MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Finance
Seventy-second Session
April 15, 2003
The Senate Committee on Finance was called to order by Chairman William J. Raggio, at 8:10 a.m., on Tuesday, April 15, 2003, in Room 2134 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman
Senator Dean A. Rhoads
Senator Barbara K. Cegavske
Senator Sandra J. Tiffany
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator Bernice Mathews
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Mark E. Amodei, Capital Senatorial District
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gary L. Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst
H. Pepper Sturm, Chief Principal Research Analyst, Research Division
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Tracy Raxter, Program Analyst
Julie Walker, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Peggy Clark, Administrative Services Officer, Rural Clinics, Department of Human Resources
Larry Buel, Ph.D., Clinic Director, Rural Clinics, Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services, Department of Human Resources
Todd Butterworth, Carson City, Independent Living Advisory Council, Rehabilitation Division, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation
Robert Milz, Dayton, Vice Chairman, Comstock Historic District Commission, Department of Cultural Affairs
Ronald M. James, State Historic Preservation Officer, Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Cultural Affairs
Bruce Kittess
Lee Vecchiarelli-Sommers, President, Do-Mor for Dayton
Camille Meggerson, Secretary, Do-Mor for Dayton
Linda L. Clements, Ph.D.
John L. Wagner, Lobbyist, The Burke Consortium of Carson City
Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research, and Evaluative Services, Department of Education
Lonnie F. Shields, Washoe County Education Administrators Association, Washoe County School District
John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration
Glen Whorton, Assistant Director, Operations, Northern Nevada, Department of Corrections
Darrel Rexwinkel, Assistant Director, Support Services, Carson City, Department of Corrections
Howard Skolnik, Assistant Director, Prison Industries, Las Vegas, Department of Corrections
Scott K. Sisco, Interim Director, Department of Cultural Affairs
This meeting will come to order at 8:10 a.m.
We will look at Senate Bill 408. It requires a supplemental appropriation to the Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services.
SENATE BILL 408: Makes supplemental appropriation to Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services of Department of Human Resources for unanticipated shortfall in Fiscal Year 2002-2003 for expenditures relating to psychiatric services and clinical hours at rural clinics. (BDR S‑1229)
Senator Raggio:
What is the status of this bill and what do we need to do?
Peggy Clark, Administrative Services Officer, Rural Clinics, Department of Human Resources:
The bill requests $740,598 to allow rural clinics to continue to operate through the end of this fiscal year.
Gary L. Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
The legislation is drafted on this bill and indicates a supplemental appropriation as originally recommended in the budget was for $614,729. The legislation indicates the supplemental is required due to unanticipated shortfall in money for fiscal year (FY) 2002-2003 for expenditures relating to psychiatric services and clinical hours at rural clinics. A review of the supporting documentation reveals the shortfall is more attributable to a collection or revenue problem in the Rural Clinics’ budget. If the committee approves this legislation, staff would recommend the appropriation be increased to $740,598 and change the reason for the supplemental from what is stated in the bill to indicate the supplemental is required due to a revenue collection shortfall and an over-expenditure of contract psychiatric services. Staff would point out that while the agency projected revenue of approximately $1.2 million this fiscal year, revenue actually collected from those same sources projected will be approximately $874,000. The agency received a supplemental appropriation last year in the amount of $413,000 and approximately $35,000 was reverted at the close of the fiscal year. I understand there is a budget adjustment forthcoming for this budget.
Senator Raggio:
Could you get that to us so we can proceed with the budget?
Ms. Clark:
Yes, I will.
Senator Rawson:
What would happen if we do not follow through with this appropriation or only give a portion of what is requested?
Ms. Clark:
We would be unable to pay salaries to our employees; we would lay off employees; and we would close clinics.
Mr. Ghiggeri:
Rural Clinics is approximately $24,000 overspent in its budget. There is a dire need for this legislation.
Senator Tiffany:
It appears we are not appropriately calculating the budget we set for them, or they have inefficiencies in their office for collection procedures. A third component is providing too many services for what the budget anticipated. Perhaps an audit would be able to improve procedures for better controls.
Mr. Ghiggeri:
Some of the problems relate to inability to hire adequate staff to provide some of the services they must provide, and the result is not being able to bill for those services.
Senator Raggio:
Is that accurate?
Ms. Clark:
Yes, it is.
Mr. Ghiggeri:
In the interim there was an increase in what they paid for contract psychiatrists over and above what was budgeted. A look at the operation of their expenditures would reveal they could have covered the shortfall within existing resources in the expenditure area; however, the revenue shortfall is insurmountable at this point.
Senator Rawson:
Social worker interns could be used in this area, but they are not able to bill because of problems in the “practice act”. I believe they will be able to bill after that is changed this session.
Larry Buel, Ph.D., Clinic Director, Rural Clinics, Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services, Department of Human Resources:
We would look forward to working with anyone to develop an internship program that would allow us to bill third-party payers so we could collect our revenues.
Senator Coffin:
Is there a backlog of claims to be paid from insurance carriers on mental health?
Ms. Clark:
We bill on a monthly basis. At some point in time there is a delay. We bill as services are completed.
Senator Coffin:
Are any dependents of state employees covered at these rural clinics?
Ms. Clark:
Yes, we provide services for state employees.
Senator Coffin:
Does the state health plan owe money to the rural clinics?
Ms. Clark:
I cannot specify an amount, but yes, I would say there is a delay on the rebilling issue if there are errors.
Senator Coffin:
It is important for us to know who is creating the deficit.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS WITH THE APPROPRIATION INCREASE TO $740,598 AND TO CHANGE THE REASON FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FROM “UNANTICIPATED SHORTFALL IN FY 2002-2003 FOR EXPENDITURES RELATING TO PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES AND CLINICAL HOURS AT RURAL CLINICS” TO “DUE TO A REVENUE COLLECTION SHORTFALL AND AN OVER-EXPENDITURE OF CONTRACT PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES.”
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
We will look at S.B. 164.
SENATE BILL 164: Creates the Office of Disability Services within Department of Human Resources to coordinate and administer certain services and programs for persons with disabilities. (BDR 38-701)
Senator Raggio:
This bill was heard previously to consider the proposed amendment for the additional surcharge on cellular phones and other amendments clarifying the responsibilities of the Department of Human Resources and Office of Disability Services. The Office of Disability Services is responsible for all the provisions concerning traumatic brain injuries and the Department of Human Resources is solely responsible for state personal assistance programs.
The amendment also codified the existing advisory committee on deaf and hard‑of-hearing persons. That committee makes recommendations and collects information concerning persons with disabilities that affect their ability to communicate and also provides for that committee to be in the Office of Disability Services. It also clarifies that the surcharge funding the program applies to the wireless phone services and the money collected from the surcharge must be used to fund deaf and hard-of-hearing centers. It also removes the appropriation for the provision of legal aid to persons with disabilities. That summarizes the proposed amendment.
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
The amendment was discussed in detail with the committee. I reviewed the amendment with Mary Liveratti from the Department of Human Resources. I discussed the issue of the two-thirds vote with the Legal Division, and the amendment would require a two-thirds vote since it imposes a fee on the wireless service. I think $.08 per month is the anticipated charge; however, depending upon the revenue collected, there may be a reduction in the monthly line charge.
Senator Raggio:
Is that determined by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC)?
Mr. Guernsey:
That is correct. The Department of Human Resources is required to submit a budget to the PUC for review to establish the monthly line charge.
Todd Butterworth, Carson City, Independent Living Advisory Council, Rehabilitation Division, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation:
Wireless companies are currently responsible to collect the surcharge. The language in the bill only clarifies that responsibility. In fact, neither the tax rate nor the tax base of the surcharge would be increased by adding the deaf resource centers as a burden on the surcharge. This will result in some reduction in General Fund requirement.
SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 164.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Makes appropriation to Lyon County for purchase of Odeon Hall and Saloon, a historic building located in Dayton, Nevada. (BDR S‑1148)
Mark E. Amodei, Capital Senatorial District:
Senate Bill (S.B.) 380 grew out of a challenge issued to everyone involved with the Dayton area in terms of its standing and its operations within the Comstock Historic District. Also, an objective of the hearing last session was to remove the Dayton area from the Comstock Historic District. As a result of some of the challenges issued to all sides, a group of individuals in Dayton has been active the last 2 years working to meet some of the goals this Legislature challenged them to meet to bring Dayton on board as a full, functioning, and fully‑recognized part of the Comstock Historic District.
The structure spoken of in S.B. 380 is one of the most historic structures still existing in Dayton. As a cultural resource, it is the jewel of Dayton, still being in good repair and of sound infrastructure. This measure results from a request by a committee, Do-Mor for Dayton committee that is working to acquire the property from the present owners, who wish to retire, for use as a cultural resource center.
Robert Milz, Dayton, Vice Chairman, Comstock Historic District Commission, Department of Cultural Affairs:
The Do-Mor for Dayton committee voted unanimously to support this bill last week. I am also the Chairman of the Comstock Historic District, and that board voted unanimously to support the bill as well.
Senator Raggio:
Mr. Milz, there is no money at the state level to accommodate your request at the present time unless we get some additional revenue at the state level. Did the Lyon County Commissioners send anything in support of the proposal to raise revenue at the state level, or have you taken a position on raising taxes?
Mr. Milz:
In order to balance our budget, the Lyon County Commission raised property taxes $.05 per $100 of assessed valuation. We understand the problem.
Senator Raggio:
We do not have the funds now. Unless there is additional revenue at the state level, we are not going to be able to do this.
Ronald M. James, State Historic Preservation Officer, Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Cultural Affairs:
This facility would be an obvious candidate for application to the Commission for Cultural Affairs for its source of funding, and application for federal funds as a non-profit organization through the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Park Service could also be done. This facility would fit in that program.
Senator Raggio:
Are there other funds available for the acquisition of the building?
Mr. James:
There are no funds for acquisition. The Commission for Cultural Affairs adopted a policy 3 years ago not to assist in acquisitions.
Senator Raggio:
Why was that policy adopted?
Mr. James:
Most of the acquisitions were large in size, exceeding the scope of the normal grant award from the Commission for Cultural Affairs, which rarely exceeds $200,000. It is better if the organization can find some other way to acquire the building.
Senator Raggio:
Are there any other sources of funding for acquisition other than this proposed state funding?
Mr. Milz:
There are Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds available. They were not applied for this year. It is possible they could apply for acquisition if there are some cultural monies available.
Senator Raggio:
The cultural bonds are not available for acquisitions. Can the county provide any match?
Mr. Milz:
We face the same problems you face. I would have to say this year, no; next year, we will see how things go.
Senator Raggio:
How much was the tax increase in Lyon County?
Mr. Milz:
It was $.05 per $100 assessed valuation.
Senator Raggio:
What is the countywide tax rate now?
Mr. Milz:
It is $3.59 in Yerington and it varies throughout the county.
Bruce Kittess:
I have been in land development and home building over 30 years, and I am now retired. I have no vested interest in any real estate in Nevada with the exception of my home in Carson City. I speak as a voluntary advisory board member for and on behalf of the Do-Mor for Dayton committee, a non-profit corporation wishing to operate the Odeon Hotel. It has been over 40 years since old town Dayton, with the Odeon, was included with Virginia City as a national historic landmark. It has been over 36 years since the Legislature created the Virginia City Historic District, and it has been 2 years since the Legislature reaffirmed that the district boundaries shall remain as they are. We have one historic district, but two separate destinations. It appears that Virginia City is well on the road to realizing its potential, and the infusion of federal and state grants over the years have been a prudent investment for building a tax base for Storey County.
While old-town Dayton shares the historic district with Virginia City, its potential has yet to be realized as a significant contributor to the Lyon County tax base. Federal and state grants have been scarce for a variety of reasons. Nevada’s oldest settlement is in need of a publicly-owned crown jewel, such as Odeon Hall, to draw tourists and residents. We are cautious when advocating public ownership and intervention to replace private enterprise unless there are special circumstances, and only when there is a truly voluntary seller, which in this case, there is. We are requesting public investment now, the purchase of the Odeon Hall for a public purpose, multi-use events center. We firmly believe that the center will stimulate private business activity within the old town, and even more significantly, in the not too distant future old- town itself will facilitate and enhance the commercial property adjacent to and outside the historic district boundary. There are other facts I will provide for you in my handout (Exhibit C).
Lee Vecchiarelli-Sommers, President, Do-Mor for Dayton:
Last year Max and Mia Kuerzi, the owners of Odeon Hall and Mia’s Swiss Restaurant, said they were planning to retire and sell their building. Do-Mor for Dayton talked the Kuerzis into giving the committee 18 months to come up with financing for the building in order to keep it as a cultural and events center for Dayton. I have a handout for each of the committee members with more detail on the history of the Melodeon Hall, as it was originally called (Exhibit D. Original is on file in the Research Library.). See pages 2 to 4.
Camille Meggerson, Secretary, Do-Mor for Dayton:
Do-Mor for Dayton is a committee organized as a non-profit organization as shown on page 24. One of our initial goals was to investigate historic property, and when we learned that the Odeon Hall might be for sale, we focused on this as our main project. During the first year of the existence of Do-Mor for Dayton, five major fundraisers were held for this cause, generating over $5,000 in revenue. With your help, Do-Mor for Dayton is committed to the success of this as a cultural and event center.
Linda L. Clements, Ph.D.:
I represent the Dayton Historical Society and Friends of the Dayton Valley Library. We strongly support this bill and what Do-Mor for Dayton is trying to do. We understand resources are limited; however, we do not want the fate of the Odeon Hall to be the same as some of the other structures in Dayton. My handout may give you more information on this subject (Exhibit E).
Senator Raggio:
The Kuerzis should be commended for their willingness to step back and allow some effort to be made for this.
John Wagner, Lobbyist, the Burke Consortium of Carson City:
We are against the bill because of state involvement in purchasing property for a local community. There is no problem if Lyon County wishes to purchase the property, or if it wants to raise money. I do not think the State should be involved in this, and that is my objection.
Senator Raggio:
We will close the hearing on S.B. 380 and open the hearing on S.B. 33.
SENATE BILL 33: Revises provisions governing charter schools and distance education programs. (BDR 34-642)
Senator Raggio:
This is a bill that emanates from the Legislative Committee on Education. Mr. Sturm will give an overview of the bill and its purposes.
H. Pepper Sturm, Chief Principal Research Analyst, Research Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
I am here to explain the contents of S.B. 33, a measure from the Interim Legislative Committee on Education (Exhibit F). This bill deals with two relatively new forms of schools, charter schools and distance education. I will go over each component.
The charter school provisions of the school were suggested by the school districts to address some minor issues that have arisen since last session. Currently, school districts are required to retest students if less than 90 percent of the students take the statewide tests or in the event of certain breaches of test security or test administration. Under the current statutes, if a charter school is required to retest the students, the school district is required to pay the cost of retesting. Sections 1 and 10 reallocate the cost of any testing to the charter school. According to testimony to the Interim Legislative Committee on Education, since the school district does not have control over testing at the charter school, the school district believed it should not have to pay this cost.
Section 2, as amended, clarifies the process for submission of fingerprints for non-licensed employees of charter schools for forwarding of records and any needed information to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction to make a determination as to whether a person’s conviction is unrelated to their prospective employment. The superintendent is required to render a decision in a prompt manner. The purpose of this section is to make the procedure for unlicensed personnel in charter schools parallel to that followed by unlicensed personnel in traditional public schools.
In Section 3, the provision that references the hiring of a teacher or administrator with a criminal history is the same standard applicable to the licensing of teachers and administrators in chapter 391 (NRS 391.033).
Finally, in the 2001 Session, the charter school law was amended to authorize the State Board of Education to sponsor a charter school. The per-pupil payment for students in the state board-sponsored charter school is the school district per-pupil amount or the statewide average, whichever is greater. Any difference is to be paid by the school district. The school districts pointed out that it was not appropriate for the school districts to pay for students they were not serving. Therefore, Section 4 of the bill makes the Department responsible for any additional payments for such charter schools.
S.B. No. 399 of the 71st Session authorized distance education and, in reviewing the draft regulations, it was brought to the attention of the members of the Legislative Committee on Education that several clean-up measures were needed.
First, while a governing body of a charter school may submit an application for a program of distance education, a committee to form a charter school was not listed. This oversight is corrected in Sections 5 and 9.
Second, Sections 6 and 7 change some reporting deadlines to “on or before the last day of the first school month of the school year” (count day) at the suggestion of the Nevada Department of Education. The purpose of this change is to ensure that written agreements concerning distance education would not be received prior to count day to avoid double counting for apportionment purposes in both the school district and distance education programs.
Third, Section 8 addresses the issue of licensure for teachers providing distance education courses. An inconsistent treatment of college and university faculty in the statutes related to concurrent enrollment in higher education courses, and distance education was brought to the committee’s attention. If a high school student enrolls in a community college course, he can receive both high school and college credit for the course taught by the postsecondary faculty. However, under the current statutes, postsecondary faculty are not eligible to teach dual‑credit distance education courses in the core academic courses unless they have valid teaching licenses, which most of them do not. The provisions of Section 8 remedy this disparate treatment and would permit Nevada students to take distance education courses, approved by the department, from college and university faculty, either here in Nevada or elsewhere. The remainder of the bill changes various cross-references necessitated by the substantive provisions of the bill.
Senator Cegavske:
In Section 9, can a distance education program be used through a charter school?
Mr. Sturm:
No, there are parallel provisions in the law for school districts to have distance education programs approved by the department, and charter schools can also apply to have such programs.
Senator Cegavske:
Does the distance education program have to go through either public school or a charter school to exist?
Mr. Sturm:
For a Nevada student to receive high school credit, it has to be some sort of approved program run through one of those entities and approved by the Department of Education.
Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research, and Evaluative Services, Department of Education:
This bill is fully supported, including the amendments made and sent to the Joint Subcommittee on Human Resources/K12. We submitted a fiscal note with the bill, and there may be some argument whether it is a fiscal note or not. In Section 4 of the first reprint, some funding requirements are changed from local to State, and I believe those could be argued as fiscal notes. Nevertheless, someone is still paying the cost, whether the school district or someone else. With the simple wording in Section 4 that changes the payment of the added costs from school districts to the State, we estimated the State would pick up about $1,000 per student. It is hard to estimate, it depends on where the charter school is located, but on average there are about 180 students each, $180,000 per charter school.
Senator Raggio:
Has that fiscal note changed since the original bill?
Dr. Rheault:
It has not. If it were Odyssey Charter School in Clark County for example, the cost would be more because we are talking about 500 students instead of 180.
Senator Raggio:
Why does that double in the second year?
Dr. Rheault:
We estimate there may be two state-sponsored charter schools. It is still only for state board-sponsored charter schools. There is an applicant from Washoe County for state board sponsorship. The final vote will occur on April 25 at 3 p.m., so we will know whether we have a state-sponsored charter school at that time.
Senator Raggio:
When does the fiscal note kick in?
Dr. Rheault:
It kicks in when the state board assumes sponsorship of the charter, and when we make payments, the State would have to pick up the difference.
Senator Raggio:
Is that assuming an application for a program of distance education is made?
Dr. Rheault:
That one is separate from the distance education.
Senator Raggio:
In other words, under existing law, the school district would pay that cost.
Dr. Rheault:
That is correct.
Lonnie F. Shields, Washoe County Education Administrators Association, Washoe County School District:
We are in full support of this bill with the amendments.
Senator Raggio:
We will close the hearing on S.B. 33. We will look at Closing List No. 5 (Exhibit G. Original is on file in the Research Library.).
This committee took some action on the issue of inflation for food costs at one of our last hearings. Subsequently, I received a letter objecting to that and implying the staff of this committee was acting in a retaliatory manner by suggesting food inflation costs had never been an issue, and therefore some funding could be saved in that area. Mr. Comeaux, I take offense to that kind of response. The staff is asked to do certain things by this committee, and for the response to come back to us that, by making a recommendation of that kind the staff was acting somewhat other than objective and in a retaliatory fashion, is just not acceptable. If you have a comment, that is fine, but do not suggest this staff is retaliatory. That issue will also be considered as we take up these other budgets today.
John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration:
I would like to briefly comment on the concern you expressed, basically in the same vein in which I commented when this came up. I think staff is correct in believing that we have historically not provided inflationary increases for food, just as we have not provided inflationary increases for other things, and that is simply due to lack of funding. We recommended the inflationary funding this time because, in our opinion, we have tightened down considerably on the Department of Corrections in a number of different areas. They requested the inflationary increase; they pointed out that the amount we are spending per inmate is low; they pointed out that the recommended caloric intake for their population barely met standards; therefore, it was our opinion that recommending that inflationary increase this time for the Department of Corrections was the correct thing to do, and it is still what the Governor recommends.
Senator Raggio:
Does anyone from the prison want to comment on this?
Glen Whorton, Assistant Director, Operations, Northern Nevada, Department of Corrections:
I am the author of the letter that you referred to and I accept your admonition. We also appreciate the opportunity to be able to talk about this issue. It was represented at the last hearing that food is not a security issue for the Department of Corrections. Every correctional administrator will indicate that food is a very significant security issue. It is the one item that will unite a population to retaliate against our staff. We have an obligation to run a constitutional organization. Comparisons were made regarding the fact that there was no inflation provided for the Division of Child and Family Services, and that is correct. The difference between them and us, however, is that they receive a significantly larger per day, per meal, budget than the Department of Corrections. At the present time we are serving 11,000,000 meals per year at $2.28 per day per inmate. Everyone has to deal with inflation, and frankly, we are appealing to you to restore that inflation to the budgets that have been closed, and to forego that cut in the budgets you are seeing today and in the future.
Senator Raggio:
Do you really believe that failure to add that amount is going to result in that type of deprivation of caloric intake or quality food?
Mr. Whorton:
We have not received inflationary adjustments in the past. As a result, we have a continual decline in the quality and quantity of the food that we are able to serve.
Senator Raggio:
Do you contract out any of your food services?
Mr. Whorton:
No, sir. It is all prepared within prison. We obviously achieve the economy of scale by being able to meet those needs with $2.28, but we need some relief and help in doing this.
Senator Raggio:
That is a per-day cost?
Mr. Whorton:
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Darrel Rexwinkel, Assistant Director, Support Services, Carson City, Department of Corections:
As Mr. Whorton pointed out, our average daily food cost, at least for FY 2005, would amount to $2.29. The average western states’ food cost for FY 2000 was $4.41. That excluded Wyoming because some inmate labor costs were included in their food expense. Hawaii was excluded because the costs were very high, and the State of Nevada was excluded. We are at $2.29, and the remote camps are actually more, $2.59. Ely is slightly higher, but otherwise the average that institutions in Nevada spend is $2.29 compared to the $4.41 spent in other western states.
Food costs have increased. We have done everything possible to try to keep our food costs down and now we are very low. We reviewed the producer price index from the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau Statistics, and that amount over the 9 years ending December 31, 2002, was 1.58 percent. The index decreased in 2002 presenting more of a difficulty because our budget is based on that year. The index increased by 2.7 percent in January and February of 2003, the last numbers available from the index.
Mr. Whorton pointed out in his letter that there are statutory requirements. Each offender must be provided a healthful diet. The State health officer shall examine periodically and report to the board semi-annually upon the following operations of the Department of Corrections: the nutritional adequacy of the diet of incarcerated offenders, taking into account the religious or medical dietary needs of the offender; and the adjustment of dietary allowances for age, sex, and level of activity. Let me point out that the recommended daily allowance, at least for males, is being targeted at 2900 calories. The State of Wisconsin provides more calories than that at 3200 calories, and Arizona provides between 3200 and 3400 calories. I do not think we are being excessive in the amount of calories we provide.
Senator Raggio:
What will the inflationary increase that was requested allow you to do insofar as per day cost? What will it do to that cost, and what will it allow you to do with the caloric intake?
Mr. Rexwinkel:
We are hoping to just maintain status quo. Our total food budget is about $17 million in all of our budgets, including the inflationary factor of about $750,000.
Senator Raggio:
What will the cost per day be then?
Mr. Rexwinkel:
The $2.29 includes the inflation factor.
Senator Coffin:
I appreciate the author of the letter coming forward and indicating his reasons for stating these things, and at the same time, all people should be admonished to know that one of us could request a hard-to-answer question and the staff could be blamed for it. Maintaining caloric content is one thing, but I am worried if we squeeze the food budget, the kinds of calories you are giving them will be cheap, starchy calories versus calories that might also be contained in protein. We pay for a lot of heart attacks for those inmates, and a lot of medical expenses, because of bad diet over the years. I am curious about what has been done in the area of nutritious and medically healthy meals. Does a nutritionist approve the food, and are the calories nutritious?
Mr. Rexwinkel:
Our menus are certified by a dietitian for protein content, carbohydrate content, and the fat content we are required to serve. On the dietary side, we are attentive to content of the meals that we serve.
Senator Rawson:
How much food do we raise in this system?
Mr. Rexwinkel:
We buy milk from the prison dairy. We have “opportunity buys,” and sometimes we can buy product from a vendor with a huge surplus of, for example, canned tomatoes. We take advantage of all of those buys we can within the contracts we have for food purchases.
Senator Rawson:
Do we raise any beef for the system?
Mr. Rexwinkel:
I think we buy all of our beef on the outside.
Senator Raggio:
We need to resolve this in order to go on to the other budgets.
Senator Rawson:
I think when an issue is raised with concern for the overall rest or unrest in the prison, it is an important issue. We should supply the inflationary increase.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO SUPPLY THE INFLATIONARY INCREASE; ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE SAVINGS PROJECTED WILL NOT BE REALIZED; AND THE GOVERNOR’S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE INFLATIONARY INCREASE WILL BE ACCOMMODATED IN THE BUDGETS.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
The effect will be that the savings that would have been projected would not be realized and the Governor’s recommendation for an inflationary increase would be accommodated in the budgets as we close them.
Southern Nevada Correctional Center – Budget Page NDOC-24 (Volume III)
Budget Account 101-3715
Tracy Raxter, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
Southern Nevada Correctional Center staff recommends closure of the Governor’s proposed budget with one technical adjustment for insurance charge.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-3715 WITH GOVERNOR’S RECOMMENDATIONS AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT BY STAFF.
SENATOR TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Restitution Center- North – Budget Page NDOC-86 (Volume III)
Budget Account 101-3724
Mr. Raxter:
Staff has made one technical adjustment for one-time miscellaneous equipment costs of $505, decision unit M-200, which provides for the population changes in inmate-driven costs.
Staff notes that the inmate room-and-board charges revenue, which is $16 per day and paid by inmates to be housed at the restitution center, is excluded in the Executive Budget for the first 10 days of an inmate’s residence at the restitution center. This creates an impact of about $27,200 per year in additional General Fund need, and it is a departure from the way this budget has been constructed in the past. NRS 209.4831 provides for the deduction from inmate wages to offset the cost of providing the inmate with housing, transportation, meals, and medical and dental services while housed at the restitution center. Staff has not made a recommendation on that revenue line item.
Senator Raggio:
Inmate room-and-board charges revenue is recommended in the budget and excludes the first 10 days of residence. Why is that?
Mr. Comeaux:
The department changed its policy to give the inmates a chance to accumulate some funds or to secure employment before it starts charging them for the room and board. In general, inmates do not have any funds for the first 10 days.
Senator Raggio:
Where is the restitution center north located?
Mr. Comeaux:
I believe it is still on the river in Sparks.
Senator Raggio:
Was it acquired from the city years ago?
Mr. Whorton:
Yes, it is in the immediate vicinity of the hotel.
Senator Raggio:
How many are housed there?
Mr. Whorton:
There are 94, even though the capacity threshold is 88.
Senator Raggio:
How is it operating?
Mr. Whorton:
Our staff has good relationships with employers in the community, and we generally get people employed within that 10-day time frame.
Senator Raggio:
What is the average length of stay at the restitution center?
Mr. Whorton:
It can vary. Inmates are eligible within a year, but they could end up staying longer than a year.
Senator Raggio:
What is the record on their employment as a follow-up?
Mr. Whorton:
There is no way of knowing. The Division of Parole and Probation might have that information for those that are paroled.
SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-3724 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
We will go to budget account 101-3723.
Pioche Conservation Camp – Budget Page NDOC-96 (Volume III)
Budget Account 101-3723
Mr. Raxter:
The staff has made several technical adjustments. One is to increase the inmate-driven food costs by $4400 each year as reflected by an average of 5 inmates provided meals at the Lincoln County Jail. This budget also includes revenue for that line item, and staff has made a technical adjustment in the second year to reflect a change in the contract price.
Senator Raggio:
Where do you get the $1.50 per meal figure?
Mr. Raxter:
The Lincoln County Jail contracts with the Department of Corrections to provide meals for jail inmates at the county jail. There is a technical adjustment in decision unit E-730, buildings and grounds maintenance. Staff has made a deduction of $787 for costs of painting already included in the base budget.
Senator Raggio:
I will take a motion for approval as recommended with the adjustments.
SENATOR TIFFANY MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-3723 WITH ADJUSTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Wells Conservation Camp – Budget Page NDOC-106 (Volume III)
Budget Account 101-3739.
Mr. Raxter:
Staff recommends closing this budget as the Governor recommended.
SENATOR TIFFANY MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-3739 WITH GOVERNOR RECOMMENDATIONS.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
On the Wells Conservation Camp, as well as others, are they still doing work for the local communities and projects that they have done in the past?
Mr. Whorton:
Yes, they are doing a lot of community projects.
Prison Industry – Budget Page NDOC-150 (Volume III)
Budget Account 525-3719
Mr. Raxter:
One technical adjustment has been made to this budget to increase the license plate charge revenue by approximately $53,000 the first year and $69,000 the second year based on revenue projections supplied by the Department of Motor Vehicles. Staff has also increased the storage unit rental expense in the base budget by $3500 based on ongoing expenses that were incurred in FY 2002. There is also a deletion of $300 for duplicate costs of the Interim Finance Committee’s committee on Industrial Programs travel costs for the prison industry program.
Senator Raggio:
What is the status of the Prison Industries?
Howard Skolnik, Assistant Director, Prison Industries, Las Vegas, Department of Corrections:
We have significantly expanded over the past 2 years to 765 inmates and expect to be at 800 inmates by the end of the fiscal year. We have added a program sorting playing cards and we are negotiating with a company to rebuild semi-tractors and trailers. We are working with a company out of Las Vegas on the cutting and polishing of granite countertops and tiles. We bought a building with monies the inmates have put into E-728, which is almost complete and will house the trucking company at Southern Desert Correctional Center. We are looking at the purchase of land from BLM on the site we occupy near Indian Springs for the purpose of constructing an industrial park and bringing other companies in from out-of-state using inmate labor.
Senator Coffin:
There is a bill we passed allowing expansion of manufacturing operations into areas previously forbidden. How will that affect your program?
Mr. Skolnik:
I am not familiar with the bill. Previous attorney general opinion has indicated that as long as Nevada residents are not displaced, we could engage in any of the manufacturing operations.
Senator Raggio:
There was a bill that made possession of any kind of a weapon a criminal offense. An amendment was added to the bill because manufacturing of weapons, if part of the prison industry program, would be made an exemption.
Mr. Skolnik;
The reason we wanted that modification is because the original wording would have eliminated all of the screwdrivers and other types of tools we need in order to operate on a daily basis. We want the exemption primarily for that purpose, but also, should something develop, the definition of what can become a weapon is pretty broad and really might limit us significantly in the future.
Mr. Raxter:
The budget as presented by the Governor includes an expense in the prison industry budget for up to four correctional officers to provide supervision of inmates while they are employed in the community work program. Our recommendation is that the four positions should be established within the prison industry budget instead of having the program take correctional officers from the institutional budgets and cause an impact on the institutional budgets.
Senator Raggio:
I would ask the appropriate agency if that is the intent.
Mr. Skolnik:
We would have no objections.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 525-3719 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING AN INCREASE OF SALES AND MANUFACTURING COSTS, AND INCLUDING A LETTER OF INTENT AS TO THE UTILIZATION OF THESE FOUR POSITIONS.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Prison Dairy – Budget Page NDOC-157 (Volume III)
Budget Account 525-3727
Mr. Raxter:
Staff recommends one technical adjustment for this budget in decision unit E‑605. There is a recommendation from the Governor to eliminate 1.5 positions.
Senator Raggio:
Why are these positions being eliminated?
Mr. Raxter:
These two positions have been vacant for over 2 years, and the driver warehouse worker position has actually never been filled.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 525-3727 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR AND WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS BY STAFF.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Cultural Affairs Administration – Budget Page CULTURAL-1 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-2892
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
This budget reflects the overall administration activity for the entire department, previously titled “museums, library and arts,” then changed to the Department of Cultural Affairs. It includes the arts organizations, library, and history and museums budgets. There is a decrease the first year overall in all the budgets and a slight increase of .77 percent the second year.
In reference to the revenue sources, last session there was a significant ending fund balance available from the Commission on Tourism. The Legislature took advantage of that in order to reduce the General Fund obligation. We are not in a similar position at this point in time, so the General Fund in a number of these budgets has been required to increase to make up for the one-time ending fund balance from the Commission on Tourism. Staff is recommending adjustments based upon the latest prices for computer hardware and software. The department proposed, and the budget office agreed to, funding all the data processing needs for the department within this budget with the exception of the historic preservation budget and the Cooperative Libraries Automated Network (CLAN) budget, which is funded separately. The budget for all of the separate operating agencies and their data processing needs is addressed in this budget.
There will be some additional adjustments required in these budgets. The salary and fringe benefits costs for employees in the museums are funded from the trust funds. We have captured those costs in the salary category. There are some additional costs paid out of the operating categories that we have not picked up in the past but we are going to pick up this time. Those adjustments are not reflected in this budget, and technical adjustments will be required when we close DoIT, the attorney general cost‑allocations, and property and content insurance.
Senator Raggio:
The issue here is having to use General Funds since we do not have the tourism funding, is that right, Mr. Comeaux?
Mr. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration:
Yes, that is correct.
Senator Rawson:
We set up the authority for a trust fund, but have never funded it.
Scott K. Sisco, Interim Director, Department of Cultural Affairs:
I believe you are speaking of the cultural trust fund set up last session for the State Arts Council. There is no funding in it; however, it is in the department’s budgets.
Senator Rawson:
If we were able to put something in it, would we have to reopen to do that?
Mr. Sisco:
No. That budget is not being considered today.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2892 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Museums and History – Budget Page CULTURAL –6 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-2941
Mr. Guernsey:
This budget contains four positions and provides the overall direction, administration, and financial support for the museum operations. There are no major closing issues in this budget, and staff is recommending the budget be closed with Governor recommendations.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2941 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Lost City Museum - Budget Page CULTURAL-9 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-1350
Mr. Guernsey:
The Lost City Museum is located in Overton. It operates with seven positions. There are no major closing issues in the budget. Staff recommends that the General Fund be adjusted for some technical adjustments for increased fringe benefit costs and to pick up costs for employees that are funded from the trust funds. This is one of the accounts where employees are funded directly from the trust funds. Some of the fringe benefit costs were proposed to be funded by the General Fund; however, the positions funded by the trust fund should have been the account that actually picked up those costs.
Senator Raggio:
Attendance was projected at 30,000 and they actually had over 25,000 visitors. Is that correct, Mr. Sisco?
Mr. Sicso:
The 2002 attendance was 25,253, and we are projecting approximately 26,000 for 2004 and 26,200 for 2005. A lot of this comes from school children, so we are not anticipating an increase in admissions.
Senator Raggio:
The school children attendance is about 3500. Where do the rest of the funds come from?
Mr. Sisco:
The Board of Museums and History has a trust fund account and they decide how those funds are spent. Over the last 2-year period they have allocated $50,000 and given grants to school districts for bus costs and overtime costs for bus drivers to bring the students for field trips. Unfortunately, our trust account dropped substantially, and we will not be able to continue that funding.
Senator Coffin:
Is there sufficient money in the budget to maintain the structure?
Mr. Sisco:
We took budget cuts, and the adobe restoration project took a major cut in 2003; however, since the money was put in about 4 years ago, we have been successful in providing ongoing restoration.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-1350 WITH TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Nevada Historical Society – Budget Page CULTURAL-12 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-2870
Mr. Guernsey:
The Nevada Historical Society is located on the University of Nevada, Reno campus. The staff is recommending some technical adjustments to pick up the trust fund costs for the fringe benefit increases for the employees, to realign the insurance costs for employees, and correct an error in the property and contents insurance.
Senator Raggio:
The schedule shows 11 in the work program. Are there actually 10 full-time employees here?
Mr. Guernsey:
There is a reduction in this budget recommended by the Governor.
Mr. Sisco:
We have three different budgets where we have taken private or fee-funded positions. Over the years as the full-time equivalent (FTE) count has gone up, we have taken positions such as this one, where funding has not been accomplished through the regular sources, and we have eliminated them hoping to someday re-create them. Meanwhile, they are just dragging the rest of the trust funds down.
Senator Raggio:
Are you estimating about 45,000 visitors in 2004 and 2005?
Mr. Sisco:
That might be optimistic. Since the economy has declined, museums have been hit fairly hard on attendance.
Senator Raggio:
Is there an admission charge on this?
Mr. Sisco:
The admission fee is $2 for adults and free for children.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2870 WITH ADJUSTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
State Museum, Carson City – Budget Page CULTURAL-18 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-2940
Senator Raggio:
Why was there such a drop-off? It was anticipated that there would be 87,000 attendees and the actual number was only 69,000.
Mr. Sisco:
This particular museum was hit very hard by the September 11, 2001, incident. We saw a bigger drop here than elsewhere. Again, this budget had used most of the school busing funding the previous year and there was no supplemental to the school districts to bus the children in.
Senator Raggio:
What is shown in the budget for funding from admission charges?
Mr. Guernsey:
This is one area where staff is recommending a tentative adjustment on page 21 of the closing sheet. Actual revenue from admission charges came in at $109,173 in 2002, which was less than the budgeted amount of $125,851. The Governor’s budget is not recommending increasing the admission revenue in 2004 and 2005. The performance indicators reflect an increase in the number of visitors from the actual 68,866 in 2002 to 85,000 in 2004 and 90,000 in 2005.
Senator Raggio:
How much do you charge?
Mr. Sisco:
It is $2 for adults and free for children.
Mr. Guernsey:
Staff recommends the committee consider adjusting this budget. This is the only museum budget staff examined that we felt there could be a possibility of increasing the admission revenue by $5390 per year. In other budgets for the museums, the revenues are coming in lower than the current work program level.
Senator Raggio:
Is there any reason why this cannot be adjusted up?
Mr. Sisco:
My preference would be to increase it to $113,000.
Senator Raggio:
I will accept a motion to raise it from $109,000 to $115,000.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2940 WITH THE ADJUSTMENT OF AN INCREASE TO $115,000 AND OTHER TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Museum and Historical Society- LV – Budget Page CULTURAL 23 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-2943
Mr. Guernsey:
With the passage of Question One in November 2002, the Department of Cultural Affairs received authority for construction of a $35 million new museum as part of the Las Vegas Springs Preserve. The museum will eventually be moved from its present location at Lorenzi Park to the Las Vegas Springs Preserve and use the present Lorenzi Park site for records storage.
Senator Raggio:
Now that the bond issue has been passed, what is happening on this project?
Mr. Sisco:
We have met with the State Treasurer’s Office and they will sell the first round of bonds in June. We will start getting distributions from that in July. For the Department of Cultural Affairs, we are contracting with the Las Vegas Valley Water District to build a museum for us. Public works will service our owner representative and we hope to see the planning process start.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2943 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
State Railroad Museums – Budget Page CULTURAL-27 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-4216
Mr. Guernsey:
This budget contains the cost of operating the State’s three railroad museums. The budget is recommending that two of the four positions currently funded out of the Boulder City portion be eliminated. That would reduce the staff for the Boulder City Railroad operation from four positions to two positions. That is the major adjustment from the administration in this budget. There are some changes with proper funding of the trust fund employees as discussed. Those include funding for continuation of the renovation of the railroad site, locomotives, and other rolling stock at that facility.
Senator Raggio:
Tell us about the rehabilitation that is going on in the various museums.
Mr. Sisco:
In northern Nevada they are still working on the McKean car. We are still 8 to 10 months away from completion. We finished the French Gratitude box car, which was displayed for the Oasis Conference at the Nevada State Museum. Now that it has been restored, we are attempting to get funds to build a pavilion to protect it. We struggle to keep the museum going in Ely, but they have managed to restore the depot there and they are working on the freight barn which will house exhibits. In Boulder City we ran the first Santa Train last year. It was very successful with1500 children riding the Santa Train. When the Department of Transportation released its plans for the bypass in Boulder City, we saw the opportunity to get back across the highway with track we could access. We backed off on the $4.5 million to build the loop track extension, and what we are able to do now is provide rides back and forth from our site up to Railroad Pass and back. The funding in this particular one is the last funding we will request from the General Fund.
Senator Raggio:
Will employees have to be terminated by eliminating these two positions?
Mr. Sisco:
No, there was an enhancement unit in the last biennium to do the reconstruction of the trains as well as finally add staffing. We decided to keep one position and eliminate the other two that had never been hired.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-4216 AS RECOMMENDED IN THE EXECUTIVE BUDGET.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Comstock Historic District – Budget Page CULTURAL-33 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-5030
Mr. Guernsey:
The Governor submitted a Capital Improvement Project proposal to construct a new facility in Virginia City to house the staff of the Comstock Historic District and also to bring back Engine No. 27 to Virginia City. The only adjustment staff is recommending is to adjust the board members’ salaries down to the historic levels of the actual attendance at the meetings.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-5030 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
State Historic Preservation Office – Budget Page CULTURAL-36 (Volume I)
Budget Account 101-4205
Mr. Guernsey:
The staff is recommending some technical adjustments. This is the only other budget in the department that is recommended to get computer equipment, hardware, and software. Staff has adjusted those and also made the technical adjustments for property and contents insurance.
Senator Raggio:
I am concerned about the lack of funding for the marker program.
Mr. Sisco:
The marker program does continue, but it was one of those programs that had tourism funding in it, and when the tourism funding went down to such a low level, we decided to concentrate all the tourism funding in a single budget account. This was just replaced with General Funds.
Mr. Guernsey:
There is one reduction that the Governor recommended. There was a monument coordinator added by the 2001 Session Legislature. The position was never filled, and that position has been recommended for elimination.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-4205 AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR CEGASKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
****
SENATE BILL 340: Provides in skeleton form for scholarships to pupils with disabilities who attend private schools. (BDR 34-45)
Senator Cegavske:
I have prepared amendments for S.B. 340 (Exhibit H). In Section 1 the line “who is dissatisfied with the progress of the pupils making pursuant to that program” was changed to “with and for whom services cannot be provided.” The next would be “to attend a private school whose purpose is teaching children with special needs.”
Senator Raggio:
What does the amendment do?
Senator Cegavske:
The amendment improved the language. Also, it is a school that helps someone with special needs. That was the purpose of the bill.
Senator Raggio:
There is a significant fiscal note from the department. Let us get an updated fiscal note from Dr. Rheault on this.
Senator Raggio:
This committee is adjourned at 10:27 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Julie Walker,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
DATE: