MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY ways and means/senate finance
joint Subcommittee on
public safety/natural resources/transportation
Seventy-First Session
April 24, 2001
The Joint Subcommittee on Public Safety/Natural Resources/Transportationwas called to order at 8:20 a.m. on Tuesday, April 24, 2001. Chairman Lawrence Jacobsen presided in Room 2134 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 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. David Parks, Chairman
Mr. Bob Beers
Mrs. Vonne Chowning
Mrs. Marcia de Braga
Mr. John Marvel
Mr. Richard D. Perkins
SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Chairman
Senator Joseph Neal, Jr.
Senator William O’Donnell
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst
Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst
Brian Burke, Senior Program Analyst
Michael Chapman, Program Analyst
Mark Krmpotic, Program Analyst
Jim Rodriguez, Program Analyst
Andrea Carothers, Committee Secretary
Carol Thomsen, Committee Secretary
BUDGET CLOSINGS
Senator Jacobsen indicated that the subcommittee would hear the budgets, and if there were no objections by any person on the subcommittee, the budgets would be approved in general. If a subcommittee member had an item that they were concerned about in the budget, it would be held until the end of the hearing.
FORESTRY – BUDGET PAGE CNR-70
The Chair recognized Mark Krmpotic, Program Analyst. Mr. Krmpotic explained that the Forestry Division managed and coordinated all forestry, nursery, endangered plant species, and watershed resource activities on certain public, state, and private lands.
Decision unit M-203 recommended a combination of General Funds and transfers from the Wildlife Division to fund a Program Assistant II to provide clerical and accounting assistance for the combined Forestry and Wildlife air operations. Mr. Krmpotic noted that in the closing for the Wildlife Division budgets the subcommittee had approved the portion of the transfer for the position.
The Governor recommended the addition of federal funding, of $60,000, under an agreement between the Division of Forestry and the U.S. Forest Service for the Humboldt National Forest operating plan. The federal funding had been previously received in the Forestry Intergovernmental account, which the subcommittee would be considering to include in the Authorizations Act. Mr. Krmpotic said that the decrease in the Forestry Intergovernmental account amounted to $68,000, while the increase in the Forestry Account totaled $60,000. Information indicated that the decrease was valid and related to one‑time items that were funded by the Forest Service in the previous fiscal year.
Mr. Krmpotic explained that the Governor had proposed an amendment to create a new decision unit, M-205, to add a Management Assistant I position to replace the inmate worker recently eliminated due to the capacity in which the worker was used. This related to S.B. 485 from the Seventieth Session, which provided that inmates would not have access to personnel information. In the case at hand the inmate was being used in a capacity that allowed him access to personnel information. The amendment also proposed the elimination of a Crew Supervisor position in the Forestry Honor Camp to offset the General Fund increase associated with the Management Assistant I position.
The Governor had also proposed an amendment to add salary increases for dispatchers at the Elko Dispatch Center. This was associated with upgrades that were recommended for the dispatchers due to the fact that the dispatch center was going to a 24-hour schedule.
The Governor had recommended an increase of $112,257 each year of the biennium to the cost allocation in decision unit E-801. This would increase the overall allocation from $230,000 to $342,257. The decision before the subcommittee was whether to approve the increase in the allocation. Mr. Krmpotic emphasized that if the increase was not approved, General Funds in the amount of the increase of the allocation would needed to be added.
Mr. John Marvel said that there were some counties that could not afford the increase. The increase was a dramatic increase, and certain counties did not have the budgetary wherewithal to complete the increase. Steve Robinson, State Forester Firewarden, Division of Forestry, said that the division had examined the recommendation as it had proceeded, including having the regional forester at the meetings of the county commissions. The division knew the increase would be a burden, but the impetus for the recommendation came from the previous session. The division needed to establish specific rationale to what the counties were charged. The charge had been historical and had not been based on specific rationale. A study had been completed, and there were questions about how public input for the study was received, and Mr. Robinson noted that that was a mistake on the part of the division and the study should have been more public. He assured the committee that the mistake with the study would not be made again. The fact was that in the Executive Branch the division was granted leeway from the Governor, but what the division did not have the power to do was negotiate the Governor’s recommendations. Mr. Marvel said that the problem was that in areas like Elko County that increased from $25,205 to $80,060 at one time, the increase was out of the counties budgetary wherewithal. If the counties were not given relief in the increase they would be forced to cut back on services.
Don Hataway, Deputy Director, Budget Division, said that there was empathy for the counties. The division understood the budget process that the counties had to go through as the Budget Division had to complete a similar budgetary process, however, there was a push to complete a better job of cost allocating the services that were shared between the state and the counties. He noted that the attempt was to complete an equitable split. Mr. Hataway explained that built into the state budget was all the overtime cost that could be cost allocated, and all the insurance on the vehicles that the state and counties shared that could be cost allocated. He explained that this was an attempt at an intermittent step. There could always be negotiation, but what was presented was a fair and equitable allocation on the parameters used. Mr. Hataway explained that he understood the struggles that all governmental entities went through to balance a budget.
Mr. Marvel said that $59,855 in one increase was a dramatic increase. He noted that the rural counties were struggling due to the price of gold. He said that one of the items that bothered people in the rural areas was that they were unaware that the cost allocation was going to change, and were not privy to prior negotiations or the development of the cost allocations. Mr. Hataway said that before the program was finalized the representatives from the counties had been called together, and the basis of what was completed and the parameters of study were reviewed. The division had attempted to communicate, and there would be an attempt for improved communication in the future. Mr. Marvel asked what would happen with the increase if the counties did not have the money. Mr. Hataway said that the Budget Division had no recommended changes from the amount that was recommended in the budget. That decision would be up to the legislature to decide.
Mr. Krmpotic continued his testimony. The Executive Budget recommended the continuation of the Lake Tahoe Environmental Improvement Program (EIP) position. The decision item recommended a transfer from the Lake Tahoe License Plate Account of $30,000 each year of the biennium to partially support the position and associated costs. The Budget Office had advised that they overlooked submitting draft legislation to permit the use of Tahoe license plate monies. They were suggesting the use of interest accumulated on the initial Tahoe EIP bond issue to fund the position over the biennium. Mr. Krmpotic said the subcommittee should be aware that accumulated interest was sufficient to fund the position and a position in the State Parks budget for the next biennium only.
Mr. Marvel asked to hold decision unit E-801, but would accept the rest of the budget.
Senator Jacobsen indicated that the subcommittee would be proceeding to the next budget account.
PUBLIC SAFETY, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION –
BUDGET PAGE PS-49
Michael Chapman, Program Analyst, said there were technical adjustments in the budget as follows:
Decision unit E-250 recommended the consolidation of existing categories for Out-of-State Travel (02), In-State Travel (03), Operating (04), Training and Exercise (13), Hazard Mitigation (15), and Disaster Preparation Improvement (32) into a single use category, the Emergency Management Planning Grant (EMPG) category. Previously there had been a number of federal grants made to the agency, and those grants had been consolidated into a single grant and the division and The Executive Budget recommended consolidating the associated programs into a single grant. The issue had been discussed previously during the April Interim Finance Committee (IFC) meeting. The work program had been denied. The Governor’s recommendation had the effect of placing all of the division’s travel, operating, and special use expenditures into one category. Mr. Chapman noted there had been discussion about this item when the budget was presented for closing on April 6, 2001.
Decision unit E-300 recommended increasing an existing half-time communications system specialist position to a full-time position. The position handled the state Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Services (RACES) program, and coordinated local governments’ communications efforts. The position was currently funded, and was recommended to be funded 50 percent General Fund and 50 percent by the EMPG.
Decision units E-710 and E-720 were for replacement and new computer equipment.
Decision unit E-721 recommended a new videoconferencing system. This would connect the Emergency Operation Center, the Governor’s Carson City and Las Vegas offices, and the Washington D.C. office. Mr. Chapman mentioned that all equipment recommendations were funded with federal funds.
Decision units E-800 and E-801 were the proposed cost allocations to the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS) to support the Public Safety Technology Division, and the Public Safety Director’s Office and Administrative Services Division. Mr. Chapman noted that S.B. 306, to transfer the Department of Emergency Management from the DMV&PS to the Governor’s Office, was introduced on March 9, 2001. If S.B. 306 was approved there would not be a need for the cost allocations to the department. Public Safety would have to reallocate, taking Emergency Management out of the equation. S.B. 306 had been passed out of the Senate and referred to the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs.
Frank Siracusa, Chief, Division of Emergency Management, said that in regard to the communications positions, the position had always been a full-time position within the Division of Emergency Management because of what it did in providing technical assistance to local governments. The primary mode of communication during an emergency was through amateur radio. Mr. Siracusa stated that prior to his becoming Chief, the previous communications officer and other individuals were involved in improprieties as the result of surplus properties. As a result there was a federal-state investigation, and the person in the communications position left state government. Because the investigation lasted approximately a year the position was left unfilled. The division worked with the Legislative Counsel Bureau to see if the position could be returned. The position was not returned as a full-time position, but the division was able to eliminate a full-time clerical position within the office for a half-time position, with the hope of returning during the current session and requesting a full-time position. Mr. Siracusa said the position was critical and was needed to provide services for local governments.
Senator Jacobsen asked if Mr. Siracusa felt there were secure communications with the counties. Mr. Siracusa answered in the affirmative and noted that the position acted as a liaison and worked closely with exercise and training.
Senator William O’Donnell inquired what the incremental cost would be. Mr. Siracusa answered that being the position was half federal and half state funded, to upgrade the position to a full-time position would be approximately $11,000 from the General Fund for each year of the biennium. Senator O’Donnell confirmed that the amount being discussed was $22,000 for a position that dealt with emergency management, and indicated that he was not opposed to the position.
Mr. Bob Beers disclosed that he had had an amateur radio license for approximately 30 years, but he did not participate in the federal or local emergency management programs with any frequency. He indicated he would be voting on the budget.
Mr. Beers reiterated that the communications position had been funded until recently. He stated that decision unit E-250 was the consideration of consolidating the accounts, and stated he did not believe he was in favor of eliminating the 02, 03, and 04 categories. Mr. Beers indicated that categories 13, 15, and 32 were related to grants that had been consolidated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and asked for confirmation. Kamela Carmazzi, Deputy Chief, Division of Emergency Management, confirmed Mr. Beers’ statement. Mr. Beers asked if the federal government was requiring accounting in the categories. Ms. Carmazzi said that the special use account represented individual federal grants, which had been consolidated into one grant. Mr. Beers said that because the grant was federal there should be requirements on how the money was spent in each area. Ms. Carmazzi said that there were no such requirements, and one of the intents of the consolidation of the EMPG was to allow states to have flexibility in the use of the funds, so that states would be better able to apply the money to areas of need. Mr. Beers asked how the decision was currently made. Ms. Carmazzi indicated that a majority of the money went to local governments, and that was completed through an application process, based on the local governments assessing what needed to be completed in their jurisdictions. Mr. Beers inquired as to who rated the grant requests. Ms. Carmazzi explained that that was completed through a process within the division. Because of the limited money, the local emergency managers needed to be funded first, and then the grants were based on criteria that included planning, training, and exercise events occurring within the jurisdiction. Mr. Beers said that he did not see a problem with consolidating the accounts related to the federal grant, if the federal agency providing the grant did not see a problem.
Mr. Marvel said that the subcommittee had declined to consolidate categories in the past, and wondered if the consolidation in those accounts might be a bad precedent.
Mr. Beers asked to have comment from the Budget Division about whether the categories were set up because the grants were separate. He understood the concern about the consolidation, but if the categories were set up for specific grants that had since been consolidated by the grant provider that needed to be taken into consideration.
Mr. Hataway asked if Mr. Beers was referring to the 02, 03, 04 categories. Mr. Beers clarified that he was referring to the 13, 15, and 32 categories. Mr. Hataway informed the subcommittee that there were separate categories because there were separate grants in the past. The grant was now a single grant and that was why the suggestion had been made to consolidate the categories. The Budget Division had many budgets with consolidated categories. The Department of Education was replete with standard categories for specific grants that included 02, 03, 04 as well as aid to schools. The monies being discussed were passed through entities that needed the assistance.
Senator O’Donnell inquired if it was the Governor’s recommendation to consolidate the accounts. Mr. Hataway answered in the affirmative. Senator O’Donnell asked if the consolidation would help the management of the allocation of funds. Mr. Hataway said that in terms of the accounting system, with proper coding everything could be traced. Senator O’Donnell asked if Mr. Hataway saw a problem in the accounting of the monies, to which Mr. Hataway answered in the negative. Senator O’ Donnell indicated that he did not have a problem with the consolidation.
Mr. David Parks asked what precedence would be established through the other state agencies if the consolidation occurred. Mr. Hataway said there was not any real consistency through the agencies. There were some agencies that were routinely done in the consolidated manner, and others that would break out the accounting by each individual operating category. It was simply a matter of the confidence of the legislature in creating the accounts, but there was no consistent policy.
Senator Jacobsen indicated tentative approval of the budget.
Mr. Richard Perkins asked what the tentative approval meant. Senator Jacobsen stated that the tentative approval meant that there appeared to be no questions from the subcommittee, and a tentative agreement had been made to move the budget as recommended by staff. The motion would be made en masse at the end of the meeting.
Mr. Perkins asked what the tentative approval was for this particular budget. Senator Jacobsen said the tentative approval was based on what staff had recommended to the subcommittee. Mr. Perkins inquired if the tentative approval was based on Mr. Beers’ earlier comments, to which Senator Jacobsen answered in the affirmative. Mr. Perkins clarified that categories 02, 03, and 04 would not be consolidated and categories 13, 15, and 32 would be consolidated.
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM – BUDGET PAGE PS-57
Mr. Chapman continued his testimony with Budget Account 3674. Historically the budget had been a pass-through account of federal funds to local governments and state agencies. The Executive Budget recommended the discontinuance of the budget account, and the movement of the funds into the previously discussed budget account where they would be placed into a separate category 07. This was a portion of the EMPG grant.
Senator Jacobsen indicated tentative approval of the budget.
FORESTRY HONOR CAMPS – BUDGET PAGE CNR-83
Mr. Krmpotic testified on Budget Account 4198. The Forestry Honor Camp program coordinated and supervised forestry conservation work projects performed by inmates of the Department of Prisons who resided in statewide Forestry Conservation Camps.
There was an amendment submitted by the Governor that called for the elimination of a crew supervisor position at the Jean Conservation Camp. Mr. Krmpotic had earlier informed the subcommittee that the Governor had also proposed amendments to add a management assistant position in the Forestry budget account and to increase dispatch salaries at the Elko Dispatch Center. The recommendation in the budget would provide offsetting General Fund savings to enable the addition of the dollars in the main Forestry budget account.
It had been brought to staff’s attention that the Department of Transportation (NDOT) had included an increase of $418,702 each year to pay for additional inmate crew work to the Division of Forestry and to pay for increased rates due to a renegotiated labor agreement. Staff had met with both the NDOT and the Division of Forestry and had ascertained that the renegotiated labor agreement had not occurred, however, NDOT and the Division of Forestry negotiated the labor agreements at the local level and at times actual costs were not considered. The NDOT had also indicated that there was a plan to provide an increase in work to conservation crews over the next biennium. The decision before the subcommittee was whether to add $418,702 in Honor Camp revenue with a corresponding decrease in General Funds in each year of the biennium.
Mr. Krmpotic said that the Silver Springs Conservation Camp (SSCC) was projected to have 99 inmates in FY2002 and 105 inmates in FY2003. The SSCC was budgeted to have 8 12-person crews, which constituted 96 inmates plus a 12-person in-camp crew for a total of 108 inmates. The division indicated that the Department of Prisons was projecting to have sufficient inmates to staff the crews at SSCC. If the inmate population did drop the division would take appropriate action to mitigate the situation and it was unnecessary to eliminate the position. Mr. Krmpotic stated the subcommittee might wish to issue a Letter of Intent that indicated if the population projections did not justify the number of crews at the SSCC, and if the situation warrants, the division should consider moving the crew supervisor to a camp whose population might justify an additional crew.
Mr. Hataway indicated that in regard to the second decision item Mr. Krmpotic had mentioned, the Budget Office recognized there was a difference between what the NDOT was anticipating to expend and what was built into the budget. There had been preparation, for the Governor’s consideration and in anticipation of Economic Forum decisions, of a budget modification plan. The Governor had not made a final decision on that matter, however, on that list was the addition of $300,000 each year of the NDOT money to the Forestry budget. Regardless of the amount added, the key was the continued emphasis on the part of the Department of Prisons to place inmates in the camps, so that they could be used to generate resources. If the income was not generated then an appearance would be made before the IFC for a contingency allocation to support the operation.
Senator Jacobsen indicated that there was tentative approval for the budget.
FORESTRY INTERGOVERNMENTAL BUDGET
Mr. Krmpotic went on to say that the Forestry Intergovernmental budget account had not been included in The Executive Budget. The subcommittee of the Legislative Commissions Budget Overview Committee had asked for information to be provided as far as projected expenses and funding for the budget account. Staff had presented those to the committee. The decision before the subcommittee was whether the budget should be included in the State Authorizations Act. Mr. Krmpotic pointed out the increases to the cost allocation were built into decision unit M-801 at $112,257 each year of the biennium. If the subcommittee decided to hold that item in the Forestry budget account, they might wish to consider the same action for the budget at hand.
Senator Jacobsen indicated tentative agreement for the budget.
PUBLIC SAFETY, DIVISION OF INVESTIGATIONS – BUDGET PAGE PS-98
Mr. Krmpotic explained that the Division of Investigations (NDI) was a criminal investigative agency with statewide jurisdictional responsibility for narcotics enforcement, the collection and dissemination of criminal intelligence information, and upon request, investigative assistance to Nevada sheriffs and chiefs of police, district attorneys, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of State.
The Executive Budget recommended the elimination of the vehicle auto theft unit (VIPER) program in decision unit E-277. At the February 13, 2001, subcommittee hearing, the department indicated that the primary focus for the NDI was narcotics enforcement and the decision to eliminate the VIPER program was done to apply resources to higher priority areas. The department indicated that the program was presently based in Washoe and Clark Counties, and reported that in Washoe County, the NDI was the sole participant and in Clark County, the NDI participated with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and the Henderson Police Department. The decision before the subcommittee was whether to approve the Governor’s recommendation to eliminate the VIPER program.
Decision unit E-288 recommended the replacement of 15 vehicles through the State Motor Pool. Net ongoing expenses of $10,490 in FY2002 and $56,684 in FY2003 were recommended in each year of the biennium to provide for monthly Motor Pool charges. The Governor recommended a one-shot appropriation of $29,353 from the General Fund for the State Motor Pool to purchase the vehicles. Redirection of the one-shot appropriation to the DMV&PS for the purchase of the vehicles would eliminate the need for the General Fund appropriation of $6,560 in FY2002 and $40,964 in FY2003 for ongoing charges from the State Motor Pool. Mr. Krmpotic said that if the subcommittee wished to accept the option, the General Fund appropriation of $296,353 should be decreased for the vehicle assigned to the Highway-Funded investigator. The adjustment would result in a General Fund reduction to the one-shot of $22,341 and an increase in Highway Funds in the same amount.
Decision unit E-710 recommended using forfeiture funds for the replacement of software, desktop computers, notebook computers, and 20 vehicles. The Governor had submitted an amendment to provide funding for the replacement of agency-issued uniforms and equipment such as bulletproof vests, handguns, shotguns, and radios totaling $5,098 each year in Highway Funds, and General Funds totaling $42,815 in FY2002 and $46,986 in FY2003. Mr. Krmpotic stated that if the subcommittee approved the elimination of the VIPER program, staff would recommend the reduction to the General Funded portions of the amendment by $5,435 in FY2002 and $3,766 in FY2003 and an additional $6,860 in FY2002 to eliminate four replacement PCs and associated software. The amendment also included a replacement factor for handheld radios at $542 per employee per year. Radios had been funded in the 1999-2001 biennium through a one-shot from the General Fund. The department had indicated that the radios had a five-year useful life. Mr. Krmpotic noted that the subcommittee might wish to eliminate the radios from the amendment presented by the Governor, if the amendment was approved.
Staff sought approval to make adjustments to decision units E-800, E-801, and E-981 based on final approval of the budgets for the Public Safety Technology Division, the Administrative Services Division, and the Director’s Office.
Mrs. Vonne Chowning clarified that the VIPER program elimination would have a $300,000 savings to the General Fund. She asked if any of the positions related to the program would be eliminated, or whether they would be absorbed into the NDI. Mrs. Chowning stated that car theft in Las Vegas continued to be on the rise and Las Vegas had one of the highest rates in the nation in terms of stolen vehicles. She said that she would like to feel more comfort that the division’s work had not changed, and the investigative work would continue, so that the entire state could be served well in terms of eliminating the vehicle theft rings.
Mr. Krmpotic noted that The Executive Budget recommended reductions of General Funds of $346,138 in FY2002 and $360,434 in FY2003 associated with the VIPER program. The recommendation did call for the elimination of four positions associated with the program. In response to questions by staff, the division had indicated that the individuals that filled the proposed eliminated positions would go to vacancies within the NDI. Mr. Krmpotic said that the last time the division had responded they were waiting for a vacancy for the supervisor position in that unit. The division had also indicated, in past testimony, the investigations of vehicle auto theft crimes would continue through existing resources, however, there would be no unit that specialized in auto theft and focused strictly on that matter. Mr. Krmpotic commented that the department had indicated that the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department was establishing a unit and was focusing on vehicle-related crimes in the south. He was unsure of what other southern police agencies were contemplating regarding the matter. Mr. Krmpotic believed that Washoe County had no dedicated resources for vehicle auto theft crimes.
Mrs. Chowning reiterated that Las Vegas was the sixth worst city in the country in regard to auto theft. She stated that she would agree with the decision item, but she would like to have the vehicle theft issue examined, and if a better position was not had in the next session then she would like the subcommittee to reexamine the issue.
Senator Joseph Neal stated that he had questions regarding decision unit E-285, and the list of training courses proposed to be funded. He stated that list appeared to be a “laundry list” and some of the courses seemed as though there should be people trained in the particular areas. Senator Neal indicated he believed that there would be training needed in the computer crime investigations, wire intercepts, blood spatter analysis, and Spanish immersion for law enforcement. Senator Neal continued giving examples, and said that he believed that there should be people trained in most of the areas proposed for training courses. He said it appeared that there were items in the proposed training list that were not needed, or should not be needed.
David Hosmer, Nevada Division of Investigations, informed the committee that the list of training courses dealing with decision unit E-285 was a general list of types of training that had been presented in the past because of the difficulty in predicting what type of training would be needed. The list represented courses that might need to be attended in the future due to retirements, change in assignments, and promotions, when some of the experienced personnel would leave the agency. In addition, the agency was one of the few agencies that was called on by rural sheriffs’ departments, and the agency provided any investigation that was needed. Mr. Hosmer noted the list encompassed a variety of investigation skills, but said that when a sheriff’s office called, the office did not ask if there was a person who could investigate a certain crime, but rather asked to send someone to investigate the crime. It was necessary to provide a wide base of training to all the investigators. Senator Neal said that it appeared to him that a great deal of the training mentioned in the list could come under crime scene investigation. Mr. Hosmer said that it did come under crime scene investigation, but there were a number of subcategories and because the department might not handle as many homicides as a Las Vegas detective there needed to be refresher courses. Senator Neal asked if Mr. Hosmer was suggesting that when the department received a call from a rural sheriff’s office, the department would need to send a person to be trained before the crime could be solved. Mr. Hosmer answered in the negative. Senator Neal confirmed that the department would have to have individuals to handle the situations, and said that he expected that when the individuals were hired they would be hired with certain skills. Mr. Hosmer agreed with Senator Neal, and said that the department was having a problem in recruiting high-level candidates, which was in part due to pay grades. Senator Neal said he could understand that.
Senator Jacobsen said that due to the questions regarding the VIPER program the budget would be held.
Mr. Parks asked if Mr. Hosmer’s position was that local agencies could satisfactorily handle the situation in regard to stolen vehicles, and that was why the agency was wishing to allocate the VIPER resources elsewhere. Mr. Hosmer answered in the affirmative. The agency had received information from the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department that staff would be added to the vehicle theft units. Mr. Hosmer said the agency would still participate on a case-by-case basis when assistance was requested.
Mr. Perkins indicated that the list of training courses in regard to decision unit E‑285 was a nominal list. The areas were common areas of criminal investigating training, and no item had caused Mr. Perkins’ concern. The training was often ongoing in order to stay informed as new technology and court decisions came into influence. With turnover rates, the training was not overdone. Senator Neal said that when he looked at training for investigations of officers involved in a shooting, it appeared that there should be no need for training, because those skills should already be in the agency. Usually that type of investigation would be found in Internal Affairs. Senator Neal reiterated that it appeared there was no need for training in that area. Mr. Perkins said that officer involved shootings were a very specialized area, particularly with liability issues and new technologies. He believed that there were people trained in that area, but said that it was unrealistic to have two or three people trained in the area, and expect them to cover the entire state. Mr. Perkins also said that with the turnover rates, the expertise had left the agency and gone to other agencies. When people were hired, they were not hired with the specific knowledge. People were hired with “basic common sense” and were trained in all areas. Senator Neal said that he understood that the agency was receiving people with less experience because of the pay scale, and the training would be a need as a result of that. He reiterated that he believed the agency should have people trained in all areas already employed.
Mrs. Chowning reminded the subcommittee that the amount being discussed for the training in decision unit E-285 was $37,738 in each year of the biennium to cover the travel and registration for all the types of training that had been mentioned. Mrs. Chowning indicated that her questions had been answered and she did not need to have the budget held.
Senator Jacobson thanked Mr. Perkins for his input into the discussion. Senator Jacobsen stated that there was tentative approval of the budget.
CNR ADMINISTRATION – BUDGET PAGE CNR-1
Brian Burke, Senior Program Analyst, explained that the technical adjustments for the budget included adjustments to cover rent reductions, the elimination of inmate stipends, computer pricing pursuant to the Purchasing Division’s revised price list, and a reclassification in the Water Planning Board salaries to the Personnel category.
Mr. Burke explained that the Director’s Office currently shared a motor pool vehicle with the Division of Water Resources. Decision unit M-200 recommended General Fund appropriations to allow the Director’s Office to acquire their own motor pool vehicle.
Decision unit M-201 would add one account clerk position to the Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) accounting staff within the Director’s Office. That would provide accounting and fire billing support primarily to the Western Region. It would help to address the workload and return fiscal-related activities to the Director’s Office.
Decision unit M-202 recommended a new Administrative Services Officer I position to assist with daily fiscal operations, biennial budget preparation, work program and contract preparation and review, internal controls, and fire billing reviews. The position would assist both the Director’s Office and NDF activities within the Director’s Office.
Mr. Burke stated there were several decision units, M-203, M-204, and E-910, which continued funding for the co-location of the Director’s Office and NDF fiscal staff in the space previously occupied by the Division of Water Planning on College Parkway.
Decision unit M-205 recommended funding for two new full-time accounting clerk positions. As Mr. Krmpotic had previously explained, the Director’s Office could not use inmate support because of access to personal information. Mr. Burke noted that there had been the equivalent of two full-time positions through the inmate staff, which would be replaced with the two, new full-time accounting clerk positions.
Staff requested authority to make any necessary cost allocation changes resulting from closing decisions made in the Director’s Office and other impacted Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) budget accounts.
Mrs. Marcia de Braga stated that the funds for the Division of Water Planning continued through the end of the current fiscal year, and asked how the duties and cost of running the office were currently being absorbed. Michael Turnipseed, P.E., Director, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, indicated that the Water Education for Teachers (WET) project had been transferred to the Division of Environmental Protection because it aligned with other teacher training programs. Two of the positions in the Division of Water Planning had been vacant for a while, but had been filled, and the flood planner, water planner, and a clerical position had been transferred to the Division of Water Resources. The grants program was proposed to transfer to the Health Division, but was currently in the Division of Environmental Protection aligned with the State Revolving Fund for wastewater treatment plants. The space had been consumed by consolidating the NDF accounting staff within the Director’s Office and the Director’s Office accounting office that supported State Lands, Water Resources, and other agencies within the department.
Mrs. de Braga inquired whether there was a cost savings. Mr. Turnipseed answered that there was a large cost savings in reallocating the Water Resources budget. The cost savings was approximately $965,000 for the biennium. Mrs. de Braga confirmed that the services offered were being continued.
Senator Jacobsen indicated there was tentative approval of the budget by the full subcommittee and staff.
STATE LANDS – BUDGET PAGE CNR-62
Mr. Burke continued his testimony with Budget Account 4173. He noted the technical adjustments included rent adjustments, revised pricing for computer equipment, and a revised Internet cost schedule.
Mr. Burke indicated that the subcommittee had been previously informed that there was funding continued for 17 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. The Executive Budget indicated there was also funding for one seasonal position, but the line item detail did not include the funding. If the subcommittee desired to include the seasonal position there would need to be a General Fund appropriation of $25,664 in each year of the biennium. Mr. Burke said that in conversations with the State Lands administrator, the administrator commented that the seasonal position assisted the full-time forester in managing 500 sensitive parcels in the Tahoe Basin. The agency noted that all parcels must be inspected each year for vegetative health, diseased trees, thinning, encroachments, and other problem areas pursuant to the parcel plan. The seasonal forester would also perform vegetative management and coordinate the efforts of forestry work crews in tree thinning and removal, and disposal of slash. Mr. Burke said that if the subcommittee added the position there would be an increase to the base budget and to decision unit M-301 for the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA).
Decision unit M-202 recommended General Fund appropriations of $2,279 in FY2002 and $3,519 in FY2003 to allow participation in the Western States Land Commissioners’ Association and Western Governors’ Association conferences.
Staff requested the authority to make any necessary cost allocation changes resulting from closing decisions made in the affected DCNR budget accounts.
Mr. Burke noted that the Governor was requesting funding for equipment for the agency. Technical adjustments had reduced the request by $17,177 for the biennium.
The subcommittee had previously discussed the idea that new air quality regulations in Clark County might require the application of a chemical stabilizer to all vacant, barren land. The subcommittee had inquired as to the cost to state agencies. The administrator had provided a response that had been given to the committee.
Mr. Marvel asked how the seasonal worker was paid. Pamela Wilcox, Administrator and State Land Registrar, Division of State Lands, said the position was a continuing General Fund position and was responsible for caring for state-owned land. The position had always been a General Fund position, and the Budget Division did recommend that the position be funded.
Senator Jacobsen said there was tentative approval of the budget.
TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY – BUDGET PAGE CNR-162
Mr. Burke explained there were a number of decision items in the budget account.
Staff recommended moving $22,000 per year for equipment and operating software from the base budget to decision unit E-710. Historically the decisions involving the equipment and software were made in an enhancement decision, so Mr. Burke had reflected that in the technical adjustment.
Other technical adjustments included reduction of computer costs consistent with the previous budget accounts.
Mr. Burke explained there had been a request to prioritize the seven new positions recommended in The Executive Budget. The agency had prioritized the list with priorities one through four for the first year of the biennium, and one through three for the second year of the biennium. Mr. Burke said he would describe the positions in their respective decision units.
Decision unit M-200 recommended General Fund appropriations of $28,148 in FY2002 and $27,155 in FY2003 to fund Nevada’s share of a new senior financial analyst position. The responsibilities for the position included oversight of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) budget, contract review, and oversight of federal grants. The position was the highest priority identified by the TRPA in the first year of the biennium.
Decision unit M-201 recommended General Fund appropriations of $42,277 in FY2002 and $41,296 in FY2003 to add one new senior planner position and one new planning technician position. The positions would be for project reviews and permits associated with the Environmental Improvement Program (EIP). The senior planning position was the second highest priority, and the planning technician was the fourth highest priority in the first year of the biennium.
Decision unit M-202 would add one associate planner to provide continuing maintenance of the vegetation projects. The agency had noted there were millions of dollars of EIP vegetation projects per year in the Lake Tahoe Basin. The new planner position would administer the projects. The position was the third priority for the first year of the biennium.
Mr. Burke continued to say that there was $116,554 in General Fund appropriation in each year of the biennium to fund Nevada’s share of salary comparability costs in decision unit E-376. During the previous session the legislature had funded a salary comparability request, but when the approval was granted the agency was directed to present future salary comparability studies based on an independent review rather than an internal-agency-generated study. The TRPA had complied and the current study met the requirements.
In decision unit E-377 there was a recommendation for Nevada’s share of $200,000 per year to fund environmental threshold studies. The decision unit indicated that the funding would be provided through interest on EIP bonds. The availability of the interest would be contingent upon passage of A.B. 177, which would authorize the issuance of $16.2 million in General Obligation Bonds during the biennium to support the EIP. During the March 29, 2001, hearing the subcommittee had noted that The Executive Budget included a $400,000 General Fund one-shot appropriation for the TRPA threshold research, found in A.B. 511. The A.B. 511 funding duplicated the state share of funding requested in the decision unit. This had been discussed with the agency and the Budget Division, and the Budget Division supported a formal amendment eliminating the decision unit, and the continuation of the $400,000 one-shot appropriation. In the amendment the Budget Division indicated the reason for the recommendation of the one-shot was because of available funding, and concern regarding the timing of the bond sale. Subsequent to the previous hearing the Budget Division provided a schedule that indicated that interest receipts in the amount of $200,000 would be sufficient to fund Nevada’s share of the threshold costs in the second year of the biennium. Mr. Burke said that staff was suggesting, if the subcommittee wished to pursue $400,000 for threshold research, that it be considered that the funding be provided through a combination of one-shot appropriation in the first year and EIP bond interest in the second year. The interest funding would be contingent on the passage of A.B. 177.
Decision unit E-860 recommended three new positions and $150,000 for service contracts in FY2003 to provide regional coordination of EIP construction activity. The new positions would include one senior engineer, one associate engineer, and one principal planner. Mr. Burke noted that the interest schedule provided by the Budget Division indicated there would be sufficient revenue to fund the request along with the $200,000 in threshold research discussed in decision unit E-377.
Mr. Burke commented that the state of California had not committed to support the three new positions and additional contract costs in FY2003. The issue was one of timing, because the funding had not been considered in California’s legislative process as of yet. The subcommittee had several decisions concerning decision unit E-860. The first was, if the three new positions were approved, would the approval be contingent on A.B. 177, which would provide the flow of revenue from the interest. Secondly, if the subcommittee approved the decision unit, would it be contingent on California providing the required two-thirds match, or did the subcommittee wish to provide Nevada’s share to be used as a reduced alternative if California did not fund the enhancements.
Mr. Burke noted that during the previous hearing one of the subcommittee members had suggested accelerating the positions from the second year into the first year of the biennium. If the subcommittee wished to pursue the acceleration, the probability was that it would be without participation from California, and Nevada would have to fund the entire amount of $244,442 from the General Fund.
The Executive Budget did not include COLA for the TRPA employees. This was due to the inability to coordinate the COLA actions between California and Nevada. Mr. Burke explained that if the subcommittee wished to add the COLA equivalent to the current proposal the cost would be $48,159 in FY2002 and $102,200 in FY2003. Staff was suggesting that if the subcommittee approved the COLA similar to that for other state employees, then the subcommittee should consider including language similar to the previous session’s pay bill. The language would be, “The amounts transferred must not be utilized to increase an employee’s base salary unless the State of California provides the required 2 for 1 matching money. Any amounts provided to the TRPA should California not provide matching money must be utilized as a one-time salary bonus.”
Mrs. Chowning asked what the status was of the License Plate Fund. She noted that some of the funds in a previous budget were going to be moved, and were now going to be placed back in the License Plate Fund. Mrs. Chowning asked if the amount that was in the fund remained at $700,000 she would like to use some of that funding to offset the General Fund appropriations wherever possible. Pam Drum, Representative for the Executive Director, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, said there had been special legislation to establish the Nevada Lake Tahoe license plate, and the legislation was fairly specific about how the funds could be used for the protection and restoration of Lake Tahoe. The program, in over the three and a half years of existence, had generated over $1 million, and a great deal of the money had been allocated in the form of grants administered by Ms. Wilcox. At the current point in time the money had been used for the purpose of beginning projects at Lake Tahoe. Mrs. Chowning commented that it appeared the money could not be expended in as quick a fashion as was previous thought. Mrs. Chowning was unsure about what would need to be done to grant the agency the authority to utilize the funds, and she knew the money could not be committed as ongoing, but the Budget Division had presented that $200,000 could be used.
Ms. Wilcox indicated that the Division of State Lands was in charge of the Lake Tahoe license plate program. Although approximately $1 million in revenue had been produced, the money was being expended. There had been a first round grant review process, in which approximately $366,000 was awarded. There had been a second round where approximately $350,000 was awarded. Ms. Wilcox had noted the division would continue to have additional rounds where the money would be awarded for projects within the Lake Tahoe Basin. She stated the division was having no problem expending the money, and there were a number of projects that needed to be completed. The division was attempting to keep enough money in the reserve so that if an emergency project was found it could be funded. Ms. Wilcox indicated to the committee that the statute that established the fund did specifically say that the money in the fund may not be used to replace or supplant other funds.
Mrs. Chowning asked how much money was currently in the fund. Ms. Wilcox said that she was not sure of the current balance. The balance was probably substantial, but the funds were committed. More than $700,000 of the money in the fund was committed to grants that had been awarded.
Senator Jacobsen sensed tentative approval of the budget. He asked to have the comments relevant to each agency forwarded to the agency. Senator Jacobsen indicated that the budget would be held to the end of the meeting when the specific decisions regarding the budget would be made.
NEVADA STATE PRISON – BUDGET PAGE PRISONS-052
Carla Watson, Program Analyst, explained that the technical adjustments for the account included:
Ms. Watson said that in decision unit M-100 the Nevada Department of Prisons (NDOP) utilities projections for the biennium indicated a shortfall of $141,845 in FY2002 and $78,764 in FY2003 for electricity and natural gas.
Decision unit M-201 reflected the additional costs for the Nevada State Prison (NSP) going into emergency capacity effective December 2002. The NSP would remain above emergency capacity through the end of the biennium. Ms. Watson reminded the subcommittee that the 1999 legislature approved three new correctional officer positions and one new correctional caseworker position for Unit 3 when NSP was above emergency capacity. The Executive Budget did not recommend additional custody staff for the time period NSP was projected to operate above emergency capacity. The biennium plan used to construct The Executive Budget projected the institution to be above emergency capacity effective March 2003, and the department had identified that additional costs could be covered with vacancy savings. Ms. Watson reiterated that the latest information predicted the institution would be in emergency capacity effective December 2002. Staff had added the three new correctional officer positions and one new correctional caseworker position to start effective October 2002, to allow two months for training. The total increase to the General Fund for the four positions was $127,630 in FY2003.
Decision unit E-710 provided replacement equipment. The decision unit recommended funding in the amount of $16,938 in FY2002 and $7,410 in FY2003. The facility was requesting chairs, hot serving carts, a portable refrigerator, transport storage cabinets, utility carts, and portable radios.
In decision unit E-901 staff had broken out the blood spill kits that were included in the base budget. The decision was a policy decision and had no effect on the General Fund. In previous bienniums the blood spill kits were paid from the Medical Division budget, and the department was proposing to pay for the kits from the individual institution budgets.
Mr. Marvel asked if Jackie Crawford, Director, Department of Prisons, agreed with the inmate population projections. Ms. Crawford said that the population projections were from the George Washington University and had been very accurate in the past. One item that was not taken into consideration was that Clark County was building a 1,000-bed jail, and was opening 4 new courts. That would not diminish the inmate population, but would increase the population as time progressed.
Senator Jacobsen stated there was tentative approval of the budget.
INDIAN SPRINGS CONSERVATION CAMP – BUDGET PAGE PRISONS-111
Ms. Watson remarked the technical adjustments for the budget were as follows:
Ms. Watson reported that in decision unit M-100 the department had reported that fuel costs would exceed budgeted authority by $30,962 for the biennium.
Decision units E-277 and E-903 dealt with the elimination of seven positions that run the Boot Camp Program, and the transfer of the program to the SDCC. Ms. Watson commented that the Boot Camp Program had been temporarily transferred to the High Desert State Prison (HDSP) effective January 9, 2001, however, the department indicated they were still planning on transferring the program to the SDCC if approved by the legislature.
Staff had received a current plan from the department. The plan was to house the Boot Camp Program in Unit 7 with the Youthful Offender Program. The post chart for the SDCC indicated that 22.4 custody staff were currently staffing Unit 8, and the department had indicated that 9.6 of those custody staff would be transferred to Unit 7 to operate the Boot Camp Program. Ms. Watson noted that the Boot Camp Program required seven custody staff when it operated at the Indian Springs Conservation Camp (ISCC). Staff assumed that the program was currently operating with seven custody staff and a lieutenant at the HDSP.
Ms. Watson explained the subcommittee might wish to consider the following options:
The NDOP had erroneously transferred the inmate drivens along with the Boot Camp Program. This was an error, and the inmate-driven funding needed to stay in the ISCC budget with the 60 beds that were still in operation. Staff had included the inmate drivens in the budget in the amount of $65,570 per year and a corresponding reduction would be made to the SDCC budget. Ms. Watson noted the net effect was zero.
Senator Jacobsen asked for an update on the status of the Boot Camp Program. Glen Whorton, Chief, Classification/Planning, Department of Prisons, reiterated that the Boot Camp Program was currently located at the HDS, and there were plans to move the program to the SDCC contingent on the planning in the options Ms. Watson had presented.
Mr. Marvel asked if Mr. Whorton had a problem with the second recommendation that Ms. Watson had outlined. Mr. Whorton indicated that the second option would provide four positions plus a lieutenant to operate the Boot Camp Program at Unit 7. The staffing levels would be at the absolute minimum, and would be a savings to the state in the face of an increasing population. Mr. Whorton indicated that given the increasing population, and the necessity of continuing the program, the department would appear before the IFC to discuss flexibility regarding the moving of staff to support the program and other activities. The department was “biting the bullet” and giving its best effort to continue the program, and to be fiscally responsible. Mr. Marvel asked if the program would work at the SDCC. Mr. Whorton said that it was the department’s intent to succeed.
Mr. Marvel suggested that the subcommittee accept the second option that Ms. Watson had outlined.
Senator Jacobsen indicated there was a tentative agreement to close the budget with the second option.
CNR ADMINISTRATION – BUDGET PAGE CNR-1
Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst, indicated that during Mr. Burke’s presentation on the budget the subcommittee had been informed of a number of technical adjustments. There were several decision items before the committee. Mr. Ghiggeri said that during the earlier presentation there had been no negative comments regarding the addition of the funding as recommended in The Executive Budget. This would provide for the addition of staff as recommended in the budget.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Beers were absent for the vote.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
STATE LANDS – BUDGET PAGE CNR-62
Mr. Ghiggeri noted that Mr. Burke had given a presentation of the budget earlier in the hearing. There were technical adjustments to the budget, and there were no comments from the subcommittee about the adjustments. There were decision items that reflected recommendations made by the Governor in The Executive Budget, as well as the addition of a position eliminated in The Executive Budget and the addition of General Fund dollars to fund the position.
MR. PARKS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Beers were absent for the vote.)
BUDGET PASSED
********
FORESTRY – BUDGET PAGE CNR-70
Mr. Ghiggeri said Mr. Krmpotic had presented the budget to the subcommittee, and there had been tentative approval of the technical adjustments. There was an additional Program Assistant II requested, and funding for a portion of the position had been approved by the subcommittee during the closing of the Division of Wildlife budget. Mr. Ghiggeri noted there was a recommendation of federal funding to the Humboldt National Forest. Mr. Krmpotic had indicated that there was $60,000 included as compared to $68,000 in the Intergovernmental Agency account, but the $60,000 was an accurate number because the $68,000 had included $8,000 in one-time costs. Mr. Ghiggeri explained there was the addition of a Management Assistant I position that was recommended as an amendment by the Governor and would require the addition of funding to the budget. The position would provide for the replacement of inmate workers that previously provided assistance to the NDF. Another amendment recommended by the Governor would provide for dispatch positions for the Elko Dispatch Center. Mr. Ghiggeri said the only item held on the budget was cost allocation in decision unit E-801. If the committee did not approve the decision unit there would need to be an increase of $112,257 in General Fund to fund the difference.
Mr. Marvel asked if other adjustments could be made in decision unit E-801 to provide a modified increase to the counties. Mr. Ghiggeri said that any adjustment that would be made to the account would require the addition of General Funds. Since it was anticipated that state General Fund revenues would be lower based on the upcoming Economic Forum meeting, the various subcommittees were attempting to reduce the amount General Funds recommended in The Executive Budget. It appeared there would be between a $25 million and $35 million reduction in one-shot monies, and a reduction between $50 and $60 million in ongoing funding in FY2002 and FY2003. Mr. Marvel said that for some of the counties the decision unit was a “backdoor tax increase.” Mr. Ghiggeri said he was unable to comment on that matter, and could only reiterate the facts regarding the financial situation of the state.
Senator Jacobsen held the budget.
********
FORESTRY HONOR CAMPS – BUDGET PAGE CNR-83
Mr. Ghiggeri indicated there had been a number of technical adjustments made to the budget. A crew supervisor had been eliminated for the Jean Conservation Camp to offset additional General Fund dollars that had been added based on the Governor’s amendment in Budget Account 4195. Staff recommended an increase of $418,702 per year in honor camp revenue. This would align the receipts in the budget with what was projected to be paid out of the NDOT’s budget for the work by honor camp crews. Mr. Ghiggeri said that he believed the honor camp program provided approximately $2.5 million in un-reimbursed work during the previous fiscal year. Conversations between staff and the NDF indicated that the department had planned federal projects that would assist in covering some of the paid projects. Additionally, there was a recommendation for a Letter of Intent based on the availability of inmates at the Silver Springs Conservation Camp and the recommendation that the crew supervisor be moved to camps where there was needed work.
MR. PARKS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH THE FOLLOWING:
· A LETTER OF INTENT INDICATING THAT IF THE POPULATION PROJECTIONS DID NOT JUSTIFY NUMBER OF CREWS AT THE SILVER SPRINGS CAMP, THE DIVISION WOULD CONSIDER MOVING THE CREW SUPERVISOR.
· THE INCREASE OF $418,702 TO THE FORESTRY HONOR CAMP REVENUE.
MRS. CHOWNING SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell was absent for the vote.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
FORESTRY INTERGOVERNMENTAL
Mr. Ghiggeri reiterated that the budget was not included in The Executive Budget, but had been included on a historical basis. This was the first session where it had not been included. There had been direction by the Budget Subcommittees of the Legislative Commission at their January meeting requesting the budget be placed in The Executive Budget. Mr. Ghiggeri said the proposed budget closing recommended including the budget in The Executive Budget. The subcommittee could approve the budget, subject to giving staff the authority to adjust decision unit E-375, the cost allocation reimbursement, based on what would be decided in Budget Account 4195.
MRS. CHOWNING MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH THE AUTHORITY FOR STAFF ADJUSTMENT.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell was absent for the vote.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY – BUDGET PAGE CNR-162
Mr. Ghiggeri referred to Mr. Burke to reiterate the items in the budget.
Mr. Burke said there were three decisions before the subcommittee. The first dealt with the threshold research. Staff recommended that the committee consider a revision that would allow a combination of one-shot funding and interest from the EIP bond to fund decision unit E-377, contingent upon the approval of A.B. 511.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO FUND DECISION UNIT E-377 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
Mr. Burke said that in decision unit E-860 there were two decisions to be made. The first was whether the subcommittee wished to approve the new positions. If so, staff suggested that the approval be contingent upon the passage of A.B. 177, which would provide the necessary revenue. The second decision was if the subcommittee did decide to go forward with the funding of the positions, was it contingent on California providing the two-thirds match, or did the subcommittee wish to allow the TRPA to fund a reduced alternative should California decide not to provide the funding.
MR. PARKS MOVED TO APPROVE DECISION UNIT E-860 WITH THE FOLLOWING:
· THE ADDITIONAL POSITIONS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF A.B. 177,
· AND THE INCLUSION OF THE MATCHING FUNDS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
MRS. DE BRAGA SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mrs. Chowning said that she believed that the state should not accelerate the positions from the second year of the biennium to the first year, and confirmed that that was not in the motion.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
Mr. Burke went on to say that The Executive Budget did not approve a COLA for the TRPA. If the subcommittee desired to add a COLA the cost would be $48,159 in FY2002 and $102,200 in FY2003 at the current 4 percent per year rate found in The Executive Budget. If the subcommittee wished to add the COLA, then there needed to be a decision about whether to use the language found in the 1999 pay bill.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO PROVIDE THE COLA AND USE THE LANGUAGE FOUND IN THE 1999 PAY BILL.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
The budget was closed in the subcommittee according to the previous motions regarding the various decision units.
********
NEVADA STATE PRISON – BUDGET PAGE PRISONS-052
Mr. Ghiggeri noted that staff had made a number of technical adjustments in the account, the biggest of which was the reversal of the consolidation proposal. The following decisions remained for the subcommittee. Staff had added three correctional officer positions and a correctional caseworker position, because the NSP would be operating above emergency capacity from December 2002 through June 2003. Historically when the housing unit was operated above emergency capacity the legislature had funded additional staff for the facility based on a need by the Department of Prisons. The addition of staff would result in additional costs not currently in The Executive Budget, of $127,630 in FY2003. The positions would sunset June 30, 2003.
Mr. Marvel asked if the department could appear before the IFC regarding this matter. Mr. Ghiggeri said he believed the IFC would have limited funds during the interim. There was no additional funding being added to the IFC to cover anticipated utility costs. Mr. Marvel asked what would occur if the NSP did not reach emergency capacity. Mr. Ghiggeri said that if the emergency capacity was not reached the positions would not be filled.
MR. PARKS MOVED TO APPROVE FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $127,630 IN FY2003 FOR THREE NEW CORRECTIONAL OFFICER POSITIONS AND ONE NEW CORRECTIONAL CASEWORKER POSITION IF EMERGENCY CAPACITY WAS REACHED.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
Mr. Ghiggeri said that in decision unit E-710, the subcommittee needed to make a decision regarding replacement equipment. Staff had presented what was recommended in The Executive Budget, and found no reason to alter the recommendation.
Mrs. Chowning asked if the 20 portable radios included in the recommendation were for the correctional officers. Mr. Ghiggeri said that he believed the radios were for correctional officers. A few of the radios might be for maintenance staff, but all were for use in the institution.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE EQUIPMENT RECOMMENDATION.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
Mr. Ghiggeri noted that decision unit E-901 was included in the recommended budget in a different decision unit, but was clarified for the committee to indicate that blood spill kits would be provided in the custody areas. Historically the funding for the blood spill kit was provided in the Medical Division budget, but there had been a shift and the funding was no longer included in the Medical Division budget. Mr. Ghiggeri speculated that the Medical Division was attempting to reduce their costs by shifting non-medical costs to other areas within the department.
Mr. Marvel asked where the blood spill kits were needed. Mr. Ghiggeri said that the blood spill kits were currently in the prisons and in the housing units for use in emergencies as they arose. Mr. Marvel confirmed that the placement of the blood spill kits in the institution budget was appropriate.
MRS. CHOWNING MOVED TO APPROVE DECISION UNIT E-901.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator O’Donnell and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
The subcommittee closed the budget according to the previous motions.
********
INDIAN SPRINGS CONSERVATION CAMP – BUDGET PAGE PRISONS-111
Mr. Ghiggeri noted there were technical adjustments to the budget, of which the biggest was the reversal of the consolidation. The major decision unit to be reviewed by the subcommittee was the matter of the approval of the transfer of the Boot Camp Program to the SDCC as recommended in The Executive Budget. Information provided by staff indicated the program would be operated in Unit 7, and seven staff would be dedicated to the function in addition to the correctional lieutenant that would be transferred to the SDCC. The program had historically operated using a staffing ratio of seven correctional officers and one lieutenant.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF THE BOOT CAMP PROGRAM TO SDCC WITH THE FOLLOWING:
· THE REDUCTION OF STAFF RECOMMENDED FOR UNIT 7 FROM 9.6 TO 7,
· THE TRANSFER OF THE REMAINING 3 CUSTODY STAFF IN UNIT 7 TO THE HDSP,
· AND THE TRANSFER OF THREE CUSTODY STAFF TO HDSP NEGATED THE NEED TO ADD 3.2 NEW CUSTODY POSITIONS.
MRS. DE BRAGA SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mrs. Chowning asked if the motion was for the entirety of the budget or for the transfer of the Boot Camp Program with seven positions. Mr. Ghiggeri stated that the motion was for the transfer of the program, with a seven person staffing level and the transfer of associated positions.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mr. Perkins was absent for the vote.)
Senator Jacobsen indicated the budget needed to be closed.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS MOTION.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mr. Perkins was absent for the vote.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
PUBLIC SAFETY, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION –
BUDGET PAGE PS-49
Mr. Ghiggeri noted there had been a number of technical adjustments to the account. The major decision item within the budget was the collapsing of the categories that had been discussed earlier. Mr. Ghiggeri noted the earlier discussion indicated approval of leaving the grant categories collapsed, but leaving the traditional categories for out-of-state travel, in-state travel, and operating expenditures.
Senator O’Donnell inquired as to whether the subcommittee would approve the addition of $11,164 in FY2002 and $11,659 in FY2003 to increase the communications system specialist to a full-time position for the support of the RACES program. Mr. Ghiggeri said that was the next decision unit to be discussed.
MR. PARKS MOVED TO RESTORE THE EMPG EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY TO THE TRADITIONAL AND SPECIAL CATEGORIES.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mr. Perkins was absent for the vote.)
Mr. Ghiggeri said the next decision item was the conversion of the half-time communications system specialist position to a full-time position. There were also replacement and new equipment items recommended in the budget.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR, CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS MOTION.
SENATOR O’DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mr. Perkins was absent for the vote.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM – BUDGET PAGE PS-57
Mr. Ghiggeri noted that the budget was “zeroed out” in The Executive Budget. The staff recommended closing the budget as recommended by the Governor.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mr. Perkins was absent for the vote.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
PUBLIC SAFETY, DIVISION OF INVESTIGATIONS – BUDGET PAGE PS-98
Mr. Ghiggeri explained that there had been a number of technical adjustments to the account. The decision units had been discussed previously. Mr. Ghiggeri stated that the subcommittee had not previously commented that they did not wish to approve the Governor’s recommendation to fund the use of space for the Tri-Net task force, nor were there negative comments about the addition of a Program Assistant III position. The item that had been discussed was the elimination of the VIPER program, which would require the addition of approximately $350,000 per year in operations. Decision unit E-285 provided the additional training funding, which had been previously discussed. Decision unit E-288 provided an opportunity for the subcommittee to save General Fund dollars, if the funding for the purchase of the motor pool vehicles was shifted from a one-shot appropriation to the Motor Pool Division and made the funding to the NDI. This would save on the daily rental cost for the vehicles, which would be charged by the motor pool to the NDI. If the subcommittee funded the vehicles as found in the budget, the vehicles would be purchased with General Fund dollars and then the agency would be charged additional General Fund dollars to lease the vehicles. Staff was recommending that the vehicles be purchased by the NDI rather than by the motor pool. Additionally, staff recommended that the one vehicle that was identified as being associated with a Highway Fund position be funded with Highway Fund dollars.
MR. MARVEL MOVED STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON DECISION UNIT E-288.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Neal asked for clarification on the motion. Mr. Marvel explained that the motion was relating to the change in the purchase of vehicles from the motor pool to the NDI.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. de Braga and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
Mr. Ghiggeri explained that decision unit E-289 provided funding to remove and reinstall radios and emergency equipment in the new vehicles. To remain consistent with the previous motion, Mr. Ghiggeri sought authorization to change the funding to Highway Fund dollars for the purchase and installation of equipment relating to the vehicle identified as being able to be funded with Highway Fund dollars.
MR. PARKS MOVED STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON DECISION UNIT E-289.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. de Braga and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
Mr. Ghiggeri said that decision units E-710 and E-720 provided for the purchase of replacement and new equipment. There was the opportunity for additional savings in decision unit E-710 based on the elimination of the VIPER program. Additionally, staff had indicated that savings could be accrued by the deletion of the recommended purchase of new radios, because radios had been purchased two years ago and the agency had indicated the radios had a five-year life expectancy.
Mr. Marvel suggested the elimination of the VIPER program, and Mr. Ghiggeri said he believed that the subcommittee had agreed upon the idea. Based on that elimination the state could save additional monies by eliminating the equipment that had been identified for use by the VIPER program personnel in decision units E-710 and E-720.
MR. PARKS MOVED TO ELIMINATE THE EQUIPMENT IDENTIFIED AS RELATING TO THE VIPER PROGRAM IN DECISION UNITS E‑710 AND E-720.
MRS. CHOWNING SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator O’Donnell explained that the VIPER program was being eliminated and asked if the positions were being eliminated. Mr. Ghiggeri explained there were four positions assigned to the VIPER program, and all the positions except one had been absorbed by the NDI. Senator O’Donnell explained that even though the positions were not working with the VIPER program they were performing another function, and might need the equipment. Mr. Ghiggeri said that the equipment would be funded up to the necessary levels for staffing that remained in the budget. No equipment for ongoing positions was being eliminated. The equipment being eliminated correlated to positions that were being eliminated.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. de Braga and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
Mr. Ghiggeri opined the only remaining decision was to close the budget and provide staff the authority to make necessary adjustments to the cost allocation.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS MOTIONS.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Neal said in decision unit E-285 there was a list of training courses that did not have justification or a schedule. He believed that was an inappropriate method to budgeting. Mr. Ghiggeri said that staff would defer to the legislature or the agency for the need of the type of training previously discussed. The decision unit was a policy item that required action by the legislature regarding the approval or non-approval of funding.
Mr. Marvel said that Mr. Perkins had earlier stated the training programs were needed programs. He believed the subcommittee should fund the training. Senator Neal asked if the subcommittee was going to abide by Mr. Perkins’ earlier comments. Mr. Marvel noted that Mr. Perkins knew more about the training of law officers than he did.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. de Braga and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
The meeting adjourned at 10:31 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Andrea Carothers
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Chairman
DATE: