MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE

on public safety/natural resources/transportation

of the

SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

AND THE

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ways and means

 

Seventy-First Session

February 22, 2001

 

 

The Joint Subcommittee on Public Safety/Natural Resources/Transportation of the Senate Committee on Finance and the Assembly Committee on Ways and Meanswas called to order by Chairman Lawrence E. Jacobsen at 8:15 a.m., on Thursday, February 22, 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.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Chairman

Senator William R. O’Donnell

Senator Joseph M. Neal Jr.

 

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Mr. David R. Parks, Chairman

Mr. Bob Beers

Mrs. Vonne S. Chowning

Mrs. Marcia de Braga

Mr. John W. Marvel

Mr. Richard D. Perkins

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst

Steven J. Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst

Mark Krmpotic, Program Analyst

Bob Williston, Committee Secretary

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Steve Robinson, State Forester Firewarden, Division of Forestry, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Peter Anderson, Deputy State Forester, Division of Forestry, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Jennifer Kizer, Administrative Service Officer III, Division of Forestry, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

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

Robert S. Hadfield, Lobbyist, Executive Director, Nevada Association of Counties

George R. E. Boucher, County Manager, Elko County

Cash A. Miner, Chief Financial Officer, Elko County

Mike Nolan, Budget Analyst, Budget Division, Department of Administration

Lucy D. Zeier, Administrative Services Officer IV, Office of the Director, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Gary Hames, Fire Chief, Fire Department, Storey County

Terry R. Crawforth, Administrator, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Steve Bremer, Chief, Administrative Services Bureau, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Wayne R. Perock, Administrator, Division of State Parks, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Allen Newberry, Chief of Operations and Maintenance, Division of State Parks, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

 

STATE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES

 

A document offering an overview of the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (Exhibit C) was distributed to subcommittee members.

 

Steve Robinson, State Forester-Firewarden, Division of Forestry, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, recounted briefly his service in Washington, D.C., and in other states over the past 17 years.

 

Forestry – Budget Page CNR-70 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-4195

 

Peter Anderson, Deputy State Forester, Division of Forestry, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, began with a slide presentation of what the Division of Forestry has done. Mr. Anderson said the foundation and the core of the Division of Forestry are the partnerships with private landowners, local governments, and other state and federal agencies. He said the division is pleased and proud of where they are because these partnerships are stronger than they have ever been before. He noted that a lot of good things are being accomplished “on the land.”

 

Mr. Anderson said the Nevada State Seedbank Program became a reality in 1995, thanks to the dedication and foresight of Senator Jacobsen. He noted that since that time the division has been actively trying to reclaim fire damaged lands and assisting private landowners. He said the division has a storage facility in Washoe Valley, and satellite operations in each of the division’s regions during the fire season.

 

Mr. Anderson stated that the division was awarded funds by the Interim Finance Committee (IFC) to address 8 specific projects that resulted from the 1999 wildland fire season, and he reported that all those projects are now successfully completed. He said the division teamed with conservation districts in Pershing County and Humboldt County to accomplish these results.

 

Mr. Anderson said the division’s Statewide Nursery Program is a foundational program for the division. He noted that the division has received national recognition for ability to propagate native plants. He showed a slide of native sod that is being grown in Washoe Valley and used for reclamation and restoration projects in the Tahoe Basin. He said this process has not been tried anywhere else before.

 

Mr. Anderson said the division has a federally-funded, cooperative fire program that provides training, equipment, and other services to the state’s fire districts. He explained the division is facing many challenges, urban interface fires being one of them. He said this presents a very real problem that is the concern of everyone in the state.

 

Mr. Anderson said the division also administers a volunteer fire assistance program, which provides grant money to volunteer fire departments across the state. He pointed out that in the last year $28,000 was awarded and was matched by the local fire departments.

 

The Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) county-funded fire district personnel respond to emergency incidents, Mr. Anderson said. He noted they play a key foundational role in rural county emergency services.

 

Mr. Anderson said that forest stewardship is a federally-funded program with the United States (U.S.) Forest Service. He explained that the division works with private landowners to improve their windbreaks, forestlands, and herbarium forests throughout the state. He stated that the division has accomplished 15 plans over the last calendar year, which improved the management of approximately 500 acres of private land.

 

Urban and community forestry, Mr. Anderson continued, is another very popular program for the division. He said the division is very active with local communities across the state doing plantings. He said they also have a program regarding big trees, which has been recognized nationally. In this program some of the bigger trees in the state are identified. He showed a slide of the state’s biggest fig tree, located in Las Vegas.

 

Mr. Anderson said the conservation camp program provides an extremely wide diversity of projects. He said the program constructs fences for the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), and provides a lot of community services, such as chipping trees at Christmas time, school construction, and assistance to senior citizens. He said the camp program fights wildland fires, and responds to a variety of emergency incidents. He noted that one of the camp’s more recent activities was seed collection. He said a concerted effort has been made over the last year and a half to train the crews in the specifics of natural resource management. This, he commented, has made a significant difference in the ability to meet some of the changing demands of resource management.

 

Concerning conservation education, Mr. Anderson said the division works within elementary schools in the state. The Project Learning Tree (PLT) program gives specific training to teachers in scientifically-based forest management.

 

Mr. Anderson said the division’s federal excess property program is one of the more popular programs. He explained the division obtains worn out equipment from the federal government, brings it into the division’s three regional shops, and turns out refurbished, rebuilt fire trucks.

 

Mr. Anderson said the division just recently hosted a national conference in Las Vegas of forest health managers from across the country. He said the focus of these managers is a nationwide monitoring program to scientifically track the health of forests and woodlands. He noted this is a significant problem in certain parts of the country, and it is something NDF tries to stay on top of by addressing the problems before they become major concerns.

 

Continuing, Mr. Anderson said the division regulates the commercial harvest on private land of Christmas trees, cactus, and yuccas. He stated that development in southern Nevada has driven the prices of cactus up, and the illegal activity of collecting cactus has risen. The NDF, he said, does this in a partnership with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service.

 

Mr. Anderson said the division has a list of 25 species in the state that are protected by the critical native flora program. He showed a slide of three of the most popular right now: steamboat buckwheat, Las Vegas bear poppy, and the yellow grass at Lake Tahoe. He announced that the division will be delisting two species this spring. He said public hearings will be held on that very shortly. They no longer need to be on the list because of good management decisions over the past 10 years, he added.

 

Assemblywoman Chowning noted that during the last interim she had been on the rural Nevada tour conducted by the Nevada Association of Counties (NACO). She described the tour as magnificent, and expressed gratitude for the opportunity to experience that. She noted that when she toured the Caliente youth facility she was told that the young people there participate with forestry and learn how to fight fires, and the girls are actually better at it than the boys.

 

Mrs. Chowning continued, saying that she and Assemblyman Parks met with folks at the Spring Mountain Youth Camp in Clark County. She stated that a lot of good work is done there with the Division of Forestry, such as building trails, conservation projects, and fire fighting. She expressed thanks to the Division of Forestry for all they do. She noted that some of the young people in these facilities have never been to such places as Mount Charleston, and she said the training they receive is of great value.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Anderson to discuss the division’s airport operation, the East Lake operation, and last year’s fire season.

 

Mr. Anderson said a lot of activities are going on at the East Lake facility. He said the Federal Excess Property Program (FEPP) is extremely active, doing all kinds of good work. He said the division has come out of two very serious fire season years. He stated that more than 350,000 acres of private land and 1,600,000 acres of public land were burned in 1999; and 80,000 acres of private land were burned in 2000. He said the division now has to deal with a noxious weed issue, which is driving this whole situation. He said they have been very busy with this in the Division of Forestry in the last two years, and they expect another very busy year this year.

 

Senator Jacobsen commented that it is difficult to control this situation and handle the expenses that come with it. He noted that the division has been to the IFC several times, and he inquired about the state of affairs with respect to the bills for the fire season.

 

Mr. Robinson said that the budget office has totaled this up and arrived at a figure of $812,000 outstanding. He explained that means anything that is “30 to 120 days out.” He said all those outstanding longer than 6 months are only for a total of 7 fires. He said the situation has gotten a lot better in the last year. He noted that the federal agencies have been cooperative and no agency can be named as recalcitrant in payment.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked if preparation has been made for the next season. He noted that in the past the division has been somewhat behind in their billings.

 

Jennifer Kizer, Administrative Service Officer III, Division of Forestry, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, said the billings are currently being sent out within two weeks of the time they come in from the regional offices. She said the data entry is performed at the regional offices, and because most people in those offices are the ones who are out on the fires, it usually takes up to six months after the fire season is over to get all the incidents in. She noted there are presently 15 incidents from Fiscal Year 2000 that have not been turned in to the accounting office to be sent on to the forest service or BLM. The total for these incidents is $251,000, she stated. She said there are 107 incidents for Fiscal Year 2001 that have not been billed to date, totaling $1.9 million. She said the projected date the regions are giving for submitting these bills is March 16.

 

Mr. Robinson added that one of the problems, with respect to the backlog in billing, occurs on the big fires. He stated that everyone is dedicated to putting the fire out, and that is when they get behind. One of the things the budget office has suggested is that the division send some administrative staff out to the fires before the bills get “stacked up too much.” He said the division will try to do that in the coming season.

 

Assemblyman Marvel inquired about the accounts payable of the division. He noted that at one time the state was so derelict in payments that some of the providers would only work for payment at the time of service. Ms. Kizer said the division is processing payments in a one-month period. Mr. Marvel commented that the division’s credit has been reestablished, and Ms. Kizer agreed.

 

Ms. Kizer noted that during the last fire season the division had a few problems because some of the federal agencies did not have accounts set up at the major stores, such as Raley’s. She explained that, although they were not the state’s bills, the store was owed $50,000.

 

Assemblyman Parks asked for confirmation of the $1.9 million billing as well as the $251,000 billing. Ms. Kizer reiterated that the $251,000 is for incidents from fiscal year 2000 and the $1.9 million is for fiscal year 2001, which is for the current fire season. Ms. Kizer added that the division has $812,000 outstanding that has been billed and for which payment has not been received.

 

Mr. Parks concluded the division has about $3 million in receivables, either pending receipt or to be billed. Ms. Kizer confirmed that.

 

Freeman K. Johnson, Assistant Director, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, said he has administrative responsibility for the department’s air operations. One of them, he said, is for NDF and the other is for the Division of Wildlife.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked for a summary of what is located at the division’s facility in Minden. Mr. Johnson said the department has two hangars in Minden, one devoted to the Division of Forestry’s aircraft and the other devoted to the Division of Wildlife’s aircraft. He stated there is a total of 4 aircraft for the Division of Forestry. Two are UH-1H Huey helicopter models, which are the heavier lifting aircraft necessary for lifting water for initial attack and for lightening fires. He added the division also has 2 fixed-wing aircraft, a Cheyenne and an Arrow Commander. He explained that the Arrow Commander flies air attack missions when fighting fires under federal jurisdiction. He added that it operates as an airborne command and control platform. He said the Cheyenne acts as a lead plane to lead air tankers in to mark the spot where the drop needs to occur for the retardant.

 

Mr. Johnson said the Division of Wildlife also has a couple of aircraft: a Cessna that is used for bird surveys, and two Jet Rangers that are used to conduct animal surveys. He said the Division of Wildlife is about to embark on the spring survey to determine the fawn survival rate so hunting quotas can be established.

 

Mr. Johnson said each division has two pilots. For forestry, he explained, there is a chief pilot and a pilot; and for wildlife there are two senior pilots. He added there is a mechanic on staff as well. He said he sent reports to Mr. Krmpotic about the savings the department had expected to realize, and added that the department had saved even more than anticipated.

 

Senator Jacobsen said that he has received comments that the helitack crews are occasionally being used to keep the airplanes clean. He asked Mr. Johnson to comment on that, as well as on the helicopter that was lost.

 

Mr. Johnson said helitack crews are not used to perform any maintenance other than cleaning windows and sweeping out a helicopter. He stated they are not qualified or certified to perform maintenance operations. He said there is an airframe and powerplant-rated mechanic who has recently been hired to perform those functions. Mr. Johnson said the aircraft that was lost in an incident over Watson Lake in 1997 has been replaced. He noted that funds had been requested for the refurbishing of a helicopter that was acquired through the federal excess property program. He said the federal excess property program is a significant source of rolling stock and hardware for this division. He claimed the division has taken good advantage of that relationship with the federal government. He said the replacement helicopter is running and was pressed into service in the last fire season.

 

Senator Jacobsen informed the committee that these operations are all connected to one another at the Douglas County Airport. He said the regional dispatch center for BLM and forestry is also located there. He suggested the committee visit the facility before this legislative session ends. Mr. Johnson informed the committee he would be happy to give a tour of that facility.

 

FORESTRY HONOR CAMPS – Budget Page CNR-83 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-4198

 

Mr. Robinson said there is no change in this budget, except it includes the cost of living increase and the fringe benefit rate increase. He continued, explaining that the crews in these camps have been working on things that are quite involved. He said one of the best examples is the school that is being built in Pioche. The school, he noted, is being built from the ground up with inmate crews and a camp supervisor from NDF. The school is expected to be opened some time this summer, he added.

 

Senator Jacobsen said he has noticed over the years there has never been an open house in any of these camps. He expressed his feeling that this is not good. He also suggested there be more performance indicators in the budget so the committee will have a better picture of what the program is all about. He noted that on most occasions the committee makes judgments on things they have never seen or know anything about.

 

Mr. Robinson said he believes some efforts have been made over the last six months in that respect. He stated that the issue with forestry has been whether the division is keeping the data necessary to report whether they are reaching their goals.

 

Senator Jacobsen suggested it would be good to keep something like a scrapbook on each camp which can be used to show what each project is, where it is located, how many inmates are there, and the project’s benefits to the community. He noted that a number of legislators have felt the camps are located in areas where they are a real benefit to the community, and their remoteness allows them the opportunity to performs jobs that would not be available if they were located “down town.”

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether there are any current problems at the camps. Mr. Robinson said there is only the longstanding problem of getting the inmates in and keeping them in. He noted that the Department of Prisons is doing all it can to furnish the inmate crews.

 

FORESTRY – Budget Page CNR-70 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-4195

 

Senator Jacobsen drew attention to the matter of cost allocation to the counties. He said it would be good for the committee to know what kind of equipment, in particular forestry equipment, is spread around the state. He said this equipment supplements volunteer and rural fire departments.

 

Mr. Robinson stated that, as directed by the 1999 Legislature, the Division of Forestry hired a company to complete a study and prepare a cost allocation plan for the administrative division’s costs in budget account 101‑4195, and how it affects the county fire protection districts in budget account 101-4227. He said the division maintains administrative budget account 101-4195, and provides support for 4 other budget accounts. The division passes the costs associated with providing administrative support on to the counties, he explained.

 

Mr. Robinson explained that in past years the fixed amount of $230,000 for administrative costs was passed to the counties, allocated on full-time equivalent positions (FTE) in each district. He noted that the basis for that amount was more historical than any rationale, and he believes that the reason the committee asked for the study.

 

Mr. Robinson related that in June 2000 Kafoury, Armstrong, and Company, was contracted by the division to conduct a study to determine the most effective and efficient approach to allocate the cost for services to the counties. In addition, he said, it was requested that the firm determine the total overhead pool and establish, in writing, a simple, rational, defensible, and reasonable methodology for the indirect assessment. He said the company went to all the regional offices and to the central office to see how much time the deputy state foresters applied to the counties in an effort to establish a percentage.

 

From their analysis, Mr. Robinson said, Kafoury, Armstrong, and Company, came back with a new rationale and a new budget. He said the company specifically analyzed the positions identified to determine whether the position provided administrative support. He noted that employees were interviewed within NDF and in the budget office. He said they also reviewed the budget structures with the director’s office, and work performance standards. They determined factors affecting the level of service and evaluated the cost to determine which should be shared between the state and the counties. He noted that some factors were excluded in this manner.

 

Mr. Robinson said a cost allocation plan was developed (Exhibit D). He said that Kafoury, Armstrong, and Company, recommended the division complete time studies to ensure the amounts charged are reasonable, and he said the division will be doing that in the next biennium.

 

Mr. Robinson said that, because the increase was so substantial, the Governor’s recommended budget eliminates the cost of dispatchers and mechanics from the cost allocation. He pointed out that is different from the study recommendations.

 

Mr. Robinson said the counties in northern Nevada will see a large increase in allocations. He said the original cost allocation plan increased the current assessment of $230,000 to $586,000. Elimination of the dispatchers and mechanics from that process, however, reduces the new assessment to $342,000. He noted that this new assessment represents an increase of approximately 49 percent.

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked whether the counties were invited to participate in the development of the new cost allocation plan. Ms. Kizer replied that, because the division was looking at cost allocating forestry’s administrative budget, it was felt that it was not necessary to include the counties. Mr. Marvel noted that some of the counties have been taken by surprise by these increased cost-allocated amounts. He said Elko County faces a $60,000 increase and does not have the budgetary wherewithal to “come up with that.” He said this increase represents a serious impact on several of the counties he represents.

 

Robert S. Hadfield, Lobbyist, Executive Director, Nevada Association of Counties (NACO) introduced George R. E. Boucher, County Manager, Elko County, and said he has been Elko County manager for 27 years and 6 months, making him the longest-serving county manager in the history of the state.

 

Mr. Hadfield noted that the committee just heard that the state did not think it was important that local governments be involved in the design of the cost allocation plan. He noted that counties have enjoyed and continue to enjoy a partnership with the state of Nevada and NDF. He said they intend to continue that relationship with NDF. However, he said, to not include the counties in the design of the plan has led to some serious consequences, not all of them fiscal. He provided the committee with information from some of the counties in Exhibit D, and expressed his hope that the committee will look at it, particularly the comments from Washoe County. He lamented that the counties did not get to ask questions until after the final study was issued. He reiterated that the county management staff were not involved in any of the study until after the final report.

 

Mr. Hadfield said he telephoned Kafoury, Armstrong, and Company, to discuss the matter with them, and they reaffirmed to him they did not think it was important. The problem, he noted, is that NDF and Kafoury, Armstrong, and Company, are using different methodologies. They are not giving counties credit under the same methodology they use for the state staff in allocating time and personnel, he explained. He stated that if the counties had simply been contacted by the division initially and it had been proposed that finance staff from all counties be included to design a study, it could have been assured it would be “apples are apples and oranges are oranges.” He pointed out that did not happen and the report is not accurate and does not reflect the same level of credit for county staff as for state staff. He declared the study is flawed because its design is flawed.

 

Mr. Hadfield consented that the counties are now “stuck with it.” He said the counties are looking forward to working with the new administration on this problem, despite his opinion that the counties had been blindsided. The counties need to make sure that similar matters of such mutual concern and importance are handled by working together from the beginning, he said.

 

Mr. Hadfield repeated his desire that the subcommittee would have time to read the reports from the counties, but noted that the representatives of two counties were present to answer questions.

 

George R. E. Boucher, County Manager, Elko County, said the first indication Elko County had of the study in question was in October 2000. He said he attended a meeting in Reno on October 17, 2000, and said that at that time the figures had already been set. He said that the NDF presence in Elko County has a record of no complaints over the many years of his service in the county. He described the relationship between the county and the state as a steadfast working relationship. He stated that at this time the county is funding eight positions with the county paying the state for those positions. He noted that the plan being proposed would require that three of the eight positions be eliminated. He noted that the assessed valuation in Elko County is down this year, and it is felt that the county cannot come up with the extra money to pay for cost allocations over and above the present level.

 

Mr. Boucher said that it had been suggested the county run a cost allocation study and charge the state for the services they provide, but concluded that would be nothing more than “throwing rocks at each other.” He declared the working relationship between NDF and Elko County has been excellent and this situation is not going to bother that relationship with the men and women who are working in Elko County. But, he said, if two positions have to be taken away from Elko County it will mean a greater load for the remaining staff. And, he said, they cannot carry a bigger load.

 

Mr. Boucher presented the subcommittee with a letter addressed to Ms. Jennifer Kizer from Mr. Boucher and Cash A. Miner (Exhibit E).

 

Cash A. Miner, Chief Financial Officer, Elko County, concurred with the opinions of Mr. Boucher and Mr. Hadfield that the plan being discussed is flawed. He voiced his disagreement with the allocation plan because it ignores the 8 positions the county funds as well as all the county has provided over the year, including an additional vehicle in this year’s budget.

 

Assemblyman Marvel asked what the current tax rate is in Elko County. He expressed concern about how much these allocations will impact the tax rate and how close the county will be to the cap. Mr. Miner said there is not as much a problem for Elko County as there is with the city of Carlin because of overlapping rates. He noted that Carlin has reached its cap.

 

Mr. Miner said the combined rate for Elko County is currently at 2.4262, for Carlin it is 3.5834, and for Wells it is 3.2867. He noted that if Carlin and Wells have any movement in their rate it will have an impact.

 

Mr. Marvel asked how much would need to be added to accommodate the new allocations. Mr. Miner said it would probably be an increase of 1 cent, which would generate approximately $93,000. Mr. Marvel noted that a county such as White Pine may not even be able to pay these allocations. Mr. Miner confirmed that, based on his understanding, they would have a difficult time.

 

Assemblywoman de Braga, who represents that district, confirmed that is the case for White Pine County. She agreed that these allocations would not be fair because the services cannot be planned and budgeted for, even if they did have the money. She said White Pine County, as well as some other counties in the state, are having problems supplying even the basic services.

 

Senator Jacobsen stated it goes without saying that communication problems are always an enemy, and he suggested to Mr. Hadfield that he put NDF on the agenda for his annual conference. He said the counties could have some exposure that way.

 

Mr. Robinson said he had occasion to be with the Governor in Elko County a couple of weeks previously and one of the things the Governor remarked about was the great relationship the state has with Elko County in particular. He said it is the Governor’s opinion that relationship needs to continue. He said NDF supports the cost allocation plan, and the Governor recommended it based on priorities. He stated that any future studies and recommendations, when not prohibited by law to go public, will be as public as possible so everyone will know in advance what will happen. He apologized if that was not done in the present situation.

 

Mike Nolan, Budget Analyst, Budget Division, Department of Administration, began by saying it is not the intent of the budget office to create havoc in the counties. He pointed out that the assessment has been at $230,000 for over a decade. In that time, he said, cost of living adjustments (COLA) of 3 percent, 4 percent, and 2 percent have been granted state employees. Also, he said, cost allocations do not consider the pay raises that are proposed for the coming biennium. He said that since he has been in the budget office he has attempted to get a biennial adjustment on that assessment based on the consumer price index (CPI) and could not accomplish that. He commented that when this adjustment came, it covered a 10- to 15-year adjustment, as opposed to biennial adjustment.

 

Mr. Nolan acknowledged that in hindsight it was a mistake to not involve the counties at the initial stage, even though it was an internal assessment at NDF. He said there are a number of areas that need to be discussed and compromises to be reached that will more fairly distribute costs.

 

Mr. Marvel noted that it is not just the NDF that has increased costs, and noted that the counties also have increased costs.

 

Lucy D. Zeier, Administrative Services Officer IV, Office of the Director, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, declared that she should take the lion’s share of the blame for the way this cost allocation study was handled regarding the counties. She said it was not her wish to represent the counties’ opinion as being unimportant. However, she said, what was paramount to her and to Ms. Kizer was that the study be independent and that both the counties and the state be removed from deciding how the allocation is determined. She stated that she and Ms. Kizer were not sure the outcome was going to result in such an increase, and were indeed hoping for a decrease.

 

Assemblywoman Chowning noted that the lack of an increase in many years is an important point. But, she noted, Clark County’s allocation has been increased by 68 percent. She pointed out that these increases range from 12 percent for the least impacted county to 387 percent for the most impacted. She said this seems not to be a phased-in approach, and would represent a “tremendous hit” on county budgets.

 

Gary Hames, Fire Chief, Fire Department, Storey County, said he was asked to appear at this hearing by the county financial officer. He noted that the increase in cost allocations for Storey County comes to 25 percent, which amounts to $6,000. He said this means the funding must come out of another line item somewhere. He said he is concerned that these line items are diminished to the point that for the people on the fire lines this will impact the funds available to purchase personal protective equipment. He said it would also affect the purchase of such things as tires and light fixtures for fire stations.

 

Mr. Hames said the county currently pays about $160,803 in overhead costs and the $6,000 will take the operating costs and capital outlay from $40,000 to $34,000. He said he is concerned that the NDF staff in the field will have their hands tied so tightly that they will not be able to function. He said the only other area to take from is salaries and benefits.

 

Mr. Marvel asked whether Elko County is bound to stay in the commitment with the state, or whether there is the option of withdrawing. Mr. Boucher said he believes the county will not reject NDF and go out on its own, but will remain with the NDF even if it will involve cutbacks in personnel.

 

Mr. Marvel asked about what the other counties will do.

 

Mr. Hadfield said the counties had a partnership with NDF, but pointed out that a partnership means the two sides work together and collaborate. He took exception to the suggestion that the study was unbiased, and noted that when an accounting firm is hired, it is the person who hires the firm that decides the design of the study. He suggested that what happened in this situation is that the accounting firm studied the state side of the allocation and did not study the county side. He said for a fair, proportional distribution of costs there needs to be a comprehensive study. This, he said, is why he stresses that all the parties involved need to sit down before anyone does such a study to ensure that whoever does the study understands the system and understands who is doing what. Then, he said, a comprehensive cost allocation study can be had.

 

Mr. Hadfield explained that he was not suggesting Kafoury, Armstrong, and Company, was trying to come up with something one sided, but noted there was no other kind of result to be had when only half the information necessary for the study was available. He reiterated that this study was not a partnership effort. He insisted that if Nevada counties are in partnership with the state of Nevada, especially on this one critical issue, neither the state nor the counties can do it alone. He warned that the two sides must work together collaboratively from the beginning, with no secrets, and with no independent studies being done without talking to the other. He stated that counties do not want a relationship with the state that involves “dumping it on us at the last minute.”

 

Mr. Marvel asked whether Mr. Hadfield thinks it is too late to resolve this issue. Mr. Hadfield said he believes both the counties and the agency are more than willing to work together. The problem, he said, is that the counties have been thrown into the state’s budget and now the two sides are fighting over money. He suggested that was not necessary, and the whole issue could have been handled in a manner that respected each other’s capabilities and ability to serve. He pointed out that now the counties are going to start cutting the support they give the very people the NDF wants to charge the counties for providing. Senator Jacobsen made note of the validity of that point.

 

Senator Jacobsen noted that Elko County is somewhat unique in that it currently has about 36 fire departments and a considerable amount of activity. He noted that the area also has an excellent repair shop and a boys school from which  some fire crews are run.

 

Mrs. Chowning asked whether someone knew how much the study cost and out of whose budget that came. Ms. Kizer said that in the last fiscal year the division received approval from IFC to enter into a contract, which cost $25,959. Ms. Kizer added that she in no way intended to exclude the counties from the study and apologized for the situation.

 

FORESTRY HONOR CAMPS – Budget Page CNR-83 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-4198

 

Senator Jacobsen noted there has been some concern regarding two vacant crew supervisor positions in the honor camps. He acknowledged the difficulty involved in estimating what the need might be, but suggested it would not hurt to address the matter of crews and whether they are full and adequately covered by supervisors.

 

Mr. Robinson said the crews vary radically from camp to camp. He said some camps are very busy and others are not. He said the division has recommended an amendment that would eliminate one camp supervisor in the Jean facility. Senator Jacobsen recalled that in a couple of camps no crew could be sent out because there were no supervisors to go with them.

 

Mr. Robinson said he has been told that is not happening very often now. He said the crews are sometimes in camp because of other reasons, but not because of supervisory control.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether Mr. Thornhill is still in charge of the camps, and Mr. Robinson confirmed he is.

 

FORESTRY – Budget Page CNR-70 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-4195

 

M-200  Demographics/Caseloads Changes – Page CNR-73

 

Mr. Robinson said budget account 101-4195 is the division’s basic administration account. He said in decision unit M-200 the increase in vehicle operations expenses is addressed. He noted that the 2001 budget is insufficient and the division is proposing an increase of 19.37 percent in vehicle operating expenses. He said this increase in cost can be attributed to the higher fuel costs and the increase in vehicle repairs. He explained that, because of the higher use of vehicles in the busy fire seasons, a lot of maintenance had to be performed on vehicles. He pointed out that it is critical those vehicles are in good operating condition to respond to emergency incidents, particularly in remote locations.

 

M-202  Demographics/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-74

 

Mr. Robinson said M-202 represents funding for one additional staff-month in the existing seasonal Pilot II position in the air operations program. He stated the division currently employs one seasonal pilot to augment the air operations program during the summer fire season. He said that position is currently funded for 5 months, and it is the intent of this decision unit to increase that to 6 months each year. He noted that the normal fire season in Nevada typically runs from May 15 through November 1 and sometimes longer. He also noted there are Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and agency annual training requirements for pilots, which require two weeks to accomplish. This, he said, makes it not practical to conduct the training during the fire season. He said with a normal fire season of 5.5 months and 2-weeks of training, a 6-month commitment is required to train the seasonal pilot and staff the aircraft during the fire season.

 

M-203  Demographics/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-74

 

Mr. Robinson said M-203 concerns the new Program Assistant II position for the department’s air operations in Minden. He explained that, with the expansion of the air program and the consolidation of the air programs with the Division of Wildlife, the administrative workload is increased. He said these changes have led to the expansion of the number of aircraft in service and the missions performed by the air program. He said this increase has caused increased record keeping and accounting procedures that extend beyond the current staff’s capacity. These tasks were accomplished by the chief pilot in the past, he explained, and the division is proposing this program assistant to help him do that. It was concluded, because of the last two busy fire seasons, that this is necessary.

 

Senator Jacobsen acknowledged the importance of the position, but noted that it should be an easy task for the pilot because he must keep a flight log anyway. He said the main concern of the subcommittee is to make sure accurate records are kept in case the charges need to be justified.

 

Mr. Robinson said there are things the pilot will not delegate, the flight log being one of them. He said the assistant would be involved with other data.

 

M-204  Demographics/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-74

 

Mr. Robinson said M-204 concerns reimbursement from the United States Forest Service for the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest annual operating plan. He explained this annual agreement with the forest service in northern Nevada provides for seasonal employees for wildfire protection and funding for associated operating and equipment expenses. This amounts to $60,000 per year. He said this funding source was previously included in budget account 101-4227, which is the county fire protection districts’ budget, and this unit moves this funding source into the Forestry budget account 101‑4195.

 

Mr. Robinson noted that the western district currently receives the same type of funding from the U.S. Forest Service in a work program authority that is already in account 101‑4195.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether there is a report that shows allocation of equipment throughout the counties. He recalled that he had seen such a report in the past but he has not seen one this session.

 

Ms. Kizer said the property manager keeps track of all the inventory throughout the state, and a list of equipment assigned to county volunteer fire departments and regional offices could be provided. Senator Jacobsen asked that such a list be provided to the subcommittee. He said such a list would give them an idea of what equipment is out in the field, and noted that the subcommittee is concerned whether it is adequate.

 

Mrs. Chowning expressed appreciation for receiving a copy of such a report. She noted that it is commonly thought that Clark County is rich with resources, but she noted that Mountain Springs, which is near Pahrump, is in dire straights regarding equipment and a water source. That is a very small community and in great danger, she pointed out.

 

E-860  Lake Tahoe Initiatives (EIP) – Page CNR-76

 

Assemblyman Parks drew attention to the Lake Tahoe initiative, and noted it appears to change the temporary funding source from Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS) air pollution funds to General Funds. He asked whether the rationale behind that could be explained.

 

Ms. Kizer explained that during the last session all agencies involved (state lands, wildlife, forestry, and state parks) were asked to come back to this session and ask again for those positions. The DMV&PS pollution control fund, she recalled, was a temporary funding source. She said this is the reason for the request at this time. She noted the Governor recommends this program partially funded with General Fund with $30,000 from the Lake Tahoe license plate account.

 

FORESTRY Intergovernmental – Budget Account 101-4227

 

Senator Jacobsen indicated that budget account 101‑4227 is not included in The Executive Budget. He said the committee will receive testimony on projected revenues and expenditures at a later time.

 

WILDLIFE – Budget Page CNR-103

Budget Account 101-4452

 

Terry R. Crawforth, Administrator, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, recalled that he and Mr. Bremer had previously been before this committee and reviewed the division’s recent accomplishments and goals for the future. He stated that wildlife populations in Nevada are doing very well. He claimed some credit for that, but said a lot of that is climate related.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the budget his division is presenting to the subcommittee is designed not only to meet their goals and objectives of managing wildlife, but also to do so in a multi-state, multi-disciplinary, and collaborative environment. He said the budget is based on the three primary goals identified in their strategic plan of improved customer service, excellent wildlife management through good science, and developing human resources to their fullest potential. He stated that his division had worked closely with the budget office to accomplish these goals.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the performance indicators for the upcoming biennium have been totally revised by division staff, who have worked with the budget office and the subcommittee staff to formulate more meaningful, outcome-oriented performance indicators.

 

Mr. Crawforth announced that his division made significant changes in the way they do business in the last couple of years. He said they began by developing and implementing a comprehensive management system, which included 4 phases; inventory, strategic planning, operational planning, and finally evaluation of the process. He said the strategic plan was developed using a team of employees from very diverse professional, geographic, and personal backgrounds. He said much time was given to the process, and it was not without conflicts. However, he said, through the use of a collaborative process with a lot of public input they were able to achieve a lot of internal and external support for their strategic plan. He noted they have been using that model for a couple of years now to drive most of what they do.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the result of the strategic plan created the “buy-in” and participation from both internal and external stakeholders. He said a recently completed midterm evaluation revealed that the division has already completed over 50 percent of the goals and objectives it had established in the plan. He said the biennial work plan presented in the budget is designed to keep the division on that successful track.

 

As a result of the strategic plan, Mr. Crawforth said, division staff have begun shifting the way they budget to a more detailed planning approach. Projects are submitted from the field and reviewed by project leaders to make sure they fit with the agency’s strategic plan goals and objectives. He said this has enabled the division to build a well documented, more comprehensive, and mission-oriented budget.

 

Mr. Crawforth said that the division has dealt proactively with a number of external and internal challenges and opportunities that point to the need to be flexible in both budgeting and planning.

 

Mr. Crawforth noted that the extensive wildland fires that destroyed thousands of acres of wildlife habitat in Nevada will affect the state for many years to come. He said the Division of Wildlife constantly deals with the listing of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. He said the division has been involved in extensive elk management, on request from the Legislature. He said they have also initiated a predator management program.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division has completely revised and disseminated informational publications in a much better format than was done in the past. He noted that the division recently won a national award for one of its publications.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division has been involved with renovation and upgrading of their facilities. They have also been involved in the Lake Tahoe Initiatives program, and initiated a number of collaborative comprehensive planning programs for several species. He also noted that the division has developed and implemented the nation’s most sophisticated and customer service oriented big game drawing system.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division has worked long and hard with the budget office staff and the subcommittee staff to develop a more meaningful set of outcome measures. He said they also have increased the public’s participation, not only in their planning, but also in their budgeting processes as well. The division has also addressed all the audit recommendations and worked closely with the subcommittee staff and the Governor’s Division of Internal Audits for fiscal improvements.

 

Tapping new and innovative funding mechanisms has enhanced both the reserves and fiscal viability of the division, he said. They have achieved both short-term and long-term fiscal integrity through better planning analysis and control of revenues and expenditures, he added.

 

Mr. Crawforth indicated his agency has developed a human resources section to take better care of its personnel and help bring them to their full potential. He said the division is also implementing an agency training plan.

 

Mr. Crawforth noted that the division has expanded public services by obtaining authorization from the Legislature for 3 new positions for new offices in Ely, Winnemucca, and Henderson. He said they have reorganized the division from a multi-tiered management approach and eliminated one level of bureaucracy. This has already helped them to more effectively manage their resources and provide services to the field, he noted.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division’s engineer did a major review of all the division’s facilities and developed an enhancement and refurbishment plan for a lot of the division’s aging facilities. He said considerable effort has been devoted to that plan already. He noted they are also focused on adding to their facilities and making them a safer and more pleasurable experience for the public.

 

Mr. Crawforth concluded that the division is very proud of its accomplishments, and said the budget is designed to help continue implementation of the plans of the division.

 

Steve Bremer, Chief, Administrative Services Bureau, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, said there were several salient points he wanted to make regarding the division’s budget. He drew attention to the document Charts for February 22, 2001 Budget Presentation (Exhibit F). He said this gives an encapsulated overview of where the division’s revenue comes from and where expenditures go. It separates figures of a categorical nature, such as for personnel and for operating. He pointed out that it also separates how much funding goes into such areas as habitat, game, and fisheries. This, he said, gives an overview of the agency and its diversity.

 

Mr. Bremer said the division has worked with the budget office and legislative staff to develop and maintain a significantly enhanced fiscal management profile, both from a monitoring and a reporting standpoint. He said the division has strived for and achieved a significantly enhanced fiscal position. He noted that the division is even more fiscally sound than is presented in the budget, based on the wildlife commission’s actions at the meeting of February 10, 2001, at which nonrefundable application fee was increased from $5.00 to $10.00, the statutory limit. He said the price of nonresident game tags was also increased. This, he noted, will bring in approximately $1.7 million additional revenue to the wildlife budget account 101‑4452, over the next three fiscal years. He stated that the division has already initiated a work program on February 20, 2001, that was provided to the budget office and to legislative fiscal staff.

 

Mr. Bremer also drew attention to the fact that the federal Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA) was not passed as envisioned. Instead, he explained, two acts which potentially provide  up to $800,000 in additional funding per fiscal year were eventually passed by Congress in late December, long after the division had submitted its budget. He said neither of the federal bills is included in the budget because both bills may require the states to compete for available funding. He said the ground rules for applying for the grants have not been finalized, and it is not known when cash will be available. He said the division is watching and waiting on this situation, and as they receive additional information on this they will be working closely with the legislative staff to keep them updated.

 

Mr. Bremer said the Division of Wildlife is established by Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 501.331 and is charged with the administration of wildlife laws under Chapters 501 thru 540 and the Nevada Boat Act under Chapter 488. He stated the division is currently authorized 214.77 full-time positions and is organized with seven program bureaus, which have responsibility for three operating regions. The bureaus, he said, are based on major work areas. Work responsibilities include administrative services, game, law enforcement, conservation education, habitat, fisheries, and support services. He said each bureau is responsible for program development and program administration in its respective major program areas and each is staffed by a chief and a varying number of staff members.

 

Mr. Bremer pointed out that the Division of Wildlife is a 96 percent user-funded agency. He said that over the next biennium almost $13 million of the revenues in the wildlife account will be generated from hunting and fishing licenses and tag sales alone. He said the other major source of revenue is federal grants in aid. He explained federal grants in aid are primarily available through federal aid for wildlife restoration in the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 and federal aid and support for fish restoration in the Dingell-Johnson Act of 1950. He said both of these acts are funded by excise taxes on sporting equipment and supplies. Mr. Bremer said a 1983 amendment to the Dingell Johnson Act provided additional funds for fisheries and boating programs. Federal aid from these sources provide for over half of the Division of Wildlife’s annual revenue.

 

Mr. Bremer said the budget beginning on page CNR-103 is the agency’s principal operating account. He stated it includes various license fees, federal aid, balance forwards from year to year, General Funds, tourism transfer, mine permits, and miscellaneous income, such as Treasurer’s interest, penalties, and excess property sales. He said the adjusted base continues funding for 214.77 professional and classified positions with the necessary operating support costs. He added that adjustments have been included for longevity pay, one-time expenses, contracts and expenditures relative to the new Elko office and the completion of the new Ely office. The Ely office, he noted, is now fully staffed and operational.

 

M-200  Demographics/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-105

 

Mr. Bremer said M-200 expands support for the big game draw hunt contractor to address the increased applications and costs, system adjustments, and to improve the process in the face of ever-increasing volume. He noted that new tag stock and further refinements are requested by the Board of Wildlife Commissioners.

 

M-201  Demographic/Caseload Changes - Page CNR-106

 

Mr. Bremer said M-201 adds a Conservation Educator III, which had previously been a seasonal position and was added in a temporary status during the reorganization of the conservation education bureau of the division.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked what made a full-time position necessary, and asked for an explanation of the duties involved in that position. Mr. Bremer said the duties of that position are primarily in southern Nevada and range from hunter education activities to direct interface and information dispersal to the public. That position, he explained, has essentially been overtaxed for a number of years and it was actually reclassified in the last biennium and was brought before the IFC. He said that in the process there was a mix-up in the processing of the paperwork and the conversion had not been made to a full-time position.

 

Mrs. Chowning said she found it interesting the position is going to be in southern Nevada, and asked how and to whom Mr. Bremer anticipated such hunter education would be presented. She inquired whether television, brochures, or meetings were going to be used for this purpose.

 

Mr. Crawforth responded that the division has a statewide hunter education program. He explained they use a series of volunteer instructors and give classes just before the time when people are buying new licenses and the game application process starts. He said that program has been in existence for about 25 years, and the state now has about 15,000 licensed hunters in Clark County. He noted that first-time hunting license buyers, including children, are required to take a hunter education class, which is part of a national program.

 

Mrs. Chowning asked whether that is the National Rifle Association program, and Mr. Crawforth said it is not, but is similar to that program. He explained that the states all have their own programs. He stated that, by using the volunteer instructors, the division uses the value of their services as a match to get federal aid to help fund the program.

 

Mr. Crawforth said this position is also active during the off-season for the hunter education portion. He explained that the division has a fairly extensive fishing education program using the urban ponds in the Las Vegas Valley. He said the instructor in that program teaches fishing classes to children and adults, and organizes a corps of volunteer instructors to help with the program.

 

Mrs. Chowning asked for further clarification, noting that the division would still be using the volunteer instructors. She asked whether the full-time position is going to add more instruction. Mr. Crawforth said the position will provide for more instruction, but the position has been working over the time authorized as it is. He said the demands for hunter education classes are quite static but the desire for fishing classes has grown substantially. He added that about 65 percent of the state’s fishermen reside in Clark County. He said that as they moved into teaching young people basic fishing skills, the division is finding a lot of people who are interested in learning about fly fishing and other types of fishing than what they are used to.

 

Mrs. Chowning reiterated that the increased demand is more in fishing than in hunting. Mr. Crawforth agreed that this position is more involved with fishing.

 

M-203  Demographics/Caseload Changes – CNR-106

 

Mr. Bremer said M-203 addresses a Program Assistant for the consolidated NDF and wildlife air operations to address the increase in administrative workload, such as record keeping and accounting. He said this position is going to be assigned to the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources fiscal office and funding will come 25 percent from wildlife and 75 percent from NDF.

 

E-275  Working Environment & Wage – Page CNR-109

 

Mr. Bremer said this decision unit provides for renovation of the various wildlife facilities statewide. He said an extensive statewide survey, analysis, and assessment had been done by the division’s engineering staff person who ranked facility needs into several distinct categories: those that are legally required, those that are public or employee safety items, those that are necessary for preservation of property, and those that are considered minimum standard for a positive and healthy work and living environment. He said the assessment also addressed anticipated maintenance and repair items for the future. He explained that the analysis was extensive and detailed and concerned itself not only with the current needs of the division but also what would be needed several years in the future for aging facilities.

 

Senator Jacobsen expressed his opinion that some of the prices in the budget are really high and asked whether the division uses any inmate crews. Mr. Bremer said the division’s engineer is incredible in his use of inmate crews and every other sort of volunteer labor available.

 

Assemblyman Parks noted that several items in E-275 are over the amount that requires agencies to work with the State Public Works Board. He asked whether the division has coordinated with public works on the projects involved. Mr. Bremer replied that the division’s engineer is a licensed professional engineer and that he had coordinated extensively with public works on these projects. He explained that the engineer works closely with them on an ongoing basis on all projects.

 

Mr. Crawforth explained that a number of the division’s projects are on the edge of the expenditure limits. He explained that, because the division has a licensed professional engineer, public works will review projects and delegate sign-off authority to the division. The engineer, he noted, continues to prepare his plans and submit them to public works on projects. He said public works takes the lead if the division has large projects.

 

Mr. Parks asked whether Mr. Crawforth foresees a problem in this respect, and Mr. Crawforth responded that the division has a very good working relationship between their engineer and the public works staff.

 

Senator Jacobsen suggested that, since public works has a new manager, it would be advisable to sit down with that person and the division’s engineer a couple of times a year for discussion. Mr. Crawforth replied that this has already been done.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division has a number of construction projects in progress now and some others on the drawing board, so there have been a lot of meetings with public works staff. He said public works has been extremely helpful in working with wildlife, both on the facility assessment and on the hatchery refurbishment project. He noted that public works usually enjoys working on wildlife projects because they involve types of construction that are different from the usual projects, and mentioned fish hatcheries and dams as examples.

 

E-300  Maximize Internet & Technology – Page CNR-109

 

Mr. Bremer said E-300 provides funding for an automated license and boat registration system to improve service to customers, as well as to the game wardens and any other group that needs information from the division. He said it will also provide inventory and sales data, client demographics, and improved sales accountability and functionality for point of sale transactions by using the Internet and “1-800” lines. He added that it provides funding for contract services, limited travel, and operating and software development and computer development. This recommendation, he said, is based on a request submitted to the Department of Information Technology (DoIT).

 

Mr. Bremer referred to the Update of Status of Nevada Wildlife Data System (Exhibit G. Original is on file in the Research Library.), and explained that it us an update of the status of the system itself as well as the information provided to the executive steering committee.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether there is any computer expertise within the division. Mr. Bremer responded that there were several who may be considered “computer nuts” but not necessarily computer experts. He continued, noting that the division is requesting a network specialist position to help them through the license system and with all the other computer needs of the division.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether the division’s cooperative effort with DoIT has been satisfactory. Mr. Bremer responded that the staff of DoIT have been excellent to work with.

 

E-301  Maximize Internet and Technology – Page CNR-110

 

Mr. Bremer said E-301 provides for the development and implementation of a local and statewide (wide area) network, and would allow the division access to the Internet and the state Controller’s office with its integrated financial system (IFS), among other things. He added that it would allow the division to increase its communication and information exchange abilities. He said these systems will significantly enhance the division’s productivity, interaction with other state and federal agencies, and communication with its customer base.

 

Mr. Bremer stated this budget module provides funding for hardware and software, contract services, associated travel and training, and operating expenses.

 

E-375  Environmental Policies & Programs – Page CNR-110

 

Mr. Bremer said E-375 involves a position request for 1 Computer Network Specialist III. He said this decision unit provides for on-site support for the division’s hardware, local area network (LAN), and wide area network (WAN) primarily at the division headquarters, but also to serve regional offices as a secondary assignment. This, he explained, will be employed directly by the division rather than by DoIT through cost allocation. He stated this decision unit also provides for new office equipment, a computer and software, instate travel, and miscellaneous operating expenses.

 

E-376  Environmental Policies & Programs – Page CNR-111

 

Mr. Bremer said E-376 recommends 1 Public Information Officer (PIO) II to assist in statewide program development and implementation, to assist in volunteer training and management, to process and update volunteer applications, to maintain and update the volunteer and student database, to act as regional liaison, and to warehouse and distribute material and information. In addition, he stated, this position will be based in state headquarters and be responsible for the continued development and support of the agency website. He noted that the agency website currently averages between 5,000 and 6,000 hits a day.

 

Mr. Bremer also noted this decision unit provides for new office equipment, desktop personal computer, printer, software, file server, out-of-state travel, and miscellaneous operating expenses.

 

E-377  Environmental Policies & Programs – Page CNR-111

 

Mr. Bremer said E-377 is for a Staff I Associate Engineer to provide assistance to the current engineering staff person. This decision unit, he explained, adds the staff engineer to assist in the various projects that require engineering skills. Additionally, Mr. Bremer said, in this biennium the agency will be undertaking the beginning of the renovation of its facilities statewide based on the extensive analysis noted in E-275, as well as a multi-year project to renovate its various fish hatcheries statewide.

 

Mr. Bremer indicated this decision unit also provides funding for new office equipment, computer, printer, software, and miscellaneous operating expenses.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether this position is ongoing at the moment. Mr. Bremer said current staff work on everything from hands-on projects to engineering design and assessment. Mr. Bremer said the division’s professional engineer also did the facility assessment, and stated the engineer is extremely gifted and the division is very fortunate to have him on staff. Senator Jacobsen asked whether Mr. Bremer feels it is a necessity to have an in-house engineer, and Mr. Bremer responded that it is an absolute necessity, based on the current workload and based on what the division wants to do over the next biennium, as well as on into the future.

 

Mr. Parks asked for an explanation of some of the projects this individual will be working on and how that would compare to the other projects and their costs to the division.

 

Mr. Crawforth stated that one of the projects the division is working on is the engineering, design, and oversight of the construction of the hangar in Minden. He said the division is also involved with local government and the National Parks Service on construction of a number of boat ramps, and noted that his division has probably developed the best knowledge in the state on how to build boat access facilities in Nevada. He said that in the wildlife management areas and hatcheries the division has a lot of houses, other buildings, hatchery ponds, and a number of reservoirs that need to be assessed and repaired periodically. He said a couple of these presently need some emergency attention. Mr. Crawforth stated that without an additional staff position to help do those things the division will continue to fall behind on the maintenance and refurbishment of those buildings.

 

Mr. Parks said he was also concerned about the fact that there may be duplication of costs included in the engineering projects. Mr. Crawforth testified there is not.

 

Assemblyman Beers commended the department for having the foresight to make the Webmaster duties a function of the PIO. He drew attention to the Computer Network Specialist position that is not going to be a DoIT allocation but rather will be employed directly by wildlife, and stated that it has been his experience that “computer people respond better to being fed training than they do money.” He advised the division not to ignore the fact they have this resource in a rapidly changing environment and they have to start allocating training dollars for their computer people to keep them current on the latest technologies.

 

Mr. Crawforth expressed his appreciation of those comments, and agreed with the assessment on where the Webmaster should be. He explained that the amount of data the division has on wildlife and the public use of wildlife resources in the state is huge and much of it is on hardcopy in boxes and file cabinets. That data needs to be put into a usable form that the division can communicate both internally and externally. He noted there is a tremendous demand for information on wildlife species and the associated mapping that goes with that.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether computers require annual maintenance or anything like that. Mr. Beers replied that it varies, and in some environments computers require daily maintenance to keep going. He explained that it is not as much a matter of maintenance on the computer as it is all the integrated software and hardware pieces working together and communicating with all the other computers.

 

Senator Jacobsen remarked the lifespan of computers is short. Mr. Beers explained that the lifespan is not dictated by the obsolescence of the machinery, but by the availability of faster and bigger computers being on the market. He said there is always the option of not purchasing new computers, but noted the problem is that software products are continuously rewritten to take advantage of the greater horsepower and everyone wants the new software products.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked for an overview of the Steptoe Valley Wildlife Management Area. Mr. Crawforth related that the division recently acquired the old 3C Ranch just south of Ely using old bond funds. He said it is 6,400 acres of prime bottomland and benchland. There is a sizeable reservoir on the property, he noted, which is a tremendous fishery as long as it can be kept full of water. He said there is also a grazing allotment of over 20,000 acres that has been acquired and incorporated into the division’s wildlife management area system. He added that the division is currently receiving public input on a planning process for future management of that area.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division has already conducted a review and contracted with Ducks Unlimited to investigate their capabilities to restore wetlands in that area. This, he noted, would have implications for elk, sage grouse, deer, and antelope. He said that Cummins Reservoir on that property was probably the best fishery in the state of Nevada in the past year. Mr. Crawforth expressed confidence that the division can enhance that, but they need someone to manage that. He noted that there cannot be 6,400 acres of real property with lots of public access without there being someone to take care of the place.

 

Senator Jacobsen expressed his delight with the project. He suggested it would be advisable to have a few pictures of the property to give the committee an idea as to what the area consists of. Mr. Crawforth said he would provide a picture.

 

E-379  Environmental Policies & Programs – Page CNR-112

 

Mr. Bremer said E-379 adds a Program Officer I to develop, administrate, and maintain a statewide boating program. He said this position would be responsible for assuring all boat titling and registration functions are performed. In addition, he said, this position will be charged with performing periodic program and internal control reviews in all division offices, and will assist in the development and implementation of the new statewide licensing system. This module, he stated, provides funding for new furniture, a computer, software, miscellaneous operating costs, and instate travel costs.

 

Mr. Beers noted that 80 percent of the position’s duties would be spent on boating programs, yet transfers from the boat account provide 100 percent of the funding. Mr. Bremer said he is not sure where the 80 percent figure comes from, but it is his understanding that position will spend 100 percent of the time on boat programs. Mr. Beers asked why the position is not in the boating program. Mr. Bremer said none of the division’s positions are funded directly and none of the positions reside in the boat budget. He said they are all in wildlife and costs are allocated to the boat account. He said, “Even their internal control reviews and programmatic reviews are all boat focused.” He said the boat program is currently being managed by one person who does that as an additional duty on the side, so proper focus has not been given to the boat program, especially in light of the growth in the number of boaters in the state. The division needs to manage that program effectively.

 

E-380  Environmental Policies & Programs – Page CNR-113

 

Mr. Crawforth said that E-380 provides a Public Safety Dispatcher III to be responsible for statewide dispatching and for adequate coverage during duty hours, especially at peak business times. He explained that this position is necessary to address the increased traffic. This budget module, he said, provides for miscellaneous operating costs for the position itself.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether Mr. Crawforth could indicate the purpose of normal calls to the dispatcher. Mr. Crawforth said the division dispatches for all of its field personnel, primarily the warden force, as well as for flight services when they are working. He stated that the dispatch service runs about 18 hours a day at the Reno facility. He added that the division has just upgraded and enhanced the Reno facility, and they have a series of mountaintop repeaters scattered around the state. He said the division also contracts dispatch for the BLM enforcement effort, as well as some work for the enforcement program for the United States Forest Service.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether the dispatch service could be used for emergency management purposes in the event of a disaster. Mr. Crawforth said the division has all of the latest equipment for not only emergency management but also all the various law enforcement network systems. He added that the division has participated in such events as the flood that occurred a few years ago. Senator Jacobsen noted that he serves on the State Emergency Response Commission, and he is aware that their first priority is communications.

 

E-382  Environmental Policies & Programs – Page CNR-113

 

Mr. Bremer said the division’s expenditure patterns in each fiscal year vary to some degree based on the needs of the agency’s reaction to current and emergent situations and other factors. He said this budget module is requested to allow the division to fulfill its mission by requesting adequate expenditure authority paralleling its fiscal ability to fulfill its mission. He stated that this module provides funding for travel, operating costs, maintenance to buildings and grounds, capital improvements, and operating costs for the Board of Wildlife Commissioners. It also provides funding for personnel training and costs associated with the non game management programs; and for hunter education and aquatic education. Mr. Bremer related that “part of the process in building this budget was to come back and identify specific projects that are detailed.”

 

Senator Jacobsen asked what is meant by the approval of drugs for fish production. Mr. Crawforth said it is mostly medications for fish in fish hatcheries. He explained that the division also uses a small amount of drugs when they are capturing fish and handling them.

 

Mr. Parks asked for an explanation of out of state travel. He said it appears that an increase of $26,000 is recommended in the first year and almost $25,000 in the second year. He noted that the division spent $17,000 in Fiscal Year 2000.

 

Mr. Crawforth said he believed the change is occurring because people in the wildlife management business have realized that wildlife are not very respective of political boundaries and it is necessary to deal with species that inhabit other states as well. He said regional cooperation among various technical people is necessary to care for such species as sage grouse and elk. He explained that such relative conferences are sometimes held in Nevada, and sometimes in Colorado. He said it is the division’s desire to become more involved in a more global ecosystem effort to coordinate with and learn from other states and share knowledge with them. Most out-of-state travel is directed at that type of activity, he added.

 

Mr. Marvel asked when a report can be expected on the conservation plan for sage grouse. Mr. Crawforth said he believes the plan will be completed by June 2001. He noted that the basics of a plan have been completed, and he believes substantial progress will be made in an upcoming meeting. The goal, he explained, is to have the plan completed and accepted by all team members and the Governor’s office by early summer.

 

Mr. Marvel asked whether Mr. Crawforth believed it would be accepted by United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Mr. Crawforth replied he believes it will be because of the way the division is putting the plan together. He said that if the federal government gets a petition to list sage grouse as an endangered species, the plan the state division has put together will meet any of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s needs as long as it is an action plan and the division is working on projects and showing progress.

 

E-900  Transfer to B/A 4458 – Page CNR-115

 

Mr. Bremer said E-900 transfers the excess mining industry assessments, over and above the actual cost of the three mining biologists and their attendant travel, operating, equipment, and training expenses, to the obligated reserve budget account 101-4485. He explained that this will allow the mining industry, in cooperation with the division, to delineate and support specific projects with the appropriate credit accruing to the industry itself.

 

Wildlife Obligated Reserve – Budge Page CNR-118 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-4458

 

Mr. Bremer said revenue from the wildlife obligated reserve account is from the sale of duck stamps, tag application fees, operation game thief donations, gifts, federal aid, treasurer’s interest, and carry forward from the sale of real property and water rights in pre-1996 big game auction tag proceeds. He noted that the division is currently working on a reconciliation of the exact cash balances in this account and will be presenting that to legislative staff shortly.

 

Mr. Bremer explained that expenditures are for wetlands projects, elk damage payments and prevention, biodiversity, operation game thief programs, habitat restoration, and game water development or guzzlers. He said the base budget currently reflects those conditional or restricted funding sources within the Division of Wildlife, and includes duck stamps, operation game thief donations, elk damage fees, gifts and donations, and federal habitat revenue.

 

 

E-382  Environmental Policies & Programs – Page CNR-119

 

Mr. Bremer said E-382 provides additional authority in various special expenditure categories to enable the division to react to specific contingencies or donations that may arise on short notice. He noted that this budget module provides funding for duck stamp projects, additional operation game thief expenditures, elk damage payments, federal habitat projects, biodiversity work, wildlife water development, and gifts and donations.

 

E-720  New Equipment – Page CNR-114

 

Senator Jacobsen asked what the forklift is for as listed in E-720. Mr. Bremer said he was not sure about that, but assured that he would provide that information for the Senator. He said he knew it had already been provided to the staff, and he believed it was for the southern Nevada office for the new facility that was built there. Senator Jacobsen explained that there were two of them at the airport last year for a considerable length of time and he did not know whether they were for wildlife or forestry, but they were surplus. Mr. Crawforth said they did not belong to his division. Mr. Bremer said the only forklift the division currently owns is one at division headquarters, which has been a great boon to them.

 

E-900  Transfer from BA 4452 – Page CNR-120

 

Mr. Bremer stated that E-900 transfers the excess mining industry assessments, over and above the actual costs for the three mining biologists, from budget account 101-4452 to budget account 101-4458. This, he explained, is for working in close cooperation with the mining industry to work on joint cooperative projects that benefit both and it provides adequate support.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether the Division of Wildlife staff find the mining people cooperative. Mr. Crawforth said the division has had a partnership with the mining industry in Nevada for a number of years. He recalled it started in resolution of problem with the toxic cyanide ponds the mines had, and the division worked cooperatively to solve the problem of birds and other wildlife getting into those ponds. He said that mortality in those ponds has been reduced to almost nothing at this point. He said the division has worked with the mining industry on range rehab, mine dump rehabilitation, and a number of other things. He explained that the division has been so successful in the rehabilitation program that the division does not need the money to enhance the existing program. However, he added, the division would like to continue to receive those funds from the mining industry and put them into a different account so the division can partner with mining on various range and mitigation projects. He stated that the mining industry is in concurrence with this proposal.

 

Senator Jacobsen testified for the record that in everything he is involved in with mining, they are very cooperative. He noted the seed bank project as an example. He said the state has used some of mining industry’s plots and harvested some of their seed to use in other places.

 

Mr. Parks commented that “excess mining assessments” lead him to think that these are assessments the mining industry may want back. He said he is not sure he understands fully how the assessments have been used in the past and the kinds of mitigation efforts that have taken place.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division established a program when the cyanide heap leach ponds first appeared on the scene in Nevada. He explained that, during the fall migration of waterfowl, many birds would take a rest in these ponds and would “not leave.” He said that initiated an effort with the division and the mining industry to develop a program to resolve some of the issues concerning mitigation for wildlife around mining projects. He stated that the mining industry stepped forward and wanted to fund that program.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division put together a program and completed the startup of that program, and it is now in maintenance mode. He stated that the division  does not need that much money from the mining industry. He said the division talked to the industry people about this, and they related that they would prefer to continue to pay the permit fees involved as long as the division is prepared to put the surplus funds into the program needs and make them available for collaboration with the industry on various rehabilitation projects.

 

Wildlife-Boating Program – Budget Page CNR-122

Budget Account 101-4456

 

Mr. Crawforth stated that the division’s principal account is the wildlife account. He pointed out that a lot of their activities are in that account and they transfer funds from the boating account to cover boating’s fair share of those activities. Because of that, he explained, some of the positions and enhancements have already been discussed.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division has a multi-phase boating program. He stated that the division registers titled boats. He also said the division has an enforcement program and an extensive conservation education program for boating safety. The division installs navigational aids in several reservoirs around the state, and does boat access construction in conjunction with other agencies and local governments.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Crawforth to comment on the trout stamp program. Mr. Crawforth explained that the division constructed a new fish hatchery in Mason Valley a number of years ago. He recalled that bonds were sold and those bonds were paid for with the state trout stamp revenue which was established about the same time. He said the division just made its last payment on those bonds in the last few months.

 

Mr. Crawforth stated that the division is in need of refurbishment at that facility. He also pointed out that the hatchery at Lake Mead is getting ready to fail. He said that they have put a lot of “band aids and bailing wire” on that facility, but it is quite a number of years old and is in need of substantial refurbishment, as are the Gallagher Hatchery in Elko County and the division’s facility near Ely. He said the division’s concern is that they are going to have a failure at one of those stations and lose an entire year’s production. That, he explained, would be a loss of millions of dollars worth of fish, not to mention the recreational opportunity. The division’s proposal, he explained, is for a several-year plan to completely refurbish those facilities using bonds and pay back the bond using trout stamp funds, license revenues, and federal aid. He said to pay that back in a reasonable amount of time, he estimates that the divisions would have to raise the price of the trout stamp from $5.00 to $10.00. He noted that neither that fee nor the license to fish fee has been increased for a number of years.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked whether the hatcheries are currently disease free. Mr. Crawforth said they are, for the most part.

 

Mr. Parks asked whether Mr. Crawforth had discussed the trout stamp fee increase with administration. Mr. Crawforth responded that the division initially proposed legislation to increase the price of the trout stamp, which is presently set statutorily at $5.00, to $10.00 effective in 2002. He stated that the Governor’s office preferred that the division not establish that statutorily, but rather allow the Board of Wildlife Commissioners to establish that fee, whether under a cap or not, when it is needed. He noted that there is legislation presented to accomplish that.

 

Mr. Beers asked whether there is resident staff now at the Lake Mead fish hatchery. Mr. Crawforth answered that there are at least two people who live there, and the division has three houses there. Mr. Beers asked whether the reasoning is that, if there is a failure there in the middle of the night, someone will be there to implement the manual system. Mr. Crawforth confirmed that is the case.

 

Mr. Beers asked whether there is a fund to finance investigations, and suggested a $500 line item that could be used when the division needs cash to facilitate an investigation. He noted that typically that money would be recovered, but it would be needed to investigate some of the boating laws, particularly in Clark County. Mr. Crawforth replied that staff have a fairly substantial operating budget and is able to do those kinds of activities, and he noted that they regularly do so.

 

Senator Jacobsen asked what the need is in E-720 for body armor. Mr. Crawforth said the division provides body armor for all of the enforcement personnel. He pointed out that they have done that for a number of years, and explained it needs to be replaced every 7 years. Mr. Crawforth noted that there is proportionally a greater number of game wardens injured and killed in the line of duty in the United States than any other kind of law enforcement.

 

Senator O’Donnell asked how many fishing licenses are sold in the state. Mr. Crawforth answered that the division sells about 234,000 hunting and fishing licenses annually. He explained that about 45,000 of those are hunting licenses, and there is a combination hunting and fishing license. Senator O’Donnell referred to budget account 101-4452 and the amount of money the division plans to spend on the computerized fishing and hunting licenses. He questions whether it was worth spending $1.3 million for that.

 

Mr. Crawforth pointed out that the division has a current system on the state’s mainframe that is only about 50 percent functional at this point. He said they were never able to finish that project. He said the division had considered entering into a process to develop a point-of-sale type licensing system as a lot of other states have done. He explained that the division subsequently initiated the outsourcing of the game drawing system and they did not feel they had the resources and staff to do both systems at the same time. He said the division has perfected the tag drawing system, but it is well past time to implement a licensing system.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division is hoping to make the process for boating and for licenses more customer oriented. He pointed out that the division is still in a 50‑year-old, hard-copy, batch, mail-in system with approximately 180 license agents around the state, and the accounting procedures in the system are very poor.

 

Senator O’Donnell asked whether the division’s fishing license and hunting license processes are capable of being processed on the Internet, and Mr. Crawforth said they were not at this time. He said it is one of the plans of the division to get into a mode where individuals can purchase a license on the Internet, and they are no longer looking at point-of-sale processing any more. He indicated that they also want to permit people to use credit cards. But, he pointed out, the division has none of those capabilities at this time.

 

Senator O’Donnell repeated his concern that $1.3 million is more than enough money to do that. He interjected that this year there is a real budget crunch, and he is looking for any dollars that can possibly be saved. He asked whether there is any way the division could push this program back another 2 years, or possibly implement a portion of it instead of going with a full-blown rollout to all the Long’s Drugs and Wal-Mart licensing points.

 

Mr. Crawforth said the division will not roll out this system to all the license agents. He said they are looking at an Internet solution. He noted that presently they have a contractor who is working on a request for proposal for the division for that process. He stated the division has been successful with that contractor before in developing the big game drawing system for the division.

 

Mr. Crawforth noted that the division could continue with the current system indefinitely, but it would not provide the kind of customer service the division wants and would not provide the division the ability to account for license sales in the fashion he feels the division needs to do. He said the division has sufficient funds in the wildlife reserve to accomplish this, and in the long run the division will not only provide services but will also save money. He noted that there are 3 staff now dedicated to longhand manual computations on everything that is done on the license system, and the revenues are not received from license agents for 90 to 120 days.

 

Mr. Parks noted that in Mr. Crawforth’s opening presentation he noted the majority of the division’s revenue is generated through fees and charges, and that the division has a rather healthy prognostication as to the amount of revenues. He asked whether there is a possibility that a greater or smaller amount of the General Fund contribution could be made to the division’s respective budgets without interfering with the division’s operation.

 

Mr. Crawforth said there are a number of programs funded by the General Fund that the division could not fund with license money or federal aid because they are not eligible for that. He pointed out that hunters and anglers in the state have always paid the bill for wildlife management, and they feel very strongly that for species that are not hunted and fished someone else should be paying at least part of that bill. He also pointed out that the division cannot spend some of the federal aid money on some of those projects, such as education, law enforcement, and others.

 

State Parks – Budget Page CNR-132 (Volume 3)

Budget Account 101-4162

 

Wayne R. Perock, Administrator, Division of State Parks, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources introduced Allen Newberry, Chief of Operations and Maintenance, Division of State Parks, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Mr. Perock’s presentation was accompanied by Exhibit H entitled Division of State Parks – Budget Account 4162 – One Shot Appropriation – 2000/2002 Biennial Budget.

 

Mr. Perock stated that the Division of State Parks was set up under NRS 407.013, which is the declaration of legislative intent. This, he pointed out, is the driving force as well as the mission of this agency. He quoted:

 

It is the intention of the legislature that the division shall acquire, protect, develop, and interpret a well-balanced system of areas of outstanding scenic, recreational, scientific, and historic importance for the inspiration, use and enjoyment of the people of the State of Nevada and that such shall be held in trust as irreplaceable portions of Nevada’s natural and historic heritage.

 

In other words, Mr. Perock concluded, everything the agency does falls within those parameters.

 

Mr. Perock said his agency currently operates 24 state park areas, which encompass approximately 132,000 acres. This includes land and water bodies. He said they serve approximately 3.4 million visitors per year. He added that the division has 95 permanent employees and approximately 139 seasonal employees to help during the peak periods. The agency, he explained, is organized into three basic sections: the administrative section, the planning and development section, and the operation and maintenance section. He said there is a small program that deals with the federally funded recreational trails program.

 

Mr. Perock said the division is making a “flat request” according to the budgeting rules they received from the budget office. This, he said, includes all the components of the base, maintenance, and enhancement decision units. He noted that the base budget represents the ongoing costs of the 24 park units, 5 regional offices, and the division headquarters.

 

Revenue sources, he said, include the major areas of General Fund appropriation, marina development gas tax, and user fees. Main expenditures include personnel, out-of-state and instate travel, operating, and utilities.

 

M-100 Inflation & Per Unit Adjustment – Page CNR-134

 

Mr. Perock said M-100 is basically adjustments for operating and utility expenses.

 

M-200 Demographics/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-134

 

M-201 Demographic/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-135

 

Mr. Perock said decision units M-200 through M-204 deal with personnel. He said the division is requesting 5 permanent positions, and each is budgeted with associated equipment, operating costs, and other expenses. He stated that all positions begin in the biennium at .75 FTE in the first year and 1 FTE in the second year.

 

Mr. Perock said M-200 and M-201 are each for 1 Management Assistant I, to provide assistance at Valley of Fire State Park in Clark County and at Lake Tahoe in western Nevada. He noted that Valley of Fire is the oldest and largest state park and encompasses over 34,000 acres. He pointed out that visitation there has increased by 46 percent from 292,000 in 1996 to over 427,000 in 1999. This, he explained, is due largely to the growth in Clark County and increased numbers of out-of-state tourists.

 

Mr. Perock said increased workloads have developed in the area of clerical and office duties, which includes fee accounting, correspondence, filming permits, and visitor center reception. These duties are presently being done by field ranger staff, and Mr. Perock explained that this pulls the rangers away from their duties of providing service to visitors.

 

Mr. Perock stated that there is a continued increase in clerical and bookkeeping workload on the ranger staff at Lake Tahoe as well. He noted that it is thought that nothing happens in the winter at Lake Tahoe, but it does in fact get year-round visitor use. He explained that the office duties there are similar to those in the Valley of Fire position. He said the FTE ratio at Lake Tahoe is presently 61,000 visitors per FTE. He said this is 156 percent higher than the average of 24,406 visitors per FTE.

 

Mr. Perock said the division plans to fund these positions through increased fee collections.

 

M-202 Demographic Caseload Changes – Page CNR-135

 

Mr. Perock said M-202 is a request for a park ranger at Lake Tahoe. He stated that Lake Tahoe is the division’s most heavily visited park, with nearly 1 million visitors per year. He said the current ranger staff is not able to keep up with law enforcement and other workload duties and visitor needs. He noted that the Sand Harbor unit is state park’s most heavily visited site with over 750,000 visitors yearly, and fee collections of over $350,000 a year. But, he stated, there is only one full-time ranger assigned there plus the park supervisor, who has jurisdiction over the 14,000-acre park and other units within that park.

 

Mr. Perock explained that the additional ranger is needed to ensure visitor safety, improve fee collections and accounting, increase evening patrols and visitor service, cover leave periods for other staff, and provide a variety of other duties. Additionally, he explained, there is a continued demand for ranger duties associated with changing use patterns, longer coverage periods, and expanded special programs. He noted that 30 percent of the arrests made system-wide and 22 percent of the warnings were made at Sand Harbor alone.

 

Mr. Perock said this position will be partially funded through fee collections brought through increased compliance. This, he explained, could be done indirectly by allowing the rangers to do compliance checks.

 

Mr. Parks asked for confirmation that the increased user fee collection is going to be satisfactory to fund these positions. Mr. Perock assured him that it would. Mr. Perock explained that if there is no one in a fee booth at a park there is an honor system using envelopes. He said compliance to that system is very low. To get people to pay the division plans to have someone at the fee booth or to go around and do compliance checks and get the people who have not complied to pay.

 

M-203  Demographic/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-136

 

Mr. Perock said M-203 is a request for a permanent Park Ranger Technician III to be stationed at Rye Patch State Recreation Area. He noted that Rye Patch currently has only a park supervisor. He said a second permanent position is needed there to assist the existing position.

 

Mr. Perock said the position salary can be 80 percent funded by increased fee compliance and collection. He noted also that the position will extend coverage throughout the fall, winter, and spring when no seasonal staff is available. He explained that Rye Patch is the state’s third largest park with over 20,000 acres. He said it presently operates with 1 full-time position and 9 months of seasonal position, leaving it without staff for the equivalent of several months each year. The FTE ratio, he stated, was almost 42,000 visitors per FTE in 1991, and is twice the statewide average.

 

This second position, Mr. Perock added, would provide 7 days a week coverage throughout the year providing essential public services presently lacking much of the time. It would also provide safer working conditions for the existing permanent position.

 

M-204  Demographic/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-136

 

Pr. Perock said the M-204 position is a Maintenance Repair Worker I located in the Elko region office. Currently, he explained, the division has only one maintenance position in the Elko area. He stated that the second maintenance position is needed to assist the existing position responsible for the two state parks in the region.

 

Mr. Perock said maintenance workloads have increased with the developments at South Fork, and many projects are contracted out because of the staff limitations.

 

Mr. Marvel asked Mr. Perock whether he had addressed the problem of the washed out culvert at South Fork. Mr. Perock said his division did not address that. He explained that Elko County is addressing the culvert and has some plans to bridge it, possibly with some federal money. Mr. Perock said that is not a problem they address, noting that the state does not own the roadbed in that location.

 

Mr. Marvel stated that he had looked at that road last summer, and speculated that there will be a terrible flooding problem if that is not addressed. He asked whether there might be some federal funds that could have been received and used in cooperation with the county. Mr. Perock explained that the roadbed in question was dedicated to the county and is not something park funds could be used for. He acknowledged the need for such repairs.

 

 

 

M-205  Demographics/Caseload Changes – Page CNR-137

 

Mr. Perock said M-205 includes additional seasonal salaries, operating, maintenance of buildings and grounds, data processing, and utilities. This, he explained, is partially funded through the General Fund, and also through marine gas tax in the second fiscal year. He added that it also increases funding for seasonal salaries, operating supplies, and a variety of different things.

 

It was agreed that the rest of the presentation on this budget item would be rescheduled because of time restraints.

 

The meeting adjourned at 10:53 a.m.

 

 

 

 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

Bob Williston

Committee Secretary

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

                       

Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Chairman

 

 

DATE:           

 

 

 

                       

Mr. David R. Parks, Chairman

 

 

DATE: