the agency be involved as a partner. In response to a statement from Senator Coffin on the contractor's involvement, Mr. O'Brien stated that the contractor would not be able "to make changes based on just the agency's direction because that caused problems and an increase in the project." Additionally, Mr. O'Brien said that any changes had to go through a process whereby if the agency had a concern, they had to address that concern through the PWB who would sit down with the architect and before any changes were made in the field, there would have to be a directive to the contractor as a change order. In response to a question from Senator Coffin, Dr. Harter advised that she had confidence in Mr. O'Brien's leadership to help change some of the practices that led to the problems with the Lied Library. Dr. Harter added that she had personally "walked the Lied Library once a week before it was finished," and was very much involved and frustrated with what UNLV representatives considered to be a "negative experience" and failure of coordination between architects, some PWB staff, and the contractors.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked for the dollar amount included in the project for the demolition. Mr. O'Brien advised that the cost of the demolition was not "broken out," however, the information would be provided to staff. Additionally, Ms. Giunchigliani asked that information be provided on exactly where the $5 million reduction was expended in other projects. Mr. O'Brien agreed to provide that information to staff also.
STUDENT SERVICES ADDITION AND RENOVATION- DESIGN UNLV (CIP 01‑C26)
Mr. O'Brien identified CIP 01-C26 as a request for funding in the amount of $300,000 in state funds for the advance planning and design of a 20,000‑square‑foot addition to the UNLV student services building and a 20,000‑square-foot renovation. Mr. O'Brien explained that advance planning greatly facilitated the orderly programming, scheduling, and funding of the construction projects.
Chairman Arberry asked for information on how the remodeled space would be used. Dr. Harter responded that the offices for Admissions and Registration were currently in Frazier Hall on the east side of the campus, while Financial Aid, Career Planning, and the Bursar's Office were all on the west side of the campus which made it inconvenient for students to go between the two buildings. Dr. Harter explained that Admissions and Registration would move from Frazier Hall to the new student services complex which would be adjacent to Financial Aid, the Bursar, Career Planning, and other basic student services.
Senator Coffin asked if Frazier Hall would be renovated as a part of the project. Dr. Harter advised that Frazier Hall would be renovated and discussed the possibility of placing Continuing Education in the renovated space since it was accessible to parking.
CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS (CIPs 01-U1 THROUGH 8)
Capital improvement projects 01-U1 through 8 were not heard.
********
Chairman Arberry recognized Ron Remington, Ph.D., President, Great Basin College, Elko. Dr. Remington identified himself for the record and advised the members that while Great Basin College did not have a project listed on the agenda, he wanted to provide clarification in reference to testimony in a previous joint hearing concerning a project that may have been confused with the second high-technology facility in Elko. Dr. Remington advised that Great Basin had a $5 million project on their original list that included the term "technology" and was a facility slightly in excess of 30,000 square feet that would accommodate two existing programs housed at rented facilities in downtown Elko.
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (CIP 01-M25, M26, M27, M28)
Mr. Ward Patrick, Deputy Manager, Professional Services, PWB, identified himself for the record and advised that CIP 01-M25 was a request for funding in the amount of $313,143 for the replacement of the existing uninterruptible power supply (UPS) for the computer facility. Mr. Patrick reported that the equipment was installed in 1991 and was "near the end of its expected useful and productive life." Mr. Patrick advised the members the cost was based on a project proposal, which included a 300-kVA system expandable to 375 kVA.
HVAC SYSTEM UPGRADES, COMPUTER FACILITY (CIP 01-M26)
Mr. Patrick identified CIP 01-M26 as a request for $538,974 to upgrade the existing heating and air-conditioning equipment at the computer facility in Carson City. Mr. Patrick reported that the project included a backup air-cooled chiller, plate and frame heat exchanger, and associated pumps and piping that would allow for continual service and increased the reliability of the systems at the computer facility. In addition, upgrades were planned for the air distribution system and some of the water treatment areas, which were 30 years old and part of the original HVAC system.
Chairman Arberry asked how the backup chiller differed from the backup chiller that was approved in CIP 99-M25. Mr. Patrick recalled that the chiller in the M25 project was a replacement and the M26 project created a "redundancy." Mr. Patrick agreed to research the subject and asked the agency representative to address the question.
Dorothy Martin, Deputy Chief, Department of Information Technology (DoIT), explained that the project was for a backup system to the primary system in the event the power went out and indicated the term "redundant" was misleading. Ms. Martin addressed concerns in reference to the substantial increase in the department's technical equipment during the past five years and reiterated that the backup system would ensure the computer facility remained cool in the event of a failure of the primary system.
BOILER REPLACEMENT, COMPUTER FACILITY (CIP O1-M27)
Mr. Patrick identified CIP 01-M27 as a request for funding in the amount of $84,252 that would replace the existing boiler and pumps at the computer facility in Carson City. Mr. Patrick advised that the existing equipment was 30 years old and had reached the end of its useful life. The construction breakdown included:
ANALYSIS OF HVAC AND POWER, INSTALL SECURITY FENCE AROUND NEW GENERATOR AND WATER DETECTION SYSTEM, COMPUTER FACILITY (CIP 01-M28)
Mr. Patrick identified CIP 01-M28 as a request for funding in the amount of $119,741 to monitor and "complete the analysis of the computer facility's electrical system, air-conditioning system, and air handler controls." Mr. Patrick indicated the PWB wanted to hold the air-conditioning and controls analysis in abeyance. Mr. Patrick explained the necessity of the item was under review and the PWB would provide a revised project cost estimate if necessary. The project also included installing a power monitoring system, a security fence and catwalk, and water detection system to ensure the integrity of the computing systems.
As there was no further business to come before the subcommittee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:41 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Connie Davis
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblyman Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman
DATE:
APPROVED BY:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
DATE: