MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
Assembly Committee on Ways and Means
AND THE
Senate Committee on Finance
JOINT Subcommittee on Public Safety/Natural Resources/Transportation
Seventy-Second Session
April 10, 2003
The Assembly Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance, Joint Subcommittee on Public Safety/Natural Resources/Transportation was called to order at 8:00 a.m., on Thursday, April 10, 2003. Chairman David Parks presided in Room 2134 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
Assembly COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. David Parks, Chairman
Ms. Chris Giunchigliani
Mr. Josh Griffin
Ms. Sheila Leslie
Mr. John Marvel
Mr. Richard Perkins
Senate COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Chairman
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator Sandra Tiffany
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Mark Krmpotic, Senior Program Analyst
Mike Chapman, Program Analyst
Tracy Raxter, Program Analyst
Jim Rodriguez, Program Analyst
Linda Smith, Committee Secretary
Carol Thomsen, Committee Secretary
Chairman Parks said the Subcommittee would be reviewing issues related to the Department of Corrections. He noted that the Department had distributed new materials to the Subcommittee (Exhibit C and Exhibit D). The Chair asked Tracy Raxter, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, to come forward.
Mr. Raxter said at the last work session for the Department of Corrections, the Subcommittee had voiced concerns related to the recommendation included in the Governor’s budget for a transitional housing facility for individuals leaving the prison system. The Subcommittee had requested that the Department of Corrections develop an alternative plan for transitional housing and bring the plan back to the Subcommittee. Mr. Raxter said one day prior to the current meeting, the Legislative Counsel Bureau had received a revised housing plan. The Governor’s budget proposal included a housing facility for a maximum of 436 inmates, and staff wanted to ensure there would be a facility available for those inmates. Mr. Raxter said the Subcommittee also had concerns regarding the funding included in The Executive Budget. The original proposal included the Department partnering with a nonprofit organization, and the nonprofit organization would obtain low‑income housing tax credits. Mr. Raxter stated the Department would be presenting a different proposal to the Subcommittee.
Jackie Crawford, Director, Department of Corrections, said because of concerns the Subcommittee had with the Department partnering with a private, nonprofit organization, the Department had elected to go through the Division of State Lands and lease the facility—the Department would operate the facility. Ms. Crawford introduced Fritz Schlottman, Research Analyst, Department of Corrections, who would present the new proposal.
Mr. Schlottman said the Subcommittee and the Director had requested that Department staff examine various options for the reentry center transitional housing. The concept for reentry transitional housing originated through the Governor’s Study Committee on Corrections; a committee organized to examine what did and did not work in the area of corrections. The options pursued in the Department’s budget resulted from that study and those expert opinions.
Mr. Schlottman began a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit C) and said there were four options for housing inmates. He said the reentry center, originally called Casa Grande, was more cost-efficient than “hard beds” in the prisons. The cost of the Casa Grande facility was approximately two-thirds the cost of the hard beds at the High Desert State Prison, the most economical medium security facility. The costs for the reentry facility would be greater than the costs for a conservation camp, but within the reentry center individuals received training and treatment and acquired skills needed to be successful outside the prison system.
Mr. Schlottman continued his presentation and said additional General Fund dollars would become available with the approval of the Casa Grande facility. The Department projected $6.8 million in FY2004 and $6.4 million in FY2005 would come into the state from renting existing beds to 120 Wyoming inmates and 250 Washington inmates. Mr. Schlottman then reviewed four options:
OPTION 1
A 200-bed reentry center opening in July 2004. Mr. Schlottman said the Department had looked at the types of existing facilities that would be on the market that the Division of State Lands could consider for the reentry center. The presentation (Exhibit C) included pictures of two possible properties. Mr. Schlottman emphasized that existing properties were available. The assumption was that the center would open July of 2004 with 200 male inmates. The center would provide transitional housing to inmates within six months of discharge, or four months of parole. No sex offenders or offenders with a history of violence within five years would be eligible for the transitional housing. The facility would be leased and located at an appropriate metropolitan Las Vegas site. Income from housing Wyoming inmates would partially fund the center and inmates would be obligated to pay $18 per day for their own support. Mr. Schlottman briefly reviewed the highlights of the male master plan and the time lines for the reentry center. The time lines had been approved by Department administration.
OPTION 2
A 200-bed reentry center opening July 2004 and a second 200-bed reentry center opening September 2005. The attractiveness of the plan was the ease of adding the second phase since the land, dining room, and kitchen were already in existence in the first phase. The center would operate under the same guidelines as those presented in Option 1.
OPTION 3
A 200-bed reentry center opening July 2004 and a second, separate 200-bed reentry center opening September 2005. The argument for Option 3 was not having a critical mass of 400 inmates in one location. The option was more expensive because there would have to be two cores; two center managers, an operating facility, two dining establishments, and two kitchens. The guidelines would be the same as Options 1 and 2.
OPTION 4
If the Subcommittee elected to set aside the findings of the Governor’s Study Committee on Corrections and not consider reentry centers at the current time, the option would be to absorb the inmate population within existing housing in the Department of Corrections. Under Option 4, the Department would not open a reentry center, but would open existing housing as necessary. The Wyoming contract would have to be terminated and negotiations with the state of Washington would also have to be terminated, resulting in a loss of General Fund revenue of approximately $13 million. The Department would then be requesting additional funds to open unit 8 at the High Desert State Prison.
Mr. Schlottman concluded the PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit C) and listed the reasons for approving the reentry centers:
Mr. Schlottman said if the Subcommittee elected not to approve the reentry centers, the Department would have to utilize Option 4. An addition at the High Desert State Prison would be needed in the future, which would result in a prison facility approximately twice the size of the Ely State Prison, at a cost of over $100,000 per cell.
Assemblywoman Leslie stated for the record that it was not the will of the Subcommittee to not support reentry programs and the suggestions of the Study Committee. However, the Subcommittee members did want a realistic reentry plan. Ms. Leslie asked for further clarification on the number of individuals that would be served under Option 1. Mr. Schlottman said the impact of keeping the other 200 inmates was that eventually there would be a need to open a northern reentry center to serve inmates from the Washoe County area. Ms. Leslie asked for further explanation on the inmates from Washington and Wyoming. Mr. Schlottman said, based on the success of housing the inmates from Wyoming, the state of Washington had approached the Department to consider accepting and housing inmates from that state. Mr. Schlottman said the state of Washington had indicated their desire to place 250 inmates in Nevada’s prison system by Memorial Day, which represented significant funding for the state. The 250 inmates would utilize existing beds in an existing facility, but additional staff would be required to operate the facility. Ms. Leslie explained that the Subcommittee needed all available information in order to make informed decisions.
Ms. Leslie thought Option 2 sounded the best if it was realistic. Mr. Schlottman said the Department could go through the Division of State Lands to help locate a facility. The Department had been approached by individuals interested in the concept. He stressed that the Department would not rush the process, but would look at what would be best. All available options in the metropolitan Las Vegas area that would best serve the needs of the inmates and the state were being considered. Ms. Leslie said she liked “getting to 400 over the biennium if it is possible.” Mr. Schlottman said once the core facility was completed, it would just be a matter of looking at space to house an additional 200 inmates.
In response to a question posed by Ms. Giunchigliani on Option 1, Mr. Schlottman said Options 1, 2, and 3 would all include establishment of a reentry center in northern Nevada if the concept proved successful in southern Nevada.
Mr. Schlottman explained that all of the options required leasing land. The Department would go through the Division of State Lands to find an existing property that would be adequate for a reentry center. Ms. Giunchigliani said unfortunately there would be individuals or organizations that would object to having a reentry center in their neighborhood and resolving those objections could continue for a long period of time. Even if the property was leased, Ms. Giunchigliani thought there would have to be some type of zone variance or public hearings. Mr. Schlottman said a property owner who was interested in leasing property for a reentry center would have an understanding of possible problems and if “you are not willing to fight that fight, don’t bid.”
Ms. Giunchigliani asked about the locations of the facilities pictured in the PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit C). Ms. Crawford said she had spent an entire day in Las Vegas meeting with realtors. She provided the realtors with information on the reentry center, including who would be occupying the center, the types of jobs that would be needed, and transportation needs. Four possible sites were discussed that were zoned and that the realtors thought would not be an issue with the community. Ms. Crawford said she would provide the information to the Division of State Lands for their consideration. The photos included in the presentations were potential sites that were for sale and were possibly zoned appropriately. Ms. Crawford acknowledged there was a great deal of potential with the first site presented to the Subcommittee. Ms. Crawford said the Department would adopt a site committee to visit and analyze the potential of each site.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked how the $18 per day charge was selected and how the individuals immediately released from prison would have the ability to pay those costs. Mr. Schlottman said currently restitution inmates paid $16 per day. He said there was a demand for individuals to work in the construction and landscaping fields and those were the areas the reentry individuals could find employment and be able to generate rent money.
Glen Whorton, Assistant Director, Operations, Northern Nevada, Department of Corrections, said there were contractors who had long and established relationships with staff of the Northern Nevada Restitution Center. When those contractors needed an employee, they contacted the Center. It was expected that the same type of partnership would develop within the Las Vegas community. Mr. Whorton and Ms. Giunchigliani briefly discussed the problems with day labor and Mr. Whorton said the intent of the reentry centers was not to place the individuals into day labor jobs, but rather in long-term, productive employment. The goal of the reentry centers was to successfully return individuals to the community.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked where the job training and placement component was included in the Department’s budget. Mr. Whorton said the job training and placement would result from partnerships that would be developed with the local workforce investment boards and Nevada Job Connect. The Department had gone from “prisons” to “corrections” and needed to adjust to the change. Under the Department of Corrections, an individual came into the prison system through intake, a needs assessment was conducted, and then a continuum of programming was provided to meet the individual’s specific needs. Mr. Wharton noted that in the past the prison system had “warehoused inmates.”
Senator Tiffany referred to Ms. Giunchigliani’s concerns related to jobs for those transitioning out of the prison system. She had worked at the One-stop Center, which had specialists who dealt with the transition out of the prison system. Usually the individuals found employment in the areas of culinary, construction, manufacturing, and mechanics. Often the casinos hired individuals through the One-stop Center. The job placement had been very successful with people migrating out of prison through the One-stop Center. Because there were so many specialists working in the area of job placement, Senator Tiffany said she was not concerned with the job area.
Senator Tiffany asked how many rooms were required to house 200 individuals versus 400 individuals. Mr. Whorton said it would depend upon the specific facility. The plan was to provide specifications that would, at a minimum, meet the American Correctional Association (ACA) standards for space. The number of individuals in a room would depend upon the size of the room. Senator Tiffany then asked if the plan was to have the reentry center increase from 200 to 400 beds in Las Vegas during the upcoming biennium. Mr. Whorton said the original plan was for a two-phased increase. The intent was to prove the concept and then expand. However, after discussions with the “subcommittee of the subcommittee” there was some concern about placing that large number of people into the community at “one fell swoop.” Senator Tiffany said she just wanted to make certain any space that was leased had sufficient capacity for the 400 beds.
Ms. Tiffany asked about the number of prisoners that could be released. Mr. Schlottman said prisoner releases in Las Vegas were well over 3,000 per year. Only half of the 3,000 had a history of violence or were sex offenders, leaving 1,500, more than enough to fill the facility. He stressed that the Department did not want to commit to a large plan until the pilot was completed. Senator Tiffany thought it was important to have an awareness of the availability of jobs, the transportation, the post housing, and reintegration with families. Mr. Whorton said the Department did have a detailed plan that included the elements of the Request for Information (RFI). The center would be austere, but functional, and the charge would be $18 per day.
Darrel Rexwinkel, Assistant Director, Support Services, Department of Corrections, indicated the transition in and out of the center would be between four and six months. The Department had calculated a turnover every four months and then one month without any rent payment from the inmate to cover the costs for room and board, resulting in a cost of $763,200 annually. Senator Tiffany asked if an individual could transition out of the center and find housing for $550 per month. Mr. Rexwinkel noted that the $18 per day an individual paid while in the center equated to $540 per month. Mr. Rexwinkel said while in the reentry center individuals would be able to accumulate some earnings. He explained that some of the inmates did have money, not all were indigent, and some had a fair amount of money in the funds held in trust by the Department. Mr. Rexwinkel added that the funding included in the budget for the option of a 200-bed facility opening July 2004 and a phase two 200-bed facility opening September 2005 was based on a 200-bed facility. Obviously, if a 400-bed facility opened immediately, the lease payment that the Department would pay would be significantly more than what was included in the budget. The additional lease payment would have to be covered and the Department would not have the number of inmates to cover the lease payments. Delaying the opening of the reentry center until July 1, 2004, resulted in a General Fund requirement for the 2003‑2005 biennium of $2.687 million. The amount currently included in the budget for the reentry center was $3.466 million. Mr. Rexwinkel explained there was not yet a contract with the state of Washington, and the contract with Wyoming would end June 30, 2003. A Letter of Intent to continue the program had been received from Wyoming. Mr. Rexwinkel referred to the funding included in Section 7 of the Appropriations Act, and said perhaps it would be possible to use a portion of that money to assist in funding a 400‑bed facility.
Senator Coffin was concerned with the amount of money that would be required for rent for those who transitioned out of the reentry center. Mr. Rexwinkel said hopefully the individuals who transitioned out would gain employment immediately and be able to accumulate dollars. Senator Coffin felt there should be a longer transition period or there would be problems with enforcement, recidivism, and other areas. Mr. Rexwinkel stressed that the intent of the reentry center was to prevent those transitioning out from returning to criminal behavior.
Senator Coffin asked about deductibles for medical coverage. Mr. Whorton said a co-payment for health services was required for every inmate within the Department of Corrections. The hope was that some of the people who became employed would have their own medical plans.
Chairman Parks asked if the state of Washington’s number of 250 inmates was firm. Mr. Schlottman said 250 inmates was the number proposed by the state of Washington, but the number could increase or decrease based upon the performance of the Department of Corrections. The Chair asked if the Department would be operating overcapacity in any areas, and Mr. Schlottman said, “No, not with the opening of High Desert Unit 8.” Chairman Parks requested that the Department of Corrections work with the Budget Office to develop a budget for each of the options; the budgets did not have to provide great detail. He requested the budgets be presented to the Subcommittee in a format that displayed the budgets side-by-side for ease of comparison.
Richard Siegel, Ph.D., University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), said he was speaking as a professor of political science at UNR and as chairman of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada. Dr. Siegel referred to a report he and Dr. Larry Hyde, former dean of the National Judicial College, had authored called “Experts Propose Smart Reform” (Exhibit E). Dr. Siegel said he and Dr. Hyde had reviewed not only the report of the Nevada Committee on Corrections but also a report from the United States Department of Justice on imprisonment and recidivism. The 15-page survey found that two-thirds of those people released from prison were returning to crime or breaking the terms of their parole within three years, and the percentage was growing. Dr. Siegel noted the Department of Correction’s Director Jackie Crawford’s comments to the National Judicial College in May 2002 emphasized the critical importance of sending inmates out of prison with the necessary education, training, transitional supervision, and initial cash to begin a new life that would result in a savings of tens of millions of dollars for the state of Nevada.
Based on Ms. Leslie’s comments earlier in the meeting, Dr. Siegel said he thought there was significant support within the Subcommittee for the reentry centers. He said he could not think of a better investment for the finance committees to make in order to save the state money. He urged the members to make the options a priority in the full committees. Dr. Siegel said the ACLU, the services network, and all of the many coalitions and organizations he was so deeply intertwined with were eager and extremely positive about the reentry centers. He complimented the transition made by the Department of Corrections from the Department of Prisons. Dr. Siegel said the planning generated by the Department of Corrections was the type of planning “we dreamed about for decades.”
In response to a question asked by Senator Coffin on the rent factor in downtown Las Vegas, Dr. Siegel said he could not address the rent factor. Senator Coffin said he did not want any disincentive to enter into the program and he wanted the reentry centers to be successful.
Chairman Parks thanked Dr. Siegel for his presentation and said the Subcommittee members were also extremely impressed with the direction the Department of Corrections was pursuing.
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
CNR ADMINISTRATION (101-4150)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-1
Mike Chapman, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, said the first budget for closing consideration was the Director’s Office, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (CNR), BA 4150.
Decision unit E-840—The 17th Special Session of the 2001 Legislature approved A.B. 9 that put forth a proposal to the voters in the November 5, 2002, General Election (Question 1) for a $200 million bond program. Mr. Chapman noted there were no General Fund dollars required. The Executive Budget initially recommended two positions to provide support to the bond program, a Management Analyst IV and an Accounting Technician III. Subsequent to the budget hearings held in February 2003, the Director’s Office reevaluated the need for the positions and submitted a revised request that included a request for a Management Analyst II position. The position would provide overall fund management and program coordination, including the development of written policies and procedures for the fund; coordinating with the Office of the State Treasurer on bond sale and cash flow issues; and reviewing and processing contracts and claims for payments. A decision to approve the revised request would result in a savings to the budget of approximately $69,000 in FY2004 and approximately $68,000 in FY2005. Mr. Chapman said the request appeared to be reasonable based upon information provided by the Director’s Office. The revision included a request to place funding savings in reserve. Staff suggested, in lieu of the reserve, that the Department return to the Interim Finance Committee for additional funding from the bond fund if the Director’s Office determined the need for an additional position was warranted.
Mr. Chapman referred to the second closing issue, which related to new positions:
Mr. Chapman said The Executive Budget recommended transferring funding for the Division of Forestry (NDF) fiscal unit to the supervision of the State Forester, which was consistent with the Director’s decision to move the supervision of the unit under the State Forester in February 2002. There were technical adjustments to reflect proper grade and class of positions transferred in decision unit E-901as reflected in the adjusted base.
Mr. Chapman pointed out that decision unit E-906 recommended eliminating funding for the State Climatologist position at the University of Nevada, Reno. The Director had indicated in earlier testimony that the Department was able to obtain needed weather data from the Internet.
Technical adjustments recommended by staff included vacancy savings for fringe benefit cost increases in decision unit M-300. Staff eliminated Building and Grounds assessments for non-state owned building rent related to the transfer of the NDF fiscal unit from the Director’s Office. Staff recommended revised computer and hardware pricing and staff requested authority to make technical adjustments to the Director’s Office cost allocation based upon closing actions by the 2003 Legislature in this account and the other CNR accounts.
R. Michael Turnipseed, P.E., Director, CNR, stated he was present to answer any questions the Subcommittee might have.
Chairman Parks asked if Mr. Turnipseed was in concurrence with the recommendations presented by Mr. Chapman, and Mr. Turnipseed responded affirmatively.
Chairman Parks cautioned that the budgets were being approved based on rather substantial increases in revenue that would have to be enacted by the 2003 Legislature. All of the budgets would have to be revisited in order to make some significant reductions if no additional revenue was provided. The Chair said prioritization was a major key.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 4150 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN LESLIE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Ms. Giunchigliani and Mr. Perkins were not present for the vote.)
*******
DIVISION OF CONSERVATION DISTRICTS (101-4151)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-10
Mr. Chapman said there were no major closing issues in Budget Account 4151. The Governor’s budget reduced funding to each of the 28 districts by $93 each year of the 2003-2005 biennium as a result of one district not taking its full allotment in the base year. Decision unit E-600 recommended further reduction of $150 per year for grants to each conservation district. The total impact would be a $243 reduction to each conservation district. Mr. Chapman said during the February 17, 2003, budget hearing there was testimony requesting reinstatement of the funding to the full $5,000 level. Mr. Chapman said staff requested authority to make technical adjustments to the Director’s Office cost allocation based upon closing actions should those adjustments be necessary.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 4151 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS AND TO REINSTATE FULL FUNDING OF $5,000 FOR EACH OF THE 28 CONSERVATION DISTRICTS.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Ms. Giunchigliani and Mr. Perkins were not present for the vote.)
********
STATE LANDS (101-4173)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-18
Mr. Chapman said the Division of State Lands requested three positions in support of the Question 1, $200 million bond program. The positions would be funded through bond proceeds and interest earnings on the bonds. The positions included a Management Analyst III, a Senior Land Use Planner, and an Administrative Assistant III. The Division had since requested the Senior Land Use Planner position be changed to a Management Analyst II position, resulting in a savings of approximately $2,500 in each year of the biennium. Mr. Chapman said it appeared the request for the three positions was reasonable because of the complexity and scope of the State Lands’ portion of the Question 1 bond program, which involved allocating approximately $65.5 million to local agencies, state agencies, and nonprofit agencies. Another closing item was a recommendation of funding in the amount of $14,305 per year for system maintenance and upgrades to the State Land Information Management System (SLIMS) and development of a complementary geographic information system (GIS) mapping database.
Mr. Chapman said technical adjustments included:
· An adjustment to increase vacancy savings for increased fringe benefit costs, decision unit M-300.
· Elimination of duplicate employee bond and tort insurance expenses in the Lake Tahoe Environmental Improvement Program (EIP) bond account, which were also included in the adjusted base, decision unit E-860.
· An adjustment to reflect revised pricing for computer software, hardware, and printer costs.
· An adjustment to the Director’s Office cost allocation based upon closing actions.
Mr. Marvel asked when the Division anticipated selling the bonds. He said there had been discussion at a recent IFC meeting and there had been some hesitancy on creating new positions until the bonds were actually sold.
Pamela B. Wilcox, Acting Administrator, Division of Conservation Districts, said the Office of the State Treasurer planned on selling the first bonds in June 2003. Only the bonds for the local government grant program required IFC approval and that item was deferred at the March meeting of the IFC and would be heard again soon. Chairman Parks explained that the State Lands’ bonds did not require approval of the IFC. Ms. Wilcox said that was not quite correct because the positions being requested would have partial responsibility for “this program.” The Chair said he understood. Ms. Wilcox said if the bonds were sold in June, funding would be available to fill the positions in July 2003. Mr. Marvel asked Ms. Wilcox if she was certain the bonds would be sold in June, and Ms. Wilcox indicated that determination would be made by the IFC. Chairman Parks recognized there were factors that could come into play that could adversely influence the sale of the bonds.
Mr. Chapman said if the Subcommittee elected to approve the three positions and the bonds were not sold in June 2003, the funds would not be available to support the positions. The positions would be held in abeyance until the bonds were sold and the Legislature approved the property tax assessment to support the bond sale.
In response to a question posed by Mr. Marvel related to funding the positions, Mr. Chapman said the Authorizations Act could include the funding for the positions, however, that would essentially authorize the expenditure and did not necessarily mean the Division would incur the expenditure if there was some holdup on funding for the positions. If the Subcommittee did not elect to approve the positions, the Department could return to the IFC once there was a better understanding of the outcome of the bond sales. Mr. Marvel asked about the possibility of a Letter of Intent to address the positions.
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, LCB, said the Subcommittee could close the budget with the positions, and the funding for the positions would be dependent upon the sale of the bonds. He said the Subcommittee could issue a Letter of Intent to the Department of Conservation indicating the positions would not be filled unless the funds were authorized pursuant to the bond sales.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS, AND A LETTER OF INTENT INDICATING THAT THE POSITIONS REQUESTED IN THE BUDGET COULD NOT BE FILLED UNLESS FUNDS WERE AUTHORIZED PURSUANT TO THE BOND SALES.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Senator Coffin and Mr. Perkins were not present for the vote.)
********
WATER RESOURCES (101-4171)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-32
Mr. Chapman said there were no major closing issues in BA 4171. Other closing items recommended General Fund appropriations for inflationary adjustments for the joint funding agreements with the United States Geological Survey associated with the Cooperative Program for Surface and Ground Water gauging and measurements in the South Fork Dam on the Humboldt River. In addition, decision unit E-720 recommended a General Fund appropriation of $9,035 in FY2004 for the installation of a voice-mail system in the Division’s Carson City office.
Technical adjustments included vacancy savings adjustments for increased fringe benefit costs in decision unit M-300, aligning the appropriate funding for the cost increases in decision unit M-100, and a request for authority to make technical adjustments to the Director’s cost allocation based upon closing actions in the account.
Mr. Marvel said the 1999 Legislature had provided funding for a study with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), and he asked if the study had been completed.
Mr. Hugh Ricci, P.E., State Engineer, Division of Water Resources, CNR, said the $40,000 provided for the study was included in the budget of the USGS. Mr. Ricci said, “They are finishing up that part of phase 2 right now.” He noted that additional money had been provided for phase 3.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADMINISTRATION (101-3173)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-47
Mr. Chapman said BA 3173 was funded with indirect cost allocations based upon salary costs in the eight remaining bureau accounts within the Division of Environmental Protection (DEP). New positions were recommended in other bureau accounts. Mr. Chapman said staff would request authority to make any changes necessary to the indirect cost allocation between the bureau accounts and BA 3173 if changes needed to be made subsequent to closing recommendations. Mr. Chapman indicated that having made the request for authority to make changes to the indirect cost allocation he would not have to repeat the request in the other bureau accounts.
Mr. Chapman said no General Fund appropriations were included in BA 3173. The first closing item included the transfer of the existing Bureau Chief from Waste Management to BA 3173. The Bureau Chief would supervise a newly created Bureau of Information Management and Environmental Policy, the agency’s information technology department. Two work programs were recently processed by the IFC enhancing the Division’s information technology programs. Mr. Chapman said the transfer of the position appeared to be reasonable and it would be up to the Subcommittee to approve or disapprove the transfer. Mr. Chapman said the second closing item addressed the additional funding needed for litigation expenditures. The funding would be utilized for the equivalent of a .50 FTE Attorney General position.
Mr. Chapman said the building rent for all the bureaus was included in BA 3173. In the past, the building rent had been allocated to individual bureau budgets. For decision unit E-720, staff adjusted the prices of computer hardware and printers. Mr. Chapman noted staff had removed the costs for duplicative telephones out of other bureau budgets that were included in BA 3173. Decision unit E-900 transferred an existing Environmental Scientist to the Bureau of Air Quality. Mr. Chapman said there were a number of decision units in BA 3173 that mechanically transferred the indirect cost (IDC) revenues to this account based upon new positions in the other bureau accounts. Staff requested approval to make changes to all DEP accounts based upon actions taken by the Subcommittee on the other accounts with respect to the IDC assessment transfers.
Mr. Chapman said other technical adjustments included staff recommendations in decision unit M-100 to reflect the proper amount of Employee Bond insurance and Attorney General tort assessment for all current DEP employees. He noted that The Executive Budget did not include Employee Bond or Attorney General employee tort assessment for new positions recommended in the DEP bureaus. Mr. Chapman said staff requested approval to include those costs for new employees based upon closing actions by the Subcommittee in the other accounts.
Allen Biaggi, Administrator, Division of Environmental Protection, CNR, said he was present to answer any questions the Subcommittee might have.
Senator Rhoads asked how many mining company bankruptcies were pending. Mr. Biaggi said during the 1998-1999 time frame there were 35 separate mining operations that had declared bankruptcy. The DEP was attempting to work “through those” and there had been no bankruptcies declared by mining companies during the past two years. In response to a question asked by Senator Rhoads on the Robert Hagar case, Mr. Biaggi said the case resulted from a leaking underground storage tank near Cave Rock at Lake Tahoe. Mr. Hagar was the responsible party who did not perform the necessary cleanup functions and the DEP ultimately took responsibility for the cleanup process. The DEP was involved in litigation for a protracted amount of time in order to recover costs incurred by the Division.
In response to a question posed by Ms. Giunchigliani related to an Assembly bill, Mr. Biaggi said S.B. 419, which was not a Division-sponsored bill, would increase the fees on smog checks by $2 for vehicles in Clark and Washoe Counties. Mr. Biaggi indicated S.B. 419 would have a positive impact on the DEP budget; there were two other bills that would have a negative impact.
Ms. Leslie asked if the money being requested for litigation was tied to the 35 mining company bankruptcies referenced earlier in the meeting. Mr. Biaggi said some of the money was tied to mining bankruptcies, but there were also a number of appeals on mining permits and other mining-related issues from Great Basin Mine Watch and other areas within the agency, such as the Hagar case and corrective actions and appeals in waste management. There was increased across-the-board litigation, not just in mining. Mr. Biaggi said with the price of gold, the DEP was not anticipating any mining bankruptcies in the near future. Ms. Leslie asked what the outstanding liability would be for the state from the existing mining bankruptcies that were still in litigation. Mr. Biaggi said many of the mines that the DEP was dealing with in bankruptcy had bonds and much of the litigation was recovering those bonds from the bonding companies and getting that money to the appropriate federal agencies to conduct the necessary reclamation activities. In response to a question posed by Ms. Leslie, Mr. Biaggi indicated the DEP did not publish a report that addressed the successes and failures of litigation. Ms. Leslie said she did not have a good grasp on how many mines were being reclaimed and she would like to have that information provided.
Chairman Parks asked for clarification on the consolidation of the telephones. Mr. Chapman said The Executive Budget included replacement telephones for all of the DEP bureaus in the Administration account. When the budget was submitted, it also included replacement telephones in the individual bureau budget accounts. The adjustment eliminated all of the telephones in the other bureau accounts, leaving the replacement telephones in the Administration account.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
AIR QUALITY (101-3185)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-57
Mr. Chapman said BA 3185 supported the Bureau of Air Quality and the Bureau of Air Pollution Control. He said there were three closing issues:
Mr. Chapman said three bills were currently pending that could impact the amount of funding available from the DMV Pollution Control account for DEP Air Quality programs:
· A.B. 416 would require vehicle emission certification every other year instead of annually.
· S.B. 189 would require emission certification every other year instead of annually for 1996 model or older vehicles in Clark County.
· S.B. 419 would raise the annual emission certification fee from $5 to $7.
Staff had concerns that with the passage of S.B. 189 and A.B. 416, or the failure of S.B. 419 to pass, the amount of funding support available to the DEP from the DMV Pollution Control account could be significantly reduced. Mr. Biaggi had indicated if funding from the Pollution Control account was diminished to the point where the programs were affected, the Division would have to return to the IFC. Mr. Chapman said the recommendation for the six positions appeared to be reasonable if the funding was available. With the uncertainty regarding the transfers from the Pollution Control account, Mr. Chapman said the Subcommittee might want to recommend issuing a Letter of Intent directing the DEP to return to the IFC should funding from the DMV Pollution Control account be significantly reduced as that would require the agency to seek alternative funding or modify its air programs.
Mr. Chapman said the Governor recommended an additional transfer of $400,000 from the DMV Pollution Control account in FY2005. The agency had revised the amount to $200,000. The transfer was intended to provide additional reserve support in anticipation of the temporary or permanent closure of the Mojave generating plant. The most recent information indicated the plant would be closing in late December 2005. With the revisions submitted by the agency and the Budget Office reflecting reduced federal revenue and reductions in the transfer from the DMV account, the ending reserve at the end of the 2003-2005 biennium was projected to be $305,533, which appeared to be a reasonable reserve level. The Subcommittee needed to determine whether to approve the reduced transfer in the amount of $200,000 from the DMV Pollution Control account. Mr. Chapman said technical adjustments included revised computer and printer prices and the indirect cost allocation assessments that might be required.
Mr. Biaggi said the recommendations made by Mr. Chapman had been discussed and the recommendations were acceptable to the Division.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS, AND THE RECOMMENDATION TO ISSUE A LETTER OF INTENT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
Chairman Parks asked for additional information on the Pahrump Valley non‑attainment status. Mr. Biaggi said the Division was required to develop plans and processes in conjunction with Nye County to try and reduce the amount of dust being generated in Pahrump Valley. The two new positions would not necessarily be stationed within Pahrump Valley, but would be working on Pahrump Valley issues along with Nye County staff to put mitigation measures into place. Mr. Biaggi stated Nye County had been very cooperative and the Division was pleased to work with the County.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins and Senator Tiffany were not present for the vote.)
********
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL (101-3186)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-63
Mr. Chapman said there were two closing issues for Subcommittee consideration:
Mr. Chapman noted the Governor had recommended a separate budget account for the Water Quality Planning Bureau. The recommendation was based upon the increasing complexity in BA 3186, which housed both the Water Quality Planning Bureau and the Water Pollution Control Bureau. BA 3186 included numerous funding sources and it was hoped that the creation of a separate account would reduce the complexity of the account. Mr. Chapman advised members that transferring the Water Quality Planning Bureau to the new account would require transferring 16 positions, the Environmental Scientist III position recommended in decision unit E-503, and a number of maintenance and enhancement items. Mr. Chapman indicated justification for the two new positions appeared to be reasonable based upon the information provided by the DEP. Staff made technical adjustments to computer and printer prices and with technical adjustments transferred residual General Fund appropriations from BA 3186 to the new Water Quality Planning account. Mr. Chapman said LCB staff was in support of moving the Water Quality Planning Bureau into a new budget account as recommended by the Governor.
Mr. Chapman said decision unit E-805 included a recommendation to reclassify a Management Analyst I to a Management Analyst II, resulting from increased duties associated with program grant funding and budget preparation. Mr. Chapman said LCB staff recommended reallocation of vehicle insurance and the Department of Information Technology (DoIT) assessment to the proper program categories as submitted by the Budget Office in decision unit M-100.
Mr. Chapman concluded his presentation on BA 3186 and referred it to the Subcommittee for consideration.
Mr. Biaggi emphasized that Mr. Chapman’s comment on the complexity of BA 3186 was quite accurate. There were 25 funding sources within the budget account and moving the Water Quality Planning Bureau into a separate budget account would simplify the budget preparation process, tracking, and accountability.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, INCLUDING THE CREATION OF A SEPARATE BUDGET ACCOUNT FOR THE WATER QUALITY PLANNING BUREAU, AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
WATER QUALITY PLANNING (101-3193)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-74
Mr. Chapman said BA 3193 was the new budget account for the Water Quality Planning Bureau. The only closing issue was the transfer of the Environmental Lab Certification program from the Health Division to the Division of Environmental Protection. The program would be under BA 3193. The transfer involved two Health Facilities Surveyor positions. The budget account that included the Environmental Lab Certification program had not yet been closed, but was scheduled for closing on April 28, 2003. The budget analyst assigned to the account indicated to Mr. Chapman that he had no concerns with the transfer. Technical adjustments included adjusting reserves in decision unit E‑902 to properly match the decision unit M-100 costs transferred from BA 3186 to the new BA 3193. Computer and printer prices had been adjusted. Staff also recommended moving DoIT assessment costs from category 26 to category 11, the program category for the Environmental Health Lab program. Staff recommended closing the budget with technical adjustments.
Chairman Parks asked for clarification on the two positions to be transferred from the Health Division. Mr. Chapman explained the two positions that would be transferred from the Health Division were Health Facilities Surveyor positions. The Chair asked if the Health Division was in agreement with the transfers. Mr. Chapman said both agencies were in agreement that moving the Environmental Lab Certification program would be an appropriate move.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
WASTE MGMT AND FEDERAL FACILITIES (101-3187)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-79
Mr. Chapman said BA 3187 had a large number of funding sources and was also complex. The account included the Waste Management Bureau, the Correction Actions Bureau, and the Federal Facilities Bureau. The Governor recommended placing the Federal Facilities Bureau into a separate budget account, accommodated in decision units E-900 through E-908. Staff had no concerns with moving the bureau into a separate account. The account was established during the 2001-2003 biennium through two work programs that established the information technology programs, the One-Stop Grant program and the Environmental Health Tracking program. The Governor recommended establishing a new Bureau Chief for the Federal Facilities Bureau. A federal employee supervised the Federal Facilities program under an interagency personnel agreement (IPA) and that individual would be retiring in January 2004. The new Bureau Chief would replace the federal employee.
Mr. Chapman continued and said decision unit E-500 recommended a new Environmental Scientist III position to conduct compliance inspections for underground storage tanks, along with additional contract authority to support tank inspections in Clark and Washoe Counties. The DEP had testified during an earlier hearing that the new position would enhance the preventative program for leaking underground storage tanks. Staff recommended eliminating the duplicative replacement telephones, revising the computer and printer pricing as recommended by the Purchasing Division, an upgrade for an Administrative Assistant II position to an Administrative Assistant III position, and transferring the existing Bureau Chief position to BA 4150.
In response to a question asked by Chairman Parks, Mr. Biaggi said the Hazardous Waste Management fees were administered through the state Environmental Commission.
Mr. Chapman said he had failed to point out that in the transfer of the Federal Facilities program from BA 3187 to the new account, there was a negative reserve recommended for transfer. Staff had made a technical adjustment increasing a transfer of Hazardous Waste Management fees from BA 3187 to the new account to eliminate the negative reserve.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
BUREAU – FEDERAL FACILITIES (101-3198)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-90
Mr. Chapman said BA 3198 was the new account that would separate the Federal Facilities Bureau from BA 3187 in an attempt to decrease the complexities in the Waste Management account. BA 3198 was established during the interim and supported two information technology programs. Currently one position was included in the base budget. Mr. Chapman referred to page 25 of the closing document and said staff made a technical adjustment to remove the negative reserve transferred in the first year from BA 3187. Technical adjustments were made to remove duplicative telephones and adjustments were made to computer and printer prices.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
MINING REGULATION/RECLAMATION (101-3188)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-96
Mr. Chapman said BA 3188 contained no General Fund dollars and no major issues were noted by staff. Closing items included decision unit M-400 that would restore training and travel not taken during the base budget year due to revenue concerns associated with the disaster of September 11, 2001. The recommendation provided funding for travel to Arizona, Colorado, and Montana for bankruptcy hearings and mining conferences. Decision unit E-710 made technical adjustments for revised computer pricing and elimination of duplicate telephone costs.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH GOVERNOR RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
ASSEMBLYMAN GRIFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
WATER PLANNING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS (101-4155)
BUDGET PAGE CNR-105
Mr. Chapman said BA 4155 included 1.5 FTE positions. No General Fund dollars were included in the account. The program provided funding enabling small communities to comply with state and federal drinking water regulations. Last session the Legislature approved increasing the amount of General Obligation Bonds supporting the program from $50 million to $69 million. S.B. 233, which had been introduced and passed out of the Senate, would increase the bonding authority to $86 million. There was also a second bill, S.B. 200, which would provide an additional $4 million to provide grants for sewer improvements in the Spanish Springs area of Washoe County. There were technical adjustments for computer pricing.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH GOVERNOR RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
PUBLIC SAFETY
DIRECTOR’S OFFICE (201-4706)
BUDGET PAGE PS-1
Mark Krmpotic, Senior Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, LCB, said S.B. 6, if passed, would transfer the Division of Emergency Management from the Department of Public Safety to the Governor’s Office. Staff requested Subcommittee approval to include the Emergency Management Division in the allocation of expenses from the Director’s Office budget account and the Administrative Services budget account if the 2003 Legislature failed to pass S.B. 6. Mr. Krmpotic then noted there was a substantial amount of statewide cost allocation built into BA 4706 in decision unit M-100. The Budget Office had submitted an amendment to reduce the recommended increase in M-100 by $138,563 and reduce the base amount by $2,133 in each year of the 2003‑2005 biennium. The statewide cost allocation was not allocated to any General Fund accounts in state government.
Mr. Krmpotic said the Governor’s recommendation included a request for approximately $7,500 in out-of-state travel in each year of the 2003‑2005 biennium for the Director, Deputy Director, and Public Information Officer. Mr. Krmpotic said staff sought approval to make changes to the budget account based on changes in the Department of Public Safety technology division’s cost allocation. Minor adjustments had been made for computer hardware costs, and the agency had requested that the $200 included in the budget for a logo embosser be eliminated.
Ms. Giunchigliani recognized training was important but she had concerns with the out-of-state travel funding because of the state’s fiscal situation. She asked what the ramifications would be if the funding for out-of-state travel was not approved.
Dave Ellison, Administrative Officer III, Department of Public Safety, said the funding for out-of-state travel would allow the Director and Deputy Director to attend out-of-state conferences for certain law enforcement organizations. Because of the changes that occurred within those organizations and other issues, the Director felt it was critical to attend the conferences.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked how many conferences the Director and Deputy Director would be attending and if it was necessary that both individuals attend the same meetings. Mr. Ellison said it was the Director’s opinion that both individuals needed to attend the conferences. Ms. Giunchigliani asked about the need for the Public Information Officer to attend training in San Francisco and Los Angeles. Mr. Ellison said he was not familiar with the specific training the Public Information Officer had scheduled, but he thought the conferences were specific to the nature of the officer’s work and the training was not provided within the state.
Mr. Krmpotic said staff did not have a breakdown of the individual trips recommended in the decision unit. Adjustments could be made to the account based on direction from the Subcommittee.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH GOVERNOR RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMAN MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ms. Giunchigliani said she could not support the motion.
Ms. Leslie said she also could not support the motion because of the out‑of‑state travel funding.
THE MOTION CARRIED ON THE SENATE SIDE. (Senator Coffin was not present for the vote.)
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS AND A REDUCTION OF ONE-HALF IN THE FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR OUT‑OF‑STATE TRAVEL.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN LESLIE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED ON THE ASSEMBLY SIDE WITH MR. GRIFFIN AND MR. MARVEL VOTING NO. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES (201-4714)
BUDGET PAGE PS-5
Mr. Krmpotic said staff was seeking approval from the Subcommittee regarding decision unit E-275 that provided funding of $42,090 in each year of the 2003‑2005 biennium to allow the Department to proactively recruit college graduates and potential out-of-state applicants for vacant positions within the Department. During the budget Subcommittee hearings, the Department had indicated the recruitment process had created problems in the training academy by not producing candidates desired by division chiefs. The Highway Patrol had ceased hiring until the recruitment, testing, background, training academy, and field training programs could be reengineered. In response to questions regarding problems with the recruiting process, the Department had indicated that it previously did not have presentation materials, video or color posters, and other materials to showcase many of the law enforcement opportunities within the Department. Mr. Krmpotic noted that the Department had utilized funding in FY2002 to produce professional materials for recruiting purposes.
Mr. Krmpotic referred to other closing items and said staff recommended the elimination of a part-time accounting position as recommended by the Governor. Staff had previously noted an Administrative Services Officer IV position had been vacant for nearly 18 months. The Department indicted their intent to fill the position by the beginning of FY2004. Mr. Krmpotic said staff also recommended the transfer of a Personnel Analyst position from the Division of Parole and Probation in decision unit E-913. Technical adjustments were made to computer hardware and software costs based on revised prices from State Purchasing. A budget amendment was received from the Budget Office that reduced the statewide cost allocation based on the amounts allocated to General Fund accounts within the Department. Finally, staff requested approval to make changes to the account based on changes in the Public Safety technology division’s intra‑agency allocation.
Chairman Parks said he had a concern, and the concern went beyond BA 4714. He understood that the Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST), Public Safety, and the Department of Corrections conducted training academies and each agency appeared to have limited academies. Chairman Parks was concerned that numerous training budgets were not producing a large number of qualified individuals. He recognized in BA 4714 there had been efforts to reduce travel and have more effective recruitment.
Ms. Giunchigliani agreed with the Chair and thought the Subcommittee needed to consider some type of consolidation of the various academies.
Mr. Marvel said he thought many of the agencies did conduct joint training.
Mr. Ellison said he had limited knowledge in the training requirements for the numerous organizations. However, the training requirements for each agency were quite different. The requirements for a highway patrolman were much different than a category I police officer, which was also much different than a corrections officer. Mr. Ellison thought the Department advocated having their own training division in order to meet the specific needs.
Mr. Krmpotic said the training within the Department of Public Safety would train divisions within the department, such as the highway patrolmen and parole and probation officers. The scope of training in the POST Academy involved local, rural law enforcement agencies, local sheriffs’ offices and police departments in the rural counties. It would also include other state agencies such as the Gaming Control Board, Division of Wildlife, and the Secretary of State. The Department of Corrections Academy would focus strictly on correctional officers within that department.
Chairman Parks said he was still concerned with the amount of funding being expended in a variety of divisions for training academies, and he hoped the Subcommittee could achieve some degree of efficiency and consequently cash savings.
Chairman Parks asked that the Subcommittee close the budget subject to further consideration as to other ways for efficiency before final adoption of all budgets.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Senator Coffin and Mr. Perkins were not present for the vote.)
********
OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY (201-4707)
BUDGET PAGE PS-11
Mr. Krmpotic said the Office of Professional Responsibility was formally the Office of Internal Affairs account. There were no major issues for the account. Staff recommended funding $4,900 in FY2004 for new equipment including a digital camera, tape duplicator, security safe, color printer, and a color scanner. A minor technical adjustment was made to the cost of the printer based on revised estimates from State Purchasing. An adjustment was also made based on an amendment submitted by the Budget Office to reduce the base amount in M-100 for statewide cost allocations based on allocations to General Fund accounts within the Department.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYMAN GRIFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Senator Coffin and Mr. Perkins were not present for the vote.)
********
DRUG COMMISSION (101-4704)
BUDGET PAGE PS-21
Mr. Krmpotic said the performance indicators were the only major issues staff had with the Drug Commission account. Discussion occurred in an earlier hearing regarding the performance of the Drug Commission. Staff had posed questions to the Department regarding how the Commission had benefited the state during the current biennium in substance abuse education, prevention enforcement, and treatment. The Department had also been asked to provide performance indicators to document any benefits. The Department had responded and indicated the Commission had produced reports on Nevada drug abuse statistics and established programs to publicly recognize persons and programs that helped prevent and treat drug and alcohol abuse and enforced laws related to substance abuse.
Mr. Krmpotic said the Subcommittee might want to consider whether the benefits of the program justified continued funding. There was approximately $56,000 of General Fund appropriation in the account for each year of the 2003-2005 biennium and approximately $26,000 of Byrne Grant funding each year of the biennium. Staff noted that for FY2004, the President proposed the replacement of the Byrne Grant with a new Justice Assistance program.
Chairman Parks asked if Mr. Krmpotic had any updates on federal funding programs that would impact the Drug Commission.
Sandy Mazy, Administrator, Office of Criminal Justice Assistance, Department of Public Safety, said she had received a printout from the U. S. Department of Justice and their plan for the President’s budget for FY2004, which would impact the state’s FY2005 budget. The plan would combine the Byrne discretionary grant, the Byrne formula grant, and the local law enforcement block grant into the Justice Assistance grant, resulting in a 40 percent reduction. Ms. Mazy indicated combining the three grants was supposed to occur in FY2003 and it did not happen. It was unknown what Congress would do.
Chairman Parks said the major question was whether the benefits of the Drug Commission justified continued funding.
Ms. Leslie said she was one of the biggest supporters in the Legislature of substance abuse prevention and treatment. However, she reluctantly acknowledged that the time had come to eliminate the Drug Commission, especially based on the performance indicators submitted by the Commission. She recognized the Commission did hold meetings, and received some public testimony, but there had not been any major recommendations coming from the Commission in recent years. Ms. Leslie said the overriding factor in consideration of eliminating the Commission was that the Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Abuse had been strengthened during the past few years.
Ms. Giunchigliani said Mr. Hettrick had also advocated elimination of the Drug Commission.
Mr. Krmpotic said if the Subcommittee were to consider eliminating the Drug Commission, BA 4704, staff suggested the Subcommittee request legislation to repeal statutes related to the Drug Commission.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO ELIMINATE THE DRUG COMMISSION, BA 4704, AND ALSO REQUEST A BILL DRAFT TO REPEAL THE REFERENCES TO THE DRUG COMMISSION IN NEVADA REVISED STATUTES.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN LESLIE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Senator Coffin and Mr. Perkins were not present for the vote.)
********
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (101-3673)
BUDGET PAGE PS-36
Jim Rodriguez, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, LCB, said BA 3673, Emergency Management Division, had only one major issue that had been brought up during the Subcommittee hearings and that issue was the reclassification of two positions. The first position was an Account Technician III position that would be reclassified as an Administrative Services Officer I position; the second position was an Administrative Assistant IV position that would be reclassified as a Grants and Projects Analyst II position. The Subcommittee was concerned with the lack of documentation supporting the reclassification requests. Mr. Rodriguez said the Division subsequently provided LCB staff with additional information on both reclassifications. Based upon the detailed information provided in the job descriptions, staff determined that the upgrades as proposed by the Division were appropriate. Mr. Rodriguez said staff made technical adjustments to the Division’s cost distribution associated with the recommended reclassifications.
Mr. Rodriguez said the Budget Office had submitted an amendment to eliminate decision unit E-175, which recommended funding for additional office space for the Homeland Security Advisor and his assistant. It was determined that the funding for the additional space was included in the base budget. Mr. Rodriguez said failure of S.B. 6, which proposed moving the Division of Emergency Management to the Governor’s Office, would require that staff request authority to reallocate the Department of Public Safety’s administrative cost allocations to BA 3673. Technical adjustments were made to the Division’s request for computers. Initially the Division had priced the computers at $2,500 each because computers with extra RAM were needed. Staff reviewed the request and adjusted the costs to $1,500, which would still provide for computers that were above the standard configuration. Staff had determined the Division needed the extra RAM performance. Mr. Rodriguez said staff also requested authority to make adjustments, as necessary, to the statewide cost allocations based on final approval as other state budget accounts were closed.
Chairman Parks asked the total dollar amount of the grants that the Grants and Project Analyst would manage. Mr. Ellison said he did not have the dollar amounts before him, but it was his understanding that because of the complexity and volume of the grants, there was a need for a higher-level position.
Chairman Parks said some grants required grant applications and other grants were categorical grants that automatically went to governmental entities. He asked if the current position looked and applied for grants or simply compiled the required documentation to report how the grant funding was expended. Mr. Ellison said the position compiled the information for the grants to track the spending.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE THE BUDGET WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Mr. Perkins was not present for the vote.)
********
Chairman Parks adjourned the meeting at 10:37 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Linda J. Smith
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblyman David Parks, Chairman
DATE:
Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Chairman
DATE: