MINUTES OF THE
meeting of the legislative commission’s budget
SubCommittee
Seventy-First Session
January 26, 2001
The Legislative Commission’s Budget Subcommittee was called to order at 8:45 a.m. on Friday, January 26, 2001. Chairman Morse Arberry Jr. presided in Room 1214 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. 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 Perkins
Ms. Sandra Tiffany
SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator William R. O’Donnell
Senator Bernice Mathews
SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst
Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst
Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Cindy Clampitt, Committee Secretary
Chairman Arberry called the meeting to order and opened the budget overview for the Nevada Department of Transportation.
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Tom Stephens, Director, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), presented a $1.3 billion budget for the 2002-2003 biennium. He explained the proposed budget was up from $1.1 billion in the current biennium.
Mr. Stephens explained that half of the workforce and $100 million of the budget was spent each year in maintenance and operations on Nevada roads. To some extent, the bulk of expenditures were used on projects and repairs, but the committee should not forget that 800 employees in 50 locations throughout the state operated the snowplows, street sweepers and cleaned up accidents. Those employees also cared for minor repairs such as replacing stolen stop signs and broken guardrails.
Mr. Stephens explained the budget contained a request for 24 new positions and 16 of those were requested in the area of maintenance and equipment repair. He complimented department employees for working in maintenance and repair areas, and noted those employees did not get too much recognition at the legislature because their number of employees had not historically increased much. Mr. Stephens added, in rural areas of the state, when individuals thought of NDOT, they pictured maintenance and repair staff.
Mr. Stephens referred to Exhibit C, a chart reflecting capital improvement expenditures from FY1997 through FY2001. He noted in FY1999 capital improvement programs were running about $378 million per year. In a two-year period project delivery had nearly doubled which spoke well of the engineers, construction inspectors, and contract administrators at NDOT who accomplished the increase with no significant increase in the number of staff. Nevada has grown 66 percent in the past decade. The next highest state in population growth was Arizona at 40 percent and then Colorado at 30 percent. Thus, except for Arizona, Nevada was growing at more than twice that of the rest of the nation. Mr. Stephens added that although Las Vegas was recognized as the fastest growing area in the state, the remainder of the state, especially in Washoe County and along the Sierra front, was growing at a phenomenal rate as well.
Mr. Stephens explained NDOT defined its highway construction and maintenance efforts in three categories: (1) Maintenance, (2) Capacity, and (3) Super projects. Mr. Stephens referred to a map of Nevada indicating maintenance projects being worked on or completed in the 1999-2001 biennium (Exhibit D). He reflected that almost every area of the state had been affected by NDOT construction projects. Road conditions had been greatly improved. Rural areas had been addressed along with those in the much more populated urban areas of the state.
Mr. Stephens provided the committee with a chart indicating pavement improvement projects throughout the state (Exhibit E). He explained the green line (top) indicated the percentage of roads that were in good and very good condition. The red line (second line) indicated those roads that were in fair and poor condition. The department had been working on projects to address the increase in number of roads that were in fair and poor condition. Mr. Stephens stated in the last biennium the department had significantly decreased the number of roads in fair and poor condition.
Mr. Stephens explained capacity projects were considered below the level of the complex super projects, but most required a long lead time and were still very complex. Among many of the department’s accomplishments during the 1999-2001 biennium was the completion of the spaghetti bowl in Las Vegas, the Spring Mountain interchange, the Cheyenne interchange, the Pyramid highway, and the old interchange out in Elko County. Numerous other projects had been completed as well.
Turning to the super projects, Mr. Stephens listed six projects:
· The U.S. 95 widening in Las Vegas,
· The I-15 widening from Las Vegas to the state line,
· The Hoover bypass,
· The Carson City bypass,
· I-580, and
· The Boulder City bypass.
Mr. Stephens referred to the U.S. 95 widening map (Exhibit F) and explained the project was very large and complex. The first shovel of dirt was turned in the fall of 2000 out near Cheyenne in northwest Las Vegas indicated on Exhibit F by the green line labeled as Project 1. The second phase of the project would extend from Cheyenne to Craig. The department was currently buying right-of-way acquisition for some of the other project phases. There was still a great deal of work to be done on right-of-way purchases, design, and construction phases. He explained the project had been in process for five years and would take many years yet to complete.
Mr. Stephens touched on another super project – the widening of I-15 from Las Vegas to Primm, Nevada. The department viewed as critical the portion of that project southwest toward Los Angeles because of the Sunday afternoon traffic jams when tourists were returning home. Mr. Stephens added that people came to Las Vegas at different times but typically, they all went home at the same time. Phase 1 was complete, Phase 2 was nearly done and Phase 3 was nearly ready to go to bid. The various phases were indicated on the map provided as Exhibit G. The department was concerned about the portion extending into California because eventually a six-lane interstate highway to Primm, which would turn into a four-lane interstate highway from Primm to Barstow, and then become an eight-lane highway through Barstow was planned. After Barstow the highway would turn into another four-lane highway. NDOT had been working closely with the state of California on the Barstow to Victorville leg of the highway. The Victorville – Barstow portion was considered first because at Barstow Highway 44 from Arizona met with I-15. Two four-lane interstate highways would turn into one four-lane highway, which would be the biggest bottleneck of the plan. Six million dollars of Nevada federal money was spent on that portion of the highway, and another $10 million had just been bid. The next challenge would be between Primm and Barstow.
Mr. Stephens passed a picture to committee members of the proposed Hoover bypass project. He also provided a narrative of the project published on the Internet Web site: www.hooverdambypass.org (Exhibit H). The proposal was to build a bridge with a preferred alternative just south of Hoover Dam. He explained the project included $200 million in federal money and partnership with the state of Arizona. The approaches were in solid rock. Twenty million dollars from both states had been committed to the project, about $80 million in federal money had been raised, and the project still needed to raise approximately $80 million in federal money.
Mr. Stephens referred to photographs of awards the NDOT had received. The list of awards is provided as Exhibit I. He noted staff had worked diligently to receive the awards which included the Center Street bridge in Reno, the Memorial Point rest area at Lake Tahoe, a Clean Cities award for use of alternative fuels in Las Vegas, an award for employee Sohilia Bemanian, who had turned pavement maintenance projects around, an award for best in-house publication in the United States (the NDOT News). Mr. Stephens concluded NDOT staff was doing an excellent job of getting national recognition for the state.
Mr. Stephens noted the department was trying to communicate with the public and one way was through the department Internet Web site. The Web site had links to other Web sites for each of the super projects. Current status of each project was listed in the Web site. Mr. Stephens explained it was dangerous to show status because if it showed a project was to begin construction in 2002 the time frame was perceived as exact. He added the dates actually reflected target dates.
Mr. Stephens stated the department had a new toll-free, statewide road condition reporting telephone number (1-800-887-NVROADS) that provided road conditions anywhere in the state. A new control center for road reports was built in Reno during the previous biennium.
Mr. Stephens noted the department worked well with the Washington Office and the congressional delegation. He opined that Nevada’s congressional delegation was very well placed. The hard work of Mike Piper, Nevada Office, and John Hassel, consultant for the Washington Office, had earned millions of extra federal funds for the state. He added Nevada was fortunate that Senator Ensign was on the Commerce Committee. Mr. Stephens noted that questions were asked during the confirmation hearing for the Secretary of Commerce that had a direct bearing on the NDOT budget and the department had provided information to the senator’s office. NDOT was very concerned that distribution of the federal lands money was not forthcoming to the western states. A large share was appropriated to the eastern states that had almost no federal lands.
Mr. Stephens added Nevada was fortunate that Senator Reid was the ranking member on the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee. Senator Reid also served on the Senate Appropriations Committee and was the Majority Whip. Through his efforts millions of dollars had been garnered for specific Nevada projects.
Mr. Stephens explained that Congressman Gibbons was well thought of in Washington, D.C. Congressman Gibbons met with Director Stephens, Governor Guinn, and Don Young, representative from Alaska and new chairman of the Transportation Infrastructure Committee for the House of Representatives. Common interests were pointed out in that meeting.
Mr. Stephens added that Congresswoman Berkley also served on the Transportation Infrastructure Committee and had achieved some funding earmarked for Information Technology Services in Las Vegas.
Assemblywoman Chowning complimented NDOT on their magazine provided to legislators, which included good information on many of the projects. She noted the overview had no mention of the Needles highway project. Mr. Stephens replied the project was progressing on the Needles highway. He added there were hundreds of projects in the pipeline and he had chosen only a few for the budget overview process.
Senator Coffin complimented NDOT as well on their magazine. He asked if NDOT had any plan to improve on their radio report on 1610 AM because there were so many projects ongoing in the southern Nevada area. Senator Coffin noted if a few more watts could be added to the transmission so to reach a greater area it would be helpful. Mr. Stephens stated he agreed, but the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) regulated the output wattage. Senator Coffin suggested the possibility of an exemption being raised with the congressional delegation. Mr. Stephens noted the same problem existed in the Reno area when NDOT had tried to maintain radio coverage over the entire Lake Tahoe Basin. Mr. Stephens promised to look into an exemption application for the five-watt limit.
Mr. Stephens provided a chart of revenues received by NDOT (Exhibit J). He noted the chart indicated $100 million in bonds had been sold as of December 1, 2000. NDOT had worked very hard with the Secretary of State’s office to satisfy all questions from the rating agencies. As a result NDOT had received AA ratings on bonding and was able to obtain a 4.8 percent interest rate on municipal borrowing. The department planned to sell $600 million in bonds over a five-year period covering FY2001 through FY2005. The bonds helped to fund super projects. Bonds were not sold until they were needed in a project. He explained arbitrage occurred if bonds were sold and funds were allowed to sit in a bank account.
Mr. Stephens noted Exhibit J projected revenues over the next five years although the legislature would be concerned with the next biennium only. He added the question always arose as to what the five-year projections were. He stated any adjustments in the five-year bond projections would come before the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) when and if they became necessary. Mr. Stephens noted that any reduction in funding had to be done well in advance because contracts Mr. Stephens signed that day would obligate funding in the summer of 2001.
Assemblyman Marvel asked if NDOT was allowed to arbitrage and Mr. Stephens replied there were rules concerning the use of arbitrage. If the rules were not met on expenditure of such funds any interest earned on those funds was required to be repaid.
Mr. Stephens stated Exhibit J showed federal revenues increasing in the future while state funding remained fairly flat. He noted projections might even be a little low on anticipated federal funding. If the federal funding proved to be more, NDOT would come before the legislature to increase the authorization. The other option would be to use some of the federal money to construct some of the super projects instead of selling bonds. He explained the last appropriation had been $30 million more in funding for Nevada than had been expected. He explained the congressional delegation could not have predicted the increase in funds even two weeks before they had been authorized.
Mr. Stephens called attention to the line in Exhibit J reflecting local funding. He noted the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) in southern Nevada had indicated to NDOT that they wanted certain projects to go forward and to accomplish that, they had pledged to bond for the funding. Mr. Stephens felt funding would become available by the next biennium or possibly sooner. The legislature would be approached for authority to accept and expend those funds.
Mr. Stephens listed the following projects and funding amounts the RTC was interested in assisting:
Mr. Stephens explained RTC funds were projected to be available in the next biennium.
Chairman Arberry noted IFC had given NDOT $100 million in state construction funds. The committee was concerned that a chart showing actual and projected funding over the next five years reflected NDOT outspending the Highway Fund revenue. In FY2002 there was $123 million and $199.3 million in FY2003. The Chair asked if NDOT had projected in the long term to FY2007. He noted it appeared the department would be spending more from the Highway Fund than they would be receiving. Mr. Stephens replied that was why the department planned to sell $600 million in bonds.
Chairman Arberry asked if NDOT had a plan to address the budget shortfall. Mr. Stephens responded that spending would have to be reduced when bonding availability was gone and the department would be in a position of making bond payments. The idea was to do super projects early without affecting the rest of the projects.
Chairman Arberry asked what impact there would be on future projects. Mr. Stephens replied there would not be another list of super projects before the committee if the bonding authority was exceeded. He added the federal funding was increasing which would make up part of the difference. Super projects were a one-time type of project dealing with bonding. The Chair requested NDOT staff to work with committee staff to project what funding availability would be in FY2007. The Chair noted bonding seemed to be outpacing state revenues.
Mr. Stephens noted a large part of the taxing authority had been given to local governments who also received a large part of the gas tax. He provided the committee with a pie chart (Exhibit K) that indicated the distribution of gas taxes. He stated local governments collected a large portion of the gas tax and had the ability to charge developer fees. Those fees were $2,000 in Washoe County per new home and $500 in Clark County. That local taxing ability was on the increase so NDOT was looking to local government if an interest was expressed in advancing certain projects. The state had not raised the gas tax in many years and Mr. Stephens clarified he did not advocate such an increase.
Senator Rawson cut to the heart of the concern, stating that over a period of years the Highway Fund was being used more because bonding was decreasing. He explained that translated to several million dollars that would have to come from other resources. He expressed concern that the subcommittees would need to go into some detail on the issue. He noted the committee recognized the importance of the projects, but some issues existed with the Highway Fund balance. Mr. Stephens agreed and opined that a figure needed to be agreed upon that should reflect the lowest level to which the fund could drop. Mr. Stephens noted the Highway Fund operated more like a checking account than a savings account and a certain balance must be maintained to cover bills and contingencies. To be operated as a savings account a higher balance would be required. He correlated that if it was the desire of the legislature to maintain a higher balance, a corresponding number of funding reductions for projects would occur. He provided the committee with a chart indicating NDOT expenses (Exhibit L). He explained non-capital expenses reflected such categories as salaries, which had not increased significantly. Capital outlays reflected the next category. The top bar reflected bond payments and some advance right-of-way payments. Debt was on the increase. Looking at expenses in FY2005, non-capital expenses were projected at $173 million while capital outlay would be at about $500 million and bond repayments would be approximately $67 million. Mr. Stephens explained he had a schedule detailing the repayment of the $600 million in bonds that indicated bond payments would go to $75 million and remain there for the rest of the decade. The highest debt load during the 1990s was $32 million.
Chairman Arberry expressed concern that NDOT looked at the Highway Fund as a checkbook and when the money ran out the department would keep spending.
Mr. Stephens rebutted that spending would need to be reduced. The Chair requested NDOT to work with staff to detail how Highway Fund solvency was projected into the future.
Assemblyman Goldwater asked whether NDOT bonds were general obligation bonds or revenue bonds. Mr. Stephens replied they were revenue bonds based on the federal and state gas tax. Mr. Goldwater followed up by asking whether NDOT debt was managed by the state treasurer or managed in-house. Mr. Stephens replied everything went through the state treasurer. Mr. Goldwater asked if the debt could be managed with call features and other features. Mr. Stephens noted all debt management went through the treasurer’s office.
Mr. Goldwater noted Mr. Stephens had stated the RTC had pledged funding to NDOT. Mr. Stephens explained the RTC had programs and projects requiring RTC funding. If the RTC did not assist in funding, those projects would not go to construction. Mr. Goldwater asked if the RTC funding came from a portion of the state sales tax. Mr. Stephens responded RTC received one-quarter cent sales tax and 1 percent room tax. Mr. Goldwater asked if the RTC pledged its revenue, was it pledging only a portion of the gas tax or other revenues as well. Mr. Stephens responded RTC was simply pledging specific funding, not their revenue percentage. The RTC pledged to specific projects. Mr. Goldwater rebutted the statement made had indicated the RTC was to bond, so, if they were pledging revenue bonds they would pledge a certain revenue. Mr. Stephens replied that in order for the RTC to sell bonds they would have to pledge some revenue. The RTC would keep the bond funds and then pledge funding to NDOT associated with a certain project. Mr. Goldwater commented the funding for the RTC might have to be changed to include sunsets on sales tax or other funding. Mr. Stephens noted the RTC currently had enough revenue in southern Nevada to support what they suggested would be a $200 million bond issue, some of which would go to NDOT projects and some to other projects.
Senator O’Donnell referred to Exhibit J and Exhibit L noting that there appeared to be an anticipation of a large increase in federal revenue to the state in 2004. Senator O’Donnell added Mr. Stephens’s testimony had indicated even two weeks prior to the release of federal funds in the past, NDOT had not known what funding would be derived from the federal transportation bill. He commented the anticipated increased federal revenue in 2004 seemed to correlate with when the bond payments would begin to become due. He stated if the anticipated federal revenue did not meet expectations, the state would be looking at a larger than normal decline in the capital outlays for the construction of highways. Mr. Stephens responded that in that event, NDOT would have to reduce or delay some of their projects. He added 2004 related to the next reauthorization of the transportation bill and noted in the last authorization the state received $70 million more than they had been anticipating. Senator O’Donnell asked if Mr. Stephens was confident that the state would receive a large increase again. Mr. Stephens explained the department continually looked at income and adjusted projects to match the income. If Highway Funds were not received, contracts for projects would not be granted.
Senator O’Donnell noted that because of bond purchases there would be a drastic cut necessary in 2004-2005 if anticipated federal funds were not forthcoming. Mr. Stephens reiterated the chart reflected further into the future than the committee had gone in the past. He noted the department could forecast as far out as the committee desired but some assumptions had to be made.
Senator O’Donnell stated federal funds could not be absolutely predicted. However, the amount to be expended in bond payments could be established. He added there was a guaranteed expense, but not a guaranteed income. Mr. Stephens assured the committee the department would delay bond sales if insufficient revenue was received.
Assemblywoman Giunchigliani commented the department seemed a little glib with their responses to the committee’s concern on the revenue and expenditure issue. She asked how many projects were currently receiving federal funds in Nevada. Mr. Stephens agreed to provide the committee with the information. Ms. Giunchigliani explained she would like to determine where the state was in compliance with the federal mandate regarding hiring minorities and women. She commented the mandate was 6.9 percent for women and 25.9 percent for minority hiring. Mr. Stephens replied the department would research what the federal requirements were and on which projects Nevada had complied.
Mr. Marvel asked if NDOT had an estimate on how much federal funding in Nevada had been lost due to improper federal land allocation. Mr. Stephens replied he did not have an estimate, but the state had been disappointed in the last few distributions.
Assemblyman Parks commented the joint subcommittees would want to look at what projects had been delayed, for what reasons they had been delayed, and how that impacted the fiscal picture presented by the department. Mr. Stephens responded sometimes projects were delayed because financial projections were lower than anticipated.
Mr. Stephens noted he had provided the committee with an exhibit relating to fatal accident safety (Exhibit M) adding there had been a significant decrease in the number of fatalities.
Mr. Stephens commented there was a great disparity in engineer salaries and thus The Executive Budget contained a conservative request for salary increases in that area.
Mr. Stephens stated right-of-way costs were significant to the department because millions of dollars a year were being lost.
Mr. Stephens continued, stating there was an issue of state versus local responsibility because as the state has grown some of the roads currently under state responsibility should be turned over to local responsibility. Some local governments had asked the state to pay for the operation of traffic signals, streetlights and sidewalks. NDOT had never historically paid for those costs.
Mr. Stephens provided the committee with a book of maps detailing Nevada roadways maintained by the state (Exhibit N). He noted about 5 percent of state-maintained roads had a traffic volume of less than 100 cars per day.
Mr. Stephens explained a recent issue concerned project delivery time. Exhibit O showed the delivery time for the Fallon to Fernley project and some of the steps involved. At the last NDOT board meeting the issue had been raised.
Mr. Stephens concluded his presentation by providing a list of performance indicators (Exhibit P), which he opined the subcommittees would delve into further.
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Richard Kirkland, Director, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, introduced Ginny Lewis, Deputy Director, Motor Vehicles, and Dave Kieckbusch, Deputy Director, Public Safety.
Mr. Kirkland noted the department was down 200 employees at the time, many in management. He explained he would cover 17 major divisions, adding the department had received The Executive Budget only three days previous. It had become clear there were some issues as yet to be resolved. Reports on those issues had gone back to the Budget Office.
Mr. Kirkland stated the employee turnover issue was confronting everyone. He noted the analyst in the Department of Administration assigned to the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV/PS) was only part-time and had begun work only three days previous. Mr. Kirkland read from prepared testimony (Exhibit Q).
Mr. Kirkland explained the department was staffed with 2,285 authorized positions. Throughout the year the department averaged approximately 2,100 workers who were on the job on any given day due to turnover. The biennial budget for 1999-2001 was $399 million. The Executive Budget requested $400 million for the upcoming biennium in response to the Governor’s directions. He listed each division and budget request.
Mr. Kirkland noted for the first time in many years in reviewing statistics, DMV/PS was not asking for any additional staffing in the Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP). The NHP was the largest on the Public Safety side of the department with 581 employees authorized. However, the vacancy rate was between 35 and 50 employees on a monthly basis. The Highway Patrol’s mission was accomplished with visible patrol, law enforcement activities, motorist assists, accident investigation and enforcement of criminal laws throughout Nevada. The NHP mission focused on the motoring public and commercial trucking. Despite the problems of hiring and retaining qualified employees, the men and women of NHP were doing an excellent job of meeting and exceeding most of their goals.
Mr. Kirkland referred to a book of charts provided to committee members (Exhibit R) noting the number of citations written by NHP went from 193,000 in 1999 to 222,000 in 2000. Motor vehicle accidents were down from 13,730 to 13,677. Fatalities had decreased from 182 in 1999 to 157 in 2000. Injury accidents were up slightly and property damage accidents were down slightly. Driving under the influence crashes were down. Other arrests were up from 17,500 to 21,700. In 1995 the Highway Patrol went from 349 to 439 authorized sworn staff. Truck inspections were up substantially and citations were up substantially. Motorist assists were up by 2,000. Miles driven were down substantially from 9.4 million to 8.4 million due to fewer troopers on the roads.
Mr. Kirkland informed the committee that other charts in Exhibit R reflected dignitary protection.
Senator Rawson reflected replacing troopers involved more than just the hiring process. He asked how long it really took to replace troopers. Mr. Kirkland responded the recruitment, testing, and hiring process took between two and three months. The required training program took another four or five months. The field officer training program took about two to two and a half months. Thus it took the better part of a year before a new trooper was actually in service.
Senator Rawson confirmed the Governor’s proposed salary increase for state employees included Highway Patrol troopers. Mr. Kirkland agreed. Senator Rawson requested DMV/PS to provide committee members with the pay differential between officers primarily in Washoe and Clark counties and NHP troopers. Mr. Kirkland replied he had a detailed report that would be provided to the committee. He added the differential ranged from a low of $6,000 to $7,000 up to a high differential in Clark County of $10,000 annually.
Mr. Marvel asked what it cost to train a highway patrolman. Mr. Kirkland stated that figure was a very difficult number to obtain because there were a lot of soft dollar costs. All costs in a one-year period, not counting unproductive salary, was about $20,000. Mr. Marvel asked if that also applied to Parole and Probation officers.
Mr. Kirkland advised that until recently, Parole and Probation had been trained to Category 1 status (street police officer positions). The law provided and directed that parole officers be trained at a Category 2 level, so a change had been made. He explained that until the change parole officers were trained to make traffic stops, issue citations, and drive marked police cars – all duties they did not perform. The change resulted in parole and probation officers training for 8 to 10 weeks rather than 16 to 18 weeks. Also, arrangements had been made with a community college in Clark County to conduct training, which eliminated per diem and food costs and displacement to Carson City for those officers.
Senator Rawson asked if further bill drafting was needed or whether the matter was taken care of. Mr. Kirkland responded, other than some officers being upset because they were no longer trained to the highest category, the department had been following the law and the matter was settled.
Senator Coffin requested the department provide an update in writing on the number of perpetrators in crashes involving driver under the influence (DUI) instances. Mr. Kirkland agreed. Senator Coffin noted the figure had previously run approximately .18 where injuries were involved. He added it was a small figure but very important in future debates of whether to drop the intoxication level to .08. Senator Coffin asked for the information to be provided in injury, fatalities and property damage accidents.
Ms. Giunchigliani thanked the department for their comments on the change in training for parole officers.
Assemblywoman Chowning referred to crash information and noted the percentage had gone down in fatalities and motorcycle crashes had gone down, but were spiking up again. She asked what attributed to the rise. She also asked the department to provide the committee with what factors were tracked in crashes. Mrs. Chowning noted a bill had been presented about cellular telephones and she had been told cellular cause information would be tracked as well. Mr. Kirkland referred to the first question and stated it seemed in both Washoe and Clark Counties there had been a significant influx of motorcycle special event occurrences. Laughlin had an enormous event once a year. The department looked at the number of participants versus the number of crashes or fatalities that occurred. Mr. Kirkland stated the whole purpose of accident investigation was to determine causes and use those statistics. Mr. Kirkland noted the great unknown in accident investigation was “operator inattention” accidents because it was hard to get motorists to admit they crashed because they were talking on a cell phone. He promised to provide data to the committee.
Assemblywoman Cegavske asked if teenage drivers were included in any of the statistics under discussion and whether any decrease in teenage driver-caused accidents had occurred. Mr. Kirkland replied the department could pull out those statistics and provide them to the committee.
Mr. Kirkland did comment the department felt tremendous progress had been made in the last six months within Parole and Probation. Restitution fees were up substantially by $50,000 per month. Supervision fees were up as well.
Mr. Kirkland provided an overview of the Nevada Division of Investigation (NDI) budget. He noted there were 84 individuals assigned to the division. Four staff positions were funded through grants. In 2000 NDI investigated 517 narcotics cases and arrested 77 felons for diversion of pharmaceuticals. They received 817 requests for investigative support over the past four years, up from 286 in the previous four years.
Mr. Kirkland referred to a packet of graphs provided to the committee (Exhibit S) and noted a reduction in a number of the data. He assured the committee that NDI staff had related to him the face of narcotics was changing. Seizures were down and criminals were getting smarter. They dealt in small amounts of cash and sent it back to their country of origin. They no longer purchased expensive cars or items that might be seized. NDI was currently engaged in an era of change.
Mr. Kirkland explained that the Vehicle Investigation Project for Enforcement and Recovery (VIPER) program had changed to a program of local focus although one position would still work with statewide issues. The guidelines of the program were no longer the same and because the Governor requested the department to present a “flat” budget certain decisions had to be made.
Ms. Giunchigliani referred to Exhibit S and asked if all the arrests shown in the chart were done by NDI or whether they had been assisted by other agencies in some of the arrests. Mr. Kirkland deferred to Chief John Drew of NDI. Mr. Drew responded that on the chart indicating arrests, the gray bars represented NDI arrests while the black bars reflected assistance with arrests by other agencies.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked what types of drugs were being seized most currently. Mr. Drew responded methamphetamines were on the increase. He noted marijuana was not worked proactively, however, NDI officers seized it whenever they found it.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked if the division was seeing an increase in the methamphetamine laboratories in the rural areas of the state as was happening in the urban areas. Mr. Drew replied obviously not in the same numbers, but even in White Pine County five or six laboratories were discovered in the last year.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked about the current status of diversion drugs. Mr. Drew explained diversion drugs referred to those drugs that were legally prescribed drugs, but diverted for illegal purposes and included issues such as “doctor shopping” or pharmacy burglaries where drugs were diverted to the streets.
Mr. Kirkland continued his testimony stating the Capitol Police was a small agency with 27 employees. The Capitol Police were fundamentally responsible for state building safety with some special assignments to the Supreme Court, the Sawyer Building, and the Capitol Building. He stated the officers made 60,000 face-to-face contacts, generally meeting and greeting the public. Approximately 14,000 phone calls were received. The agency provided limited patrolling in Carson City. The officers also performed some instruction duties. He explained in 2000 they taught 85 students about workplace violence. The budget requested no increases in the next biennium.
Senator Rawson questioned whether appropriate agreements were in place if the Capitol Police needed backup from other agencies. Mr. Kirkland responded affirmatively, explaining the agreements were in place with local sheriff offices and the Nevada Highway Patrol.
Senator Rawson asked if any particular emphasis had been placed on terrorist training. Mr. Kirkland replied no, because of funding issues. He further explained the agency had previously been under the Division of Buildings and Grounds, then were moved to Public Safety, but the funding was still provided from Buildings and Grounds through allocations from various agencies. He expressed a hope that in the DMV/PS split bill some of that could be rectified. Senator Rawson opined the Governor would be reluctant to ask for increases where it might be perceived as beneficial to him. The legislature needed to be aware of that nuance. Senator Rawson asked that proposals be provided to suggest methods of handling the situation. Mr. Kirkland stated the information had been presented before, but the department would update the previous presentation and provide it again.
Mr. Kirkland explained the next budget was the State Fire Marshall’s office, which was an understaffed division and overwhelmed by the magnitude of their responsibilities. He stated there were 29,000 facilities that required inspection with six inspectors on staff. The inspectors inspected 900 facilities in 2000. The plans section conducted 560 plan reviews and was overwhelmed in that area as well. In Washoe and Clark Counties the agency was working through interlocal agreements to conduct some of the work.
Mr. Kirkland noted the agency had conducted 158 fire investigations at the request of rural agencies. He opined the agency needed to be addressed in regard to the demands being placed on such a small staff. Senator Rawson commented the legislature was aware of the need and added they would need to protect the functions performed for the rural areas where there were no other options. He noted the subcommittees would address the issue more closely. Mr. Kirkland responded the department was prepared and agreed with Senator Rawson’s comments.
Mr. Kirkland noted the State Board of Parole Commissioners would be heard on February 1, 2001 and moved on to testimony on the Nevada Criminal History Repository. He explained the agency was responsible for providing electronic access to police records, warrants, history, information and Brady gun checks. Those functions worked between the federal government, the state and all local agencies. All categories of responsibilities continued to increase substantially.
Projections placed requests at approximately 9 million requests a month and actuals were at 16 million per month.
Assemblywoman Cegavske asked if the repository had gotten any closer to working with local entities to do more background checking. Mr. Kirkland replied electronic checking had been instituted in 14 of the 17 counties. He noted if the question was whether the ability was to access that information for civil work cards, that was out of department control. He explained the concept was supported but it was a federal issue. He added they were closer and faster but the issue was not resolved.
Mrs. Cegavske asked if all of Nevada was accessible, but not the other 49 states. Mr. Kirkland responded all states were online but they could not access criminal information for a civil purpose.
Assemblyman Hettrick complimented Mr. Dennis DeBacco and his staff for their work. Mr. Hettrick explained he recently received a call from a man who had no discernable fingerprints and was unable to be fingerprinted and receive a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) release. The Nevada Criminal History Repository had worked with him and gotten the job done. Mr. Kirkland concurred and invited committee members to tour the facility if they wished.
The Division of Emergency Management had been in significant turmoil. However, with the hiring of a new chief, an excellent job was being done. For the first time they had developed a statewide emergency and recovery plan that could be used in time of emergency. They had also sent 90 state and local emergency responders and managers to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for a week-long training event. As a result of that training Nevada was positioned to respond much better than had been done in the past.
Mr. Kirkland emphasized the division focused on the recovery aspect of emergencies as well, ensuring Nevada received the maximum allowed from federal disaster/emergency assistance.
Mr. Kirkland added the Division of Emergency Management also supervised a number of grants and was responsible for both high- and low-level nuclear transportation through Nevada. He explained nuclear transportation was a new program to the division. He emphasized there was a separate detailed report concerning the program, which would be discussed in future meetings and as the transport levels increased.
Senator O’Donnell asked how many low-level transports of nuclear waste went through the “spaghetti bowl” in Las Vegas during December 2000. Mr. Kirkland deferred to Colonel Mike Hood, Chief of the Nevada Highway Patrol. Colonel Hood replied a report for low-level waste transport through Nevada was at his office and he would supply a copy to committee members. He noted the last time he had checked the report, 37 transports had been done in the past year that the department was aware of.
Senator Rawson asked if notice was provided to authorities when nuclear weapons were being transported through the state. Mr. Kirkland replied that information was out of the jurisdiction of the department, but requirements were in place for the department to be notified. He added, information he received was that the department was notified. Further, there had been a few large and serious transports that had been reported on widely for which DMV/PS was notified. Mr. Kirkland commented the requirement was in place, the federal government liked to notify the states because of the seriousness of the issue but he could not guarantee the department was notified of all transports.
Assemblywoman de Braga asked if there were sufficient resources or funding to train people in rural areas where nuclear waste was transported. Mr. Kirkland replied he could not answer whether the resources, funding and training were sufficient, but there appeared to be a fair amount of money allocated for such training. He added the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) handled the function and passed about $1 million through in grants for that purpose, as did the Department of Emergency Management. He commented such funding seemed to be increasing.
Mr. Kirkland testified the Training Division was created by the 1999 Legislature. The program trained Category I and II officers. In 2000 the division conducted 29,120 hours of training. Those hours of training certificated 52 Category I officers. Mr. Kirkland noted when he assumed the position of Director of DMV/PS the Training Division was in very poor condition and not meeting requirements. A lengthy audit was done revealing the division was not following a variety of policies and procedures. Currently the program was excellent and meeting all requirements established by the legislature.
Mr. Kirkland testified the Public Safety Technology Division provided computer support to make the criminal history, arrest warrant, sex offender, protection orders, and investigative information available statewide. Monthly transactions were up from 9 to 16 million. A computer uptime goal of 98 percent had been established and the division reported having reached 99 percent. The agency did have some one-shot requirements. He explained the division was requesting a National Crime Information Center (NCIC) 2000 mandated upgrade at $338,000. All nationwide checks were done through the system. The law enforcement database upgrade was needed due to the increasing users. A variety of different programs within the system were accessed by 900 users. Conversion to Microsoft and Windows 2000 was needed for standardization of internal computers at a cost of $312,000.
Mr. Kirkland continued his testimony with the Office of Traffic Safety. He explained that office operated pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 223.200 for the purpose of obtaining grants through the Highway Safety Act of 1966. The division had been successful in meeting their goals. The goal was 63 grants in 1999 and they reached 73 grants in 2000. Revenue increased from $2.6 million to $2.9 million. They also conducted training and educational programs for bicycle and motorcycle safety. Charts in Exhibit R reflected the success of those programs.
Mr. Kirkland stated the Drug Commission consisted of an executive director and one support staff to coordinate all training conferences and the gathering of statistical data that provided information to the Governor and the legislature on what the actual state of the use of drugs in Nevada was. An annual report was produced. The division was half funded by a Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Administration (BADA) grant and that funding had dried up. Unless fully funded through the legislature one employee would be lost in the program.
Assemblywoman Leslie confirmed that one position was funded by BADA and asked what position would be left. Mr. Kirkland replied the executive director position would remain but support staff would be lacking. Ms. Leslie asked what impact the cut would have on production of the annual report or any other activities listed as performance indicators. Mr. Kirkland replied Mr. Johnson had stated that without the program officer position, the following information was in jeopardy:
Ms. Leslie asked if the placement of the Drug Commission within the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety was appropriate or whether it needed to be more closely aligned with BADA. Mr. Kirkland replied the department was not looking for things to do. He noted the program was not a true law enforcement or motor vehicle function. He stated what was important was that the DMV/PS did use the data produced by the division and compiled from a variety of government and private agencies.
Mr. Kirkland reported cases within the Internal Affairs section were increasing. He noted some would say that was a bad thing, but he felt it was good because it indicated the department was providing for an appropriate check and balance, particularly in law enforcement. He referred to graphs in Exhibit R noting that the number of sustained findings was up, and the number of employees who had left service as a result of investigation was up.
Mr. Kirkland commented the department was responsive to citizen complaints and actively solicited input and would continue to do so.
Mr. Kirkland began a general overview of the motor vehicle side of the department. He added he had a fresh perspective, having been in his position for only seven months.
Mr. Kirkland reported, a 1994 decision was made by DMV/PS management, the Governor’s Office and a variety of other people that the transaction system called “Legacy” was 20 years old and not capable of an upgrade, or of being Y2K compliant. Over the next six years a variety of programs were instituted to design a system that would meet the needs of a variety of people. When “Genesis” was implemented in September 1999, a number of serious problems surfaced. Some of those problems were: increased customer wait times, problems with the insurance verification process, vehicle titles, customer relations, and the internal system of accountability and tracking.
Wait times were a nightmare. On a good day the wait for service was three to five hours. Three components made up the calculated customer wait time: (1) Time spent in line waiting to get a Q-matic ticket, (2) the amount of time it took for the ticket to be called, and (3) the amount of time required for the transaction to be accomplished. The Governor established a target for the department of 60 minutes or less statewide. Mr. Kirkland noted four components were present to get to that figure. (1) The number of customers requiring the service. (2) The number of employees available to provide the service. (3) The design and quality of the software and hardware programs, and (4) The management of the components.
Mr. Kirkland reminded the committee of earlier testimony that indicated Nevada had a population increase of 66 percent over the last decade. He noted comparable data to show the impact of such growth was important. In December 1999 the department processed 218,441 computer transactions. In December 2000 the department processed 251,921 transactions, which amounted to a 15 percent monthly increase.
Mr. Kirkland added in 1997 there were 1.2 million driver licenses on file and in 2000 there were 1.4 million on file. In 1997 the offices handled 1.1 million walk-in registration transactions and in 2000 the number increased to 1.4 million. The field office staff was authorized at 528 positions. In the first six months of 2000 the staff was consistently down 75 to 100 employees. In the last six months, thanks in major part to the IFC approval of a staffing request, the department had caught up and improved retention substantially. Currently staffing was down about 15 employees per month with another 10 in training.
Mr. Kirkland noted despite the authorization to hire, it took about nine months to fill positions and try to stem the number of people that were leaving. Unfortunately, when a window position was filled at the metropolitan offices, the technician was actually working at the window less than 75 percent of the time because of sick or vacation leave, family medical leave, training time, lunch, and work breaks. He commented there were 260 windows in DMV/PS offices. In essence the statistics showed approximately a 25 percent window closure time.
Mr. Kirkland explained the Genesis system was created by a wide variety of employees, spread out from all over and the records were not entirely accurate as to what input really was. Of the management personnel involved in the creation of Genesis, 98 percent no longer worked for the department. That made it difficult to produce data on why certain functions were created. He stated it appeared the system was designed to be capable of performing a large number of interrelated functions, to provide functionality for alternative service transactions, to provide detailed analytical information not previously available, and to provide transactions at one window for consolidated services.
Mr. Kirkland specified the “good news” was that the system achieved those goals, but the “bad news” was that it took twice as long to process the transactions.
Mr. Kirkland acknowledged Assemblyman Beers had explained to him that the previous system was a “heads down” system where the employee did not have to look at the screen. The employee could look at the document and type very quickly. The Genesis system was a “heads up” or windows system that required the employee to look at the monitor and navigate through a number of screens, which increased the time for each transaction. As with most new, modern hardware and software systems a certain number of problems were to be expected. Mr. Kirkland stated the current average per transaction was approximately 13 minutes. Information indicated the old Legacy system would do the same transaction in 7 minutes.
Mr. Kirkland reported on the other side of the issue. Window technicians were cross-trained so customers could handle multiple transactions at one window. The foundation was laid for customers to transact business over the Internet, over the telephone, at emission stations, and improved mail-out and mail-in processes. Mr. Kirkland opined other positive effects were offsetting the longer transaction time on the computers.
Assemblyman Beers commented he had registered a vehicle the previous Saturday, obtaining his smog certificate and using the Web site in the afternoon to register. The smog information had been successfully updated. On Monday he requested a highway patrolman to run a check on his plate to verify his record had been successfully updated.
Mrs. de Braga asked what the current staffing status was. Mr. Kirkland replied the department was very close to strong staffing levels and better historically than they had been in many years. He commented they were within 2 to 5 percent.
Mrs. de Braga asked what was being done to retain and attract employees. Mr. Kirkland noted the proposed salary increase for state employees would be a big help. He added a lot of credit had to be given to the legislature for showing support of the employees. In his opinion major issues were morale and motivation. Once employees started seeing emphasis was being placed on their performance he had seen an improvement in morale. Employees were not leaving in such great numbers. All of the factors aided employees in making them feel good about themselves. Mr. Kirkland added additional customer service training had been provided. Additional management training had been provided and a number of new managers had been hired. Seventy percent of the motor vehicle management staff was new.
Assemblywoman Tiffany asked if driving schools would ever be done online. Mr. Kirkland replied the department was currently in negotiations with schools and would be presenting legislation during the 2001 Legislative Session to do a number of additional things online. The department intent was to move in that direction and they were also looking at programs currently in place in other states. He added there would be start-up costs, but overall it should be cheaper using online services.
Ms. Tiffany noted the proposed budget included credit card fees and asked for confirmation that legislation had been passed allowing the department to decide if they wished to increase the fees for registration to cover credit card costs. Mr. Kirkland replied the department was prohibited by law from doing that, but they planned to make a request to begin doing so. Ms. Tiffany commented as online transactions increased that would increase the credit card convenience fees requiring payment by the department. Mr. Kirkland concurred.
Ginny Lewis, Deputy Director, Motor Vehicles, explained the department had met recently with the state treasurer’s office and the state controller and other agencies were experiencing the same problem. She added her understanding that legislation was being considered as to whether the agencies should continue to absorb the credit card costs or whether the fees should be passed back to consumers as a convenience fee. Ms. Tiffany commented the state controller was talking about only accepting certain credit cards and would go back to those credit card companies and negotiate a discount based on the volume of transactions generated through state agencies. Ms. Lewis stated that issue was also being addressed because of the current state contract. Some other credit card companies were looking at doing business with the state and a little competition would not hurt. Ms. Tiffany commented she would like to see the banks absorb the fees rather than imposing fee increases to constituents.
Senator O’Donnell noted the Governor had recommended an increase in department expenditures from the Highway Fund and legislative staff projections indicated the increase would violate NRS 408.235, which detailed the 22 percent cap on spending for DMV/PS from the Highway Fund. Projections indicated the agency would be between 22.8 and 23.1 percent of the fund in spending. He asked for an explanation of why the department would violate the cap and what remedies were being looked at for the future.
Mr. Kirkland replied he could not provide a rational explanation of why the expenditure would violate the cap. Unfortunately, the agency had not had the time in the three days since the budget arrived to review all programs and requests. Mr. Kirkland stated the department would obviously not violate the cap. If that meant they would have to cut out $750,000 they would do so. He noted it remained to be seen whether the number remained as it was, because the department had some disagreements with the structure of the budget. The department was bound to the cap and they would stick to the cap unless someone else changed it. He added what needed understanding was service and waiting lines was where neglecting to spend the money would surface.
Senator O’Donnell commented he understood a bill was coming to raise the cap and asked for concurrence. Ms. Lewis responded the department had not submitted legislation to address the 22 percent cap. She added every biennium the discussion surfaced and the department came very close to pushing the cap or going over. However, by the time budgets were closed, the budget managed to come in under the 22 percent. She stated the 2002-2003 budget was the first time she had seen a budget submitted that was, in fact, over the 22 percent. She said the exact figure had been a moving target over the past three months and certainly a big impact was the recommendation for salary increases. The department was trying to deal with the 22 percent, which had been in place since the 1950s. She opined the number was unrealistic and made no sense and the department was a very high profile agency, trying to provide services. Senator O’Donnell rebutted no one wanted to limit or degrade the amount of service provided to the public. However, he asked if the department had talked to Governor Guinn in terms of raising the cap and whether the Governor would support a raise.
Mr. Kirkland replied the department had not had that opportunity, however, a first discussion was scheduled for later in the day. Senator O’Donnell asked for confirmation The Executive Budget as presented was over the 22 percent cap. Ms. Lewis concurred.
Mrs. Chowning noted the IFC had approved 57 full-time and 64 part-time positions. The cost to continue those positions was approximately $3.5 million in the budget. She asked how many of those positions had currently been hired. Mr. Kirkland replied the department had hired 12 of the part-time positions and it was highly doubtful they would ever hire all 64 part-time positions. He explained, the purpose of having the target was much like the report presented to the legislature in 1999 that indicated the need for a balance between Senator O’Donnell’s concern about the 22 percent cap and actual need. As a result there was money available at that time to hire 85 percent of the people needed to serve 1.8 million people in the state. The current census figure was 2.1 million people so the issue was, as long as 7,000 additional people entered Nevada each year, the majority of whom needed a new driver’s license and license plates, the lines would get larger.
Mr. Kirkland provided a compelling statistic that in 1999 the transaction per employee figure was 989 per month and in 2000 that figure was 1,159 per month. With that trend the department would be in a position of having to make those hard decisions of how many customers needed to be served and how long should the wait for that service be.
Mrs. Chowning followed up by asking how many of the 57 full-time positions had been hired. Ms. Lewis replied of the 57 allocated positions, 48 were specific to field services and 7 were central service functions of mail-in renewals. All of those positions had been filled. Ms. Lewis commented concerning the 64 part-time positions, that when the department came before the IFC in December 2000, they had asked for authority on the part-time staff to approach the need office by office. The department was trying to identify those times of day when additional staff was needed. Other approaches to solving wait times had been to establish a 4/10 work schedule for the Henderson office, which had a significant impact on customer wait time. The first 12 part-time positions were hired for the Sahara office in Las Vegas, and began working on the floor January 8, 2001. Training had been reduced to make those employees functional to do some of the simpler transactions allowing seasoned employees to be used at the windows to handle more complex transactions. Ms. Lewis stated it was still too early to say what results had been achieved.
Ms. Lewis stated the next office to be addressed was the Carey office in North Las Vegas. It had not been possible to reduce the wait times in that office to an hour or less. She opined the department would probably never need to hire all 64 part-time positions and explained the Galletti office in Reno had experienced some incredibly good wait times. Ms. Lewis referred to the Q-matic reports included in Exhibit R and noted wait times had been as low as 15 minutes. On one day, a seven-minute wait time had been achieved.
Mr. Kirkland stated the department had hoped to hire a Webmaster and that was an example of some positions that simply could not be filled under current budget restrictions.
Senator Coffin stated he had researched the 22 percent cap issue and found that renewal of drivers’ licenses was set at $19 and valid for four years. He opined it was one of the best bargains around. He suggested new arrivals to the state were the ones with an impact on the wait times in the offices. He noted they were unfamiliar with where to go and consumed more time in all of the transactions. He suggested the department look at raising the drivers’ license fee for new arrivals and perhaps new registrants. He suggested if the drivers’ license fee was raised from $19 to $50 it would provide at least $1.5 million in additional revenue. He asked for confirmation that approximately 250,000 people received renewal drivers’ licenses each year. He added the local people would then not have to bear the burden for accommodation to new arrivals. Mr. Kirkland replied the department was making some recommendations of extending the time period for validity of a driver’s license and vehicle registration permissively. Senator Coffin noted those suggestions would not raise income and Mr. Kirkland rebutted the suggestions would buy time to address the larger issue of the Highway Fund cap.
Mr. Beers stated when the Genesis contract ended, the state signed an agreement to release rights to the software in exchange for 5,000 hours of programming time contingent on Deloitte and Touche selling the software again. Mr. Kirkland deferred to Ms. Lewis. Ms. Lewis replied the contract was successful. Deloitte and Touche sold the software to Washington, D.C. and were currently in Washington, D.C. developing a system based on Nevada’s foundation. With that came the 5,000 hours of programming time. The department had hired two programmers under those hours. The intent was to hire only two programmers and receive one year of programming service. One of those hired was on the original design and development team and his program knowledge had made a huge difference. The Carson City office was under remodel so limited space was also considered.
Chairman Arberry questioned Mr. Kirkland regarding the proposed reorganization of the department into two separate departments. Mr. Kirkland replied the Governor’s fundamental review committee had made a recommendation to split the agency into the Department of Motor Vehicles and a slightly expanded Public Safety Department. The Chair requested the department to provide staff with the planned savings the agency split would produce and how proposed positions would be placed in the reorganization. Mr. Kirkland agreed. He added the direction to the agency was to make the split with no additional cost, but he was unsure about proposed savings. The Chair commented a proposal surfaced with every legislative session to reorganize the department.
Chairman Arberry asked Mr. Kirkland to explain the one-shot appropriation requests. Mr. Kirkland noted the three projects for technology had already been covered. The next project was for data communications and furnishings in the south approved by the 1999 Legislature, although as yet the land had not been acquired for the new Highway Patrol facility. The department was concerned the approved appropriation was for a phased-in process with no funding for the furnishing, wiring and a number of items to make it actually work.
Secured reception areas were requested for Parole and Probation in Winnemucca, Elko, Ely and Las Vegas at $33,000. The project would provide employee and public safety. He explained there was no protection between the administrative employees and parole probationers, who were not pleasant people at times.
The next project was to provide new computers to each parole and probation officer. The request was a specific Governor-recommended item. Sharing computers had not proven to be effective. The new system authorized by the legislature had really made computer access essential.
A request had been made for upgraded memory for Parole and Probation computers. Mr. Kirkland offered to discuss that project on Thursday, February 1, 2000.
A request for replacement of carpeting and furnishings at the dormitory had become a safety issue. Current carpet and furnishings were over 20 years old and had been requested for replacement in previous budgets.
Chairman Arberry asked for confirmation that the new Highway Patrol facility in Las Vegas was not under construction. Mr. Kirkland concurred, explaining unless done in the last week, the land had not been secured. Chairman Arberry commented testimony in the previous session had indicated the facility was a dire need, there was overcrowding and now two years later the land had not even been secured. Mr. Kirkland explained the planned building was a shared facility with NDOT. He agreed the current facility was in dire need of replacement. Mr. Kirkland indicated the Governor had given some very strong suggestions on the issue within the last couple of weeks. The Chair noted the committee did not disagree with the need, but wanted the project completed. Mr. Kirkland concurred.
Chairman Arberry noted Mr. Kirkland had testified regarding the Genesis project and asked what was being done in regard to advertising the telephone and online access. The Chair noted there were currently about 13,000 requests, but the numbers appeared to be flatlining rather than increasing. He noted the intent had been to cut down on the number of people coming into the offices, and then additional staff would not be needed. Ms. Lewis replied in December 2000 the department was given authority to do another mass mailing detailing the new services. A part of the package included costs of printing the inserts for renewal notices. That method had been effective in the first mass mailing. The other part of the package was funding for use of mass media such as television, radio, and billboards, but because of the cost, the project had to go through the request for proposal (RFP) process through State Purchasing. The proposals had been solicited and in the first week of February bids would be reviewed.
Chairman Arberry asked if it was legal to use Highway Fund money to cover the cost of credit card fees. Ms. Lewis responded she was not aware of the legality, but the department could not take the fee for the credit card transaction from the legally assessed registration fees. The only way to implement the credit card program was to receive a Highway Fund appropriation. Chairman Arberry commented further study was needed on the issue. Mr. Kirkland responded the department would immediately request attorney general or Legislative Counsel Bureau review of the situation. He added $1 million was authorized for program costs.
Senator Rawson suggested the registration fee could be established at $33.90 or whatever amount was needed to cover the mandated registration fee and a cost recovery of the credit card transaction cost. Ms. Lewis explained when the drivers’ license by mail program was first implemented a service fee or convenience fee of $1.50 had been attached to those transactions. She noted customers never challenged the fee or questioned it. The renewal by mail for registration did not have such a fee. She opined any customer who wanted to take advantage of those conveniences would not have a problem with some kind of fee.
Senator O’Donnell noted vehicle registrations contained a depreciation schedule for new vehicles whereby a first-year registration was fairly high, but by the tenth year the fee was low. Every year thereafter the privilege tax fee remained low. He stated he had been told the cost of registering a vehicle was equal to the amount of money received in registration fees. Thus no school funding would come from registration fees because the majority of fees were going back to the department for payment of transactions. He asked if that information was correct. Ms. Lewis replied she had not done that analysis but what he was saying made sense. She noted the $33 registration fee had been in place a number of years. Senator O’Donnell confirmed the fee had been in place since 1965. In 1965 $33 bought a lot, but somewhere down the line that anomaly in the law must be addressed. There should be no fixed dollar amounts for registration fees, otherwise local government and school district funding declined. Mr. Kirkland commented the department would try to track and identify the costs.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked if the computer screens at DMV/PS allowed for more than one address for mailing of registrations. Ms. Lewis replied there were two address fields on the registration screen. One was for the mailing address and one was for the residence address. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani noted she had two vehicles garaged at different addresses; yet her driver’s license got changed to a post office box. She suggested multiple addresses would be a thought for future planning.
Chairman Arberry asked Mr. Kirkland to provide an overview of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control account. Mr. Kirkland deferred to Ms. Lewis. Ms. Lewis stated there were multiple areas of issues on the account. The cost allocation had been done on DMV/PS budgets based on a letter of intent. Questions arose as to the level of allocations in the account. The department response to the Budget Office was that an allocation had been established for all of the department budgets. To isolate one budget account and say it seemed to be too high would mean that every budget account in the department should be reviewed and corresponding adjustments made.
Ms. Lewis continued, the level of allocation in the budget had a direct impact on the reserve. The other area of concern with the account was a work program being submitted for the next IFC meeting in the amount of $1.2 million. The department felt obligated to go forward with the project. She explained when they did all the projections for the pollution control account the department took the proposal into consideration, but other agencies had not wanted to take the same approach. The third area of concern was with how the funds from the pollution control account were used. In the Seventieth Legislative Session there was a great deal of discussion on the account and statute enacted on how the funds were distributed. A priority was established. The position of the department was that the statute should be followed. Other agencies funded through the reserve were mediated and distribution made by the Budget Office.
Chairman Arberry asked if it was true that the amount being disbursed to the counties would decrease. Jim Parsons, Administrator of Management Services, replied the amounts distributed to the counties were statutorily mandated to provide $1 per emission certificate sold. The amount that would not be going to the counties would be those distributions from the excess reserve grant requests because there would not be an excess reserve. Those distributions were utilized for special projects within the counties.
Chairman Arberry asked what level of funding local governments would receive each year. Mr. Parsons replied in FY2000 counties received excess reserve requests of slightly more than $1.1 million. $774,000 was requested in 2001, and projections for FY2002 were $1.1 million. Mr. Parsons explained dedicated funds provided to the counties in FY2000 were a little more than $1 million. Projected for FY2002 was $1.047 million and FY2003 was $1.081 million. Mr. Kirkland offered to provide the committee with a report of the distribution of funds in writing.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked if the 100 percent set aside in the last session was expended from the reserve. She asked Mr. Parsons if the expected debate would be over the availability of funding from the reserve to meet requests. She asked for written documentation to cover at least several years of history as well. She noted an earlier rationale was that money was given out of the reserve but counties had not been requesting those funds. Mr. Parsons affirmed he would provide the requested data.
Senator O’Donnell asked for confirmation that the reserve was at $1.80 million after FY2002. Mr. Parsons asked if the senator was referring to the dedicated funds. Senator O’Donnell noted a work program was going through at about $700,000 and asked what balance that would leave in the reserve. Further, Senator O’Donnell noted there was a pilot program to test 1996 and newer vehicles for smog chips. Mr. Parsons explained in FY2000 the reserve was at $3.2 million. For FY2001 the reserve was at $1.2 million, and projected for FY2002 was $1.1 million, FY2003 was $1.2 million and FY2004 was $1.5 million. Mr. Parsons explained the projections did not include any excess reserve grant requests.
Senator O’Donnell noted without grant requests the reserve account was not being added to very much each year. He added the $700,000 work program would take a large chunk out of the reserve. Mr. Parsons explained the $700,000 was what the department projected for excess reserve requests from the counties. He added the $1.2 million for the “OBDII” project was already calculated into the reserve balance. Senator O’Donnell asked the department to provide the information to committee staff.
Mr. Kirkland explained the department was asked by staff to update the committee on the new license plate issuance program. The process was operating as changed; $3.9 million was set aside for the program two and a half years ago. The cost of mailing license plates, plus the unanticipated 6,000 mail returns per month, raised the cost of just mailing license plates to $4 million. In the first phase of the changed program those citizens desiring new license plates or those who conducted their transactions in a DMV/PS office would receive the new license plates. The department planned to ask the legislature for assistance in mailing costs for others.
In conclusion, Mr. Kirkland stated the department was pleased that 80 percent of people today were completing their transactions with the department in less than 60 minutes. The remaining anomalies, such as employee problems and three-day weekend problems, would always happen, but the department felt even with the anomalies, they would continue to reduce transaction times. Mr. Kirkland noted the Reno office on Galletti Way that used to be the worst was now the star. Transactions in Reno on January 25, 2001, were at 11 minutes.
Senator Rawson stated in every legislative session new groups arose that wanted their own license plates. He asked if in a future license plate design one corner could be dedicated for a sticker for each group on a single-style license plate. He stated the concept should help law enforcement in plate recognition and help keep costs down. Mr. Kirkland replied the department was flexible on the issue.
Chairman Arberry requested Mr. Kirkland to provide staff with a mission statement for the Nevada Highway Patrol and Nevada Division of Investigations. He also asked for a list of grant disbursements for the Office of Traffic Safety and the Burn Grant Program. Mr. Kirkland replied all of the requests were in the expanded budget narratives and would be provided.
With no further business before the committee, Chairman Arberry adjourned the meeting at 11:12 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Cindy Clampitt
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblyman Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman
DATE: