MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY Committee on Ways and Means
Seventy-First Session
June 4, 2001
The Committee on Ways and Meanswas called to order at 10:07 a.m. on Monday, June 4, 2001. Chairman Morse Arberry Jr. presided in Room 3137 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman
Ms. Chris Giunchigliani, Vice Chairwoman
Mr. Bob Beers
Mrs. Barbara Cegavske
Mrs. Vonne Chowning
Mrs. Marcia de Braga
Mr. Joseph Dini, Jr.
Mr. David Goldwater
Mr. Lynn Hettrick
Ms. Sheila Leslie
Mr. John Marvel
Mr. David Parks
Mr. Richard D. Perkins
Ms. Sandra Tiffany
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst
Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Mindy Braun, Education Program Analyst
H. Pepper Sturm, Chief Principal Research Analyst
Carol Thomsen, Recording Committee Secretary
Andrea Carothers, Transcribing Committee Secretary
Chairman Arberry adjourned the meeting of June 3, 2001. The hearing was opened on S.B. 583.
Senate Bill 583: Establishes grant program for development of projects relating to tourism. (BDR 18-1562)
The Chair recognized Robert Shriver, Executive Director, Division of Economic Development, to testify in support of the bill. Mr. Shriver introduced Nancy Dunn, Interim Executive Director and Business Manager, Commission on Tourism. He noted that some of the committee members had been present during the hearing in the Assembly Committee on Taxation where the concept of the bill was presented. Mr. Shriver said the bill was a method to help rural Nevada fill the gap and try to attract tourism to the rural communities. He commented the bill was a way for economic development and tourism to work together in Nevada.
Ms. Dunn said the funding mechanism for the committee created by the bill was lodging tax revenue that might become available in the tourism account at the end of any given fiscal year. The chance of the revenue being available was dependent on the revenue stream for the year. If the funding was available, the proposal was to appear before the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) to request that a certain amount of the money be dedicated to the program. The Senate had amended the bill to place a cap on the funding for the program of no more than $200,000. The funding would have to be available before the request could be made.
The Chair closed the hearing on S.B. 583 and opened the hearing on S.B. 148.
Senate Bill 148: Makes various changes regarding education and educational personnel. (BDR 34-219)
Pepper Sturm, Chief Principal Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau, stated that the bill was originally an interim study bill from the Legislative Committee on Education. The bill had been amended in the Senate Committee on Finance. Mr. Sturm noted that as legislative staff he could not speak in favor of or against the bill, but could only explain the different provisions in the bill.
Mr. Sturm noted that the bill contained five major sections. The first was teacher licensure, and there was language regarding National Board Certification for teachers. There were also provisions concerning the Regional Professional Development Program. Language was included regarding threats to students and school personnel. Mr. Sturm said the final section was on accountability testing provisions.
Mindy Braun, Education Program Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau, said that all appropriations related to the contents of the bill were contained in either the budgets, the school funding bill, or the general appropriations bill.
Mr. Sturm explained that the first major section of the bill contained teacher licensure and National Board Certification. The bill established provisions concerning any money made available to the department by legislative appropriation for the purpose of reimbursing teachers for certain costs in acquiring national certification. The general appropriation bill provided $150,000 in each fiscal year of the biennium for that purpose. Teachers wishing to obtain such reimbursement must file a statement of intent with the school district at least one year prior to anticipated certification. Upon completion and certification, the school district would notify the department to reimburse the teacher up to $2,000 for costs related directly to the application and the receipt of certification. Mr. Sturm stated this could be found in Section 21 of the bill.
In Section 23, Mr. Sturm reported that there was an amendment to the law to change the notification requirement for teachers to submit evidence that they had received certification. The earlier law required the notification by September 15, but in reality the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards did not notify the teachers until late December. The date had been amended to read January 31. The bill also provided that the additional 5 percent, which was currently in law for teachers to receive after the certification, be paid retroactive to the beginning of the contract for the school year.
Mr. Strum commented that in Section 21, S.B. 148 also revised current statutory requirements that limited teacher licensure to United States citizens. This was one of the interim study recommendations asked for by the school districts. It specified that the Superintendent of Public Instruction may issue a license to teachers identified by a school district who held a temporary visa and who had academic qualifications that would otherwise qualify them for a license in a subject area that had been declared by the school district to be a high-need shortage subject area. The examples given were math, science, and special education.
In Section 4, the bill read that the Superintendent of Public Instruction may declare that an emergency condition existed in hiring and assignment of licensed personnel in specific licensure subject areas. Mr. Sturm noted this was another provision for subject areas where there was a shortage. The Superintendent might then authorize the district to hire and assign personnel, for a period not to exceed two years, who did not meet specific licensure requirements set forth in regulation in the identified licensure subject area. During that period of time, the Commission on Professional Standards in Education must consider changes to licensure requirements that would address the emergency condition.
Mr. Sturm said the second major section of the bill contained provisions related to the Regional Professional Development Programs (RPDPs) and clarified the role and governance of the RPDPs. Most of the provisions were set forth in the appropriation bill from the previous session or reflected current practices.
The first of those could be found in Sections 8 through 10 and provided for the establishment of a statewide RPDP Coordinating Council. Mr. Sturm noted the council did currently exist and met regularly. The council would: provide for the coordination of programs and services; adopt standards for establishing and approving quality, effective professional development programs; conduct long‑range planning with regard to teacher and administrator professional development needs; adopt common definitions, protocols, and reporting requirements to assist with the evaluation component; and authorize the council to contract for administrative services to assist the council.
The second part of the RPDP portion of the bill strengthened and clarified the role of regional governing boards. Mr. Sturm said Sections 11-16 provided that the governing boards created by S.B. 555 of the Seventieth Session would appoint the RPDP coordinator, and the proportion of the coordinator’s time that may be paid from the budget. The bill specified that each governing board would have budget review responsibilities with regard to the RPDP budget, that the board would oversee the program’s evaluation, and would be responsible for long-term and short-term planning. It further specified that each RPDP governing board would meet at least twice a year and a representative from the board, the program director, or a designee would participate in the statewide RPDP council.
Mr. Sturm noted that another provision of the bill, contained in Sections 25 and 27, concerned threats to students and school personnel. The measure provided, from A.B. 319 that made various changes to provisions governing education, that persons making threats of bodily harm or death to any pupil or school employee, in a public or private school, would be guilty of a misdemeanor or, under certain circumstances, a gross misdemeanor, unless a greater penalty was provided by a specific statute.
The next major portion of the bill concerned accountability, and Mr. Sturm deferred to Ms. Braun.
Ms. Braun said that with regard to accountability, Section 8 amended the bill to delay the implementation of the new science portion of the high school proficiency exam for two years. The change would require that seniors graduating in the 2004-2005 school year must pass the science test to receive the standard diploma, versus those due to graduate during the 2002-2003 school year, as was currently required.
The second item dealing with accountability was that beginning in the 2002‑2003 school year Section 29 provided that the norm-referenced examinations, the TerraNova exam, which were currently administered at grades 4, 8, and 10, be administered at grades 4, 7, and 10. This was done in order to comply with the Federal Title I regulations. There was a need for Nevada to administer a criterion-referenced examination (CRT) in the middle school grades. Ms. Braun commented that the standards council had recommended that the CRT take place in grade 8 and currently that was the level the TerraNova exam was offered at. Essentially the students would be taking a test in the fall and a test in the spring. The testing director recommended that this be changed and the TerraNova exam be given in grade 7, and the CRT be given in grade 8.
Ms. Braun continued with Section 2, which amended the NRS 389.015 to require the High School Proficiency Examination (HSPE) be developed, printed, administered, and scored by a nationally recognized testing company. The provision was previously included in the school funding bill. However, now the funding for the HSPE was not included in the Distributive School Account (DSA), but rather was included in its own budget. The language presented would clarify the need for the high-school test to be developed, printed, administered, and scored by a nationally recognized testing company.
In regard to the CRT, Ms. Braun noted that if one-shot funding for a new CRT was approved during the current session, which was found in S.B. 459, Section 40 of the bill provided that the State Board of Education develop or purchase the examination by December 1, 2002; pilot the test questions in the spring of 2002; and administer the examination for the first time in the spring semester of 2003.
In Section 41, the bill provided language to authorize staff of the Legislative Counsel Bureau to participate, to the extent practicable, in the process for the review and selection of a testing vendor, noted Ms. Braun. In addition, the section required that any contract with the department that was entered into with a testing vendor include a provision to allow the testing vendor to respond to requests for information for the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
Ms. Chris Giunchigliani thanked Mr. Sturm and Ms. Braun for their presentation. She asked what the difference was from the original bill and the amended bill, beside the language from A.B. 319. Mr. Sturm said that the original bill contained an extra appropriation of approximately $12 million for an extra school day that was removed. The teacher licensure provisions and the national board certification were in the original bill. The threat provision of the bill, the RPDP portion, and the accountability testing was added to the bill in the amendments.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked if Section 1, subsection f, regarding the national board certification, was transitory language. Mr. Sturm said that language in that subsection was going to be permanent language, and it was the retroactive pay for the national board certification pay. Ms. Giunchigliani asked why the language was necessary. Mr. Sturm answered that originally because of the September 15 notification date it was a simple matter to compensate for the original pay, but because the date was being shifted to December, it was necessary for language to be included setting the date at the beginning of the contract.
Ms. Giunchigliani said that there currently was language for people who were licensed but did not hold an endorsement to teach in the subject area for which there was a shortage of teachers, and asked why that language was necessary since currently schools had the right to request an exemption or an exception when there was a shortage. Mr. Sturm said that the school districts were present and since they had requested the language he would defer to them. Ms. Giunchigliani commented that the school districts requested hundreds of exemptions, and that was part of the problem because people were teaching that were not certified in the subject they were teaching. She said that when a person had a license it did not mean that he could teach a particular subject area.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked what the total budget cost was for the bill. Ms. Braun said that there was no budgetary impact. All the items had been included in the education budgets or in the DSA.
Ms. Giunchigliani commented to the district representatives that if the exemption language was included in the bill, despite the fact that it was already in law, and the school district required the individual who was exempted to get an endorsement, they should be required to pay for the endorsement.
The need for the RPDP language was questioned by Ms. Giunchigliani. Mr. Sturm said that the RPDP program had an evaluation component in the previous session. One of the recommendations from the evaluator was to make the structure more formalized in order to standardize the program, and so that in future evaluations standard data could be used. Most of the provisions that were in statute were previously in the transitory appropriation portion of S.B. 555 of the Seventieth Session. Ms. Giunchigliani inquired who the contractor was for the evaluation. Mr. Sturm answered that the contractor was Stanley Chow with WestEd of San Francisco. Ms. Giunchigliani confirmed that the statewide council currently existed, and asked if there was a need for the statewide council. Mr. Sturm deferred to the school districts. Ms. Giunchigliani said that the council might have been appropriate at one time, but there was a better focus for dollars. She said that maybe the council did not need to exist, especially under the present structure. Ms. Giunchigliani asked what the Regional Professional Development Programs were funded at. Ms. Braun said that the funding was in the DSA, and was a block amount distributed through the four regional programs. Within that there were coordinators that ran the professional development program. The statewide coordinating council was a method for the state coordinators to gather so that all programs were statewide. Ms. Giunchigliani stated that this created another bureaucracy, and said she would examine the issue.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked what was the necessity of the language regarding people from other countries receiving licenses when the University had a program to examine transcripts and decide if a person would qualify for the license. Mr. Sturm believed there was a provision in the NRS that prohibited foreign nationals from being teachers. Ms. Giunchigliani stated that in her school district there were foreign nationals that were teaching. Mr. Sturm said Section 21 of the bill said that NRS 391.060 said that it was currently unlawful for the superintendent to issue a license to a non-citizen, unless naturalization papers had been filed. Ms. Giunchigliani confirmed that if a person was legally in the country and had filed the proper paperwork, they could receive a license. Ms. Giunchigliani said she would further ask the districts about this matter.
Dr. Dotty Merrill, Washoe County School District, testified regarding the bill. Dr. Merrill commented that Section 38 included language that moved the outset of the science high school proficiency test for members of the graduating class of 2005. The work about how the standards of science greatly impact the curriculum in middle and high schools that was done by the Legislative Committee on Education was appreciated. Dr. Merrill indicated that the inclusion of the language was appreciated. The district also supported the language in Section 39, which moved the norm reference test to students that were in grade 7, and was in conjunction with the language in Section 40, the implementation of the grade 8 CRT. Dr. Merrill opined that the grade 8 CRT would be useful, because it would provide the district with a clear way to examine the achievements of the students on the standards of the state in reading and math, so that as the students entered high school the district would know what areas were weak, and the areas could be addressed in a direct way. The district believed that the CRT would improve the passing rate of the high school proficiency test early in a student’s high school career. The district also appreciated the committee’s inclusion of language in Sections 25 and 27 regarding electronic communication threats to students or employees of school districts. With regard to an earlier question about Section 21, it was the understanding that the superintendent may not currently issue a license to any person who was not a citizen of the United States or who had not yet filed for a declaration to become a citizen. Dr. Merrill commented that there were people in the country on various types of visas that might have training, which was appropriate to teach a specific subject area for which there was a shortage of teachers. The district had testified in support of the language found in Section 21.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked to see representatives from the district after the meeting for clarification regarding her earlier questions. Her concern was ensuring that people had an equivalency of educational background, and training alone did not necessarily indicate that. The university would review the backgrounds and give an answer to the equivalency. Ms. Giunchigliani confirmed that the districts did not wish to circumvent that process, but was clarifying that if a person had a visa they would be permitted to teach in certain circumstances.
The Chair closed the hearing on S.B. 148 and opened the hearing on S.B. 458 and S.B. 518.
Senate Bill 458: Makes appropriation to Department of Education for cost-of- living bonus for all public employees in local school districts. (BDR S‑1424)
Senate Bill 518: Revises provisions relating to state financial administration. (BDR 23-1514)
Don Hataway, Deputy Director, Budget Division, said that S.B. 458 was one portion of the package for funding for K-12 education for the next biennium. The original appropriation in the budget was $57 million for a 5 percent cost of living adjustment (COLA). The reprint was $34 million for an approximate 3 percent COLA. The act was effective on passage, and the intent was to have the funds to the agencies as quickly as possible.
Mr. Hataway explained that S.B. 518 was the IFC Contingency Fund. At the present time the balance in the fund was less than $100,000. The original bill was to restore and expand the balance to $9 million and $2 million from the Highway Fund. There had not been Highway Funds in the IFC Contingency Fund in the past, however, it was felt that that would potentially be beneficial for the state. The first reprint had the basic allocation to the Contingency Fund from the General Fund of $11 million, $2 million from the Highway Fund in Section 1. Section 2 was an amendment that would add $3,750,000 and $13,250,000 for potential energy needs for state agencies and the University and Community College System. It required policies and procedures to be developed for the allocation of the funds, and the IFC would be the final entity to approve the use of the funds. Section 3 was $6.5 million for potential energy needs for local school districts under the same conditions.
Chairman Arberry declared the hearing on S.B. 458 and S.B. 518 closed and opened the hearing on S.B. 465.
Senate Bill 465: Makes various changes concerning adjudication emergency account. (BDR 48-530)
Hugh Ricci, P.E., State Engineer, Division of Water Resources, spoke in favor of S.B. 465. He noted there had been a memorandum from the Budget Office on March 9, 2001, that the appropriation was included in The Executive Budget. The bill proposed to allow the State Engineer to request money from the Contingency Fund if the budget account reached a critically low level, and the bill asked for an appropriation of $10,000 to be placed in the budget account. Mr. Ricci explained the budget account had been created in 1925 with the amount of $6,000. The division had not requested money since that time, and was now requesting the additional funds.
The Chair closed the hearing on S.B. 465.
Assembly Bill 232: Establishes judicial retirement system for certain justices of the supreme court and district court judges. (BDR 1-208)
Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst, explained that A.B. 232 was the judicial retirement bill. There were amendments to the bill, mainly of a technical nature. In addition, there was a $14.3 million appropriation in the bill that was recommended in The Executive Budget. Mr. Stevens said that the proposal was to reduce the appropriation to $5 million.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 232.
MRS. CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Assembly Bill 70: Makes various changes with respect to affordable housing. (BDR 40-43)
Chairman Arberry said that the bill dealt with the Las Vegas Housing Authority. There was a recommendation from the Housing Authority to delete the sum of $2.9 million and replace it with a $1 million appropriation, as well as leave the language as it read, and delete the additional two appropriations and add the language regarding the water meter so that charges could be made on large service systems versus the individual meter.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 70.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Assembly Bill 75: Requires adoption of state cancer plan and mandates administrative action necessary to provide Medicaid coverage to certain patients with breast or cervical cancer. (BDR 40-277)
Ms. Giunchigliani said that A.B. 75 was originally going to be placed in the planning study bill, but she had requested an amendment for transitory language. There would be no appropriation in the bill. Ms. Giunchigliani said the bill had not been included in the planning study bill.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 75.
MRS. CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.
********
Assembly Bill 594: Makes appropriations to Culinary and Hospitality Academy of Las Vegas for design and planning of facility for vocational training in Southern Nevada and to Department of Cultural Affairs for distribution to Las Vegas Performing Arts Center Foundation for planning and design of performing arts center in City of Las Vegas. (BDR S-42)
Ms. Giunchigliani explained that the bill needed to be amended to become planning and design for the Culinary and Hospitality Academy of Las Vegas and planning and design for the Las Vegas Performing Arts Center Foundation. The appropriation would be reduced from $8 million to $750,000 for the Culinary and Hospitality Academy planning and $250,000 for the Performing Arts Center Foundation planning.
MR. GOLDWATER MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 594.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 84: Requires Department of Personnel to increase level of compensation of uniformed highway patrol positions and makes appropriations to State Board of Examiners. (BDR S-750)
Chairman Arberry indicated S.B. 84 was a one grade salary increase for the Highway Patrol.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 84.
MR. HETTRICK SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 109: Makes appropriations relating to education. (BDR S-838)
Mr. Stevens said that the bill provided approximately $300,000 for a consultant for the In Site financial system, which provided financial data on all school districts inside the state.
MR. DINI MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 109.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 193: Makes various changes concerning department of prisons. (BDR 16-311)
Mr. Stevens stated that the department had approached the Chair about potential amendments for the bill. The proposals were: on line 3, page 1, “shall” would be changed to “may”; on line 10, page 1, “shall” would be changed to “may” continue to develop; and on page 2, lines 24-31 would be deleted and references related to the assistant director for the Offender Management Program would be eliminated.
Ms. Tiffany said that she had a question regarding page 2, lines 24-31. She stated that one item she found important was that the prison system was attempting to move into programming, which meant that the Offender Management Program complemented the Mental Health Court and the Reentry Court so that prisoners could attempt to transition out of prison early. Ms. Tiffany asked if the amendments eliminated that from happening. Jackie Crawford, Director, Nevada Department of Prisons, commented the amendment clarified that rather than creating an additional division, the duties would be melded together under the Mental Health Division and the Medical Division of Offender Management. Ms. Tiffany asked if the programming would be under the control of a medical doctor. Ms. Crawford said that the program would be a Division of Offender Management, but would be under the Mental Health and Medical. Ms. Tiffany asked if placing the programming under the medical director impacted the ability to complete the offender management programming. Ms. Crawford answered in the negative, and said that the programs had to meld and complement each other. Ms. Crawford said that programs had not had an organizational voice, and with the expansion of the division there would be that organizational voice, and it would be a Division of Offender Management. Ms. Tiffany asked if there would be enough staff for the Offender Management Program, to which Ms. Crawford answered in the affirmative, and explained that the existing mental health coordinator position would be used. That role would expand, through the job description, and would deal with the mental health coordinating and the programming. Ms. Tiffany confirmed that the only impact the amendment would have was what budget account the programming was under.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 193.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 445: Makes appropriations to Peace Officers’ Standards and Training Commission for analysis of job tasks and study of physical fitness validation for peace officers and to Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety for various information technology upgrades. (BDR S‑1383)
Mr. Stevens said that the bill was a one-shot appropriation for the Peace Officers’ Standards and Training (POST) validation study. The appropriation was originally recommended at $200,000 and had been reduced to $100,000.
Ms. Giunchigliani said that because the committee had not received a budget, she believed the project could be completed for $50,000. In addition, through conversations with Don Hataway and the Governor’s Office, it had come to Ms. Giunchigliani’s attention that the committee had indefinitely postponed A.B. 592, which the department needed to complete the National Crime Center upgrade in the DMV. Ms. Giunchigliani suggested that the language in A.B. 592 be included in S.B. 445. The amount the DMV was to receive for the National Crime Center upgrade would be $562,569 in Section 1 and, from the Highway Fund, $442,019. This would complete the project and the funding was in the budget.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 445.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning and Ms. Leslie were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 497: Authorizes issuance of general obligation bonds by state for purchase of certain facilities. (BDR S-1475)
Mr. Stevens commented that S.B. 497 dealt with bonds for the University and Community College System, and would allow the use of the bonds to purchase the Old Town Mall facility currently utilized by Truckee Meadows Community College. The total was $8.5 million in bonding authority.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 497.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 578: Revises provisions governing certain fees charged by department of motor vehicles and public safety and transfers of money to state highway fund. (BDR 43-1561)
Mr. Stevens said the bill was needed to implement the budget, and it reduced the amount that could be retained in the Insurance Verification account at the end of the fiscal year from $1 million to $500,000. The bill also implemented a fee for photo licensing once the digital formatting was implemented.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 578.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 458: Makes appropriation to Department of Education for cost-of- living bonus for all public employees in local school districts. (BDR S‑1424)
Mr. Stevens explained that the bill dealt with a 3 percent bonus and had an appropriation of $34 million.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 458.
MR. HETTRICK SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ms. Giunchigliani disclosed that she was a public school teacher, but the bill would not affect her any differently than any other person would be affected.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 465: Makes various changes concerning adjudication emergency account. (BDR 48-530)
Mr. Stevens said the bill had been heard earlier in the hearing, and dealt with the water adjudication account.
MR. DINI MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 465.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 518: Revises provisions relating to state financial administration. (BDR 23-1514)
Mr. Stevens proposed an amendment, on behalf of the administration, to the bill. The bill would replenish the IFC Contingency Fund to $11 million, and would build in money for the energy pool so that state agencies could approach the IFC during the interim if energy costs exceeded the budgeted amounts. The administration had requested an increase in the per diem rate for state employees for hotel rooms. The administration felt that a number of hotels were increasing rates due to the energy situation, and was recommending that the rates per night provided to state employees for travel be increased from $42 to $50 in the first year of the biennium and $58 in the second year of the biennium. Mr. Stevens noted the bill appeared to be one of the last bills the committee could amend items into. The committee had been requested by the administration to consider the request.
MR. DINI MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 518.
MR. HETTRICK SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mr. Goldwater asked if the bill would affect all other budgets that contained in‑state travel and out-of-state travel. Mr. Stevens said the bill would impact every budget, and noted that in the past when increases had been made there had not been an adjustment to the individual budgets. The impact was that the agencies would have to travel less or would have to bring in savings from other areas to augment the travel category.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Senate Bill 583: Establishes grant program for development of projects relating to tourism. (BDR 18-1562)
Chairman Arberry said that S.B. 583 would establish a grant program for the development of projects related to tourism. The Chair held the bill.
********
The meeting was recessed at 10:54 a.m. to the call of the Chair. The meeting was reconvened at 10:55 a.m.
Chairman Arberry asked the committee to take action on the following Bill Draft Request (BDR).
MR. PARKS MOVED COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR S‑1580.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mrs. Chowning, Ms. Leslie, and Mr. Perkins were absent for the vote.)
********
Assembly Bill 449: Reserves portion of certain gaming license fees from off- track pari-mutuel wagering to augment purses for horse racing in certain counties. (BDR 41-657)
Mr. Marvel said that the bill allowed Elko, White Pine, and Humboldt Counties to keep more of the pari-mutuel wagering to promote better horse racing. He believed the bill would be conducive to racing and would bring more people to the state of Nevada. Mr. Marvel noted the cost could not be determined because it changed dependent on the year, and the bill raised the percentage of what the counties could keep for horse racing promotion.
Chairman Arberry held the bill.
********
The meeting was recessed at 10:57 a.m. to the call of the Chair, and reconvened at 12:18 p.m.
Ms. Shelia Leslie said that the previous day she had presented a letter from Jon Sasser, Lobbyist, Washoe Legal Services, to the committee. The letter had requested that the committee issue a Letter of Intent (LoI) to the Division of Aging allowing the division to utilize some of the appropriated tobacco funding to complete the recommendation from the interim study on Long-Term Care in Nevada to investigate how Medicaid could be used for affordable housing. The Division of Aging was in agreement with the recommendation, and the request was for a LoI authorizing that usage. Ms. Leslie noted that other states had used Medicaid to pay for services to assist people in obtaining affordable housing or in assisted living. Nevada had not been able to complete that, and the long-term care study had examined the matter and made the recommendation.
Ms. Giunchigliani commented she was in support of the LoI, and noted it had been mentioned in subcommittee discussions. She reiterated that the division was willing to complete the recommendation and believed it was appropriate.
Mr. Dini asked if there was a study that would be under the Legislative Committee on Health Care dealing with long-term care. Ms. Leslie said the matter had been studied, and the LoI was a recommendation from the interim study. It had been discussed twice during the budget subcommittees, but no action had been taken.
Ms. Leslie noted that she could provide the letter requesting the LoI at a later time.
Assembly Bill 671: Makes appropriations to state distributive school account for class-size reduction. (BDR S-1574)
Assembly Bill 672: Makes appropriations for support of civil government of state. (BDR S-1578)
Mr. Stevens explained that A.B. 671 dealt with class-size reduction and would allow the Elko County School District to continue the pilot program for class-size reduction with the inclusion of grade 6. There was no cost built into the bill for the Elko County project to continue.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 671 AND A.B. 672.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. (Mr. Perkins was absent for the vote.)
********
The meeting was recessed 12:21 p.m. and was not reconvened due to time constraints.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Andrea Carothers
Committee Secretary
Carol Thomsen
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblyman Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman
DATE: