MINUTES OF THE

SENATE Committee on Finance

 

Seventy-First Session

May 26, 2001

 

 

The Senate Committee on Financewas called to order by Chairman William J. Raggio at 8:19 a.m., on Saturday, May 26, 2001, in Room 2134 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Agenda.  Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.  All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman

Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman

Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen

Senator Bob Coffin

Senator Bernice Mathews

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

Senator William R. O’Donnell (Excused)

Senator Joseph M. Neal Jr. (Excused)

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

Assemblywoman Vonne S. Chowning, Clark County Assembly District Number 28

Assemblyman Richard D. Perkins, Clark County Assembly District Number 23

Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, Washoe County Assembly District Number 27

Assemblywoman Bonnie L. Parnell, Assembly District Number 40

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Gary L. Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst

Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst

Jennifer Ruedy, Committee Secretary

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Daryl E. Capurro, Lobbyist, Nevada Motor Transport Association

Wm. Gary Crews, CPA, Legislative Auditor, Audit Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau

Daniel G. Miles, Vice Chancellor, Finance and Administration, System Administration Office, University and Community College System of Nevada

Paula Berkley, Lobbyist, EduCare, Community Living Corporation

Brian L. Lahren, Lobbyist, Washoe Association for Retarded Citizens Inc.

Don Hataway, Deputy Director, Budget Division, Department of Administration

Charles Duarte, Medicaid Administrator, Division of Health Care Financing and Policy, Department of Human Resources

Bob Gagnier, Lobbyist, State of Nevada Employees Association (SNEA)

Jeanne Greene, Director, Department of Personnel

Tom Tatro, Fiscal Manager, Management Services and Programs Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety

Chuck Abbott, Management Analyst, Office of Executive Director for Veterans’ Services, Office of Veterans’ Services

Martin Bibb, Lobbyist, Retired Public Employees of Nevada

Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Nevada Highway Patrol Association

Freeman K. Johnson, Assistant Director, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Joe Crowley, Lobbyist, University and Community College System of Nevada

Dr. Jane A. Nichols, Chancellor, System Administration Office, University and Community College System of Nevada

 

 

Senator Raggio opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 641.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 641:  Makes various changes to Multistate Highway Transportation Agreement. (BDR 43-1330)

 

Daryl E. Capurro, Lobbyist, Nevada Motor Transport Association, explained A.B. 641 amends a statute enacted in 1975 that entered Nevada, along with ten other states, into a reciprocal statutory agreement called the Multistate Highway Transportation Agreement (MHTA).  He noted the original eleven members were all western states.  He said the purpose of MHTA is to foster cooperation in establishing uniform standards regarding a variety of highway related issues, principally commercial vehicle issues.  He stated the alliance had been unchanged from its inception until about 2 years ago when MHTA Chairman Mack Cole, who is a state senator in Montana, requested the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) review the governance documents and other related items to identify differences in the various state statutes that had been enacted.

 

Mr. Capurro articulated NCSL conducted a yearlong study and ultimately recommended that all states in the alliance need to modify the language of their individual statutes to ensure uniformity.  He said A.B. 641 proposes language to ensure Nevada’s statute complies with the recommended language changes.  He stated that despite the recommended language being distributed late in the year, seven of the states have already passed the necessary legislation this year, and Nevada will be the eighth if this bill is approved.  He noted the recommended language changes arrived in Washington too late for Washington to deal with it this year.  He added Idaho passed the changes nearly unanimously in the Assembly before it was ensnarled in procedural matters in the Senate.  He said Idaho was unable to act on the bill before the end of its legislative session, but he has been assured it will be addressed again in Idaho during the next session.  He commented California has also indicated interest in rejoining the compact.

 

Senator Raggio asked Mr. Capurro to clarify the objective of Article V of the bill.

 

Mr. Capurro prefaced his response by pointing out the agreement was adopted in 1975.  He explained the NCSL found some language to be superfluous and obsolete, so the language will be deleted.  He said new language is proposed that “sets forth the cooperating committee as the designated representatives from all participating jurisdictions.”  He said in 1975 the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) Director was named as the representative for Nevada.  He said most other states had legislators sitting as the participating members.  He said the participation by Nevada in the alliance has been “spotty.”  He explained Nevada has paid full dues some years and partial dues in other years.  He added the Nevada representative has attended some meetings and not others.  He noted one of the most significant recommendations from NCSL was that there should be two legislators on the cooperating committee instead of one.

 

Senator Raggio stated Mr. Capurro appeared to be discussing Article XI instead of Article V.  He asked whether the proposed language in Article V regarding “combination of vehicles” would change anything presently in existence in Nevada.

 

Mr. Capurro responded it would not change anything.  He pointed out the language to be deleted from line 48 of page 4 to line 11 of page 5 is obsolete language that NCSL recommended for deletion.  He said the proposed language would be a substitution for the obsolete language being deleted.  He indicated the proposed language would not change anything regarding size or weight in Nevada.  He said there is nothing in the compact that would change size and weight guidelines in Nevada; it would require specific legislation.  Nor does it affect taxes or environmental issues, he added.

 

Senator Raggio inquired about the goal of A.B. 641.

 

Mr. Capurro responded:

 

There may be recommendations coming from MHTA for uniform transportation laws in the West, and regulations that satisfy regional and economic requirements as well as perhaps studies on the efficiency of operations in the West.  They would also be touching on environmental issues, safety issues, and one of the big things that we are involved in now is intelligent transportation systems.  That is the use of electronic credentialing for commercial vehicles throughout.  Actually that is a national program.

 

Senator Raggio questioned whether this would limit the state in enacting laws that might be contrary to MHTA. 

 

Mr. Capurro responded MHTA recommends actions, but there is no requirement the state must adopt those recommendations.  He said historically the standards MHTA has adopted are the same standards that the Western Association of State Transportation Officials has adopted for use as uniform standards.

 

Senator Raggio inquired about the purpose of the requested appropriation in the amount of $7,500 in each year of the biennium, which is to be appropriated from the state highway fund.

 

Mr. Capurro replied annual dues for MHTA are $5,000.  He said the remainder of the funds requested would be for travel expenses for the two legislators that are currently being named as the representatives to the coordinating committee.

 

Senator Raggio asked whether Assemblywoman Vonne S. Chowning, Clark County Assembly District Number 28, would like to comment on A.B. 641.

 

Mrs. Chowning said she spoke with State Senator Mack Cole of Montana, Jim Reed of NCSL, and Don E. Bush, Utah State Representative, regarding the benefit of membership in MHTA.  She noted all three of them were very supportive of MHTA.  She said MHTA is “a research think tank solely regarding transportation issues.”  She noted the following western states belong to MHTA:  Colorado, Utah, Montana, New Mexico, Washington, Arizona, California, Nevada, Wyoming, and Oregon.  She said she believes Nevada will benefit from being able to work with the research staff and the representatives from the other western states on issues such as “CANAMEX,” the highway from Canada to Mexico, and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that directly affect our state laws.  She stated her support of the bill. 

 

Mrs. Chowning stated as the Chairperson of the Assembly Committee on Transportation, either she could attend the seminars or a designee such as another legislator or representative from NDOT could attend the seminars.  She explained she withheld her support for the measure until she was able to speak directly with the other representatives.  She said after hearing them attest to the benefit of membership in MHTA for their states, she supports A.B. 641.  She offered to answer any questions the committee might have.

 

Mr. Capurro said if A.B. 641 were to fail, Nevada would still be in the compact, but the statute language would not be uniform with the other states.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked how many states presently belong.

 

Mr. Capurro replied that ten states belong, and California is the only western state that does not belong to the compact.  He explained California belonged to MHTA for many years, and California has indicated it would like to restore its membership soon.

 

Senator Jacobsen questioned how often the representatives meet.

 

Mr. Capurro responded the bylaws of MHTA require at least one meeting each year, and they have been meeting twice a year.

 

Senator Raggio commented there should be a provision for reversion of the state highway funds if the bill is passed.  He closed the hearing on A.B. 641.  He opened the hearing on A.B. 26.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 26:  Requires legislative auditor to conduct audit of University and Community College System of Nevada and Board of Regents of University of Nevada. (BDR S-370)

 

Assemblyman Richard D. Perkins, Clark County Assembly District Number 23, stated an audit of the University and Community College System of Nevada (UCCSN) and Board of Regents of University of Nevada was last conducted in 1996.  He said the 1996 audit included an examination of methods used by the Board of Regents of University of Nevada and UCCSN to control its budgets and expenditures; it included budgetary activities in effect since FY 1992.  He pointed out the legislative audit report contained ten recommendations for the Board of Regents of University of Nevada and UCCSN, of which only four were fully accepted by the system.  He added three were partially accepted and three were rejected. 

 

Mr. Perkins said the 1996 audit report determined that, although the Nevada Constitution requires the Board of Regents of University of Nevada to control and manage the financial affairs of the UCCSN, most of this responsibility had been delegated to the seven institutions.  He explained because responsibility had been delegated, the seven institutions developed seven different methods to manage and control the expenditure of funds.  He noted that according to the audit, the different methods included a number of inconsistent procedures and practices, many of which were ineffective.  Furthermore, he stated, the lack of strong system-wide management controls diminished the Board of Regents’ oversight, reduced accountability, and required the use of additional resources.  He articulated, “The Board of Regents has a constitutional responsibility to properly manage the public funds that have been entrusted to it.”  He pointed out the audit suggested the establishment of strong system-wide management controls should be a priority. 

 

Mr. Perkins stated a great deal of information vital to the audit was withheld by the system and its institutions, such as much of the information needed to properly oversee the financial operations of the system, and oftentimes, basic financial and budgetary information provided to the auditors was incomplete and inaccurate.  He said the audit revealed that when the Board of Regents approves the operating and self-supporting budgets, it is reviewing and approving only about 80 percent of the UCCSN system revenues and related expenditures.  Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 396.380 requires the Board of Regents “to control the expenditures of all money for the support and maintenance of the system and all money received from any other source,” he pointed out.  He commented his recollection of the last audit, confirmed by reading the audit report, made it clear the system did not want the legislature to have particular information or to impose accountability measures upon UCCSN. 

 

Mr. Perkins pointed out the total approved budget for UCCSN for the 1995 to 1997 biennium was slightly over $600 million, whereas the total recommended budget for the 2001 to 2003 biennium is about $1 billion.  He said the UCCSN budget is continuing to grow, representing a funding increase of more than 70 percent from the time of the last legislative audit until now.  He commented this is a huge amount of money for which UCCSN should be accountable to the taxpayers.  He noted, “The UCCSN has a new chancellor who is committed to working with the Legislature to improve the system’s accountability.”  He commented that the Chancellor will need the information as much as the Legislature does.  He stated UCCSN is in the process of long-term strategic planning, which includes financing and fee-structure reforms among other issues. 

 

Mr. Perkins said there has been a great deal of discussion among elected Board of Regent members regarding the UCCSN budget.  In fact, he commented, many Regents have said that the presidents of Nevada’s publicly funded colleges and universities need to implement more efficient means of operation before requesting additional funding from the Legislature.  He said articles in newspapers several months ago quoted Board of Regent members stating there have been numerous inappropriate expenditures by the UCCSN.  He commented that when the issue of inventory controls was a problem, “one Regent stated there appeared to be a total failure in the area of inventory control at the community college level.” 

 

Mr. Perkins summarized that after the audit in 1996, recommendations were made with only partial acceptance by the system.  He said the system’s budget has increased considerably since that time with many pressing issues facing UCCSN.  He articulated this is an opportune time for an audit of the system because there is a new Chancellor who is proceeding with strategic planning, and various Board of Regent members have expressed concern with the way the money is being handled within the system.  He added Nevada has the fastest growing high school graduate population, which will be an increasing burden on a system that needs to be as efficient as possible. 

 

Senator Raggio stated he would like Wm. Gary Crews, CPA, Legislative Auditor, Audit Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, to discuss the necessity of the proposed audit, the capability of his staff to perform the audit, and the scope and cost of the audit.

 

Mr. Crews stated the last legislative audit of the UCCSN and Board of Regents of University of Nevada was approved by the 1995 Legislature and presented to the 1997 Legislature.

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether the 1995 audit encompassed the entire UCCSN. 

 

Mr. Crews responded the 1995 audit was an all-inclusive audit of UCCSN.  He said it primarily looked at the expenditure and budgetary controls of the complete system.  He commented the auditors did not anticipate the difficulties encountered during the audit because of the extent of decentralization of UCCSN.  He assured the committee the Audit Division has staff capable of performing this audit, including the supervisor who became very familiar with the system during the 1995 audit.  He noted the supervisor would likely be in charge of the audit this time if the Legislature decides to approve the measure.  He said many of the issues in the bill deal with basic financial and management controls of the UCCSN.  He reiterated the Audit Division is capable of performing the audit and reporting back to the 2003 Legislature.  He pointed out the bill provides $90,000 for the cost of the audit and that is similar to the provisions in the 1995 bill.

 

Senator Raggio stated the language in the bill currently states the audit must include “without limitation, an analysis” of certain things.  He said he anticipates the UCCSN may object to an audit “without limitation.”  He asked whether Mr. Crews had any suggestions to alleviate potential concerns of UCCSN regarding the broad scope of the language.

 

Mr. Crews responded the language in the bill is fairly standard within the audit bills, and the broad scope allows the Audit Division to pursue any problem issues to the fullest extent.  He said he did not anticipate any problems, but the language is necessary to perform a complete audit.

 

Senator Raggio asked what recommendations made as a result of the audit were not accepted by UCCSN.

 

Mr. Crews stated the first recommendation denied by UCCSN was to establish system-wide management controls, including appropriate organizational structure and reporting responsibilities, uniform policies and procedures, and consistent accounting policies.  He explained UCCSN partially accepted that recommendation.

 

Mr. Crews indicated the second recommendation that was partially accepted was a centralized oversight body for UCCSN.  He said the following recommendations were rejected:  to revise Board of Regent policy to require system administration approval for accounting transfers; to establish Board of Regent policy requiring system administration approval for budgetary revisions and Board of Regent approval for those exceeding a certain level; and to replace the exception reporting process with regular monitoring of budgets at the system administration level.  He commented the last recommendation that was partially accepted was to prepare year-end budgets to actual comparisons for all accounts.  He said the Audit Division generally recommended stronger oversight of the UCCSN administration.

 

Senator Raggio asked Daniel G. Miles, Vice Chancellor, Finance and Administration, System Administration Office, University and Community College System of Nevada, to describe any other audits generally performed of UCCSN and to discuss UCCSN’s reaction to this proposed audit.

 

Mr. Miles declared UCCSN would welcome the benefit from information the proposed audit would provide.  He said UCCSN is concerned about the phrase “without limitation” that is included about four times in the body of the bill.  He pointed out it is an “enormous burden” on UCCSN to comply with all auditors’ requests in a timely manner, and for this reason he hoped the scope of the audit might be narrowed to focus on the issues of concern listed on lines 5 through 13 of page one of the bill.  He commented he is uncertain what “without limitation” would entail.  He said UCCSN suggests the language “without limitation” should be amended.  He assured the committee UCCSN intends to fully cooperate with the audit.

 

Mr. Miles stated there have been some changes since the last audit, such as the replacement of the previous accounting system, College and University Financial System (CUFS), by Advantage Accounting.  He said he did not know whether Advantage Accounting would alleviate many of the problems identified by the last audit, but UCCSN did implement the new system in response to the audit.  He commented he believed many of the recommendations in the audit report were heeded by UCCSN.  He pointed out, for example, UCCSN generates a number of centralized reports now, and there are new policies on transfers and budget revisions.  He noted budgets with less than 1 half time position in the account were considered exempt from the budget review by the Board of Regents, and that was changed pursuant to the recommendation of the audit report.  He said the Board of Regents now must approve all budgets in excess of $25,000.

 

Mr. Miles commented there are some fundamental differences between the budgets of the UCCSN and other state agencies.  He articulated many of the separate budgets under UCCSN are equivalent to categories within other state agencies’ budgets because they are small pieces of one program.  He explained UCCSN separates these budgets primarily for accounting purposes.

 

Senator Coffin commented Mr. Crews stated he believed the language “without limitation” is necessary for a complete audit, but Mr. Miles objected to the language because an audit would be an enormous burden, especially without a narrow scope.  He stated it is similarly difficult to live through a legislative session because a lot of questions are asked and staff spends a great deal of time responding to those questions.  He said he believes many of those questions are useful to determine what went wrong between sessions and what was not handled properly during the previous session. 

 

Senator Coffin noted the language “without limitation” appears to be contradictory in the bill because the scope of the audit is specifically listed following that language.  He said it does not appear this audit will cover the scope and breadth that other agency audits cover such as “purchasing of goods.”  He suggested the language in the bill should be changed to delete “without limitation” and maintain a specific list of the items to be audited.  He added the second option would be to maintain the language “without limitation” and delete the specific list of items. 

 

Mr. Miles questioned whether the audit of “the generation and distribution of investment income” as specified in the bill would include donations.  He voiced concern the intent of the bill might include audits of donors.

 

Mr. Crews said he did not anticipate auditing foundations.

Mr. Miles distributed a handout with the suggested language for the scope of the audit, which deleted “without limitation” (Exhibit C).

 

Senator Coffin said he believes the donors should also be audited because they wield enormous influence on activities of UCCSN.

 

Mr. Miles said UCCSN is happy to provide its records regarding donations, but it did not want donors to be bothered with personal visits from the auditors.

 

Senator Coffin asked whether the overvaluation of gifts to UCCSN is a problem.

 

Mr. Miles responded there are Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules and regulations in place with which donors must comply, and the Board of Regents holds them accountable.  He said the IRS has been very aggressive in this area.

 

Senator Raggio inquired about any other audits performed of UCCSN on a regular basis.

 

Mr. Miles replied UCCSN is subjected to one external audit each year, and the audit report is readily available.  He indicated an audit report would be provided to the legislative auditor.  He noted during the course of the 18-month long audit proposed by the legislative auditor, UCCSN would also undergo two external audits.  He said the audit performed by external auditors is formally presented to the Board of Regents along with letters from management.  He said the audit is system wide.

 

Senator Raggio inquired who performed the last audit.  Mr. Miles responded Price Waterhouse Coopers conducted the last audit.

 

Senator Raggio asked whether Mr. Crews had a copy of the last audit.  Mr. Crews responded affirmatively.

 

Senator Coffin questioned why the press brought so many of the UCCSN’s problems to the attention of the public and the legislators rather than the external auditor.  He said he believes the audit should include “acquisition of materials or purchasing because those are not capital construction projects in our lingo.  And that is where we ran into some real problems.”

 

Mr. Miles replied UCCSN would not oppose the additional language.  He commented there have been changes made in inventory control regarding equipment that is now approved through policies of the Board of Regents.  He said the audit was in progress when he joined the UCCSN staff, so he was unable to respond to the question regarding the press.

 

Senator Coffin commented the Chancellor’s office has undergone nearly 100 percent staff change since that time.  He asked whether the language Mr. Miles suggested was sufficient, with some possible additions for Mr. Crews’ audit.

 

Mr. Crews stated “without limitation” would be unnecessary the last three times it is used in the bill, but it is necessary on line four of the first page.  He pointed out:

 

If you don’t have the “without limitation” clause applying to investment policies, does that preclude you from testing compliance with those investment policies or just evaluating those investment policies?  We need to have the ability to conduct tests and carry these issues out to the end, not have our hands tied.

 

Senator Jacobsen stated he was the Chairman of the Audit Subcommittee during the last audit of UCCSN.  He said the audit of UCCSN was the greatest concern to the subcommittee.  He pointed out the first audit of UCCSN received by the subcommittee was very upsetting to the subcommittee members, so they requested a second audit, which showed no improvement from the first audit.  He said the subcommittee members met with representatives of UCCSN on two separate occasions to discuss the findings of the audit.  He said the subcommittee members were cautioned not to destroy the image of UCCSN because of the potential affect on fundraising abilities and the public’s perception since UCCSN is publicly funded. 

 

Senator Jacobsen said he believed the parameters of the audit should be “set in concrete” prior to initiating the audit rather than allowing the scope of the audit to be determined as an individual might desire.  He commented UCCSN is very large, and it would be very difficult to “tie it together.”  He noted programs such as athletics and cooperative extension are part of numerous programs at UCCSN.  He said the “4-H Camp” at Lake Tahoe has always been one of his concerns.  He explained through his efforts and those of past state Senator Henry Berumen, the 4-H Camp was turned over to UCCSN, but later when there was no budget under the control of the UCCSN for the 4-H Camp, he and former state Senator Berumen were unable to help.  He expressed concern the Dreyfus Estate at Lake Tahoe might someday fare a similar lack of funding.

 

Senator Jacobsen pointed out one of the biggest failures of the legislative audits is there is little, if any, follow-up to the audit.  He stated Senator Ann O’Connell shares his concerns regarding follow-up on legislative audits.  He commented he spent 40 years in private industry and really “hated” auditors then.  He said he knows it is a contentious area, but it is necessary.  He said it is important to not damage the image of UCCSN, so the parameters of the audit should be clearly defined at the onset of the process.  He said he could relate from his own personal experience how frustrating it is to receive criticism from someone without any professional experience in the business they are auditing.

 

Mr. Miles stated UCCSN believes the state should pay the entire cost of the audit, not UCCSN.

 

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.B. 26.  He opened the hearing on S.B. 364.

 

SENATE BILL 364:  Establishes developmental services commission. (BDR 38-931)

 

Senator Raggio pointed out that, contrary to some public information indicating this committee had refused to hear S.B. 364, it was noticed and heard on April 18, 2001.

 

Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, Washoe County Assembly District Number 27, stated she and Senator Randolph J. Townsend work with Community Unity in Reno.  She explained Community Unity is a group of about 70 people from varied professional backgrounds that meet regularly to evaluate human services issues.  She said S.B. 364 evolved from Community Unity’s evaluation of a series of problems between the developmental services community and state and local governments.  She said the bill would establish a commission that would review and set rates.  She commented she hopes the commission would facilitate communication between community-based providers and the state to provide future recommendations that are mutually supported to avoid the contentious atmosphere that has existed in the past.  She acknowledged Senator Townsend was the primary sponsor of the bill, but he was unable to appear at the meeting. 

 

Senator Raggio asked who would address the effect of the commission’s recommendations and its impact on the state and the budget.

 

Senator Mathews stated she had a note from the previous hearing of this bill, that S.B. 364 was a companion bill to A.B. 513.  She questioned what the status of A.B. 513 was and whether the two bills might be combined.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 513:  Makes appropriation to Department of Human Resources for development of long-term strategic plan concerning health care needs of citizens of Nevada. (BDR S-1407)

 

Paula Berkley, Lobbyist, EduCare, Community Living Corporation, stated A.B. 513 provides for seven studies recommended by the Governor, one of which would be a rate study.  She said the rate study included in A.B. 513 would cost $500,000, but it would study 5,000 rates, not just rates related to developmental disabilities.  She said she believed previous testimony on S.B. 364 might have indicated the study proposed in S.B. 364 could be included in A.B. 513.  She articulated the supporters of S.B. 364 believe that after 6 years without rate changes, and little agreement on what the problem is, the special attention S.B. 364 would provide is necessary.

 

Brian L. Lahren, Lobbyist, Washoe Association for Retarded Citizens Inc., thanked Senator Raggio for his patience and for providing a second hearing for the bill.  He indicated he had clarified with the press that supporters of the bill had failed to attend the first hearing of the bill at no fault of the Legislature.  He also thanked Senator Rawson and Assemblywoman Leslie for their help regarding S.B. 364. 

 

Mr. Lahren said his organization believes the Department of Human Resources (DHR) proposed study of rates, the Strategic Plan for Developing Rates for Health Services, is flawed in its current form.  He said the DHR plan is not focused on enough critical issues in the developmental disabilities service system to be of use to the large pool of service providers whose current rate deficiencies have placed the state’s developmental disabilities service system at risk.  He explained the DHR plan to review 5,000 rates does not specify how tasks will be prioritized.  He said he believes the developmental disabilities service system is in crisis and the potential for a rate-based, class-action lawsuit similar to one currently being heard in California “looms on the horizon for Nevada” without immediate attention to these problems.  He pointed out the DHR’s planned rate study does not contemplate the involvement of the affected providers or its advocates or consumers in the process of reviewing the current reimbursement system.  He added S.B. 364 proposes to look at the reimbursement system rather than just a particular rate, such as Medicaid rates.  He stated, “The very experts with direct knowledge of how our system works are valued less than outside consultants in this case.”

 

Senator Raggio read Section 4 subsections (e) and (f) of S.B. 364.  He asked, “What is the intended effect of the Commission’s action?”

 

Mr. Lahren responded, “The key word is ‘recommended.’  We do not contemplate that the commission will in any way be able to control or force upon the state any particular rates.”  He explained the commission would provide an independent review as to what rates seem reasonable under the circumstances.  He said the commission would then report its findings to the Legislature prior to The Executive Budget process.

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether Community Unity Coalition currently reviews rates.  Ms. Leslie responded Community Unity Coalition looks at broader issues than rates, not rates specifically.  She suggested some of the people from the coalition might be good members for the proposed commission.

 

Senator Raggio commended the supporters of the bill on their intentions, and asked whether anyone could address the issue of locating funding for the commission.  Mr. Lahren responded that is the responsibility of the Executive and Legislative Branches of Nevada’s state government.

 

Senator Raggio asked whether the supporters of the bill intend to present the measure to the Executive and Legislative Branches and tell them “This is a state funded commission and how dare you not accept our recommendations.”  Mr. Lahren replied, “There is some reality to what you are saying.”

 

Senator Raggio stated providers would probably tell the commission what rates they would like to receive.

 

Mr. Lahren said the private-provider community is subsidizing the state by millions of dollars each year.  He stated, “We are glad to continue to do that.  We just have to have a fundamental rate established that will allow us to keep that private provider system that is so essential to the state’s economic efficiency.”

 

Ms. Berkley said this year the process has consisted of the state presenting one view for the developmentally disabled community and the providers presenting an opposing view.  She said both of them are doing their best with limited resources, but the two sides are not compromising to accomplish what needs to be done.  She explained the organization she represents, EduCare, is part of ResCare, Inc., which is the largest provider of developmental services in the nation.  She said her organization provides Medicaid services to numerous states, and it has a great deal of information and resources to offer the state.  She articulated that without this commission EduCare would not have the ability to participate in the rate process from the beginning to the end.  She explained the state typically requests assistance from her organization in the beginning of the process only.

 

Ms. Berkley said if the Legislature forced her organization to choose between S.B. 364 and S.B. 486, her organization would choose S.B. 364, which would be less expensive for the state.  She provided a revised budget for S.B. 364 and S.B. 486 (Exhibit D).

 

Ms. Leslie pointed out the membership of the proposed commission is outlined on page two of the bill, and the membership would include businesspeople, providers, and several representatives of the state.

 

Charles Duarte, Medicaid Administrator, Division of Health Care Financing and Policy, Department of Human Resources, summarized his prepared statement (Exhibit E).  He stated his division agrees reasonable rate methodologies should be developed that are cost-effective and reflect the cost of services.  He said the division also agrees standardized assessment tools should be developed and used in a proper fashion.  Furthermore, he added, the division believes procedures for the design of effective health care plans, based on medical necessity, need to be utilized and it is the Medicaid agency’s responsibility to oversee this Medicaid program.  He opined this bill underestimates the complexity of dealing with Medicaid services for individuals with developmental disabilities. 

 

Mr. Duarte commented many of the activities of the commission, as proposed in S.B. 364, duplicate many of the functions provided by the Executive Branch agencies.  He pointed out the bill proposes to oversee and assist in the development of standardized assessment tools, the allocation of available resources, and the schedule of timely review of cases, which would require additional staff for the committee and for implementing recommended policies.  He explained the committee would require a significant amount of research that would be duplicative of work currently performed by the Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services and the Nevada Medicaid Office.  He said federal and state laws already address the development and timing of individual service plans for clients.  He pointed out the policies developed by the commission would create additional staffing demands for state agencies.  He said the bill proposes the commission would facilitate the viability of providers that provide services to individuals with developmental disabilities.  He opined facilitating the viability of businesses is difficult. 

 

Mr. Duarte stated, “Although payment rates are an important factor, we agree with that, like any other business, the providers are affected by the abilities of their managers to manage their operations and financial matters.”  He said the commission would establish rates for services provided to persons with developmental disabilities who are eligible for Medicaid, which he believes is too broad.  He stated advocates have indicated interest in two specific types of rates:  supportive living arrangements and training centers.  He explained individuals with developmental disabilities receive a range of medical services across a continuum of health care similar to other Medicaid recipients.  He stated this study would encompass literally thousands of different rates and numerous methodologies, creating an enormous task for the commission. 

 

Mr. Duarte pointed out the establishment of specific rates for individuals with developmental disabilities potentially violates federal Medicaid law regarding the comparability of services to all other Medicaid beneficiaries.  He said it could create equal protection issues for individuals with disabilities.  He noted the department had proposed a rate study, as Mr. Lahren indicated, as a part of the comprehensive health care strategic plan, which would not be limited to individuals with developmental disabilities.  He said the study proposed by the department would focus on service areas where standardized methodologies are most needed, including supported living arrangements and training centers.  He said the study would focus on rates and service categories where different rates exist for the same services across departments and divisions.  He stated the methodologies developed would be ongoing, thereby enabling policy makers and providers to plan and develop quality services appropriate to the care of Medicaid clients.  Finally, he summarized, the bill includes an appropriation of $200,000, not included in The Executive Budget.

 

Senator Rawson asked whether there would be sufficient funding in the budget to complete the rate study proposed by the Department of Human Resources as part of its Comprehensive Health Care Strategic Plan.

 

Mr. Duarte responded affirmatively.  He explained the rate study proposed by the Department of Human Resources includes enough funding and it would be matched by federal Medicaid funding to the extent possible to evaluate specific types of rates including those of concern in S.B. 364.

 

Senator Rawson questioned whether that study had commenced.  Mr. Duarte responded it had not.

 

Senator Mathews asked whether the Department of Human Resources study Mr. Duarte referred to is part of A.B. 513.  Mr. Duarte responded affirmatively.

 

Senator Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 364 and opened the hearing on A.B. 285.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 285:  Provides for appeal of decision of appointing authority regarding use of catastrophic leave by state employee. (BDR 23-438)

 

Assemblywoman Bonnie L. Parnell, Assembly District Number 40, stated A.B. 285 would create a five-member committee to hear appeals to decisions made by appointing authorities.  She said the five committee members will consist of three management representatives and two labor representatives all appointed by the Governor.  She said the intent of the bill is to provide consistency in granting catastrophic leave.  She pointed out state employees have voiced concern over the current process of leave decisions taking place within each individual department, which might result in varying interpretations between departments.  She commented she has introduced A.B. 285 on behalf of the State of Nevada Employees Association.

 

Bob Gagnier, Lobbyist, State of Nevada Employees Association (SNEA), explained that SNEA requested the bill to provide consistency within state government concerning the use of catastrophic leave.  State employees donate their excess leave for the benefit of other state employees who have been granted catastrophic leave, he explained.  He said the current criteria to qualify for catastrophic leave is included in Section 5 of the bill, which applies to either the employee or a member of the employee’s immediate family who has a serious illness or accident that is life threatening or will require a lengthy convalescence.  He stated catastrophic leave is also permitted in the event of a death in the employee’s immediate family.  He said “life threatening” is a determination made by a physician attending the ailing person, and “lengthy convalescence” is defined within the regulations.

 

Mr. Gagnier articulated there are specific limitations regarding the amount of time that can be donated and the amount of catastrophic leave that can be used.  He said he believes this is “a very good program.”  He pointed out when Nevada enacted this legislation it was one of only two states in the nation to adopt this type of legislation, but similar programs have now been enacted throughout the nation.  He said he believes state agencies inconsistently apply the criteria “lengthy convalescence” and particularly “life threatening.”  He said when the original bill was processed, the denial of catastrophic leave was determined not to be eligible for appeal under the state’s grievance procedure.  He noted it has been suggested a provision to allow appeals might solve existing problems.  He said he believes the appeal process, which lasts from 60 days to 6 months, is too long to offer any relief because the need for the catastrophic leave may have passed by the end of the appeal process.  He proposed a simple, short process to determine whether an employee would qualify for catastrophic leave.

 

Mr. Gagnier articulated that state records indicate few catastrophic leave requests have been denied, but he said he believes the state records are misleading because many state employees are discouraged from ever officially applying for catastrophic leave.  He directed attention to the fiscal note (Exhibit F) that indicates the bill would cost $20,719.80 in each year of the biennium.

 

Senator Raggio stated staff indicated the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means did not address the fiscal note.  Mr. Gagnier stated Jeanne Greene, Director, Department of Personnel, testified to the fiscal note before the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means, but he acknowledged the fiscal note was not in the bill books.

 

Mr. Gagnier voiced agreement with the fiscal note prepared by the Department of Personnel for the first fiscal year, but commented he would anticipate a decrease in costs for the second fiscal year.  He noted savings would result if the committee met by teleconference.  He said the proposed committee should establish “very clear guidelines on what should be approved and what should not be approved.”  He pointed out the bill was approved unanimously by Assembly Committees on Ways and Means and on Government Affairs.

 

Jeanne Greene, Director, Department of Personnel, stated during the 2000 calendar year there were 217 requests for catastrophic leave, of which 195 requests were approved.  She noted that meant approximately 90 percent of the requests were approved. She commented 22 requests were denied for the following reasons:  2 employees left state service prior to action on their requests, 2 employees did not receive sufficient donated time from fellow employees, 1 employee submitted the request after returning to work, and 17 employees did not meet the qualifying conditions of serious illness or accident that is life threatening or would require a lengthy convalescence.

 

Senator Raggio pointed out supporters of the bill have commented there is no uniformity in the decisions regarding qualifying conditions.

 

Ms. Greene said, “Life threatening is defined in the statute.  And then lengthy convalescence is that they would have to be off work ten weeks.  So there is some definition.”

 

Senator Raggio asked Mr. Gagnier to respond to the statement that further definition would not be necessary.

 

Mr. Gagnier responded his organization believes the statistics available from the Department of Personnel are not reflective of all issues, only official issues.  Furthermore, he stated there is a difference of opinions within the agencies as to what constitutes “life threatening.”  He said in the past a physician has termed an employee’s condition as “life threatening,” but the director of the employee’s department disagreed.

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether Ms. Green was aware of any such instances.  Ms. Green replied she was not aware of any instance where a department director disagreed with an employee’s physician.

 

Ms. Green commented the 195 employees who received catastrophic leave during 2000 were granted a combined leave of 49,386 hours, which was worth over $700,000.  Senator Raggio pointed out the leave was all donated from other employees.  Ms. Green agreed.

Senator Mathews commented that dollar value is significant only to the employees, not to the state.  Ms. Green responded employees who receive catastrophic leave would otherwise be forced to take leave without pay.

 

Senator Mathews noted the state would save money if the employees did not receive catastrophic leave.  Ms. Green explained, “There is a possibility.  The employees are paid out some of their sick leave when they retire or leave state service, so this would be deducted from their time when they leave state service.”

 

Mr. Gagnier articulated, “Actually, there is a benefit to the state because people with a higher hourly [wage] rate are donating time to people with a lower hourly [wage] rate.”

 

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.B. 285, and opened the hearing on A.B. 234.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 234:  Makes supplemental appropriations to Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety for shortfalls in budgets of Division of Parole and Probation, Field Services, Central Services, Parole Board, Division of Compliance Enforcement and Hearings Office. (BDR S-1258)

 

Tom Tatro, Fiscal Manager, Management Services and Programs Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, stated A.B. 234 originally requested $2.1 million from the Highway Fund to fund the shortfall created by the approval from Interim Finance Committee (IFC) on February 2, 2000, for 57 new positions.  He explained his office reviewed the balances available within all of the budget accounts of the motor vehicle branch of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS).  The department projected expenditures for the balance of the fiscal year and determined the requested amount could be reduced to $1.1 million. 

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether those figures were provided to the committee.

 

Gary L. Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB), responded he provided the committee with a one-page handout (Exhibit G) prepared by the division for the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means hearing of the bill, which reflects the amount in the amended bill.

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether the appropriation could be reduced any further.  Mr. Tatro stated the First Reprint of A.B. 234 includes the reduced appropriation amount. 

 

Senator Raggio asked what the appropriation would include.  Mr. Tatro responded, “A payroll claim and another retirement for the two General Funded budgets.  The parole board had a retirement and a number of incidents that occurred that caused a shortfall.“

 

Senator Raggio directed attention to Section 2 of the bill, which provides $830,000 for new positions in Field Services. 

 

Mr. Tatro commented the new positions approved at the IFC meeting on February 2, 2000, are to be funded by the appropriations included in Sections 2 and 3 of the bill.

 

Senator Raggio noted Section 3 provides a $230,000 appropriation for new positions in Central Services.  Mr. Tatro explained Central Services received seven new positions.

 

Senator Raggio directed attention to Section 5, which provides a $62,000 appropriation to fund the shortfall created by a decrease in fingerprint revenues.

 

Mr. Tatro said the fingerprint revenues go directly into the Highway Fund.  He explained more people became car salesmen than previously anticipated when the budget was drafted.

 

Senator Raggio asked whether LCB staff had verified the amounts in the bill.  Mr. Ghiggeri responded the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means approved the bill, but staff would like to review Section 5 again based on Mr. Tatro’s comments regarding the applicability of fingerprint revenues.

 

Mr. Tatro explained that Section 5 refers to fingerprint revenues.  He said the fingerprinting cost is incurred in this budget, but the revenues are collected through the Highway Fund from individuals who become car salesmen.

 

Senator Raggio pointed out Section 5 appropriates funds from the state Highway Fund “for a shortfall caused by a decrease in fingerprint revenues and by the payment of terminal leave.”  Mr. Tatro explained it is actually an increase in fingerprint expenses not a decrease in fingerprint revenues.

 

Senator Raggio stated staff would correct the language.  He closed the hearing on A.B. 234, and opened the hearing on A.B. 278.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 278:  Authorizes Office of Veterans’ Services to accept gifts and grants for support of World War II Memorial Campaign. (BDR S-247)

 

Chuck Abbott, Management Analyst, Office of Executive Director for Veterans’ Services, Office of Veterans’ Services, explained the First Reprint of A.B. 278, which is now under consideration, eliminated the $100,000 appropriation originally included in the bill to support the World War II Memorial Monument in Washington, D.C.  He said $100,000 would have required about five cents from every citizen of Nevada, which is less than the amount of sales tax revenue generated from the purchase of a single can of soda at a convenience store.  He pointed out the monument is intended to honor the World War II veterans who served for the United States of America.  He said the bill has been amended to accept gifts and donations in lieu of a General Fund appropriation.

 

Senator Raggio opined a significant amount of money was raised in Reno to be donated on behalf of the state of Nevada for the World War II Memorial Monument.  He explained the Rusty Humphries radio program raised a significant amount of money already that is waiting to be allocated.

 

Mr. Abbott commented he believed the Rusty Humphries radio program raised between $40,000 and $60,000, but the Office of Veterans’ Services had not been in direct contact with any representative of the Rusty Humphries radio program.  Senator Raggio suggested Mr. Abbott contact Mr. Humphries directly if the bill is approved.  Mr. Abbott agreed he would contact Mr. Humphries if the bill is approved.

 

Senator Raggio reiterated significant funds have already been donated for this purpose, and it appears the use of state funds is unnecessary.

 

Senator Jacobsen commented one of the classes at an elementary school in Douglas County raised over one hundred dollars for the World War II Memorial Monument, but the class had a difficult time determining the proper party that should receive its donation.  He said he believed the class ultimately delivered the funds to the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW).

 

Mr. Abbott reported Charles W. Fulkerson, Executive Director, Office of Veterans’ Services, has the check waiting for the issue to be resolved before mailing it to the World War II Memorial Campaign.

 

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.B. 278 and opened the hearing on A.B. 558.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 558:  Establishes for next biennium amount to be paid by this state for group insurance for certain public employees, public officers and retired public employees. (BDR S-1437)

 

Don Hataway, Deputy Director, Budget Division, Department of Administration, stated the Second Reprint of A.B. 558 is the bill currently under consideration.  He explained the First Reprint of the bill would have returned the rates in FY 2002 to the rates that currently exist, which would have cost an additional $3.9 million.  He noted $2.2 million of that $3.9 million would have been General Fund.  He stated the Budget Division recommends the Second Reprint of the bill.

 

Martin Bibb, Lobbyist, Retired Public Employees of Nevada, stated his organization supports the Second Reprint of A.B. 558.  He said his organization understands the plan is recovering from the financial insolvency that occurred a couple of years ago.  He pointed out that required a $25 million appropriation from General Fund approved by the Legislature 2 years ago to maintain the plan.  He said when rates were set last fall, of the three options in the program, retirees supported the rate that would have returned the largest amount to financial reserves in consideration of the plan’s recent financial troubles even though it would require higher rates for those in the plan.  He noted studies indicated there was double-digit inflation in the medical component, so retirees supported the higher rate when the bill was amended previously.  He said the higher rate would have provided 3 percent more funding to the plan, and retirees are disappointed that it is not part of the current reprint of the bill.  He said retirees acknowledge the limited financial situation the state is currently facing and support the current version of the bill.

 

Senator Raggio acknowledged Mr. Bibb’s comments were understandable, but stated it is too late to pursue further changes of the bill with the Assembly.  Mr. Bibb agreed that would be unwise.

 

Bob Gagnier, Lobbyist, State of Nevada Employees Association (SNEA), indicated his support of the Second Reprint of A.B. 558.

 

Gary H. Wolff, Lobbyist, Nevada Highway Patrol Association, offered his support of the Second Reprint of A.B. 558.

 

Senator Raggio readdressed A.B. 285.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 285:  Provides for appeal of decision of appointing authority regarding use of catastrophic leave by state employee. (BDR 23-438)

 

Freeman K. Johnson, Assistant Director, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, stated he would like to address the issue of catastrophic leave on behalf of his department.  He said, “Catastrophic leave is rather vague and ill-defined.”  He said the two conditions that exist in statute are “life threatening,” which is generally satisfied by a statement from the employee’s physician, and a lengthy convalescence of at least ten weeks.  He commented some employees believe catastrophic leave is their right and should be available upon request. 

 

Mr. Johnson explained the statute provides catastrophic leave may be granted at the discretion of the appointing authority if the qualifying conditions have been met.  He said the appointing authority of the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources convened a catastrophic leave committee, on which he serves.  He stated the committee evaluates documentation presented by the employee as well as supportive documentation from the employee’s physician as to the life-threatening nature of the illness.  He noted the committee has not denied any request for catastrophic leave where the eligibility conditions have been satisfied. 

 

Mr. Johnson articulated the catastrophic leave program, by statute, is at the sole discretion of the appointing authority and not subject to the grievance procedure or judicial review.  He noted it is not funded by the General Fund, but by donations from other employees within the department.  He pointed out he, the director of the department, and all division administrators donate the maximum leave allowed, 120 hours each year, in case an employee needs it.  He added many of the field positions are high-risk within the Division of Forestry and the Division of Wildlife.

 

Mr. Johnson said he believes the establishment of another committee to review the decisions of another committee is illogical, bad public policy, and counter to efforts to streamline government.  “It creates another layer of bureaucracy,” he added.  He pointed out the additional committee would create an appellate procedure for an issue that was conceived to be discretionary based on the benevolence of the employees of the departments.  He stated the division or department manager should review catastrophic leave requests and act upon those requests in accordance with the provisions of the catastrophic leave statute, as is the current practice.  He pointed out the Department of Personnel indicated over 90 percent of the catastrophic leave requests were approved in 2000, and those that were denied were well justified by Ms. Green.  He encouraged the committee not to approve the bill because he said it is unnecessary.

 

Senator Jacobsen commented he was surprised to hear Ms. Green state there were 217 requests for catastrophic leave during 2000.  He asked how many employees within the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources applied for catastrophic leave during 2000 and what the total number of employees is in the department.

 

Mr. Johnson replied one employee requested catastrophic leave during 2000 because of a diagnosis of Hodgkins Disease, and the employee was granted leave.  He said 18 employees in the department have requested and received catastrophic leave since 1992, which resulted in the use of 4,485 hours of catastrophic leave.  He said the cost of the 4,485 hours was $60,192.  He pointed out the committee has not denied any request at least since 1992.

 

Mr. Johnson stated many employees believe they can use catastrophic leave to supplant their income until they are able to draw disability retirement or regular retirement without any intention of returning to work.  He said this is contrary to the definition of a leave of absence because a leave of absence implies there is intent to return.

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether anyone else would like to address A.B. 285, to which no one responded.  He closed the hearing on A.B. 285 and reopened the hearing on A.B. 26.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 26:  Requires legislative auditor to conduct audit of University and Community College System of Nevada and Board of Regents of University of Nevada. (BDR S-370)

 

Joe Crowley, Lobbyist, University and Community College System of Nevada, asserted the last legislative audit of UCCSN was a helpful experience.  He stated his support of the language in the amendment proposed by Mr. Miles.  He said, “Virtually all of the recommendations of the previous audit were accepted by the system and implemented.”  He pointed out the fundamental issue that remains unresolved from the last audit is that the legislative auditors are accustomed to organizational structure common to state agencies, but that structure is contrary to how UCCSN believes it should be organized.  He noted the legislative auditors’ recommendations from the last audit focused heavily on centralization.  He said he believes centralization is appropriate only at the policy level.  He commented that to accomplish the kind of centralization the legislative auditors suggested would have required a completely different understanding of the way the system operates, and a lot of money for additional staff and space, “probably an additional building or two to house that staff at the Chancellor’s level.” 

 

Mr. Crowley said he hopes at the onset of this audit there will be a discussion between the auditors and UCCSN to attempt to arrive at some understanding “why we are different and why, from the point of view of central control, the most fundamental issue would be policy and not adding a bunch of staff.”  He pointed out UCCSN’s internal auditors perform 50 or more audits of the institutions each year.  He noted every foundation is the subject of an external audit, and the athletic programs have to be audited every year pursuant to National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) regulations.  He added this proposed audit of UCCSN will cost in excess of the $90,000 suggested.  He said, “There will probably be hundreds of thousands of dollars in staff time spent in dealing with the audit, and we don’t resist that, but I just wanted you to know this is a very expensive proposition.”

 

Dr. Jane A. Nichols, Chancellor, System Administration Office, University and Community College System of Nevada, said she fears the result of the proposed audit will be another recommendation “to add a very large bureaucracy on top of the university system that is quite expensive and not necessary.”

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether Dr. Nichols was referring to the centralization recommendation.

 

Dr. Nichols confirmed she was referring to the centralization issue.  She said she believes centralization for UCCSN, as it is with all other higher education systems, should provide for the adoption of good policy and consistent adaptation of those policies throughout the campuses.  She noted this consistency could be achieved without transferring all of the comptroller functions to the system level.  She said UCCSN would like all reports to the legislative commission from the auditor to include the following:  a report of all audit activities already conducted by UCCSN with an examination of them; an estimate of the fiscal cost to carry out the recommendations of the audit; a comparison with the manner in which other states accomplish “what is intended for higher education in Nevada;” and an acknowledgment of the changes the UCCSN has implemented and continues to implement since the last audit.  She concluded, “I think with that protection built into this audit, we certainly would feel that we can partner with the audit division and come back with a product you will be happy with.”

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether Dr. Nichols made the suggestions to the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means.

 

Dr. Nichols responded UCCSN had not made the suggestions previously because it was attempting to identify the core of the issue.  She said UCCSN does not want to receive another recommendation to centralize all functions, and it attested to that before the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means without the specific suggestions she offered the Senate Committee on Finance.

 

Senator Raggio asked whether the UCCSN would like to propose an amendment incorporating Dr. Nichols’ suggestions.  Dr. Nichols responded the UCCSN has been unable to determine language for the bill that would limit the recommendation other than including her earlier suggestions.

 

Senator Raggio indicated the UCCSN should have an amendment drafted as soon as possible.  Dr. Nichols responded she and her staff would provide the amendment to the committee later in the day.

 

Senator Raggio closed the hearing on A.B. 26.  He indicated he would like to readdress several bills heard earlier in the meeting.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 234:  Makes supplemental appropriations to Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety for shortfalls in budgets of Division of Parole and Probation, Field Services, Central Services, Parole Board, Division of Compliance Enforcement and Hearings Office. (BDR S-1258)

 

Senator Raggio indicated he would like to process A.B. 234 unless there were objections from the committee.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri stated that pursuant to Mr. Tatro’s testimony earlier in the meeting, Section 5 of A.B. 234 should indicate “an increase in fingerprint expenses” instead of “caused by a decrease in fingerprint revenues.”

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO AMEND A.B. 234 AS INDICATED BY STAFF AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 558:  Establishes for next biennium amount to be paid by this state for group insurance for certain public employees, public officers and retired public employees. (BDR S-1437)

 

SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 558.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 641:  Makes various changes to Multistate Highway Transportation Agreement. (BDR 43-1330)

 

Mr. Ghiggeri pointed out at the end of A.B. 641 in Section 3 there is an appropriation of $7,500 in each year of the biennium with no provision for a reversion of any unspent funding.

 

SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND A.B. 641 BY ADDING LANGUAGE TO PROVIDE FOR A REVERSION OF ANY UNSPENT FUNDING AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 259:  Requires department of human resources to pay rural hospitals for certain costs incurred by rural hospitals in providing certain services to Medicaid patients. (BDR 38-223)

 

Senator Raggio stated S.B. 259 was heard on March 21, 2001.

 

Senator Rawson indicated he had received a letter requesting the withdrawal of the bill (Exhibit H).  He provided copies of the letter, dated May 22, 2001, to the committee.

 

Senator Raggio noted the letter was signed by Robin Keith, Lobbyist, Nevada Rural Hospital Project Foundation.  He said the letter indicates the Division of Health Care Financing and Policy and the Nevada Rural Hospital Project have developed a constructive working relationship, and S.B. 259 is no longer needed.  He said the letter indicates the two parties agreed that hospital-based beds will remain on a cost basis and the routine service cost limit will be deleted from the state plan.  He added the letter further indicates the two parties are working out another type of cap on costs intended to prevent hospitals from unrestrained cost increases.

 

SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE S.B. 259.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

Mr. Ghiggeri provided a handout (Exhibit I) that included several memoranda regarding an anticipated $6,000 shortfall in the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) budget for FY 2001.  He said the shortfall would occur in the personnel category of the WICHE budget because of a reclassification adjustment.  He stated this information was being presented to the committee in the event the committee decided to request a bill draft for a supplemental appropriation to provide an additional $6,000 to WICHE.

 

Senator Raggio asked whether Mr. Hataway was in agreement with a bill draft request for this purpose.

 

Mr. Hataway responded the Budget Division was in agreement with a potential supplemental appropriation of $6,000 to WICHE.  He explained the situation began in FY 2000, but a vacant position in the budget allowed WICHE to balance its budget that year.  He noted all three positions within WICHE’s budget account were occupied throughout FY 2001, and the Budget Division overlooked the additional need for salary funding until recently.  He said WICHE received $2,800 in salary adjustment funds from the Board of Examiners’ fund, but the additional $6,000 would still be necessary.

 

Senator Raggio indicated he would accept a motion to request a bill draft request for the supplemental appropriation.

 

SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO REQUEST A BILL DRAFT REQUEST FOR A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,000 FOR WICHE.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

Senator Raggio indicated the committee would be receiving an increasing number of “one-shot” appropriation bills at this point in the session.  He said the committee has historically made numerous “one-shot” appropriations to nonprofit organizations without any means of tracking the use of those funds.  He proposed to include language in the “one-shot” appropriation bill that would require all nonprofit organizations to provide a detailed report of the funds usage to the next legislative body.  He said it is appropriate because the state requires similar reporting from state agencies that receive funds.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri distributed a list of legislation for consideration by the Senate Committee on Finance dated May 26, 2001 (Exhibit J).

 

Mr. Hataway indicated the Budget Division agrees with the suggestion.

 

Senator Rawson questioned whether the language should include a provision for reversion of any unspent funds.

Senator Raggio responded he would agree to provide language for reversion in the bills.  He said language providing for reporting and reversion should be added to the action on most of these types of bills.

 

SENATE BILL 428:  Makes appropriation to Nevada Humanities Committee. (BDR S‑1351)

 

Mr. Ghiggeri stated S.B. 428 was heard by committee on April 4, 2001.  He said testimony on the bill indicated the funding would be for the Las Vegas office, and office space would be provided at University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) at no cost.  Additionally, he pointed out, $200,000 was provided by the 1999 Legislature to the Department of Museums, Library and Arts for allocation to the Nevada Humanities Committee.  He said the $9,000 in each year of the biennium that was included in the Department of Museums, Library and Arts operating budget for allocation to the Nevada Humanities Committee has been deleted in anticipation of the bill being approved.

 

Senator Coffin said the Nevada Humanities Committee is “the exception to the rule in many ways.”  He said the Nevada Humanities Committee adopted the policy several years ago that every recipient of its funds would provide a letter to the Legislature detailing what was done with the money.  He said the Nevada Humanities Committee would be a good model for others to follow.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri said the bills are being addressed in numerical order, and his intention was not to imply the Nevada Humanities Committee needs to implement the practice of reporting back to the Legislature on the use of the appropriated funds.

 

Senator Raggio agreed the Nevada Humanities Committee is very good about reporting on the use of appropriated funds, but he opined all nonprofit recipients should be required to report back to the Legislature.  He questioned whether the proposed appropriation amount was accurate.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri responded the amount was accurate, but staff recommended the bill be amended to provide the appropriation to the Department of Museums, Library and Arts budget for allocation to the Nevada Humanities Committee.

 

Senator Raggio indicated he would accept a motion to appropriate the funds to the department as done in previous sessions and to add reversion language to the bill.  He said the funds are intended to continue the operations of the Nevada Humanities Committee’s office in southern Nevada.

 

SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 428 TO PROVIDE FOR A REVERSION OF ANY UNSPENT FUNDING AND TO APPROPRIATE THE FUNDS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MUSEUMS, LIBRARY, AND ARTS BUDGET FOR ALLOCATION TO THE NEVADA HUMANITIES COMMITTEE AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 450:  Makes appropriation to State Department of Agriculture for vehicles and new equipment. (BDR S-1399)

 

Mr. Ghiggeri stated staff had no recommendations for adjustment to the funding level in the appropriation.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 450.

 

SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 451:  Makes appropriation to Lifeline Family Education Center. (BDR S-1401)

 

Mr. Hataway pointed out there were two bills that propose appropriations to Lifeline Family Education Center this session.  He said S.B. 451 was requested on behalf of the Budget Division, and Senator Neal introduced the other bill.

 

Senator Mathews stated S.B. 78 was requested by Senator Neal.

 

SENATE BILL 78:  Makes appropriation to Life Line Family Education Center for continuation of its nonprofit pregnancy assistance, educational and vocational training programs. (BDR S-840)

 

Mr. Ghiggeri pointed out S.B. 78 proposed an $800,000 appropriation.

 

Senator Raggio said he did not think the committee would be able to approve an $800,000 appropriation.  He indicated the bill should be amended to include language requesting a detailed report to the next Legislature and to include a provision for reversion of any unused funds.  He said previously appropriations have been provided to the Lifeline Pregnancy Assistance and Vocational Training Center for the continuation of its nonprofit pregnancy assistance, educational and vocational training center.  He questioned whether Mr. Hataway had any objections.

 

Mr. Hataway indicated he had no objections.

 

SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 451 TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE REQUESTING A REPORT BE PROVIDED TO THE NEXT LEGISLATURE DETAILING THE USE OF THE APPROPRIATED FUNDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE REVERSION OF ANY UNUSED APPROPRIATED FUNDS AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

Senator Mathews asked whether any action would be taken on S.B. 78.

Senator Raggio stated it should probably be indefinitely postponed, but he would prefer to wait until Monday, May 28, 2001, when Senator Neal would be present to take action on the bill he introduced.  He opined Senator Neal would be pleased with the approval of S.B. 451.

 

SENATE BILL 452:  Makes appropriation to Alliance for the Mentally Ill of Nevada. (BDR S-1402)

 

Senator Raggio stated the last appropriation to the Alliance for the Mentally Ill Of Nevada (NAMI) was provided for expenses involved in the training of volunteers, coordination of the “Family to Family” program, and for operation of a toll-free telephone number for persons to call who need help caring for a family member with a serious brain disorder.  He said the intended purpose of the appropriated funds remains the same.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri pointed out during the hearing of the bill the chairman of the committee requested information regarding expenditures from the appropriated funds received last session and an operating budget for FY 2002 and FY 2003.  He said the information (Exhibit K) was provided by NAMI and distributed to the committee members.

 

SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 452 TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE REQUESTING A REPORT BE PROVIDED TO THE NEXT LEGISLATURE DETAILING THE USE OF THE APPROPRIATED FUNDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE REVERSION OF ANY UNUSED APPROPRIATED FUNDS AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 453:  Makes appropriation to Department of Human Resources for marketing efforts and enhancement of subsidies for provision of prescription drugs and pharmaceutical services to senior citizens. (BDR S-1404)

 

Senator Raggio commented S.B. 453 was recommended for indefinite postponement.

 

Mr. Hataway stated the Budget Division requested S.B. 453 be withdrawn.

 

SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE S.B. 453.

 

SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

*****

 

SENATE BILL 460:  Makes appropriation to University and Community College System of Nevada for operation of Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies at University of Nevada, Las Vegas (BDR S-1427)

 

Senator Raggio stated S.B. 460 would provide an appropriation for the Harry Reid Center.  He explained when the committee closed the university budget, the amount of the appropriation was committed from the UCCSN indirect cost allocation in lieu of this appropriation.

 

Senator Coffin questioned, “That has been covered?”

 

Senator Raggio responded affirmatively that the appropriation amount was included in the indirect cost recovery of the university’s budget.  He said, “They committed that it would covered.”

 

SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE S.B. 460.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

Senator Raggio articulated,  “Make sure the record indicates again that it is covered.  This amount is committed by the university system to be covered in that amount from their indirect cost recoveries.”

 

SENATE BILL 462:  Makes appropriation to Nevada Silver Haired Legislative Forum of Aging Services Division of Department of Human Resources. (BDR S‑1431)

 

Senator Raggio stated S.B. 462 was heard by the committee on April 18, 2001.  He said the bill includes a $5,000 appropriation.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 462 TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE REQUESTING A REPORT BE PROVIDED TO THE NEXT LEGISLATURE DETAILING THE USE OF THE APPROPRIATED FUNDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE REVERSION OF ANY UNUSED APPROPRIATED FUNDS AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 464:  Makes appropriation to Office of Secretary of State for various enabling technology projects and new and replacement equipment. (BDR S‑1433)

 

Senator Raggio stated the bill was heard by the committee on March 28, 2001.  He pointed out the Governor recommended reducing the amount of the appropriation in S.B. 464, and staff subsequently met with the Secretary of State to determine the necessary amounts.  He directed the committee’s attention to the list of revised appropriation amounts (Exhibit L).

 

Mr. Ghiggeri stated Exhibit L consists of one page reflecting the revised amounts in the “one-shot” appropriation and the second page indicates the Secretary of State’s original request.  He noted that if the committee chooses to approve the revised amounts, staff recommends adding the language “and promotional materials for commercial recordings division” at the end of line three of the bill.  He pointed out $50,000 is recommended for each year of the biennium in the revised amounts for promotional materials for Commercial Recordings Division, which does not “fall within the definitions in the bill.”

 

Senator Coffin said he believed this is the third bill requesting huge appropriations for the Office of the Secretary of the State.  He suggested it would be appropriate to consider the three different measures and pending legislation potentially affecting the Office of the Secretary of the State simultaneously.

 

Senator Raggio responded that he believed staff had been doing just as Senator Coffin recommended.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri commented staff worked with the Office of the Secretary of the State to revise the appropriation amount.  He pointed out he had also met with representatives of the Office of the Secretary of the State the previous afternoon to discuss some issues regarding S.B. 577.

 

SENATE BILL 577:  Limits common-law and statutory liability of corporate stockholders, directors and officers and increases fees for filing certain documents with secretary of state. (BDR 7-1547)

 

Senator Coffin pointed out S.B. 577 was amended the previous day.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri commented that a portion of the proceeds resulting from S.B. 577 would fund six new staff for the Office of the Secretary of the State and rental computer hardware, software, and supplies to perform the necessary functions provided in the bill.  He pointed out the funding for the operation of that program is linked to the legislation.  If the legislation is not approved, then the funding would not be approved, he added.

 

Senator Coffin inquired about the reliability of the revenue numbers projected in S.B. 577, and whether the potential departure of corporations has been sufficiently taken into consideration.  He said he was not trying to block S.B. 464, but he suggested a few more days to review information regarding the bill might be appropriate.  He stated some of the figures might be “soft.”

 

Mr. Hataway said S.B. 577 is a “stand alone issue.”  He noted S.B. 464 is primarily composed of replacement equipment requests, which are necessary for the continuation of business at the Office of the Secretary of the State.

 

Senator Raggio asked what the total revised appropriation amount would be for S.B. 464.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri responded the total revised appropriation amount is $467,617.  He reminded the committee the additional language “and promotional materials for commercial recordings division” would need to be provided at the end of line three of the bill if the revised appropriation is approved. 

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether the committee had any objections to processing the bill with the revised appropriation amounts.  The committee members voiced no objections.

 

SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 464 TO INCLUDE THE LANGUAGE “AND PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS FOR COMMERCIAL RECORDINGS DIVISION” AT THE END OF LINE THREE OF THE BILL AND TO REVISE THE APPROPRIATED AMOUNTS AS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT L AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 491:  Makes appropriation to Opportunity Village Foundation. (BDR S-1354)

 

Senator Raggio explained Ed Guthrie, Executive Director, Opportunity Village Association of Retarded Citizens (ARC) Las Vegas, provided testimony at the hearing on April 18, 2001, indicating the appropriation is intended to revitalize thrift stores operated by the Opportunity Village Foundation.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri stated staff would recommend including language to require a detailed report of the expenditures be provided to the next Legislature and to require the reversion of any unspent funds.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 491 TO PROVIDE FOR A REVERSION OF ANY UNSPENT FUNDING AND TO REQUIRE AN EXPENDITURE REPORT BE PROVIDED TO THE 2003 LEGISLATURE AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 494:  Creates Nevada protection account in state general fund. (BDR 31-1430)

 

Senator Raggio stated S.B. 494 was heard by the committee on April 16, 2001.  He explained the Governor originally requested $5 million for the protection of the state to fund activities to prevent the location of the nuclear waste repository in Nevada.  He said the Governor recently recommended the appropriation amount be reduced to $4 million.  The funding is intended for potential legal expenses, he added.  He indicated he would accept a motion to amend the bill to provide a $4 million appropriation and to do pass the bill as amended.  He commented this issue is of great interest to the legislators, and the committee should issue a Letter of Intent requesting periodic reports of this account.

 

SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 494 TO REDUCE THE APPROPRIATION TO $4 MILLION AND TO ISSUE A LETTER OF INTENT REQUESTING PERIODIC REPORTS OF THE ACTIVITY OF THIS ACCOUNT AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 444:  Makes appropriation to Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety for security upgrades at various offices of Division of Parole and Probation. (BDR S-1380)

 

Senator Raggio stated S.B. 444 was heard by the committee on March 28, 2001.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri articulated staff received information indicating the total appropriation could be reduced from $33,847 to $32,622 of which staff recommends $25,182 should be “one-time costs” and $7,440 be split over each year of the biennium for the ongoing costs of the alarm system.  The cost of the alarm system is $310 each month, he added.

 

Senator Raggio asked whether Mr. Hataway had any objections to the recommendation.  Mr. Hataway indicated he had no objections.

 

SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND S.B. 444 TO REDUCE THE APPROPRIATION TO $32,622 AND TO DO PASS AS AMENDED.

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

SENATE BILL 427:  Makes appropriations for educational technology and signing bonuses for teachers. (BDR S-1349)

 

Mr. Ghiggeri provided the committee members with copies of Senate Amendment Number 1028 to S.B. 427 (Exhibit M).

 

Senator Raggio stated the committee voted to amend and do pass as amended S.B. 427 at the committee meeting held the previous day, May 25, 2001.  He said the action is consistent with the proposal that was agreed upon, at least informally, between the Governor and both houses on education funding.  He said the committee amended the bill to allocate $10 million for new incentive pay for newly hired teachers and to allocate $9.95 million to the Commission on Educational Technology for the purposes previously discussed.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri stated the amendment did not substantially change any part of Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the bill from what was presented at the meeting the previous day.  He pointed out staff attempted to fine-tune Section 4 of the amendment to accurately reflect the intent of the legislation.  He said in subsection one of Section 4 some additional language was inserted as follows:

 

A teacher may not receive more than one signing bonus.  A teacher who teaches for a school district in this state before the effective date of this act and who subsequently transfers to another school district in this state is not eligible to receive a signing bonus pursuant to this section.

 

Senator Raggio inquired whether Mr. Hataway thought the additional language was satisfactory.  Mr. Hataway indicated his agreement with the additional language.

 

Senator Coffin asked whether the signing bonus would be available to newly hired teachers who signed their contracts prior to the new law, which, if enacted, will provide signing bonuses to newly hired teachers.  He said he believes some new teachers may have signed contracts based on the verbal understanding that signing bonuses would be available to them upon approval of this legislation.

 

Senator Raggio said he believed this signing bonus would only be applicable for “newly hired teachers.”  He said he believed any newly hired teachers who sign contracts for either FY 2002 or FY 2003 will receive signing bonuses regardless of the date the teachers sign their contracts.

 

Mr. Hataway said he believed Senator Raggio was correct regarding eligibility for signing bonuses.  He pointed out the Governor requested that the signing bonuses be granted after newly hired teachers completed at least one full month of teaching.  He said under that specification the date the newly hired teachers signed their contracts would be irrelevant to qualify for the signing bonuses.

 

Senator Raggio stated he had not heard the language specifying the newly hired teachers must complete 1 full month of teaching before becoming eligible to receive the signing bonuses.  He said the Governor indicated the bill should be processed quickly to assist in the ongoing recruitment process.

 

Mr. Hataway explained the bonus would apply to all new teachers in the classroom in FY 2002 and FY 2003.  He said the Governor requested the bill be processed expeditiously, so the recruitment material currently being sent to potential applicants would accurately reflect the signing bonus.

 

Senator Raggio asked Mr. Hataway to explain the requirement that new teachers be in the classroom for 1 full month prior to receiving their signing bonuses.

 

Mr. Hataway responded some people who sign a contract might leave the position for a variety of reasons before they completed one month of teaching.  In order to avoid paying signing bonuses to newly hired teachers who do not even show up in the classroom to teach, the Governor decided to require 1 full month of teaching be completed before receiving the bonus.

 

Senator Coffin commented, “That makes sense.”

 

Senator Raggio said any teacher who signed a contract and then did not fulfill the contract would be in breach of contract.

 

Mr. Hataway commented, “I guess that is what attorneys are for.”  He said the Governor wants to see all of the newly hired teachers in the classroom.

Senator Raggio inquired whether the proposed requirement that teachers must be in the classroom for 1 full month prior to receiving the bonus should be in the bill.

 

Mr. Hataway responded it did not have to be in the bill, but it is the Governor’s intent.

 

Senator Coffin commented both houses must approve the bill.  He suggested the Assembly could amend the bill if the committee decided to process the bill today without any amendment.

 

Senator Raggio relayed the suggestion from staff that the proposed requirement be included in the teachers’ employment contracts.

 

Senator Coffin commented many contracts have already been signed for this next school year.

 

Mr. Hataway said he thought that approach would be problematic for 2002, but it would be appropriate for 2003.  He explained many contracts have already been signed for 2002.

 

Senator Raggio questioned the precise language Mr. Hataway would suggest for the amendment.  He asked whether “payable after 1 month of teaching” would be appropriate.  Mr. Hataway responded affirmatively.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri advised against the language “payable after 1 month” because schools will require sufficient time to get an accurate count of the number of teachers.  He suggested the language “provide teaching services for a minimum of 1 month.”

 

Senator Raggio instructed staff to draft another amendment.

 

Mr. Ghiggeri said, “I will ensure that gets placed in the bill.”  He proceeded to read subsections 2, 3, and 4 of the amendment (Exhibit M).

 

Senator Raggio stated the Department of Education must adjust the amount provided for signing bonuses according to the number of qualified recipients and the appropriated funds available.  He pointed out the Legislature will not appropriate any further funds for signing bonuses for teachers for the 2001 to 2003 biennium.  He said the language Mr. Ghiggeri suggested would be included in the amendment with no further changes to the amendment.

 

Mr. Hataway indicated his agreement with the action.

 

Senator Raggio indicated the language should be added expeditiously.

 

ASSEMBLY BILL 278:  Authorizes Office of Veterans’ Services to accept gifts and grants for support of World War II Memorial Campaign. (BDR S-247)

 

SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 278.

 

SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

THE MOTION CARRIED.  (SENATORS NEAL AND O’DONNELL WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

 

*****

 

Senator Raggio asked the committee to please review the bills scheduled for hearing on Monday, May 28, 2001, and to indicate any bills that should be processed.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 10:41 a.m.

              

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

Jennifer Ruedy

Committee Secretary

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

                       

Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman

 

 

DATE: