MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY ways and means/senate finance
joint Subcommittee on
public safety/natural resources/transportation
Seventy-First Session
May 10, 2001
The Subcommittee on Ways and Meanswas called to order at 9:44 a.m. on Thursday, May 10, 2001. Chairman David Parks 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 William O’Donnell
Senator Joseph Neal, Jr.
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst
Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst
Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Mark Krmpotic, Program Analyst
Carla Watson, Program Analyst
Andrea Carothers, Committee Secretary
Lila Clark, Committee Secretary
Carol Thomsen, Committee Secretary
DIRECTOR OFFICE – BUDGET PAGE PRISONS-1
The Chair recognized Carla Watson, Program Analyst. Ms. Watson noted the technical adjustments to the budget increased General Fund appropriations by $80,108 in FY2002 and by $43,960 in FY2003. The increases were primarily due to funding not included in The Executive Budget for honor guard uniform allowance and inmate drug testing for the new Therapeutic Program at Southern Desert Correctional Center (SDCC). Additionally, a modification to The Executive Budget that requested funding was included for the monthly circuit and telephone/fax line charges or video teleconferencing with the Immigration and Naturalization Service at the High Desert State Prison (HDSP), Ely State Prison (ESP), and Lovelock Correctional Center (LCC).
Ms. Watson began testifying on the decision units in the budget. She noted that in decision unit M-200 staff had to adjust the mattress replacement based on the new population projections. The adjusted funding was $8,985 in FY2002 and $12,069 in FY2003.
The second decision unit was regarding the eight new positions recommended for the Director’s Office at a total cost of $566,441 for the biennium. The positions were as follows:
Ms. Watson continued with information on decision units:
Chairman Parks noted that there were eight new positions recommended for the budget, and asked about the prioritization of the positions. Ms. Watson stated that the prioritization was as follows:
With regard to decision units M-204 and M-205 the Chair asked if the department was planning to use inmate staff within the Purchasing Section. Jackie Crawford, Director, Nevada Department of Prisons, said that the department was attempting to remove inmate workers in that sensitive area. Due to the automation of the department the use of inmates was not a wise practice.
Mrs. Vonne Chowning asked for clarification about the number and location of the existing and proposed locksmiths. Darrel Rexwinkel, Administrative Services Officer IV, Nevada Department of Prisons, said that the department had two locksmiths, one at Ely and one at Lovelock. There had been one at High Desert, but that position had been reclassified to the Facility Maintenance Supervisor. This had been discussed previously. The proposal in the current budget would provide one locksmith position for the northern Nevada facilities excluding Ely and Lovelock. Mr. Rexwinkel stated that there had also been a discussion regarding the electronic technician position at NNCC to maintain electronic systems including the electronic component of the lock system. He noted that there were several institutions with electronic technician positions for electronic systems, but all of the lock systems required a locksmith position. Mr. Rexwinkel reiterated that the proposal would provide for a total of three locksmith positions.
Mrs. Marcia de Braga asked if there was a possibility that the proposed locksmith could replace one of the existing maintenance positions. Ms. Crawford deferred to Mr. Tom Glab, Chief of Plant Operations, Department of Prisons. Mrs. de Braga reiterated that she was curious as to whether there needed to be an additional full-time employee.
Mr. Glab said that the reason the division was not eager to replace an existing position was because currently there was the need for all the current positions. He noted that currently lock maintenance was a secondary function. The locksmith would be a regionalized position consistent with the maintenance audit that had been completed. The locksmith would be maintaining the locks at seven facilities. Mr. Glab explained that the position would be completing maintenance prevention. The requested locksmith would be very busy working with the seven facilities. Mrs. de Braga confirmed that the proposed locksmith would have full-time employment.
Chairman Parks said there had been $36,000 total in the budget for the electronic locks at NNCC, and asked if the proposed locksmith position would be able to repair the electronic locks. Mr. Glab said that the locksmith would be able to repair the locks either alone or with the cooperation of other technicians. The Chair explained that in the budget $24,000 for a repair contract at NNCC had been approved for the second year of the biennium, and he was curious as to whether that $24,000 could be removed if the locksmith position was approved. Mr. Glab said that the NNCC lock system was a new system, and he was unaware of whether the locksmith would have knowledge of the system. After a learning period the proposed locksmith position should be able to maintain the locks.
Chairman Parks requested a motion of the approval of the proposed positions.
MR. MARVEL MOVED APPROVAL OF THE EIGHT POSITIONS.
The Chair noted that there was no second on Mr. Marvel’s motion, and suggested that the committee move to approve only one of the Management Assistant I positions found in decision unit E-297.
Senator O’Donnell asked if the department had requested the eight positions and whether the eight positions included the locksmith position. Chairman Parks stated that the eight positions did include the locksmith position, and all eight positions were requested by the director of the division.
SENATOR O’DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED. (Mr. Parks voted no. Senator Neal and Mr. Perkins were absent.)
Chairman Parks clarified that he was voting no because he felt that one or two of the positions could have been deleted.
The Chair requested information about how the $38,302 in each year of the biennium for accreditation found in decision unit E-232 would be expended. Ms. Crawford stated that the division had advocated accreditation for the Ely and Lovelock facilities. This would be the initial move in accreditation of the facilities. Accreditation standardized the facilities and was a useful tool in courtroom procedures. Ms. Crawford said that the requested $38,302 in funding would be used for the pre-audit and the start of the accreditation process. She opined that the division only needed $38,302 for one year of the biennium for both institutions.
Chairman Parks confirmed that the division only needed $38,302 once for both of the facilities. He inquired as to how the money would be expended. Ms. Crawford said there would be paper work, and the division would enter into a contract for the pre-audit. The division would then begin to complete an audit, and then there would be a review by outside auditors. The outside auditors would award the accreditation. Ms. Crawford said the two institutions in question would not require a number of additional amenities or requirements for new buildings to achieve accreditation.
Ms. Crawford explained that the funding for the accreditation was not an annual requirement. She noted that the accreditation happened every three years and the amount of $38,302 would handle the accreditation for the two institutions for the three-year period. Chairman Parks confirmed that the outside auditors were paid to complete the accreditation audit. He asked if there was a contract used to assist the department with the accreditation process. Ms. Crawford said that in the accreditation process, the department entered into a contract with the American Corrections Association (ACA), and then the department completed a self-audit. After the self-audit was completed the ACA would proceed with an intense audit, which would determine whether the institution had achieved accreditation.
Senator Jacobsen asked if the accreditation would provide additional benefits, such as an increased eligibility for federal funds. Ms. Crawford stated that accreditation would provide increased benefits and credibility. Currently inmates were using the ACA accreditation standards in courts, and attorneys were being asked if the department was using ACA standards. Ms. Crawford said that the department needed to be brought into the mainstream, and the accreditation would provide a position light on the department for grants.
Chairman Parks said that accreditation was often worth the effort expended. The Chair recognized Janet Johnson, Assistant Director, Department of Prisons, and asked about her retirement plans. Ms. Johnson explained that she would be retiring effective May 11, 2001. The Chair expressed his gratitude for the service that Ms. Johnson had provided.
Senator Jacobsen indicated his appreciation of Ms. Johnson’s services for the department. Mr. Marvel indicated his agreement with Senator Jacobsen’s statements. Ms. Johnson stated her enjoyment with working with the committee, and thanked the members for the opportunity. Senator O’Donnell opined that Ms. Johnson had done a good job for the state during her years of service. Mrs. Chowning also provided her congratulations to Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Watson clarified that The Executive Budget did provide funding of $38,302 in each of the biennium for the accreditation process. The director had indicated that $38,302 was only needed in FY2002, and staff requested the authority to remove the $38,302 in FY2003.
The Chairman noted that decision unit E-235 would provide an overall savings. Mrs. Chowning desired to know exactly how much the savings would be. Ms. Watson stated that the savings in FY2002 would be $27,029 less $5,032 or approximately $22,000. In FY2003 the savings would be $29,628 less $6,505 or approximately $23,000.
Chairman Parks explained that decision unit E-298 was the relocation of the director’s office administrative staff. The original request was for $350,691 in FY2002 and $303,000 in FY2003. Staff was recommending a reduction to $212,892 in FY2002 and $200,332 in FY2003. The move was a policy decision for the committee.
Senator Jacobsen had previously expressed his concern about having the director moving to commercial space, and the idea of using the clinic building at the Stewart Complex had been researched. It was noted that the clinic building was an unacceptable option and Senator Jacobsen withdrew his previous objection. He noted that he was concerned about the distance between the director and the remainder of the administration staff. Ms. Crawford said that she would be five minutes from the existing buildings, but due to the immediate need for space the division had to find available space. She noted that to move the director’s office would be the least disruptive because there was the least amount of automated equipment. Ms. Crawford noted this was an interim move while Building 17 was being renovated.
Senator Jacobsen commented that he would like to see the division look at the small wooden building near building Number 89 as a possible space option. Ms. Crawford stated that the division was examining all options, but there were asbestos issues.
The Chair asked for comment from Mr. Beers regarding decision unit E-302. Mr. Beers stated that he agreed that the division appeared underfunded and the increase in decision unit E-302 appeared warranted. He noted that the funding for 200 employees was similar to that which was being contemplated for 12 employees at the Veterans’ Home.
Mr. Beers indicated that he was in support of the amount of funding in decision unit E-303.
Chairman Parks stated that in decision unit E-401 the committee needed to examine the required modification to the legislation involved. The Executive Budget recommended funding the $138,750 from the General Fund. In decision unit E-730 The Executive Budget recommended $125,000 in each year of the biennium for extraordinary repairs, and staff recommended the amount be reduced to $92,000 for each fiscal year, establish criteria for the use of the funds, and have a status report to the IFC.
MRS. CHOWNING MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF CONCURRENT WITH THE PREVIOUS MOTION AND WITH:
· A LETTER OF INTENT FOR THE ESTABLISHING OF CRITERIA AND A STATUS REPORT TO THE IFC IN DECISION UNIT E-401.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (Senator Neal and Mr. Perkins were absent.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
********
PRISON MEDICAL CARE – BUDGET PAGE PRISONS-17
The Chair recognized Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst. Mr. Ghiggeri noted that the inmate-driven costs for the account were recommended by the Governor and were presented for closure at a significantly reduced level than what was budgeted in FY2000-2001. The technical adjustments displayed in the account reflected the adjustments for what was recommended in The Executive Budget for the number of inmates anticipated to be housed over the biennium and what was currently projected by the George Washington University. There was a projected increase of approximately 125 inmates in FY2002 and 205 in FY2003. Mr. Ghiggeri said that the total of the technical adjustments provided for an increase of approximately $78,000 in FY2002 and $157,000 in FY2003, of which $35,000 was funded from the General Fund in FY2002 and $95,000 was funded from the General Fund in FY2003.
Mr. Ghiggeri stated that the budget was a status quo budget, with no extravagant additions during the current biennium. One issue for the subcommittee was that the Department of Prisons had requested $8,829.22 per year for the implementation of the federal Needlestick Safety and Prevention Law. Staff was not provided sufficient detail to analyze the funding need, but due to safety issues staff would recommend the additional funding. The subcommittee also needed to know that S.B. 193, which would make various changes concerning Department of Prisons, and S.B. 241, which would revise provisions relating to determination of whether certain offenders constituted menace to health, safety, or morals of others, were pending in the Senate Committee on Finance. No adjustments were recommended for the legislation because the legislation had not yet been approved. If the legislation was approved, staff recommended that the funding required for implementation be placed in the legislation.
Senator O’Donnell asked about the recommendations of staff regarding S.B. 193 and S.B. 241, and whether there were actions required on the legislation in order to close the budget. Mr. Ghiggeri stated that no action was required on the legislation at the current time, and staff was recommending to include funding required to implement the legislation within the legislation. He noted that to implement S.B. 241 there would be a required appropriation of approximately $13,000 per year in excess of the Medical Care budget, and there would be required adjustments if S.B. 193 was approved.
SENATOR O’DONNELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator Neal and Mr. Perkins were absent.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
Senator Jacobsen commended Dr. Ted D’Amico, Medical Director, Department of Prisons, for his work.
********
INMATE WELFARE ACCOUNT – BUDGET PAGE PRISONS-201
Ms. Watson stated that the technical adjustments reduced the Inmate Welfare Reserve by $155,348 in FY2002 and $143,925 in FY2003. The reductions were primarily due to A.B. 389 General Fund payback amounts, which were not included in The Executive Budget. Staff included the payback amounts.
Ms. Watson stated that decision unit E-225 recommended consolidating the nine existing Inmate Law Libraries into one category. This had been requested during the 1999 Legislative Session and was not approved by the legislature. Once combined, information comparing expenditures at one location versus another would be more difficult for fiscal staff to monitor. Staff recommended the reversal of the consolidation and the closing sheets reflected the impact of the recommended change.
Senator O’Donnell asked what the cost of combining the library accounts would be. Ms. Watson stated that the fiscal impact was zero. Senator O’Donnell asked what the dollar amount was that was being tracked. Ms. Watson said that she was referring to tracking the individual expenditures within the nine separate libraries. Senator O’Donnell asked what was the aggregate amount of money staff was tracking. Ms. Watson stated that she did not have the total amount, but it was in the thousands range.
Chairman Parks stated that it appeared that the amount being discussed was in the range of $180,000. Ms. Watson confirmed that amount. The Chair clarified that the amount was for each year.
Senator O’Donnell stated that each of the law libraries was approximately $20,000. He was not against deconsolidating the accounting measures, provided that the amount of money that was being tracked was worth the cost.
Ms. Watson explained that decision unit E-276 was the cash match for the therapeutic community in the south. The subcommittee had approved the establishment of the Therapeutic Community Program at SDCC. The transfer from the Inmate Welfare Fund Reserve was $92,035 in FY2002, and $73,334 in FY2003. Similarly decision unit E-278 was the cash match for the Therapeutic Community Program in the north, operated at WSCC. The recommended funding from the reserve was $28,744 in FY2002 and $32,037 in FY2003. Staff increased funding in the decision unit by $1,505 in FY2002 and $2,206 in FY2003 based on the most current grant information.
Decision unit E-710 was for replacement VCRs, said Ms. Watson. Decision unit E-730 was for maintenance of buildings and grounds. The decision unit recommended funding from the reserve of $2,735 in FY2002 and $530 in FY2003 to resurface the basketball court at NNCC once per year, and repair the gym floor at ESP. Ms. Watson said that decision unit E-905 was the transfer of profits from the Offenders Store Fund to the Inmate Welfare Fund. Staff had created the decision unit to facilitate the transfer of profits, and the subcommittee had approved the decision unit in the Offenders Store Fund.
SENATOR O’DONNELL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH:
· CASH MATCH FUNDING IN DECISION UNITS E-276 AND E‑278.
· THE RECOMMENDED FUNDING FOR REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT IN DECISION UNIT E-710.
· THE RECOMMENDED FUNDING FOR MAINTENANCE OF BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS IN DECISION UNIT E-730.
· THE DECONSOLIDATION OF THE NINE LAW LIBRARIES IN DECISION UNIT E-225.
MRS. CHOWNING SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Senator Neal and Mr. Perkins were absent.)
BUDGET CLOSED.
Mrs. Chowning noted that although the movement of women from the Southern Nevada Women’s Correctional Facility had not occurred, she hoped the move would be considered.
Chairman Parks stated that with regard to the relocation of the Director’s Office he hoped that there would be no extension of the relocation in the next biennium, but rather that the needed Capitol Improvement Project would be completed, at building 17 at the Stewart Complex.
********
Richard Kirkland, Director, Department of Motor Vehicles & Public Safety (DMV&PS), asked to be allowed to speak. He stated that he had just become aware of what Mark Krmpotic, Program Analyst, would be presenting to the committee, and it did not include the readjustment that the department had provided. Mr. Kirkland noted that in previous hearings some budgets had been closed before he had an opportunity to speak on the budgets during the closing hearing. Mr. Kirkland stated that the presentation Mr. Krmpotic would complete was not based on what the department had provided as a revised plan, and there could be a discussion on why that had happened, but Mr. Kirkland would like to have an answer to his question.
Chairman Parks inquired as to what Mr. Kirkland was asking. Mr. Kirkland stated that approximately five days previous members of the committee had said there were holes in the budget that needed to be addressed. Simultaneous with that issue individual members of the committee had expressed questions to Mr. Kirkland, and the Economic Forum information had been released. Mr. Kirkland also noted that he had been advised that the division’s budget had been cut by the Governor due to the desire to reduce funding. Those events had changed the information that Mr. Krmpotic would present, stated Mr. Kirkland. He continued by saying the division had “scrambled around” and had created a proposal that answered the question to replace the original proposal. The changes included the elimination of requested positions, and the elimination of some highway funds. Mr. Kirkland opined that the new proposal would create a savings of $50,000. He then stated that the question before the committee was whether the new proposal should be discussed, or whether Mr. Krmpotic should present based on the information that he had originally received from the department, which the department was no longer supporting.
Mr. Marvel asked where S.B. 481, which would provide for reorganization of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety into two departments and removed limitation on costs of administration payable from the state Highway Fund for collection of proceeds of certain fees and charges relating to operation of motor vehicles, was currently. Mr. Kirkland stated that what would be decided in the subcommittee would be the forerunner for the discussions in the Assembly Committee on Transportation.
Senator O’Donnell stated that S.B. 481 had been passed out of the Senate, and was residing in the Assembly. He stated there was a hearing scheduled for May 10. Senator O’Donnell noted that the DMV budgets before the committee were a precursor to the approval of the proposed split.
Mr. Ghiggeri stated that the presentation Mr. Krmpotic would be presenting were closings based on The Executive Budget. He had prepared the closings with the recommended split of the department because the legislation was still proceeding through the legislative process. Mr. Ghiggeri emphasized that to prepare the closing sheet an exorbitant amount of time was required. To have received the new DMV proposal on May 9th, and to expect it to be incorporated in the closing presentation would be unrealistic. Mr. Krmpotic had been working diligently to prepare his presentation for the committee.
Senator O’Donnell agreed with Mr. Ghiggeri that an exorbitant amount of time was needed to close the session. He acknowledged that Mr. Krmpotic had spent a number of hours on the presentation, but Senator O’Donnell said he was interested in hearing Mr. Kirkland’s new proposal. Senator O’Donnell confirmed that the Governor had heard the division’s new proposal, and stated that there was not much hope for the new proposal, but reiterated that he would like to hear the proposal.
DMV, DIRECTOR’S OFFICE – BUDGET PAGE DMV-1
Mr. Krmpotic stated the DMV, Director’s Office budget account, was created as a new budget account to administer and oversee the operation of the Department of Motor Vehicles. S.B. 481 provided for the reorganization of the Department of Motor Vehicles and the removal of the 22 percent cap for the department. S.B. 481 had been passed out of the Senate and concurrently referred to the Assembly Committee on Transportation and the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means. Mr. Krmpotic stated that there were several decision units within the budget that would facilitate the operation of a stand-alone DMV.
The first decision unit was E-226, which recommended a new director’s position for the DMV for $130,069 in FY2002 and $129,497 in FY2003. If the subcommittee did not wish to approve the reorganization and split of the department, than decision unit E-226 should be considered for elimination.
Mr. Krmpotic stated that decision unit E-915 proposed to transfer 6 of 13 positions currently included in the Director’s Office budget account. The subcommittee should note that the Governor had submitted an amendment on March 9 that revised the transfer to include minor changes for in-state travel, operating and training, and a significant increase for the Attorney General (AG) Cost Allocation. The department had also submitted a request to transfer a Management Analyst II position that was previously slated for the Public Safety Director’s Office to the DMV Director’s Office. Mr. Krmpotic explained that The Executive Budget included an administrative cost allocation in decision unit E-801, which allocated costs from the Public Safety Director’s Office account, the Public Safety Administrative Services account, and the Internal Affairs account. The Governor’s recommended cost allocation was based on a consolidated DMV&PS. The Governor recommended a modified approach to allocating costs with the proposed DMV. The modified approach allocated expenses to non-highway funded budget accounts, Pollution Control and Salvage Wreckers/Body Shops, from the Motor Vehicle Administrative Services and Director’s Office accounts based on a pro rata share of full-time equivalent (FTE). Mr. Krmpotic said that consequently, additional Highway Funds recommended in highway funded budget accounts such as Field Services and Central Services for cost allocations recommended in decision unit E-801 would be reduced. The overall estimated impact of the amended cost allocation would be an increase in Highway Funds of $1.3 million in FY2002 and $1.1 million in FY2003 as estimated by the department. Mr. Krmpotic stated that the decision before the subcommittee was whether the members desired to transfer the six positions from the Public Safety Director’s Office budget to the proposed Motor Vehicles Director’s Office. If the subcommittee approved the transfer, then did they wish to include other expenses as recommended by the Governor, such as operating and training, and the AG Cost Allocation. The subcommittee should also consider the amendment to revise the administrative cost allocation for the Director’s Office and the Administrative Services budget accounts as modified for the DMV.
Mrs. Chowning stated that in the new DMV proposal it appeared that there was a large difference from the numbers that Mr. Krmpotic had presented. She stated that it was regrettable that Mr. Krmpotic had done such a great deal of work, but it was imperative that the subcommittee look at the new proposal for the savings that were in it. Mrs. Chowning noted that in the new DMV proposal the Highway Funds were approximately $106,000 and $214,000 and there was a savings to the General Fund.
Chairman Parks expressed his frustration over the fact that the proposals had not been finalized, and the committee was being asked to make decisions about cost allocations.
Mrs. Chowning reiterated the fact that she found it regrettable that the time had been spent on the presentation, and that the necessary figures had not been given to staff. She then expressed her appreciation at the new proposal that the DMV had supplied.
Ms. Virginia Lewis, Deputy Director, Motor Vehicles, stated that her previous testimony before the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means regarding A.B. 611, which would remove limitation on the amount of money in the state Highway Fund that may be used to pay costs of administration, had been based on The Executive Budget and any amendments to that budget.
Senator O’Donnell asked about the progress of A.B. 611. Ms. Lewis stated that that bill had not been passed out of the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means as of yet. Senator O’Donnell asked about the progress of S.B. 481. Ms. Lewis stated that S.B. 481 would be heard before the Assembly Committee on Transportation in the afternoon, and had not been scheduled before the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. Kirkland stated he had been willing to accept the originally submitted budget, until the division received messages from members of the committee that due to the financial position of the state the division would need to relook at the budget. Mr. Kirkland was sorry that the budget had to be reexamined.
Senator O’Donnell said there were certain bills that needed to be addressed, passed, and approved by the Governor, before the budget could be closed. He stated that he knew that he had “done his part” to craft the legislation and send it to the Assembly, but was unaware of where the bills would go in the Assembly. This created a lack of direction with the budget. Senator O’Donnell stated that if there was a hearing on a bill that committee members did not approve of, then the bill should be killed. This would prevent the staff from having to create closing presentations based on a bill that was assumed to be passing out of both houses, and then inform staff that the bill would not be passed. Senator O’Donnell stated that that was “irresponsible.”
Mr. Kirkland stated that the fiscal staff was not the only staff that had to work on the budget proposals. The department staff also had to work on the numbers, and had to work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. It was equally as big an imposition upon the department staff as it was upon the fiscal staff.
Mrs. Chowning stated that there was confusion regarding S.B. 481. The Assembly Committee on Transportation had scheduled S.B. 481 as fast as was possible. The hearing was scheduled once the bill was received, and had to be passed out of the Assembly Committee on Transportation before it could be scheduled in the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means. Mrs. Chowning stated that there had been no attempt at refusing to process the bill.
Senator O’Donnell suggested that the budget be held until the committee found out the status of S.B. 481.
Chairman Parks stated that he would have Mr. Krmpotic proceed with the presentation of the budgets, but a final decision might not be made during the hearing.
Mrs. Chowning asked that the new proposal provided by the DMV be allowed to be presented to all committee members and staff.
********
DMV, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES – BUDGET PAGE DMV-4
Mr. Krmpotic stated that the budget account was created to provide administrative support to the DMV for a stand-alone department. The decision items in the budget account included a new Administrative Services IV position in decision unit E-226 to oversee the Administrative Services, at a cost of $75,260 in FY2002 and $70,031 in FY2003. Decision unit E-916 recommended the transfer of 42 of a total of 63.51 FTE that existed in the current Administrative Services budget account to the new Administrative Services budget account, for a total of $2.8 million in FY2002 and $2.9 million in FY2003. Included in the transfer were operating expenses totaling $807,488 in each year of the biennium. The Governor had submitted an amendment to increase the transfer by $454,908 in FY2002 and $119,167 in FY2003. The changes included vacancy savings in the salary category and the allocation of in-state travel and the majority of operating expenses based on a pro rata share of FTE. In the categories for equipment, land and building improvements, and information technology, the agency had more accurately identified major purchases relating to Motor Vehicles. Lastly, stated Mr. Krmpotic, training, purchasing assessment, and statewide cost allocation categories were revised to calculate transfers based on a pro rata share of FTE.
Mr. Krmpotic said that decision unit E-960 recommended the consolidation of administrative support positions and expenses in the DMV. The decision unit included the transfer of 11 FTE from the Management Services budget account. The Executive Budget also proposed, in the same decision unit, to consolidate expenses for the driver’s license photo contract and printing costs registration forms. Driver’s license photo expenses of $782,633 in FY2002 and $848,556 in FY2003 were recommended to remain in the Management Services budget account. Additionally, expenses to print registration forms totaling $58,329 in FY2002 and $59,389 in FY2003 also remained in the Management Services budget account. Mr. Krmpotic noted that if the subcommittee approved decision unit E-960, staff recommended the transfer of all expenses related to the printing of registration forms from the Management Services budget account to the Administrative Services budget account. This would allow for the complete accounting of costs related to the function in the same budget. Staff would seek approval from the subcommittee to make changes to the transfer of expenses and revenues related to the driver’s license photo fees based on changes approved by the subcommittee during the closure of the Management Services budget account. Mr. Krmpotic noted that the subcommittee had delayed action on the decision unit during the closure of the Management Services budget account. Staff would seek approval to make changes to the decision unit for technical adjustments approved in the Management Services account.
Mr. Krmpotic explained that the transfer of replacement personal computers and printers for the Motor Vehicle branch from the Management Services budget account was recommended in decision unit E-992. The total cost would be $638,096 in FY2002 and $630,800 in FY2003. This decision unit should be eliminated from the budget based on the decision by the subcommittee to distribute computer purchases among the various budgets within the department.
Mr. Krmpotic reported that the Governor had proposed a modification to the administrative cost allocation to allocate on a pro rata FTE basis to the Pollution Control account and the Salvage Wreckers/Body Shop account. Based on information provided by the agency, the impact of the change would result in an increase in Highway Funds of $1.3 million in FY2002 and $1.1 million in FY2003.
********
DIRECTOR’S OFFICE – PUBLIC SAFETY – BUDGET PAGE PS-1
Mr. Krmpotic said that The Executive Budget included an administrative cost allocation in decision unit E-801. The Governor’s recommended cost allocation was based on a consolidated DMV&PS. The Governor recommended a modified approach to allocation costs within the proposed Department of Public Safety. The modified approach allocated expenses following transfers in decision unit E‑915 to the budget account within the proposed Department of Public Safety. Allocations were based on the percentage of dollar allocations for the Public Safety budget accounts as determined for FY1998-1999 actual, based on the study performed by the contractor.
Mr. Krmpotic went on to say that decision unit E-915 proposed to transfer 6 of 13 positions currently included in the Director’s Office budget account. He reiterated that the transfer had been amended, based on the Governor’s amendment dated March 9 and based on information provided by the division on February 5, to increase the transfer for operating, training, and the AG cost allocation, as well as an additional Management Analyst II.
Decision unit E-923 recommended the transfer of contract security expenses from the Highway Patrol budget. Mr. Krmpotic explained that, based on the closure of the budget for the Highway Patrol by the subcommittee, decision unit E-923 had been eliminated.
Mr. Krmpotic stated that staff was seeking approval to make changes to decision unit E-990 based on the final approval of the Administrative Services budget.
********
PUBLIC SAFETY – ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES – BUDGET PAGE PS-7
Mr. Krmpotic said that the budget provided support to the department, including accounts payable, personnel services, payroll, warehousing, inventory control, mail services, facilities management, and budget analysis.
Mrs. Chowning requested that the approximate $6,000 needed to have the driver’s education manuals translated into Spanish be included in the previous budget. Mr. Krmpotic stated that the DMV Administrative Services budget would be the budget to place the translation funding in, assuming the approval of the split of the department and establishment of the new budget account. Mrs. Chowning reiterated her request to have the $6,000 placed in the appropriate budget to ensure the translation of the driver’s education manual.
Mr. Krmpotic explained that the first decision unit in the budget included increases recommended for credit card fees associated with transactions through alternative means, such as the Internet. The credit card fees were incurred in field offices as well. The decision unit would include $2,183,921 in increases each year of the biennium. Mr. Krmpotic noted, that based on the closure of the Motor Carrier account, staff might be transferring credit card fees of $25,000 in FY2002 and $50,000 in FY2003.
The Executive Budget also recommended funding of $90,470 in each year of the biennium in decision unit E-276 to allow travel to Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas to perform on-site recruiting and testing for Highway Patrol troopers and Parole and Probation officers at job fairs and select universities that had criminal justice programs. The department indicated that the recruiting and testing process would be conducted two times per year for the Highway Patrol Division and four times per year for the Parole and Probation Division.
Mr. Krmpotic went on to say that decision unit E-300 recommended $43,853 in FY2002 and $5,550 in FY2003 to upgrade document-imaging software used to archive accounts payable documents. The department indicated that existing software was written in a 16-bit program, which was currently obsolete. The recommended funding would enable the purchase of software written in a 32‑bit environment and provide the ongoing license fees in FY2003 to improve network access. The purchase of additional disk storage space was recommended for a total of 140 GB of storage. The department indicated that storage requirements for documents accumulated over one year use 30 GB.
Mr. Krmpotic stated that $29,375 was recommended in decision unit E-720 to add five scanners to expand document imaging for payroll, purchasing, and personnel. In response to questions from staff, the department indicated that currently the document imaging system resided on the Motor Vehicle network. If the department split the system would remain on the Motor Vehicle network and continue to be maintained by staff within the Motor Vehicle branch. The proposed Department of Public Safety would continue to have access to and use the system if the split of the department was approved. If problems arose regarding communication between the two networks, the new recommended software would allow the Department of Public Safety to access the system through the Internet.
Decision unit E-801 allocated costs from the Public Safety Director’s Office budget account, the Public Safety Administrative Services account, and the Internal Affairs account. Mr. Krmpotic reiterated that the Governor recommended a modification to the cost allocation throughout the department of Public Safety.
Decision unit E-888 included one-time items recommended by the Governor to upgrade the existing security system in Carson City, to replace counters at the Winnemucca Field Office, and to remodel the Carson City warehouse. Staff had received a request from the department to modify the request for the upgrade to the existing security system. This item would be modified and would include security systems throughout field offices within the Motor Vehicle branch to protect and secure areas where revenue was collected and money was handled and stored. It would provide security cameras and motion sensors to the field offices. The modification would reduce the request from $136,034 to $60,000. Mr. Krmpotic added that the department had also indicated the desire to add security systems to two doors in the Carson City office that did not currently have security. This would bring the modified total for the security system to $64,000.
Mr. Krmpotic stated that in the 1997 and 1999 Legislative Sessions, expenses identified as direct support for other programs in the department were transferred to those budget accounts. This provided a better picture of the program’s cost and limited the Administrative Services budget account to indirect costs. The Executive Budget recommended the transfer of additional direct expenses to the budget account through the department to further improve budgetary integrity and to isolate indirect expenses to implement the administrative cost allocation. Mr. Krmpotic stated that the Governor had submitted an amendment to distribute an additional $22,447 in FY2002 and $42,641 in FY2003.
The final decision unit Mr. Krmpotic discussed was E-916, which recommended the transfer of 42 positions, as was previously discussed in the Motor Vehicle Administrative Services account. Mr. Krmpotic reiterated that the Governor had submitted an amendment to increase the amount of the transfer.
********
PUBLIC SAFETY – INTERNAL AFFAIRS – BUDGET PAGE PS-23
Mr. Krmpotic continued his testimony and stated that the Internal Affairs budget had been created by the 1999 legislature to investigate complaints and allegations of misconduct against peace officers in the department. Staff had made technical adjustments for changes in the price of computer software and hardware.
Decision unit E-250 recommended funding of $10,115 for each year to increase travel and operating expenses incurred during investigations. The recommended amounts represented expenses funded from other budget accounts for travel and operating expenses incurred by the investigators in the budget account.
Mr. Krmpotic stated that the budget account was included in the administrative cost allocation in decision unit E-801 and was originally based on the number of sworn officers per budget account. There had been amendments and modifications to allocate costs based on percentage estimates determined by the contractor who originally performed the study.
Staff sought approval to make changes to decision unit E-998 based on final approval of the Administrative Services budget account.
********
PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNOLOGY DIVISION – BUDGET PAGE PS-28
Mr. Krmpotic stated that the Public Safety Technology Division budget provided computer support to make criminal history, warrant, sex offender, protection orders, and investigation information available statewide to law enforcement and public safety agencies.
Decision unit E-228 recommended additional funding of $82,523 in each year of the biennium to upgrade existing communications circuits by increasing bandwidth. The upgrades were primarily from 56 K frame relay to a T1 or a T1 frame relay.
Mr. Krmpotic explained that decision unit E-278 recommended funding of $62,420 in each year of the biennium to provide for hardware and software maintenance costs for purchases that occurred during the last biennium. The agency had listed Corel software support as an additional expense in the recommendation for additional funding. The Governor recommended a one‑shot appropriation in A.B. 592, which would make appropriations from the state General Fund and state Highway Fund to the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety for various information technology upgrades, including the purchase of 720 copies of Microsoft Office to use throughout the Public Safety branch. If the one-shot appropriation was approved the agency had indicated that the software maintenance for Corel would not be needed.
Mr. Krmpotic reported that A.B. 592 also recommended an appropriation to fund the purchase of Oracle 8i that, according to the agency, would allow conversion from the existing 300 concurrent user licenses to a processor-based license permitting unlimited users on the existing servers. Decision unit E-284 recommended funding of $79,692 in each year of the biennium to provide for maintenance for the Oracle license upgrade. The funding would be contingent on the passage of A.B. 592.
Decision unit E-888 recommended one-shot reimbursements totaling $1,004,588. The Governor had requested removal of the recommendation since the funding was recommended in A.B. 592. Due to the removal of the one-shot reimbursement the agency had revised the allocation of expenses from the budget. Mr. Krmpotic suggested that if the subcommittee approved the removal of the one-shot appropriation, then the subcommittee should consider a revision to the cost allocation for differences between amounts billed and amounts budgeted as well as the removal of the one-shot item.
Staff sought approval to make changes to decision unit E-997 based on approval of the Administrative Services budget account.
********
PUBLIC SAFETY, TRAINING DIVISION – BUDGET PAGE PS-129
Mr. Krmpotic stated that the Training Division budget account was created during the 1999 Legislative Session to provide a central department point for cadet training, in-service training, and the custody and maintenance of training records. Staff had made technical adjustments.
Mr. Krmpotic reported that The Executive Budget recommended Highway Funds of $100,000 in FY2003 to provide in-house command and supervisor training for the Highway Patrol in decision unit E-225. The recommendation called for $20,000 of in-state travel and $80,000 for contract services. The department indicated that they intended to offer training to staff from all divisions in the department. The division also indicated that training teams and some rural area staff would be used to provide training in five regions throughout the state. The department also indicated that they did not intend to use contractors for the training, as well as the primary expense would be travel for the training teams. Mr. Krmpotic added that there had been $80,000 worth of contract services and $20,000 of in-state travel identified with the decision unit. Mr. Krmpotic had received information from the department that requested the decision unit be funded at approximately $67,000 to provide training to staff throughout the department. Mr. Krmpotic reiterated that the decision unit was funded with Highway Funds, and said that to provide training to all agencies within the department would require funding from additional funding sources, which would be General Fund.
Mr. Krmpotic noted that the 1999 legislature had approved the creation of the Training Division based on the transfer of training positions and related funding from the Highway Patrol, Division of Investigation, and the Division of Parole and Probation. The Executive Budget recommended decision unit E-225 to replace General Funds totaling $380,905 in FY2002 and $361,188 in FY2003 with Highway Funds. In response to questions about the use of Highway Funds to support training for non-highway funded divisions, the department indicated that in-kind contributions from the Division of Parole and Probation would more than offset the difference between the cost of the registration fee received and the cost of training provided. The department indicated that a majority of the estimated 44 Parole and Probation cadets would be trained through community colleges over the next biennium. The department also indicated that in-kind contributions of $560 per cadet and registration fees did not cover the cost of training provided for Category II cadets, which was $10,310. Mr. Krmpotic said that General Funds totaling $56,199 in FY2002 and $4,501 in FY2003 remained in the budget account. The Governor had submitted a recommendation to replace the General Fund amounts with Highway Funds. Based on further review of the agency response, staff had determined that the cost per Parole and Probation cadet for academy training was $3,748. The agency had reported that ten Parole and Probation cadets were training in FY2000. If the subcommittee wished to approve the recommendation and replace General Funds with Highway Funds, staff would recommend that $37,480 of General Fund remain in the budget each year based on the estimated efforts on the part of the division to train Parole and Probation cadets. The addition of General Funds totaling $37,480 each year would result in a General Fund decrease of $18,719 in FY2002 and an increase of $32,979 in FY2003 for a net increase of $14,260 over the biennium.
Mr. Krmpotic explained that decision unit E-710 recommended funding to replace VCRs, televisions, whiteboards, and projection screens. In response to questions by staff, the department indicated that three VCRs had been purchased with grant funds since the budget was submitted. The decision before the subcommittee was whether to approve the replacement items, and to consider the removal of the three VCRs from the budget.
Decision unit E-720 recommended funding at $11,056 for new equipment to train employees, including an LCD projector, defensive tactics mannequin, and protective clothing.
Mr. Krmpotic stated that decision unit E-888 recommended funding of $162,043 for the replacement of carpeting and furniture in the dorms and personal computers.
Staff sought approval to make changes to decision units E-800, E-801, and E‑983 based on approval of the budgets for the Director’s Office and Administrative Services.
Mr. Krmpotic mentioned that the Motor Carrier budget was currently an open budget and the decision before the subcommittee was whether to delay the implementation of the Gas Tax Program and the transfer of the program from the Department of Taxation beginning January 1, 2002.
Mrs. Chowning asked how the Department of Taxation budget had been closed regarding the Gas Tax Program. Mr. Parks stated that there had been action taken on the Department of Taxation budget, but not on the Motor Carrier budget, and the action was to delay the implementation. Mrs. Chowning said that the action was to delay the implementation for one year.
Mr. Ghiggeri stated that the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means and Senate Committee on Finance, Joint subcommittee on General Government had closed the Department of Taxation budget by delaying the transfer of the Gas Tax Program to the DMV by six months. This reflected a savings of approximately $740,000 to the General Fund, which would impact the Motor Carrier budget. Mechanically, if the delay was carried into the Motor Carrier budget, there might be additional adjustments that would be required in the budget to enable the hiring of staff. Mr. Ghiggeri opined that there would not be a corresponding savings or adjustment in the Motor Carrier budget. Additionally, there would be legislation required in order to delay the implementation.
Senator Jacobsen asked why the training for the Parole and Probation cadets would be occurring at community colleges, when the division had a training center. Mr. Krmpotic stated that the department had previously indicated that community colleges would be cost-effective, particularly with new hires in southern Nevada, to avoid travel costs.
********
Chairman Parks recessed the meeting for five minutes. The meeting was reconvened at 11:47 a.m. at which time the Chair recessed the meeting until 12:30 p.m. Chairman Parks called the meeting back to order at 12:49 p.m., and noted there was no quorum of the Senate members. He recessed the meeting to the call of the Chair. The meeting reconvened at 10:16 a.m. on May 11.
Chairman Parks stated that the decision before the committee dealt with the closing of the Motor Vehicles and Public Safety budgets. The primary issue was whether the subcommittee wished to approve the deconsolidation of the department, or continue the traditional operation of the budgets.
Senator Neal asked which budgets were being discussed. The Chair stated that the entire series of budgets was being discussed because most, if not all, were impacted on the issue of deconsolidation.
Mr. Perkins said that he had received information regarding the deconsolidation and had reviewed the information. Although he believed that the two operations would eventually need to be split, Mr. Perkins was not comfortable with the plan presented and did not consider the plan workable. Mr. Perkins reiterated that at a future point he believed the operations would need to be split, but not having the time to become comfortable with the recently presented plan, he was uncomfortable with deconsolidation at this point.
Senator Neal asked what the problem was with continuing the organizational structure as it currently stood.
Senator Jacobsen stated that all the information had been predicated on the deconsolidation of the division, and although he had reservations he felt that the split needed to take place.
Senator Neal reiterated that he desired to know the problem with leaving the division as it currently was. He asked if the two directors that would be needed if the department was split had been provided for in The Executive Budget.
Senator O’Donnell stated that S.B. 481 had been processed through the Senate Committee on Transportation, and there had been testimony that suggested that if there were two organizations with two directors the organizations could be managed more efficiently. The problem was that there was a director that was spending a majority of his time in meetings and was unable to complete other tasks because he needed to be informed of every aspect of the Department of Motor Vehicles, Highway Patrol, Hazmat, etc. Senator O’Donnell said that the division had made the case as to the split, and acknowledged that the organization was large. He stated that he was unsure of the exact time when the division first asked for the split, but he opined that it was in 1989. Senator O’Donnell noted that he had denied the request in previous years, but he was now convinced.
Senator Neal asked if the Governor had approved the plan, to which Senator O’Donnell answered in the affirmative. Senator O’Donnell reiterated that the bill had been passed out of the Senate and was residing in the Assembly.
Mrs. Chowning stated that the money was in the budget, but there was a significant amount of difference from the money in the budget and the revised plan that Mr. Kirkland had spoken about on May 10. The savings in the new plan were nominal General Funds, of approximately $50,000 each year of the biennium, and in the Highway Fund there was an approximate $50,000 reduction in expenditures per year. Mrs. Chowning acknowledged the amount of time that the fiscal staff had spent on the budget, and agreed with Mr. Perkins that not all of the committee members had had a chance to examine the new proposal. There had been six directors in seven years for the division. Mrs. Chowning stated that there had been opposition to the split from the standpoint that there was a concern that inspection of commercial motor vehicles would suffer. The response to that was that the functions would remain the same, and the department felt the inspections would not suffer. The only change was that instead of one director there would be two directors. It had also come to Mrs. Chowning’s attention that in the Highway Patrol there were more staff changes, and there was a drastic need for a solution to be found. Mrs. Chowning reported that it would be possible that the Assembly Committee on Transportation would be voting on S.B. 481 later that day, after the hearing that occurred on May 10. She said there appeared to be savings with the split, and she was personally in favor of the split.
Mr. Marvel explained that this deconsolidation concept had been discussed in the previous session, and he agreed with Senator O’Donnell that the director had too many tasks. Mr. Marvel indicated his agreement with the split.
Senator Jacobsen said that he did not believe that there had ever been a consolidation originated by the legislature, but rather that consolidations originated with the Governor. Consolidation was thought to bring about efficiency, but the DMV&PS proved that concept wrong. Senator Jacobsen opined that the fewer bosses there were, the better.
Senator O’Donnell stated that the split in the department originated with former Governor Bob Miller and Senator O’Donnell then opposed the deconsolidation. At that point the then DMV&PS director, Jim Weller, quit. Senator O’Donnell stated he believed Mr. Kirkland had excelled in his position, but if the job was so insurmountable that high quality professionals could not be kept in the department then the subcommittee would need to live with the decisions. Senator O’Donnell reiterated that the Senate had passed out the deconsolidation bill, and said that if the Assembly did not believe the deconsolidation would be beneficial, then the department would remain status quo and the committee would have to live with the decision for two years. Senator O’Donnell stated that a decision needed to be made because Mr. Krmpotic needed the information to complete the staff budget analysis. He stated if the bill was killed that would be fine, but he believed it would be better to deconsolidate the department.
Chairman Parks stated that one of the problems was that the department had submitted a revised plan two days previous, and the earlier numbers were fairly “far apart as far as what the additional cost” was.
Senator O’Donnell stated he believed the new proposal presented by Mr. Kirkland had been created because Mr. Perkins had stated that the division was either not going to be split, or would not receive the removal of the 22 percent cap.
Mr. Perkins stated that philosophically he supported the deconsolidation of the department, but he was not comfortable with the plan that was presented to the committee. He stated there had been a number of occurrences over the interim of failures of the DMV system, and part of the problem was that the committee had not received an organizational plan in the previous session that showed how the reorganization of the DMV would occur. Mr. Perkins was concerned about proceeding with the deconsolidation, although he believed the two agencies would function better individually, without a proper plan in place, the agency would be set up for failure, and there would be multiple problems in the following session. Mr. Perkins stated he would like to see a strong organizational plan presented to the committee, and then commended Mr. Kirkland.
Senator Neal opined that the subcommittee was confused on their role in the reorganization. The subcommittee should be concerned about the policy, but not manage the reorganization. He believed that the subcommittee should vote on the broad policy and then allow the department to implement the policy. The reorganization could be reviewed in following legislative sessions.
Senator Jacobsen asked for comment from Mr. Beers. Senator Jacobsen noted that previously the main problem with the DMV had been the lines, and asked Mr. Beers if the GENESIS system had solved the problems. Mr. Beers stated that the lines had improved, and he was receiving very few complaints and an occasional commendation regarding the DMV. If that was the issue behind the change then Mr. Beers was unsure whether it was enough to deconsolidate the division. A better job could be done, but only by adding additional staff.
Mrs. Chowning had received the organizational chart presented by the division because she was a member of the policy committee examining the issue. She believed that the members of the subcommittee needed to receive the organizational plan, because if it was conceptionally approved and did not succeed then the subcommittee would be blamed.
Mr. Beers disagreed with Mrs. Chowning. He stated that if the policy committees approved the deconsolidation, then the subcommittee should be examining the monetary issues. Mr. Beers stated that if the budget was in place to allow the deconsolidation then he was confused as to why there were hesitations.
Mrs. Chowning reiterated that only one side had approved the policy, but she believed it would happen in the next few days. Mr. Beers confirmed that the bill was in the Assembly Committee on Transportation.
Senator O’Donnell stated that if the bill was not going to proceed then the subcommittee was wasting its time. He asked to have the Assembly inform the Senate when their minds were made up, and then the Senate could proceed.
SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO DECONSOLIDATE THE DIVISION.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
Chairman Parks informed the subcommittee that there was not a quorum to accept the motion. The Chair entertained a motion on the part of the Assembly members of the subcommittee.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO DECONSOLIDATE THE DIVISION.
MR. BEERS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION FAILED. (Chairman Parks, Mrs. de Braga, and Mr. Perkins voted no.)
********
Chairman Parks recessed the meeting to the call of the Chair, and the meeting was not reconvened due to time constraints.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Andrea Carothers
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblyman David Parks, Chairman
DATE: