MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
INTERIM
FINANCE COMMITTEE
LEGISLATIVE
COUNSEL BUREAU
Carson
City, Nevada
Chairman William J. Raggio called a regular meeting of the Interim Finance Committee to order on February 5, 2002, at 9:26 a.m., in Room 4100 of the Legislative Building, in Carson City, Nevada. The agenda is Exhibit A. The sign-in sheet is Exhibit B.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
Assemblyman Morse Arberry Jr., Chairman
Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen
Senator Bernice Mathews
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
Senator William R. O'Donnell
Senator Raymond D. Rawson
Assemblyman Bob Beers
Assemblywoman Barbara K. Cegavske
Assemblywoman Vonne Chowning
Assemblyman Marcia de Braga
Assemblyman Joseph E. Dini, Jr.
Assemblywoman Christina R. Giunchigliani
Assemblyman David E. Goldwater
Assemblyman Lynn Hettrick
Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie
Assemblyman John Marvel
Assemblyman David R. Parks
Assemblyman Richard D. Perkins
Assemblywoman Sandra J. Tiffany
COMMITTEE MEMBERS EXCUSED:
Senator Bob Coffin
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL BUREAU STAFF:
Lorne J. Malkiewich, Director
Brenda J. Erdoes, Legislative Counsel
Scott Wasserman, Chief Deputy Legislative Counsel
Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst, Senate
Mark W. Stevens, Fiscal Analyst, Assembly
Robert Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Steve Abba, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Connie Davis, Secretary
Jo Rasey, Secretary
A. ROLL
CALL.
Ms. Brenda Erdoes, Legislative Counsel,
Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB), called the roll and advised the Chairman a
quorum of each house was present.
*B. APPROVAL
OF MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 26, 2001, MEETING.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
OF THE NOVEMBER 26, 2001, MEETING.
MS. CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
C. APPROVAL OF WORK PROGRAM REVISIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH NRS 353.220(5)(c). INFORMATIONAL ONLY – REQUIRED ACTION WITHIN 45 DAYS.
The Chairman noted Item C was an
informational item only and required no action by the Committee. There were no questions concerning Item
C.
1. Department of Employment, Training, and
Rehabilitation – Services to the Blind – FY 02 – Addition of $94,991.00 in Federal Independent Living and addition of
$16,000.00 in Recoveries to balance forward from State Fiscal Year 2001 unspent
Federal Independent Living grant authority with no change in purpose, and to
accept a stipulated restitution payment from a former employee as part of a
plea agreement. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount added to the Older Blind Independent Living
category exceeds $50,000.00.
*D. APPROVAL
OF GIFTS, GRANTS, WORK PROGRAM REVISIONS AND POSITION CHANGES in accordance
with Chapter 353, Nevada Revised Statutes (list available upon request).
Chairman Raggio expressed his intent to call specific work program items for further testimony as well as any work programs requested by members of the Committee. The following work program items required testimony:
Items 1, 5, 6, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 32, 33, 34, 36, 39, 40, 43, 44, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 59 through 63 inclusive, 64, 72, 73, 78, 80, and 81;
Items 29 and 53 were withdrawn; and,
Items 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 32, 39, required a public hearing.
The Chairman entertained a motion to approve all other items not specifically indicated.
MR. PARKS MOVED TO APPROVE ALL ITEMS NOT ENUMERATED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
MS. CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
The Chairman noted that all of the work program items other than those enumerated were approved, and members of the audience who were in attendance for any of those items were excused.
The Chairman moved to Informational Item L (see Item L).
The Chairman announced Item J. would be heard out of agenda order (see Item J).
1. Department of Education – Discretionary
Grants – Restricted (2709) – FY 02 – Addition of $15,335,734.00 in Federal
Reading Excellence Act Grant to allow for the receipt of additional Federal
Reading Excellence Act Grant authority.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds
$100,000.00.
Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent, Department of Education, identified himself for the record and introduced Joan Taylor, the Education Consultant, who provided oversight for the Federal Reading Excellence Act Grant.
Dr. Rheault appeared before the Committee to request authority for the Department of Education to receive an additional $15,335,734 toward the Federal Reading Excellence Act Grant. Dr. Rheault explained that while the grant was a three-year grant, the Department had been given authority for the full amount of the grant for the three-year period, which totaled $26,189,248.
On behalf of the Committee, Chairman Raggio extended congratulations to Ms. Taylor concerning her work on the grant application.
The Chairman requested testimony from the Department representatives concerning how the funding from the grant tied in with the state funding for the same purposes, especially with regard to planning and coordination efforts with the Regional Professional Development Centers (RPDC).
Ms. Taylor reported that the Regional Professional Development Centers and Department of Education worked together on an alignment of both the Governor’s Early Literacy Program and the Regional Professional Development programs. Ms. Taylor explained that Department staff worked with all four regions on an alignment of goals and objectives. Ms. Taylor pointed out they were also in alignment with the Reading First initiative that would soon be before President Bush and which it was anticipated would piggyback with the Reading Excellence Act grant.
Chairman Raggio discussed the goal expressed by the Governor and endorsed by the Legislature that every child would be able to read by the end of the third grade and the funding of training for teachers for that goal. The Chairman requested a projection concerning the Department’s capability over the next biennium to develop the kind of expertise needed for the program.
Ms. Taylor reported that 50 schools had applied for Local Reading Improvement subgrants, and that most of the schools had sent teachers through the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) and University of Nevada Reno (UNR) to obtain their masters degree in literacy. Ms. Taylor projected that by the end of the grant, there would be a substantial number of literacy leaders in the state who could look at all of the literacy programs and expertise as well as contribute to some of the nationwide research in providing literacy education.
Ms. Taylor also discussed the second language learner issue, which she indicated could come up during the next biennium and to which considerable resources would be made available. Ms. Taylor reported that an existing base of information on second language learners dating back to the 1920s and 1930s was being studied to determine how the schools had assimilated those students.
Chairman Raggio addressed the aspects of the Federal Reading Excellence Act that dealt with professional development, out-of-school tutoring, and family literacy. The Chairman specifically questioned whether family literacy included parent involvement and the type of programs that were envisioned.
Ms. Taylor responded that each school that put together a subgrant, that varied from $150,000 to $500,000 per school for a two-year period, that contained a tutoring component for children at risk as well as a family literacy component. The schools would employ a literacy specialist who would oversee professional development for teachers as well as family literacy. A second literacy expert would provide job imbedded professional development and would be in charge of a tutoring program for the school.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio concerning whether families would have direct intervention, Ms. Taylor advised that part of the program included direct intervention with families and the family literacy expert would be working weekly online with specialists at the University of Nevada Reno (UNR) and the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) to receive information on how to accomplish the goal.
Chairman Raggio expressed concern that parents would be reluctant or uncertain about entering a program and questioned the extent of the effort that would be extended.
Ms. Taylor advised that most of the schools’ subgrants included home visits to bring parents into the school, and, if not included, they were encouraged to do so. Ms. Taylor indicated that there were many different incentive programs and each subgrant had its own set of incentives to bring parents either into the school or to go to the children’s homes to help parents. Some of the schools included parents in their tutoring program, training them to become tutors and then hiring them to work as tutors after school with their own children as well as other children at the school site.
The Chairman requested testimony concerning the Department’s planning and coordination efforts with the Regional Professional Development Centers.
Ms. Taylor advised that the Reading Excellence Grant was set up with stringent guidelines as to which schools would be eligible to apply for funding, and, as a result, approximately only fifty schools could be served statewide. However, Ms. Taylor indicated that the Regional Professional Development programs could serve every school in the state. It was anticipated that models would be developed and Early Literacy Program groups brought on board to take part in whatever information was available. While funding was limited to only those schools eligible, Ms. Taylor indicated assistance and information could be provided to all schools.
Chairman Raggio noted that none of the initial $10.85 million funding from the Reading Excellence Grant had been distributed and questioned the status of the Local Reading Improvement subgrant process.
Ms. Taylor responded that the Department of Education sent out proposals for schools to write subgrant applications in August and extended a six-month period of time to put the subgrants together with assistance from the Department. The applications had to include site-based analysis, test scores, staff requirements, as well as “needs and goals,” and the Department provided over 2,000 hours of technical assistance toward that effort. Ms. Taylor added that the subgrants were due February 8, and a call from Clark County representatives on February 4 indicated a stack of subgrants 12 feet tall was in the process of being mailed. Ms. Taylor indicated that upon receipt, the subgrants would be divided up and distributed to outside evaluators to decide which grants would be funded. Approximately 82 schools were eligible, and it was anticipated that fifty would be funded.
In response to a question from Ms. Cegavske, Ms. Taylor advised the goals and objectives included:
· Every child would read by the end of third grade, and to “catch” those children who would potentially be misdiagnosed as needing special education;
· Promotion of early literacy learning activities;
· Expansion of family literacy programs;
· Early intervention for children at risk; and,
· Tutoring.
Ms. Taylor pointed out that the five specific goals she had just discussed were on the Department’s web site at www.nevadarea.org. Ms. Taylor further advised the Department had an extensive evaluation plan and had hired an outside evaluator in addition to evaluations being conducted by both the UNLV and the UNR. Additionally, Ms. Taylor advised that while gains were expected in every one of the Reading Excellence Act schools, the Department also wanted to ensure gains were seen in non‑REA schools. Ms. Taylor reiterated the goal that every child in Nevada would read by the end of the third grade and indicated that whatever worked well would be “passed on” to assist others.
While Mrs. Cegavske expressed her understanding of the state and national initiative to have every child read by the end of the third grade, she asked for information on how the goals would be accomplished. Ms. Cegavske also pointed out that Governor Guinn was Chairman of the Education Commission of the States, which she indicated had many “avenues” that could be utilized. Additionally, while both universities had been mentioned, Ms. Cegavske indicated that she had not heard any mention of the community colleges.
Ms. Taylor advised that the community colleges were involved in the process insofar as undergraduate degrees; however, they typically did not offer the graduate credit required by the teachers involved in the professional development process.
In response to a question from Ms. Giunchigliani, Ms. Taylor advised that the subgrants included provisions for childcare and transportation for parents and after school snacks for children.
Ms. Giunchigliani questioned the basis on which teacher compensation for after school instruction during home visits was provided.
Ms. Taylor responded that teacher compensation issue was determined by each school district and varied from district to district.
Ms. Giunchigliani questioned the availability of grant money for Head Start programs.
Ms. Taylor responded that grant money could not supplant existing programs; however, many of the of the schools had chosen to expand upon Even Start and Head Start programs because they had procedures and people in place to do the work.
Ms. Giunchigliani expressed an interest in learning exactly how many children within the State of Nevada were involved in the Head Start and Even Start programs.
The Chairman expressed the Committee’s interest in the issue of Nevada’s Reading Excellence Act and requested that the Department provide progress reports on the subgrants and programs for which the grant was being utilized at each meeting of the Interim Finance Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARBERRY MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 1.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. Department
of Education – Discretionary
Grants – Restricted – FY 02 – Addition of
$3,473.00 in Federal Emergency Immigrant Grant, addition of $305,735.00 in
Federal Teacher Quality Grant, and addition of $3,351.00 in Federal
Administration and Training Grant to allow for the receipt of increases in
grant awards for Teacher Quality Grant, Advance Placement Grant, and a prior
year refund for Emergency Immigrant Education.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant to the
Teacher Quality category exceeds $100,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
3. Department of Education – IASA – Title I Grants – FY 02 – Transfer of $19,522.00 from the Chapter/Basic Aid to Schools category to the Indirect Costs category and transfer of $91,646.00 from the Chapter/Basic Aid to Schools category to the Basic Program Improvement category to update the expenditure authority for the Basic Program Improvement grant and increase the indirect cost rate to 17.6%. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Basic Program Improvement category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
4. Department of Education – Occupational
Education – FY 02 – Transfer of $41,258.00 from the 11 - Occupational
Education Basic ATS category to the 09 - Technical Preparation category and
transfer of $26,735.00 from the 11 - Occupational Education Basic ATS category
to the 12 - Indirect Cost category to reconcile budget for salary and indirect
costs payable by the Technical Preparation grant. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the
Indirect Cost category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that
category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
5. Department
of Education – GEAR UP – FY 02 – Addition of
$4,080.00 in School to Careers Federal Grant, transfer of $51,708.00 from the
Personnel category to the Sub Grants category, transfer of $2,830.00 from
the Operating category to the Sub Grants category, and transfer of $37,217.00
from the School to Careers Administration category to the Sub Grants category
to adjust the remaining budget authority to complete the School to Careers
program and allow for the receipt of $4,080.00 in prior year refunds. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount transferred to the Sub Grants category exceeds $50,000.00.
Dr. Rheault, Deputy Superintendent, Department of Education, reported that the Gear Up budget was a new funding “piece,” and the work program adjusted the remaining authority to complete the School to Careers program.
In response to the Chairman’s request for information concerning the amendments to the work program, Gary Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst, reported the work program should be adjusted to reflect:
$51,708 transferred from Salaries;
$469 transferred from Out-of-State Travel;
$244 transferred from In-State Travel;
$1,778 transferred from Operating;
$95,496 transferred to Aid to Schools; and,
$37,217 transferred from Schools to Career.
Doug Thunder, Deputy Superintendent, Department of Education, Administrative and Fiscal Services identified himself for the record and agreed with the work program as adjusted by Mr. Ghiggeri.
MS. CHOWNING MOVED TO APPROVE THE AMENDED WORK PROGRAM ADJUSTMENTS IDENTIFIED BY STAFF.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Scott Sisco, Interim Director, Department of Cultural Affairs identified himself for the record and introduced Ginny Lewis, Director, Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Mr. Sisco was before the Committee to request authority for the Department of Cultural Affairs to transfer $103,000 from the Salary category to the Operating category and to accept and expend $315,930 from the DMV backlog project for equipment and temporary services for the project.
The Chairman questioned whether the requested funding would be sufficient to complete the backlog of drivers’ license and registration documents that required microfilming.
Mr. Sisco responded that the project had been reviewed in December 2001, and that he and Ms. Lewis had decided to approach it from a different direction than originally planned. Mr. Sisco advised that it was anticipated that by the time the work was finished, they would have completed 117 percent of the project because the backlog continued to grow for the DMV. Additionally, Mr. Sisco explained that the DMV and the Department of Cultural Affairs had agreed to a readjustment and exchange of work that each had originally been projected to accomplish.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio, Mr. Sisco testified that there had been some misunderstanding concerning the size and complexity of the project.
Chairman Raggio questioned whether the Committee’s approval of the request would provide sufficient funding to complete the job at the end of the fiscal year, and if not, how much work would remain to be completed.
Ginny Lewis, Director, DMV, identified herself for the record. Ms. Lewis explained that after the project had been re-evaluated and the work reassigned, an estimated backlog of 1.4 million titles would remain to microfilm at the end of the fiscal year on the DMV side. Ms. Lewis pointed out that the DMV had been funded for a second shift of microfilm operators who had been hired in December and were currently working a swing shift. Ms. Lewis reported that the operators were able to keep up with current work and were beginning to “delve into” the backlog.
In response to questions from the Chairman, Ms. Lewis explained that registration was not an issue and that in accordance with the Department’s record retention, all supporting documents as a result of title transactions had to be microfilmed.
In response to a question from the Chairman concerning the length of time it took to receive a title after the purchase of a new vehicle, Ms. Lewis explained that the actual title production was a separate matter and that the specific issue was the process of microfilming the documents. Currently, Ms. Lewis indicated that a title transacted in a field office had a five-to-seven-day turnaround while paperwork submitted by a dealership had “a 19-day backlog to create the title.”
In response to a question from the Chairman concerning the projected completion date of the project, Ms. Lewis indicated the project was “years behind,” in eliminating the backlog.
Chairman Raggio questioned how much of the job would be completed by the end of the fiscal year.
Ms. Lewis indicated that by the end of March or April 2002, it was expected they could determine how quickly the recently hired crew could eliminate the backlog.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio, Ms. Lewis explained that the computer records were not affected; however, it was the microfilming of those records that was the issue.
Senator Neal questioned whether the retention schedule would be impacted by the backlog of records to be microfilmed.
Ms. Lewis responded that the record retention schedule was not affected by the backlog since paper files were maintained until the documents could be microfilmed. Ms. Lewis added that while it was a labor-intensive process, the paper documents were available and could be accessed for court or research inquiries.
In response to an additional question from Senator Neal, Ms. Lewis indicated the record retention schedule called for the retention of microfilmed drivers’ license records for 85 years.
Mr. Beers questioned whether there had been any cost estimate for putting the microfilmed records into a “useful digital format.”
Mr. Sisco testified that the Nevada State Library and Archives employed an electronic records archivist who was looking into digital imaging and watching the actions of other states. However, Mr. Sisco advised that microfilming was currently the only proven method of accessing records 100 years from now.
Mr. Beers expressed disagreement with Mr. Sicco’s premise that digitally processed documents could not be read 100 years into the future.
In response, Mr. Sisco explained that the Library and Archives employed one of the few experts in the country who was an electronic records archivist. Mr. Sisco indicated that retention of all documents including e-mail was a “very delicate” situation noting that the press was currently suing the Governor of Utah to retain every piece of e-mail produced. Mr. Sisco advised that while the issue was complex, the Department of Cultural Affairs was working hard to deal with it.
MR. DINI MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 6.
MRS. DE BRAGA SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
7. Department of Agriculture – Gas Pollution Standards – FY 02 – Transfer of $12,631.00 from the Reserve category to the Equipment category and transfer of $27,933.00 from the Reserve category to the Information Services category to acquire additional freezers to conform with requirements for shipping and storage of fuel samples and rework of the laboratory information system to include two new computers and space on the Department of Information Technology Server Farm. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Information Services and Equipment categories exceed 10% of the legislatively approved level for the categories.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
8. Department
of Agriculture – Registration
and Enforcement – FY 02 – Addition of $241,062.00 in Environmental Protection Agency Pesticide
Consolidated, deletion of $811.00 in Environmental Protection Agency Pesticide
Certification, and deletion of $4,747.00 in United States Department of
Agriculture Record Keeping to acquire high-performance liquid chromatograph
with mass spectrographic dector and attendant equipment as well as four file
cabinets. Additionally adjustments are made
to reconcile grant authority/expenditures in categories 10 and 14. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount transferred to the Equipment category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
9. Department of Business and Industry –
Housing Division – Low Income Housing Trust Fund – FY 02 – Transfer of
$1,565,000.00 from the Reserve category to the Loan Disbursements category to
increase authority to fund anticipated grants allocated to local government
recipients. Requires Interim Finance
approval since the amount added to the Loan Disbursements category exceeds 10%
of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
10. Department of Business and Industry – Industrial Relations – FY 02 – Addition of $132,000.00 in Allocation from Fund to provide funding for a medical fee schedule study pursuant to Assembly Bill 44 passed by the 2001 Legislature. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Operating category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
11. Department of Business and Industry –
Energy Conservation – FY 02 – Addition of $130,000.00 in Transfer from
Other Budget Account Same Fund to increase authority of Petroleum overcharge
funds, to support increase funding for sub grants. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the
Petroleum Overcharge Rebate Sub Grants category exceeds 10% of the
legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
12. Department of
Business and Industry – Energy Office – Petroleum Rebate – FY 02 – Transfer
of $130,000.00 from the Reserve category to the Stripper Well category to fund
four grant projects designed to support significant improvement in the level of
energy efficiency integration. Requires
Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Stripper Well category
exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
13. Department of Human Resources – Director’s Office – Administration – FY 02 – Addition of $1,670,324.00 in Transfer from Health Care Financing and Policy - Maximus to reflect Maximus revenue recoveries in excess of budget and reserve balance for reversion. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Collection Expense category exceeds $50,000.00.
Mike
Torvinen, Administrative Services Officer, Director’s Office, Department of
Human Resources, identified himself for the record. Mr. Torvinen requested IFC approval to augment the Department of
Human Resources’ budget with Maximus federal revenue recoveries. Mr. Torvinen pointed out that the schedule
attached to the work program (Exhibit D) identified four separate
invoices for money that had already been received and to which an additional
$500,000 was added in anticipation of additional recoveries for the remainder
of the fiscal year. Mr. Torvinen
further advised that money had been set aside to pay Maximus for their services
with the balance placed into a Reserve category.
Chairman Raggio noted the request was to approve the
augmentation of the budget by $1,670,324 in federal revenue recoveries, and, of
that amount, $1,414,604 was proposed to be reserved for reversion to the
General Fund and $255,720 to pay for Maximus’ services. Chairman Raggio addressed concerns in
reference to legislative intent that $500,000 of Maximus revenue in each year
of the biennium was to be provided to the Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Abuse
(BADA) for the continuation of adolescent substance abuse treatment
programs. The Chairman noted that thus
far $383,112 had been distributed to BADA and requested that Mr. Torvinen
address the status of the BADA funding.
Mr. Torvinen advised that the
$500,000 per year had already been set-aside in Category 70, Transfer to
BADA.
In response to questions from the Chairman concerning the
status of the maximum $250,000 per year for the pilot program for seriously
mentally ill and homeless adults in southern Nevada, Mr. Torvinen advised that
the Department would return to the IFC with a work program to transfer the
revenue. Additionally, Mr. Torvinen
added that he had spoken to Dr. Carlos Brandenburg, Administrator, Division
of Mental Health/Developmental Services, and he assured the Chairman, the
Department would not lose sight of the revenue.
Chairman Raggio noted that actual Maximus collections in
Fiscal Year 2002 totaled $1,780,964.
Mr. Torvinen indicated that his records reflected a total
of $1,720,000 had been collected, and that the Department was very mindful of
the fact that any balance not obligated had to revert to the General Fund.
In response to a question from Ms. Tiffany, Mr. Torvinen
indicated the $250,000 earmarked by the Legislature for the homeless project
could be set aside in a special account rather than placed in the reserve
account. Mr. Torvinen mentioned the
availability of an accounting work program to transfer the funding, which would
not require Interim Finance Committee approval.
Ms. Leslie questioned whether the $1.7 million that had
been collected could be placed in reserve at the present time for program
planning purposes since it was the Legislature’s intent to have $500,000 per
year for the continuation of BADA programs for adolescent substance abuse
treatment and $250,000 per year for a pilot program for seriously mentally ill
and homeless adults in southern Nevada.
Mr. Torvinen agreed to Ms. Leslie’s suggestion.
In response to a question posed by Ms. Tiffany concerning
setting aside the funding at the present time and whether or not a Request for
Proposal (RFP) would have to be postponed until the end of the second year of
the biennium, Mr. Torvinen was of the opinion that there appeared to be no
reason to delay the planning process.
MS. LESLIE MOVED
APPROVAL OF ITEM 13
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE
MOTION.
MS. LESLIE MOVED TO
AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE A REVISION TO AUTHORIZE THE FUNDING EARMARKED FOR
BADA AND DIVISION OF MENTAL HEALTH/DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES’ PROGRAMS.
MR.
PARKS SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION.
THE
MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Torvinen indicated he would work with
staff to ensure that the legislative requests were carried out.
The Chairman called upon John P. Comeaux and
Mike Willden to provide an overview of the General Fund budget projections and
year-to-date shortfall.
John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration,
identified himself for the record and referred to a document (Exhibit E)
which reflected budget tracking for the four largest sources of General Fund
revenue - sales tax, percentage gaming fees, casino entertainment tax and the
business license tax.
Mr. Comeaux explained that the display across the top of
the schedule (Exhibit E) showed August to January, the months in which
the revenue reports were issued, with January 2002, the most current
report. While the February reports
would not be issued until later in the month, Mr. Comeaux indicated a gaming
and sales tax report would be available within the next few weeks.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio, Mr.
Comeaux advised that the January numbers reflected November business activity,
which held true for percentage gaming fees as well. Mr. Comeaux further explained that six months worth of revenue collection
for gaming was displayed in the schedule and only five months for sales tax
because sales tax was accrued and gaming was not.
In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr. Comeaux
explained the shortfall compared to the revenues estimated on May 1 by the
Economic Forum on which the state budget was based. Mr. Comeaux turned to page 2 of the schedule (Exhibit E),
which displayed sales tax data and pointed out the first two lines across the
top of the page reflected data for Fiscal Year 2001, and the second group of
numbers down reflected Fiscal Year 2002 collections that would be required
based on the Economic Forum forecast.
Mr. Comeaux explained that the Fiscal Year 2002 numbers were split
up in monthly amounts that tracked the previous year. As an example, Mr. Comeaux indicated that the amount on the sales
tax table under July for Fiscal Year 2002 Monthly Collections Needed was 5.5
percent more than collected in July Fiscal Year 2001 and August was 5.5 percent
of the preceding year (August 2000) based on the Economic Forum’s estimate that
revenues would increase 5.5 percent for the year. Mr. Comeaux pointed out that the year-to-date shortfall of
$37,779,000 shown on page 1
(Exhibit E) was based on that set of assumptions for revenues displayed.
Mr. Comeaux moved to the cover sheet of the document (Exhibit
E) and explained that the Local School Support Tax (LSST) “Makeup” was not
a state revenue. However, the amounts
that went into the Distributive School Account (DSA) were guaranteed which
placed the state in the position of “making up” that revenue out of the General
Fund if the LSST fell short.
Cumulatively, through the January 2002 report, Mr.
Comeaux pointed out the shortfall:
·
Sales Tax $6,798,000
·
LSST $7,648,000
·
Percentage Fees $21,524,103
·
Casino
Entertainment Tax $1,606,365
·
Business
License Tax $201,772
In response to a question from
Senator Neal, Mr. Comeaux explained that the Percentage Fees reflected the
gross gaming tax.
Chairman Raggio asked Mr. Comeaux to discuss
the projected shortfall at the end of the fiscal year if the downward trend
continued.
Mr. Comeaux pointed out the following
projected shortfall for each tax at the end of the fiscal year, if revenue
continued to be collected at the same rate of gain or loss as currently being
experienced:
·
Sales Tax $16,805,000
·
Percentage Fees $44,052,662
·
Casino
Entertainment Tax $3,862,458
·
Business
License Tax $796,444
In response to a question from the Chairman,
Mr. Comeaux indicated the numbers for Business License Tax could be somewhat
higher depending on the data for the second quarter. Mr. Comeaux pointed out that while the budget was based on the
revenue sources he had just discussed, other revenue sources appeared to be in
line with projections.
In
reference to a question from the Chairman concerning Insurance Premium Tax,
Mr. Comeaux advised that there was no growth in the first quarter
collection over the first quarter for Fiscal Year 2001. However, Mr. Comeaux pointed out the first
quarter of Fiscal Year 2001 was the quarter there was a 20 percent increase in
collections. With the first quarter of
Fiscal Year 2002 at the same level, it was Mr. Comeaux’s opinion that Insurance
Premium Tax might not fall short.
Additionally, Mr. Comeaux addressed the
General Fund ending fund balance, which he indicated on July 1, 2001, was
approximately $17.6 million more than had been budgeted.
In response to a question from the Chairman
concerning the ending fund balance, Mr. Comeaux advised that while he did
not have the information on the total number with him, he recalled it was
approximately $116 million.
In response to a question from the Chairman,
Mr. Ghiggeri recalled the preliminary ending fund balance was around $124-$126
million and the projection had been approximately $114 million to which Mr.
Comeaux agreed.
Discussion ensued concerning the ending fund
balance shortfall, and Chairman Raggio determined the shortfall would be
approximately $58 to $59 million at the end of the fiscal year and staff
agreed.
Chairman Raggio questioned the status of
other projections for revenue enhancements, which included fees for the
Secretary of State at $14 million, Unclaimed Property at about $8 million and
$12 million for short-term car rentals.
Mr. Comeaux responded that the Treasurer had
reported confidence in collections of approximately $5 million for Unclaimed
Property, and the fee collections for the Secretary of State were coming in at
a higher rate than in Fiscal Year 2001.
However, Mr. Comeaux indicated it was too early to determine if the full
amount of those enhanced revenues built into the budget were on target.
In response to Chairman Raggio’s assumption
that the shortfall problem would be exacerbated by some of the funding requests
because of higher than anticipated expenditures, Mr. Comeaux indicated the
numbers would not be made worse by the Welfare caseload report that Mr. Willden
was scheduled to present. However, Mr.
Comeaux anticipated there would be some problems concerning the Welfare
caseload.
In response to a question from Senator Neal
concerning the gaming Percentage Fees, Mr. Comeaux pointed out that on the
third page of the document (Exhibit E) the monthly collections needed
for Fiscal Year 2002 were projected as follows:
·
June $41,712,563
·
July $50,539,409
·
August $47,648,380
·
September $53,244,655
·
October $49,946,003
·
November $42,837,348
·
December $31,178,171
·
January $53,255,362
·
February $45,572,027
·
March $71,069,813
·
April $39,941,932
·
May $58,254,339
·
Total $585,200,000
Mr. Comeaux clarified the collections were
for the period July 2001 to June 2002 and that in July 2001, the collections
were projected to come in at $41.7 million; however, actual collections came in
at $38,055,110.
In response to a question from Senator Neal,
Mr. Comeaux pointed out that the year-to-date collections needed were
illustrated on the chart as cumulative through that month of the fiscal
year. Additionally, Mr. Comeaux
clarified that a total of $565,048,733 in Percentage Fees was collected in
Fiscal Year 2001, and the Economic Forum estimated that total would increase by
3.6 percent for Fiscal Year 2002 for a total of $585,200,000.
In reference to a question from Senator Neal
concerning revenue from coin-operated machines, Mr. Comeaux advised that gaming
shortfall had occurred in the games played by “high-rollers.”
In response to a question from Senator Rawson
concerning the shortfall for the overall revenue, Mr. Comeaux indicated
that revenues for the year totaled approximately $1.8 to $1.9 billion, and the
year-to-date shortfall was approximately $37 million.
Senator Rawson noted that the $37 million was
approximately 1.5 percent of the total budget and inquired about the 5 percent
trigger for the budget stabilization account.
Mr. Comeaux advised that before the 5 percent
trigger for the budget stabilization account could be utilized, the shortfall
would have to total approximately $120 million.
Mike Willden, Director, Department of Human
Resources, identified himself for the record and distributed a document (Exhibit
F) that detailed Nevada Welfare Division caseload data.
In a review of the data, Mr. Willden pointed
out that the first page illustrated three boxes that contained data for the
caseloads on Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), Food Stamps and Total
Medicaid. Mr. Willden reported that the
TANF program originally budgeted at 18,000 recipients had seen “explosive
growth” since the September 11, 2001 event with recipients in December at
30,427, a 15.35 percent change in projected growth.
Mr. Willden pointed out that while the Food
Stamp program had increased to 90,820 recipients, which was of concern for
staff, the benefits did not have a budgetary impact on the state as they were
entirely funded by the federal government.
In reference to the Medicaid caseload, Mr.
Willden pointed out there were 141,029 recipients in December while 125,500
recipients were budgeted for Fiscal Year 2002 and 133,000 were budgeted for
Fiscal Year 2003.
Turning to the chart on page 2 of the
document (Exhibit F), Mr. Willden pointed out that January’s growth for
the TANF caseload did not appear to be growing as it had in October, November
and December.
On page 3 of the document (Exhibit F),
Mr. Willden pointed out the two areas of the chart he had circled illustrated
the growing gap between the actual number of recipients versus budgeted and
actual expenditures versus budgeted.
Mr. Willden informed the members of the
Committee that the caseload growth for Medicaid and TANF was almost exclusively
related to families and children and that during the last six months, “a
tremendous number of families” had accessed the low-income health insurance
programs. Mr. Willden attributed the
growth in caseload to the layoffs and loss of insurance provided by the
Culinary Union as well as other health insurance coverage. The chart on page 4 of the document (Exhibit
F) illustrated a 50 percent growth in families‑related Medicaid in
the past six months.
Mr. Willden turned to page 5 of the document
(Exhibit F), which illustrated the current caseload trend and
projections for a total Medicaid caseload average for Fiscal Year 2002 of
131,133 recipients versus the 125,524 recipients that had been budgeted. Mr. Willden reiterated that the December
2001 total number of recipients was 141,029.
Additionally, Mr. Willden indicated the worst-case scenario for
Fiscal Year 2003 was an average of 164,156 recipients versus the 133,142
budgeted.
Mr. Willden turned to page 6 and 7 of the
document (Exhibit F), which illustrated budgeted and actual enrollment
data concerning the Nevada Check-Up Program.
Mr. Willden explained that Nevada Check-Up was an insurance program for
families and children under 200 percent of poverty, which had a budgeted
enrollment of 20,574 recipients versus an actual enrollment of 22,850.
Page 7 of the document (Exhibit F)
displayed Nevada Check-Up enrollment projections for Fiscal Year 2002 and
Fiscal Year 2003.
In response to a question from Chairman
Arberry concerning the monetary shortfall, Mr. Willden projected a
shortfall of about $4.5 million for the Nevada Check-Up Program for Fiscal Year
2002.
In response to additional questions from
Chairman Arberry, Mr. Willden explained the Nevada Check-Up Program was funded
by a combination of state and federal dollars matched $1 state to $2
federal.
In reference to the TANF Program, Mr. Willden
reported that in the event of a worst-case scenario that growth would continue
and reach 40,000 actual recipients, the state would face a shortfall of
approximately $20 million. However,
Mr. Willden indicated the availability of some variables that included
whether federal population modifier money was made available to the state,
currently an issue in Congress, and the possibility of deferring some programs
that had been scheduled to come on line in July. Mr. Willden indicated he had been directed by the Governor to
look at some of those deferrals and additional information would be provided to
the Committee.
In reference to the Medicaid Program, Mr.
Willden reported that the latest projections for Fiscal Year 2002 included a
low range $36 million shortfall and a worst‑case scenario $60 million
shortfall.
Insofar as assistance that could be provided
to these programs, Mr. Willden discussed the TANF reserve and advised that a
significant amount of money had been banked over the past five years and held
for a “rainy day.” That reserve was
currently being fully utilized.
Additionally, Mr. Willden indicated he had been directed by the Governor
to provide a list of new programs that could be deferred. The Governor, however, had been very
explicit not to cut current recipients and benefits.
In reference to the Medicaid Program, Mr.
Willden discussed the Intergovernmental Tax Transfer Account, which held
approximately $26 million that could be used for the Medicaid Program or Nevada
Check-Up, or both. Additionally, Mr.
Willden indicated that the money in the Intergovernmental Tax Transfer Account
could be matched at the current federal matching rate of 50:50 percent in
Medicaid (anticipated to increase to 51.79 percent Federal in Fiscal Year
2003), or $1 to $2 in the Nevada Check-Up Program.
In reference to a question from Chairman
Raggio concerning new initiatives, Mr. Willden advised the members of the
Committee a list of new initiatives had been prepared and discussed with the
Governor. As a result of that
discussion, the new initiatives in the TANF Program would be deferred. Mr. Willden offered to provide the members
of the Committee with the list.
Specifically, the deferrals included a pay increase to families required
to stay at home and care for an ill and incapacitated member of the family,
which had been initially deferred to April and subsequently deferred to July
dependent upon revenue and caseload figures.
Additionally, Mr. Willden indicated requests for proposals for new TANF
services had been deferred; however, benefits would not be cut, nor would
enrollment be capped for either the TANF or health insurance programs.
In response to a question from Senator
Rawson, Mr. Willden explained that the TANF Program primarily provided a
monthly cash grant for the basic needs of low-income families. While TANF money
was specifically prohibited for medical coverage, low-income families with TANF
assistance were eligible for health insurance paid for through Medicaid. TANF also provided employment services and
other social services such as assistance in areas of domestic violence and
emergency housing.
In response to a question from Senator Rawson
concerning the unemployment benefit waiver, Mr. Willden advised that the
Governor requested implementation of a waiver on October 1 following the
September 11 crisis so that families could receive unemployment benefits as
well as TANF cash assistance and Medicaid assistance through the TANF option.
Senator Rawson expressed concern in view of
the deficit and the deferral of programs for people with long-term needs and
indicated that difficult decisions would need to be made and “immediate steps”
taken concerning those deferrals.
Mr. Willden clarified that the policy
decision by the Governor to provide unemployment benefits to TANF recipients
was not the primary driver to caseload growth and that there was a net impact
of less than $500,000 in TANF cash assistance during the past three
months. Mr. Willden indicated that the
driver for the caseload increase was the general economy, unemployment and the
need for health insurance.
In response to a question from Senator
O’Donnell concerning the deferral of specific programs, Mr. Willden reported
the following deferrals:
·
The transfer of
money from TANF to Title XX. Mr.
Willden explained that because the Title XX block grant for Fiscal Year 2002
was higher than budgeted, the full TANF to Title XX transfer would not take
place;
·
The $94 increase
for families in the Ill and Incapacitation Program, approved by the Legislature
and scheduled to begin in January 2002, was deferred to April and subsequently
to July during which time caseload and revenues would be monitored;
·
Requests for proposals for new TANF services
in the area of teen pregnancy and the formation of two-parent families was
deferred; and,
·
Budgeted TANF
money for the $75 child support disregard was moved to a funding source within
the Child Support Program that had revenue to cover the payments for Fiscal
Year 2002. Mr. Willden indicated that
there were a number of transfers to the Division of Child and Family Services
as well as Mental Health that supported programs in those areas and no cuts
were intended; however, an evaluation would made concerning whether the total
amount of TANF transfers needed to be made to those programs.
In response to a question from Senator
O’Donnell concerning the difference between a deferral versus a cut,
Mr. Willden indicated the two were not associated, and defined a deferral
as simply not implementing a new program while a cut eliminated services to an
existing recipient or program.
Senator O’Donnell questioned whether the same
level of service could be maintained for TANF recipients if the caseload
continued to rise.
In response, Mr. Willden projected that if
the caseload continued up to the 40,000 mark; there would be no TANF funding by
next spring.
Mr. Goldwater asked Legislative Counsel’s
opinion concerning the extent of Executive authority to cut or defer budgets
before Legislative action or oversight was required.
Ms. Erdoes indicated that while the question
might be more properly asked of the Fiscal Analysis Division Analysts, the work
programs on the agenda required action by the Interim Finance Committee to move
money from one year to the other as specifically authorized in the
Appropriations Act. Ms. Erodes further
advised that the Executive Branch had the “authority to pay out money for the
services” and that Legislative action would be required if there was a change
in the work program.
In an effort to ensure a clear understanding
of the roles of the Executive and Legislative branches during a period of
crisis, Mr. Goldwater requested that the Fiscal Division Analysts prepare an
outline of where Executive authority ended and Legislative authority began.
Ms. Tiffany recalled an option concerning the
Intergovernmental Transfer and questioned whether the money was from a reserve
or whether it would be taken from the University Medical Center and other
hospitals.
Mr. Willden indicated the $26 million was
from a reserve and would not be taken from any of the hospitals.
Ms. Giunchigliani questioned whether the $26
million would be restricted for Medicaid use only.
Mr. Willden responded that the legislation
concerning the reserve provided for the use of Intergovernmental Transfer funds
related to the disproportionate share payments and the Intergovernmental Tax
transfer payments. Whatever was left in
the account after those payments could be used to fund Medicaid programs, and
if Medicaid needs were met, then the funds could be used to cover Nevada
Check-Up.
Ms. Giunchigliani addressed the deferral of
new programs including the Kinship Program and questioned what many had
considered “budget holes” during the Legislative Session.
Mr. Willden indicated the Governor had
directed him to look at programs that had not yet been implemented and defer
them for a few months while monitoring the caseload and revenues. Mr. Willden further indicated that the
programs would be implemented if it were at all possible. Mr. Willden also advised that the Kinship
Program for grandparents had been implemented in October 2001.
Ms. Giunchigliani discussed a more cautious
approach as the budget process began for the 2003 Legislative Session.
Chairman Raggio indicated that the September
11 events and the economic downturn that followed could not have been foreseen,
and that at this point everyone was trying to act responsibly.
Chairman Raggio welcomed Governor Guinn to
the meeting and invited him to address the members of the Committee.
Governor Guinn’s opening remarks indicated
that all of the budgets had been adequately funded and that had the revenues
continued as they had at the start of the fiscal year, there would have been no
“budget holes.” However, the Governor
said as a result of the September 11 events, a substantial drop in revenue not
only lowered income streams but raised the caseload under Medicaid and TANF.
Governor Guinn indicated that in another
month or two he believed he would be able to demonstrate a better picture of
the state’s economic status and recommended action to maintain a balanced
budget. With California between $12 and
$15 billion in the red, Arizona $1.8 billion in the red, Ohio $2.8 billion
dollars in the red, and five other states that had already held special
sessions, Governor Guinn pointed out that Nevada was in “good shape overall” as
a result of conservative budget building and legislative action.
The Governor advised that while revenue was
down about $37 million through the first six months of the fiscal year, $26 to
$27 million of that downturn was covered by the hiring freeze in effect since
July 1. The Governor reported
approximately $1.5 million a month in savings by not hiring additional people
except in critical areas. While
revenues were rebounding, the Governor indicated it would be quite some time
before revenue reached the Economic Forum projections.
The Governor asked for the Committee’s
understanding that the budget problems were not a result of the budget process
or actions on the part of the Legislature.
Additionally, the Governor referenced the state’s loss of sales tax
revenue and double impact on the budget to also have to make up the Local School
Support Tax shortfall to school districts.
The Governor indicated the state faced
difficult times and that while everything that could be done to mitigate the
problems would be done, this was not a time to cut back on funding for the
programs under discussion. The Governor
indicated that he wanted no part in cutting services to needy families and that
a reallocation of funding would be determined.
In his closing remarks, the Governor
emphasized the importance of the Executive and Legislative branches moving
ahead in the right direction but doing it together in an effort to continue
service to those families who were “less fortunate and more fragile” than
others. The Governor indicated the
times were as difficult as he had seen in 38 years in the state and asked for
the Legislature’s cooperation in determining the figures and recommendations to
offset those dollars into helping those who truly needed the assistance.
14. Department of Human Resources – Directors
Office – Healthy Nevada Fund Administration – FY 02 – Addition of $1,121,774.00
$1,071,774.00 in Transfer from Treasurer - Tobacco Settlement Funds to
provide for an additional staff position (Administrative Assistant, IV) to
support the Senior RX Program including associated operating expenses,
increased postage expense due to higher than anticipated enrollment and
adjustments for unused grant award that were balanced forward to State Fiscal
Year 2002. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Operating category exceeds
10% of the legislatively approved level for that category and includes new
staff. (Revised 1-24-02)
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
15. Department
of Human Resources – Directors Office – Healthy Nevada Fund Administration – FY
03 – Addition of $25,327.00 in Transfer from Treasurer - Tobacco
Settlement Funds and transfer of $17,094.00 from the Operating category to the
Salaries category to provide for the continuation of an additional staff
position (Administrative Assistant IV) and associated operating expenses. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount transferred to the Operating category exceeds 10% of the legislatively
approved level for that category and includes new staff.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
16. Department
of Human Resources – Health Care
Financing and Policy – Nevada
Check-Up Program – FY 02 – Addition of $1,341,939.00 in State General fund, addition of
$2,492,173.00 in Federal Title XXI Funds, and addition of $86,018.00 in
Reimbursement of Expense to accommodate the projected client enrollment of
22,779 versus a budgeted 20,431.
Requires Interim Finance approval per Section 32, Chapter 570 (Assembly
Bill 672), 2001 Session and this action involves the allocation of
block grant funds and requires a public hearing.
Items 16 and 17 required a public hearing and were heard together. See Item 17.
17. Department of Human Resources – Health Care Financing and Policy – Nevada Check‑Up Program – FY 03 – De-augmentation of
$1,341,939.00 in State General Funds and de-augmentation of $2,492,173.00 in
Federal Title XXI Funds to provide for projected enrollment in the Nevada
Check-Up Program in State Fiscal Year 2002.
Requires Interim Finance approval per Section 32, Chapter 570 (Assembly
Bill 672), 2001 Session and this action involves the allocation of block
grant funds and requires a public hearing.
Items 16 and 17 required a public hearing and
were heard together.
The Chairman indicated that many of the
Committee’s questions had been answered during the budget overview.
Charles Duarte, Administrator, Division of
Health Care Financing and Policy, identified himself for the record and
introduced Deb King, Administrative Services Officer for the Division. Mr. Duarte advised the members of the Committee
that Item 16 accompanied Item 17 (an offset to Fiscal Year 2003 revenues)
and requested an increase in revenue and expenditure authority to cover the
increased client load in the Nevada Check-Up Program. An additional $3.9 million in revenue and expenditure authority
was requested of which the Division would utilize $1.3 million in State General
Funds, $2.49 million in federal funds and $86,000 in additional premium
revenues received from clients to pay for operating expenses in the current
fiscal year.
In response to a question from the Chairman,
Mr. Duarte indicated that in Fiscal Year 2003, companion adjustments would be
made to the budgets; however, the Division was not currently requesting
adjustments in Fiscal Year 2003.
The Chairman questioned whether the capped
Check-Up, TANF and Medicaid budgets for Fiscal Year 2003 would experience “a
funding hole,” and whether the Rainy Day Fund discussed in the budget
presentation would alleviate projected budget shortfalls.
Mr. Duarte responded that the Division was
aware that the budgets were capped and had the ability, with approval from the
Interim Finance Committee, to move money from Fiscal Year 2003 to Fiscal Year
2002 to cover the shortfall currently being experienced.
The Chairman reiterated his question
concerning the impact of the shortfall on the budgets in Fiscal Year 2003.
Mr. Duarte advised that as Mr. Willden had
indicated in his presentation, existing budget authority would be used before
“tapping into” the Intergovernmental Transfer Reserve, which would primarily be
used for Medicaid but could be used to pay for increased caseload growth in the
Nevada Check-Up Program as well.
Chairman Raggio noted a potential $35 million
shortfall in TANF funding in Fiscal Year 2003 and the recommended
deferrals on new initiatives that could alleviate some of the shortfall. However, the Chairman pointed out this was
an area in which the Committee needed to be kept fully informed and an update
was requested to be presented at each meeting of the Committee.
There was no public testimony on either Item
16 or 17.
MR. DINI MOVED
APPROVAL OF ITEMS 16 AND 17.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED
THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
18. Department of Human Resources – Division
of Mental Health and Developmental Services – Administration – FY 02 – Addition
of $49,352.00 in Community Mental Health Service Block Grant to fund salaries,
in-state travel, operating and computer software and hardware for six new
full-time employees for two months in State Fiscal Year 2002 and ten months in
State Fiscal Year 2003 (see work program C18993 for State Fiscal Year
2003). These six full-time employees
would provide peer counseling currently provided by contract. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount of grant includes new staff and this action involves the allocation
of block grant funds and requires a public hearing.
Items 18 and 19 required a public hearing and were heard together. See Item 19.
19. Department
of Human Resources – Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services –
Administration – FY 03 – Addition of $152,344.00 in Community Mental
Health Service Block Grant to continue salaries, out-of-State travel, in-State
travel, and operating expenses for six new full-time employees for ten months
in State Fiscal Year 2003 and two months in State Fiscal Year 2002 (see work
program C18992 for State Fiscal Year 2002).
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds
$100,000.00, includes new staff, and this action involves the allocation of
block grant funds and requires a public hearing.
Items 18 and 19 required a public hearing and were heard together.
Carlos Brandenburg, Administrator,
Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services (MHDS) identified himself
for the record and introduced Alyce Thrash, Chairperson, Mental Health Planning
Advisory Council. Dr. Brandenburg
advised the members of the Committee that Items 18 and 19 pertained to the
Community Mental Health Service Block Grant the Division had been receiving
over a number of years. Dr. Brandenburg
requested the addition of $49,352 in Fiscal Year 2002 and $152,344 in Fiscal
Year 2003 to fund six new full-time Peer Counselor positions.
Ms. Thrash, identified herself for
the record as a consumer as well as the Chair for the Mental Health Planning
Advisory Council. Ms. Thrash reported
that over the past three months, from October 2001 to January 2002, twelve town
meetings had been held in an effort to receive input from consumers concerning
the full-time state employment of Peer Counselors. A recent report by the Surgeon General indicated consumers were
more involved in recovery development and mental health services. Ms. Thrash explained the role of Peer
Counselors would be to provide support, advocacy and quality control in a more
user‑friendly system for clients of human service agencies who were on
the road to recovery.
In response to a question from the
Chairman, Dr. Brandenburg advised that the MHDS began using a statewide
contractual agreement during Fiscal Year 2001.
However, Dr. Brandenburg explained it was so much more cost
effective to hire state employees, the Division could go from four contractual
Peer Counselor positions to six.
There was no public testimony.
MS. CHOWNING MOVED
APPROVAL OF ITEMS 18 AND 19.
MS. LESLIE SECONDED THE
MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
20. Department of Human Resources – Division of Mental Health and
Developmental Services –
Northern Nevada Adult Mental Health Services – FY 02 – Addition of $65,000.00 in Federal Housing and
Urban Development Shelter Plus Care Housing Program Grant to continue
transitional living - Housing and Urban Development (category 19) expenditures
- increase the number of clients who can be placed in community housing with federally
funded Housing and Urban Development/Shelter Plus Care housing contracts and
continue the effort of reducing the number of State funded Supportive Living
Arrangements. Requires Interim Finance
approval since the amount of grant exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved
level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
21. Department of Human Resources/Mental
Health and Developmental Services – Rural Regional Center – FY 02 – Transfer
of $60,000.00 from the Non-Community Training Center Jobs and Training category
to the Community Training Center Day Training category and transfer of
$10,000.00 from the Non-Community Training Center Jobs and Training category to
the Community Training Center Jobs category to meet projected expenses of the
Certified Training Centers for both Day Training and Jobs due to an increase in
the number of clients. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Community Training Center
Day Training (38) and Community Training Center Jobs (39) from the Community
Training Center Jobs and Training categories exceed 10% of the legislatively
approved level for the categories.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
22. Department of Human Resources – Health Division – Vital Statistics – FY 02 – Addition of $89,904.00 in Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Federal Grant to continue the cost of travel, supplies and the inter-local contract with the University of Nevada Reno to conduct the annual random sample telephone survey, data collection, analysis and report to determine the incidence and prevalence of unhealthy behaviors in Nevada. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant to the Behavioral Risk category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
23. Department of Human Resources – Health Division – Community Health Services – FY 02 – Addition of $110,185.00 in Transfer from Other Budget Account (Welfare - Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) to fund operating expenses for the purpose of preventing and reducing out-of wedlock pregnancies. Requires Interim Finance approval since this action involves the allocation of block grant funds and requires a public hearing.
Item 23 required a public hearing.
Philip Weyrick, Administrative Services Officer, Health Division, identified himself for the record. Mr. Weyrick explained that during the budget process for the last biennium budget, $219,766 was placed in Budget Account 3224, Community Health Nursing. At the time, the Division was not aware of the full scope of the proposal to fund operating expenses for reducing out-of-wedlock pregnancies, approved by the Welfare Division at a later date. The work program before the Committee requested an additional $110,185 to fund operating expenses for Community Health Nurses.
In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr. Weyrick advised that Community Health Nurses were already engaged in a program to help reduce and prevent out-of-wedlock pregnancies in the rural communities. The work program request would reimburse the Nurses for their work.
In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr. Weyrick advised that the Division had compiled monthly statistics in an effort to measure the work being accomplished by the Community Health Nurses and the statistics showed good results.
Ms. Tiffany questioned whether the Community Health Nurses went out into the community to provide outreach services or whether clients visited a clinic.
Mr. Weyrick responded that for the most part, clients visited the rural health clinics for assistance; however, some outreach programs existed that provided Community Health Nurse visits to schools where guidance was provided to young people.
Ms. Tiffany clarified that she was speaking about adults, no longer in school, who would have access to outreach activities where discussions about birth control took place.
While public information campaigns had been initiated to reach adults, Mr. Weyrick expressed uncertainty concerning whether Community Health Nurses organized events in the local communities.
In response to a question from Ms. Tiffany, Mr. Weyrick explained that the request before the Committee focused on anyone who accessed the rural health clinics seeking medical care. Additionally, Mr. Weyrick pointed out that in many instances, the services provided by Community Health Care Nurses was the only medical care available in some rural counties.
There was no public testimony.
CHAIRMAN ARBERRY MOVED TO APPROVE ITEM 23.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
24. Department of Human Resources – Health Division – Communicable Disease – FY 02 – Addition of $1,014,706.00 in Federal Disease Prevention Grant to continue the travel, operating, medical, and contract costs in conducting the Breast and Cervical Cancer Detection Program. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Breast and Cervical Cancer category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
25. Department of Human Resources – Health Division – Communicable Disease Control – FY 02 – Addition of $41,241.00 in State-Based Diabetes Program to Reduce the Burden of Diabetes Grant to continue support of community organizations in diabetes education and surveillance systems. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant to the State Based Diabetes Program category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
26. Department of Human Resources – Health
Division – Family Planning – FY 02 – Addition of $74,942.00 in Title X,
Family Planning Services Program to continue salaries, in-state travel,
operating and the APPLE Project (designated toward the prevention of teen
pregnancy). Requires Interim Finance
approval since the amount of grant to the Operating category exceeds 10% of the
legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
27. Department of Human Resources – Health Division – Sexually Transmitted Disease Control – FY 02 – Addition of $261,771.00 in Federal Housing and Urban Development Contract – Housing Opportunities for Person with AIDS Grant to continue funding of housing assistance, referral and supportive services to individuals and their families who have AIDS or related diseases. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant to the Federal Housing and Urban Development Contract category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
28. Department of Human Resources – Health Division – Maternal Child Health Services – FY 02 – Transfer of $21,599.00 from the Salaries category to the Systems Development Grant category to use salary savings from two positions funded with the Maternal State Systems Development Initiative Data Enhancement Project grant to fund projected expenditures for out-of-state travel, in-state travel, operating, office equipment, information services and training expenses. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Systems Development Grant category from the Salaries category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
29. Department of Human Resources – Welfare
Division – Welfare Administration – FY 02 – Addition of $45,000.00 in
Federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Grant to provide an increased
cash assistance for families with an ill or incapacitated member who cannot
participate in work-related activities.
Requires Interim Finance approval since this action involves the
allocation of block grant funds and requires a public hearing.
Item 29 was withdrawn.
30. Department of Human Resources – Welfare Division – Child Support Enforcement Program – FY 02 – Addition of $88,944.00 in Federal Child Support Grant to provide for increased paternity tests in locating and serving non-custodial parents. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Genetic Testing category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
31. Department
of Human Resources – Welfare
Division – Child Support Federal
Reimbursement – FY 02 – Addition of $1,006,592.00 in Federal Child Support Program to provide
child support incentive awards to qualifying counties for Federal Fiscal Year
2000. Requires Interim Finance approval
since the amount added to the County Incentives category exceeds 10% of the
legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
32. Department of Human Resources – Welfare
Division – Low Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEA) – FY 02 – Addition of $600,712.00 in Low Income Home
Energy Assistance Federal Grant to provide energy assistance for an additional
3,758 households which will allow approximately 13,222 households to receive
energy assistance payments. Increased
operating expenses are also necessary to cover additional office space,
temporary staffing and leased office equipment associated with the substantial
increased volume of applicants.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds
$100,000.00 and this action involves the allocation of block grant funds and
requires a public hearing.
Item
32 required a public hearing.
Nancy Ford, Administrator, State Welfare
Division, identified herself for the record and introduced Roger Mowbray,
Administrator Services Officer. Ms.
Ford advised the members of the Committee the work program requested
augmentation of revenue and expenditure authority by $600,712 for the
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEA) program.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio, Ms. Ford explained that indirect charges among Welfare Division budget
accounts had increased as a result of the higher number of households served,
and the LIHEA Payments category increase would provide funding for an
additional 3,758 households. Ms. Ford
indicated the increase would allow 13,222 households to receive payments from
LIHEA funds.
There was no public testimony.
MS. CEGAVSKE MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 32.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
33. Department
of Human Resources – Child and
Family Services – Children,
Youth and Family Administration –
FY 02 – Addition of $40,883.00 in Federal Title IV-E,
addition of $225,775.00 in Gifts and Donations, transfer of $91,122.00 from the
Administrative Reserve-University category to the Personnel Services category
and transfer of $5,096.00 from the Administrative Reserve University category
to the Equipment category to create a training infrastructure; to meet training
and staff development goals in the Federally required and approved five-year
Comprehensive Child and Family Services Plan; and assist the Division with
current infrastructure needs within Fiscal.
Adds five new full-time employees.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the
Specialized Training category exceeds $50,000.00 and includes new staff.
Items
33 and 34 were heard together. See Item
34.
34. Department of Human Resources – Child and Family Services – Children, Youth, and Family Administration – FY 03 – Addition of $96,551.00 in Federal Title IV-E, addition of $225,775.00 in Gifts and Donations, and transfer of $225,775.00 from the Administrative Reserve-University category to the Personnel Services category to continue five new full‑time employees and associated costs to create a training infrastructure and assist the division with infrastructure needs in Fiscal. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Specialized Training category exceeds $50,000.00.
Edward Cotton, Administrator,
Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS), identified himself for the record
and introduced Jim Baumann, Administrative Services Officer, and Liz Breshears,
Family Programs Officer.
Mr. Baumann explained that the work
programs leveraged federal revenue generated through the UNR and UNLV federally
approved indirect cost rates to expand child welfare-related training through
the UNR and UNLV training partnership.
Approval of the request would provide the Division the ability to create
a training infrastructure within their fiscal services section to meet training
and staff development goals and would also provide fiscal support. The training infrastructure request included
five positions, four of which comprised a team that would identify training
needs and develop and implement training strategies and one position that
provided fiscal support.
Mr. Baumann further advised that the project had been approved in the
Comprehensive Child and Family Services Plan.
As it appeared the University would
conduct the training, Chairman Raggio requested information concerning the
specific services the new team would provide.
Ms. Breshears explained the training
provided by the University was related to degrees in social work and certain
core training that all child welfare workers required. Ms. Breshears advised the Committee
that the Division of Child and Family Services faced two federal reviews of the
Child and Family Services Program, one in April 2002 and the other near the end
of the following year. Ms. Breshears
explained that the federal Department of Health and Human Services would be
sending in a team of six to nine people who would conduct the reviews. Associated with those reviews was a series
of penalties that would be imposed if the state was not in compliance with
“systemic indicators and seven outcome indicators” in the Division’s
programs. Ms. Breshears further advised
that in the past, the Division had one individual on site responsible for
internal training.
Chairman Raggio brought up the
integration of Child Welfare services between the Division and Clark and Washoe
counties in which a number of DCFS Social Worker staff would leave state
employment and become county employees.
The Chairman questioned whether the positions under discussion would
transition to county employment or remain with the state.
Ms. Breshears responded that the team would
remain centrally located with the Division as the Division would remain the
oversight agency with responsibility for ensuring that county employees were
trained and knowledgeable in performing their work in accordance with state and
federal regulations. While Ms. Breshears
indicated the DCFS had some time to incorporate the “myriad new
responsibilities” received from the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the
Multi-Ethnic Placement Act, timing was “particularly important’ because of the
upcoming reviews and potential penalties associated with the reviews.
Chairman Raggio requested an explanation
concerning information in the backup material that indicated in the event the
University incentive funds were no longer generated, the positions would be
terminated.
Ms. Breshears explained that Robin Ynacay-Nye,
a Family Programs Officer, with the DCFS was able to ascertain that a number of
courses that qualified for Title IV‑E reimbursement were provided
through the University.
Ms. Ynacay-Nye worked with the UNR and the UNLV in order that some
of those funds could be made available to the Division to provide internal
training. While changes were not
anticipated, Ms. Breshears indicated the funding would be deleted if federal
law or circumstances changed.
Chairman Raggio questioned whether all four
positions would continue to be necessary after the integration of services
between the state and counties occurred.
Ms. Breshears advised that all four of the
positions would be necessary to the DCFS as the state still retained oversight
responsibility to ensure compliance with indicators in the Division’s programs.
Mr. Cotton added that one of the areas in
which the federal reviews would focus would be the occurrence of child abuse
after a case had become known to the state.
Other states had developed protocols and practices that reduced, by as
much as 40 percent, child abuse that occurred after initial intervention by the
state. Nevada had been unable to train
staff on how to use those protocols with only one staff member in the training
unit. Additionally, Mr. Cotton
advised that whether the employees were county or state, they would continue to
look to the DCFS to implement changes.
Chairman Raggio questioned whether any of the
four positions would transfer to the county and who would monitor child abuse
at the county level after initial intervention had occurred.
Mr. Cotton explained that the positions would
not be transferred, and the DCFS would continue to have a monitoring role.
Chairman Raggio questioned whether the state
would hire additional positions to monitor any reoccurrence of child abuse at
the county level.
It was Mr. Cotton’s opinion that additional
employees would not be necessary and that the DCFS would serve as a monitoring
and quality assurance unit for the counties including the rural counties. Mr. Cotton further explained the counties
would provide administrative structure, and the DCFS would provide oversight.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio, Ms. Breshears advised that the funding source was a combination
University and state generated IV-E revenue.
In a reference to information provided to the
Committee concerning the Comprehensive Plan, Ms. Leslie questioned whether the
funding could be utilized within the DCFS for any purposes other than those set
out in the work program, for example to provide mental health services to
children within the DCFS.
Ms. Breshears advised that while the funding
technically could be used to provide other types of services, other use of the
funding would not be in accordance with the planning agreed to with the Region
IX office and the University. Ms.
Breshears indicated she held some ethical concerns in the use of the funding
for other purposes, particularly as the Comprehensive Child and Family Services
Plan was designed to ensure that the DCFS services were in compliance with
federal regulations.
Ms. Leslie expressed some surprise concerning
the request and did not recall discussion during the 2001 Legislative Session
that indicated the four positions would be used for training purposes. Additionally, Ms. Leslie indicated that the
positions would not actually provide training but would study needs and develop
a plan for training.
Ms. Breshears advised the positions would
provide technical assistance as well as arrange training and conduct “some
training where needed.”
In response to a question from Ms. Leslie
concerning whether the need for the four positions was created during the 2001
Legislative Session, Ms. Breshears advised that she was not involved in the
testimony during the session.
In view of other priorities, Ms. Leslie
expressed her reluctance to make an immediate decision on a request she
indicated the Committee had not been given enough time to “process” against
“the options.” Additionally, Ms. Leslie
expressed uncertainty that she was prepared to determine the best use of the
money during the meeting and indicated there had been no discussion concerning
the request during the first meeting of the Interim Legislative Committee on
Children, Youth and Families, on which she served.
In response to a question from Ms. Leslie
concerning Clark and Washoe counties, Ms. Breshears indicated that both
counties had representatives on the Nevada Training Partnership, the oversight
body that reviewed all of the child welfare training needs, and the Partnership
had endorsed the request as had the UNR and the UNLV.
In response to a question from the Chairman
concerning compliance, Ms. Breshears indicated the entire system was set up and
negotiated with the federal regional office and the UNR and the UNLV.
In response to an additional question from
the Chairman, Ms. Breshears indicated the eligibility review would take place
in April 2002, and the Child and Family Services review would take place in a
year.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio concerning whether the positions were necessary for the state to be in
compliance with the upcoming reviews, Ms. Breshears explained that the
positions were written into the Comprehensive State Plan to assist the state
“in gearing up the quality of state services” for the eligibility review in
April 2002 and the Child and Family Services review at the end of 2003 or early
2004.
The Chairman questioned whether the positions
had been filled and discussed deferral of the work programs until the following
meeting in order to address some of the concerns expressed during the meeting.
Ms. Breshears advised that the positions had
not been filled and indicated that while the request could be deferred, the
DCFS had worked on the project for approximately two years, and there was some
concern that as time eroded there would be less capability to ensure that
compliance would be met.
Chairman Raggio suggested that Items 33 and
34 be deferred until the following meeting of the Committee in order to resolve
concerns in reference to the number of positions needed, actual compliance
requirements and other utilization of the funding. The Chairman requested that the DCFS representatives work with
staff concerning the questions discussed by the members of the Committee.
Hearing no objections from the Committee, the
Chairman deferred Items 33 and 34 to the following meeting of the Committee.
35. Department
of Human Resources – Child and
Family Services – Youth
Community Services – FY 02 – Deletion of $57,787.00 in Federal Title IV - E, deletion of $327,457.00
in Federal Medicaid Rehabilitation, and transfer of $554,376.00 from the Child
Welfare category to the Washoe County Pilot category to continue the Integrated
Permanency Planning Project with Washoe County to increase the continuity of
care and establish a plan to expedite the permanent placement of children. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount added to the Washoe County Pilot category exceeds 10% of the
legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
36. Department
of Human Resources – Child and
Family Services – Child Welfare
Integration – FY 02 – Addition of $2,436,980.00 in Title IV-E and addition of $114,786.00 in
Medicaid Rehabilitation to pay for costs associated with the transfer of
certain child welfare services from the State to Clark and Washoe County
pursuant to Assembly Bill 1, Special Session, 2001 Legislature. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount added to the Clark County One-Shot category exceeds $50,000.00.
Jim Baumann, Administrative Services Officer, Division of Child and Family Services, identified himself for the record and reported that Section 136 of A.B. 1 of the 17th Special Session appropriated $5,166,860 from the State General Fund to the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) to pay for costs associated with the transfer of certain child welfare services from the Department of Human Resources to Clark and Washoe counties. Section 137 of A.B. 1 appropriated $1,015,497 in Fiscal Year 2002 from the State General Fund to pay for costs associated with the transfer. Mr. Baumann reported that the total of the two amounts ($6,182,357) was currently work programmed into Budget Account 3142, Child Welfare Integration. The work program created authority in revenue general ledgers 3562, Federal Title, IV-E and 3860 Medicaid Rehab, to claim the estimated federal share of the one-time and ongoing costs associated with the transfer.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio Mr. Baumann advised that the DCFS requested approval to augment the budget by a total of $2,551,776.
Chairman Raggio noted that certain requirements had to be met before federal funds included in the integration effort could be collected. The Chairman requested an update on the status of the requirements to develop and receive federal approval for a cost allocation plan and federal approval that Clark County’s current automation system met federal child welfare data reporting requirements.
Mr. Baumann explained that a response to Clark County’s October 24, 2001, inquiry to determine whether the county could use the Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System (SACWIS)had not yet been received. Mr. Baumann advised that it appeared that a response from the “feds” had been drafted and was currently being reviewed.
In response to additional questions from Chairman Raggio concerning the cost allocation plan, Mr. Baumann advised that one cost allocation plan concerning SACWIS had been submitted during the previous week and another for the addition of Clark and Washoe counties to the plan so that they could collect Title IV-E money would be submitted within a week to ten days and was retroactive to January 1, 2002. While Mr. Baumann did not envision any impediments, he expressed some concern in reference to the ninety-day response period. Mr. Baumann anticipated the plan would be approved and effective retroactively to January 1, 2002. In the meantime, Mr. Baumann advised that state or county funding would be utilized.
In response to a question from Mr. Hettrick concerning the use of state and county funding if the plan was not approved, Mr. Baumann advised that the counties were aware, as was the state that the state funds were capped. Mr. Baumann indicated the counties and the state were committed to “live within the timeframe set up in A.B. 1” to begin the incremental transition of staff and services in April 2002 to Washoe County.
Chairman Raggio requested that the DCFS representatives work with staff to keep the Committee informed as to the status of the requirements and collection of federal funds.
MR. MARVEL MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 36.
MR. HETTRICK SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
37. Department
of Human Resources – Community
Connections – Children’s Trust
Account – FY 02 – Addition of $246,865.00 in Federal Community Based Family Resources Grant
to align State authority with State Fiscal Year 2002 contracts, provide for one
new position including associated operating expenses to support the
administrative needs of the Committee for the Protection of Children and
reserve balances for distribution to community agencies in future periods. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00 and includes new staff.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
38. Department of Human Resources – Child and Family Services – Community Juvenile Justice Program – FY 02 – Addition of $398,972.00 in Enforcing Underage Drinking Grant to continue program to design and implement innovative community specific underage drinking prevention strategies and education techniques to lower tolerance of underage drinking and curtail purchase of alcohol by minors. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws - Discretionary category exceeds $50,000.00.
In response to questions from Chairman Raggio, Larry Carter, Program Chief, Juvenile Justice Program Office, pointed out that while underage alcohol consumption was a problem that continued to exist, it appeared as though on a national level, Nevada had made progress. In conjunction with programs geared to enforcement of underage drinking laws, sting operations and limiting the availability of alcohol to minors, Nevada implemented a program that “built teen capacities in local areas to combat drinking and partnered with the Nevada Interscholastic Activities Association to develop statewide policies and programs to assist in the schools.” Mr. Carter pointed out when Nevada’s sting operations began, local retailers passed only 49 percent of the time while they currently passed 70 percent of the time. Mr. Carter reiterated that in addition to enforcement of laws, Nevada had attempted to build community-based capacities and to provide programs and initiatives that would enhance the a ability of local communities to assist in the problem.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
39. Department of Human Resources – Child and
Family Services – Juvenile Accountability Block Grant – FY 02 – Transfer of
$6,680.00 from the Administrative Reserve category to the Out-of-State Travel
category, transfer of $6,357.00 from the Administrative Reserve category to the
In-State Travel category, transfer of $11,299.00 from the Administrative
Reserve category to the Operating category, transfer of $3,150.00 from the
Administrative Reserve category to the Equipment category, transfer of
$3,124.00 from the Administrative Reserve category to the Youth Parole Special
Needs category, and transfer of $1,066.00 from the Administrative Reserve
category to the Information Services category to meet projected travel and
operating costs through the end of the Fiscal Year and to purchase a new phone
system, equipment, compact disk writers, and scanners. Requires Interim Finance approval because this
action involves the allocation of block grant funds and requires a public
hearing.
Item 39 required a public hearing.
Jim Baumann, Administrative Services Officer, Division of Child and Family Services, identified himself for the record and reported that the work program transferred authority from Budget Account 3262, Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant, in category 91, Administrative Reserve, to pay for operating, travel and equipment for Youth Parole staff. Mr. Baumann indicated there were no salaries paid from Budget Account 3262, and there was no match requirement for the funds. Additionally, Mr. Baumann advised that the work program involved the allocation of block grant funds and required a public hearing.
There was no public testimony.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 39.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
40. Department of Human Resources – Child and Family Services – Juvenile Correction Facility – FY 02 – Transfer of $112,265.00 from the Private Contractor category to the Operating category, transfer of $44,229.00 from the Private Contractor category to the Maintenance of Buildings and Grounds category, and transfer of $58,173.00 from the Private Contractor category to the Utilities category to maintain the Summit View Correctional Facility while it is in a temporary shutdown phase from March 1, 2002 through June 30, 2002. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Operating category exceeds $50,000.00.
Mr. Baumann reported that the work program realigned expense categories to accommodate the temporary closure of Summit View operations in southern Nevada by the State of Nevada, effective March 1, 2002 through June 30, 2002. Mr. Baumann added that the work program proposed minimal operation of the facility and needed buildings and grounds maintenance during the four-month closure.
Chairman Raggio requested an update on the status of the Request For Proposal (RFP) for a new operator.
Willie Smith, Deputy Administrator, Youth Corrections, Division of Child and Family Services, identified herself for the record. Ms. Smith responded that the Division had completed its work on the RFP which had been sent to the Purchasing Division for review and editing.
Chairman Raggio questioned whether the RFP would accommodate a proposal that involved a partnership between the State of Nevada and the operator. The Chairman used an example of perhaps the State providing security personnel while the operator provided other necessary staffing.
Mr. Cotton, Administrator, Division of Child and Family Services advised that although not a requirement, the RFP would allow for such a partnership. Mr. Cotton further advised that if such a proposal were received, the Division would review it.
The Chairman reiterated that the RFP should be flexible enough to provide for the receipt of proposals that considered a partnership between the State and the contractor.
Mr. Cotton expressed his belief that the RFP would accommodate a partnership.
In response to a question from the Chairman, Ms. Smith advised that it was expected that the RFP would be returned from the Purchasing Division within the next few weeks and would be reviewed again by the Division prior to being published around March 1.
In response to a question from the Chairman, Ms. Smith advised that the facility was currently under operation until March 4, 2002, by Correctional Services Corporation (CSC). Ms. Smith indicated that the request before the Committee realigned expense categories in order to provide funds to maintain the facility during its closure.
In response to questions from the Chairman, Ms. Smith advised that the CSC under provisions of the “Mutual Termination of Contract for Management Services” was required to participate in a joint inventory of the facility’s condition and equipment. Ms. Smith indicated that CSC had been requested to work with the Division in the joint inventory, and it was assumed they would do so. Ms. Smith explained that under the existing contract CSC would be responsible for deficiencies discovered during the inventory.
MR. MARVEL MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 40.
SENATOR O’DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
41. Department of Human Resources – Child and
Family Services – Caliente Youth Center FY 02 – Addition of $141,672.00 in
Forest Fire Reimbursement to reimburse the Fire Cat Fire Crew salary and
overtime expenses while on fire calls during fiscal year 2002. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount added to the Salaries category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
42. Department
of Human Resources – Child and Family Services – Nevada Children’s Gift Account
– FY 02 – Addition of $25,000.00 in Gifts and Donations to accept a
donation from the E.L. Cord Foundation to be used for the most pressing needs
of the organization. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount of gift exceeds $10,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
43. Department of Employment, Training and
Rehabilitation – Information Development and Processing – FY 02 – Addition
of $50,000.00 in Transfer from Employment Security Special Fund to augment
Personnel Services to cover overtime and additional temporary staff required to
accommodate the increase in volume of weekly Unemployment Insurance checks and
modifications to the unemployment insurance system to produce extended benefits
due to the September 11, 2001 disaster.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the
Personnel Services category exceeds $50,000.00.
Items 43, 44 and 46 were heard together. See Item 46.
44. Department of Employment, Training, and Rehabilitation – Employment Security – FY 02 – Addition of $957,479.00 in Transfer from Employment Security Special Fund to augment authority in Operating Expense, Information Services and Utilities expenditure categories to fund the Division’s operations through June 30, 2002. The majority of this request is related to the increase in unemployment activity experienced in Nevada since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on America. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Operating Expense, Information Services, and Utilities categories exceed 10% of the legislatively approved level for the categories.
Items 43, 44 and 46 were heard together. See Item 46.
45. Department of Employment, Training and
Rehabilitation – Career Enhancement Program – FY 02 – Transfer of
$80,000.00 from the Reserve category to the Operating Expense category and
transfer of $20,000.00 from the Reserve category to the Utilities category to
meet projected Operating and Utilities expense requirements. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount transferred to the Operating category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
46. Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation – Employment Security Special Fund – FY 02 – Transfer of $957,479.00 from the Reserve category to the Employment Security Division Funding category and transfer of $50,000.00 from the Reserve category to the Information Development and Processing category to fund increases in projected operating costs in budget accounts 4770 Employment Security and 3274 Information Development and Processing attributable to the significant increase in unemployment activity experienced in the State since the national tragedy of September 11, 2001. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Employment Security Division Funding and Information Development and Processing Funding categories exceed $50,000.00.
Items 43, 44 and 46 were heard together.
Birgit Baker, Administrator, Employment Security Division, identified herself for the record and introduced Marty Ramirez, Chief Financial Officer, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation.
Ms. Baker reported that Items 43, 44 and 46 were companion work programs that requested additional budget authority to address the significant increase in unemployment workload experienced by the Department as a result of the events of September 11, 2001. Ms. Baker testified that in the 4.5 months following September 11, Unemployment Insurance Program staff answered over 225,000 telephone calls through the Statewide Claims Center. Between September 11, 2001 and January 31, 2002, staff took over 100,000 new claims, answered 125,000 information calls, resolved 36,000 eligibility issues, issued 585,000 unemployment checks and infused $162 million into the Nevada economy.
Through Governor’s Guinn’s leadership, Ms. Baker indicated the Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation quickly responded to the needs of unemployed Nevadans affected by events of September 11. Ms. Baker indicated that immediately following the event, the Governor directed the Employment Security Division to hire forty additional staff and purchase the computer and telephone equipment needed to expand the capacity of the call center. To address the area hit hardest by the economic downturn, the Governor facilitated the Department’s participation in two community events in Las Vegas where staff provided on-site assistance to over 5,500 individuals.
Ms. Baker further advised that during the month of February 2002, the Division would phase‑in an Internet application as an alternative to telephone claim filing. As of February 1, claimants could obtain information about the status of their claims and checks over the Internet. The next phase to take effect on March 1 would allow claimants to file continue claims and new claims over the Internet.
In response to a question from the Chairman concerning length of time claimants were placed on hold during a telephone call, Ms. Baker explained that while there were some on-hold wait times that exceeded one hour, wait time had dropped to below ten minutes during the last two weeks as a result of additional staff that had been hired. Ms. Baker indicated that it was anticipated the Internet application would even further reduce the telephone wait time.
Chairman Raggio requested an updated assessment of the state’s Unemployment Trust Fund.
In response to the Chairman’s request, Ms. Baker reported that despite the significant increase in claims volume, Nevada’s Unemployment Trust Fund remained solvent with a balance of $434 million. Additionally, Ms. Baker projected income for the calendar year of $281 million, payouts of $310 million, and an expectation that the Fund would be solvent on September 30, the day the Fund would be tested.
In response to questions from the Chairman concerning an increase in the unemployment tax rate, Ms. Baker reported that the Employment Security Council met in October 2001, and, based on a determination that the Trust Fund was healthy and strong, chose not to increase the rate for the current year. Although it was projected that the Trust Fund would be solvent on September 30, 2002, it was anticipated the Reserve would be significantly reduced. Ms. Baker indicated the Council would base a recommendation for an increase on the September 30 review; however, the rates for the current year would remain the same.
In response to questions from Mr. Beers concerning caseload growth, Ms. Baker advised that the number of claims for unemployment benefits had doubled since September 11, 2001. Ms. Baker explained that prior to September 11, 2001, approximately 20,000 individuals were receiving benefits and currently 43,000 individuals were receiving benefits. Ms. Baker further advised that the number of continue claims had remained stable for about the last eight weeks.
In response to questions from Senator Neal, Ms. Baker advised that as of February 1, 2002, claimants could inquire about the status of their claim and the last two checks issued to them via the Internet. Ms. Baker explained that the Division’s Job Link offices and the Nevada Job Connect offices throughout the state had resource centers with computers that had Internet access. Claimants visiting those offices to look for work could also access the computers to check the status of their unemployment claims.
In response to questions from Senator Neal concerning whether claimants had been made aware of the Internet access, Ms. Baker advised that while the Internet application was up and running, the Division was in the final testing stages of the system with a test group. Ms. Baker advised that if the test period was successful and it was determined there were no additional issues to resolve, a marketing campaign would be initiated in the next several weeks to make claimants aware of the application.
MS. CHOWNING MOVED TO APPROVE ITEMS 43 44 AND 46.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
On behalf of the Committee, Chairman Raggio extended his appreciation to Ms. Baker and her staff for their good work in dealing with a difficult situation.
47. Department of Employment, Training, and
Rehabilitation – Employment Security Special Fund – FY 02 – Transfer of
$1,997,025.00 from the Reserve category to the Contributions System Re-Write
category to provide funding support for a re-write of the Unemployment
Insurance Contribution System, which was approved by the 1999 Legislature
as the first year of a planned three-year project. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount transferred to
the Contributions System Re-write category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
48. Department of Employment, Training and
Rehabilitation – Vocational Rehabilitation – FY 02 – Addition of $15,360.00
in Federal Rehabilitation Training In‑Service and addition of $219,677.00
in Federal Supported Employment to align budget with the full federal grant
authority available for the In-Service Training and Supported Employment grants. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount added to the Supported Employment category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
49. Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation – Vocational Rehabilitation – FY 02 – Addition of $273,030.00 in Federal SSA Reimbursement, addition of $855,046.00 in Federal Section 110 Grant, transfer of $242,656.00 from the SSA/VR Reimbursement category to the Client Services System Replacement category, and transfer of $585,640.00 from the Reserve category to the Client Services System Replacement category to align State Work Program authority with available Federal Section 110 and SSA Reimbursement funds and augment Federal SSA Reimbursement Work Program authority based on projected revenue to replace the existing 30 year-old vocational rehabilitation client services computer system. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Client Services System Replacement category exceeds $50,000.00.
Items 49, 50, 51 and 52 were heard together. See Item 52.
50. Department of Employment, Training and
Rehabilitation – Vocational Rehabilitation – FY 03 – Transfer of
$402,075.00 from the SSA/VR Reimbursement category to the Client Services
System Replacement category to provide contingency funding for the Client
Services Computer System Replacement Project started with State Fiscal Year
2002 Work Program B80239. Requires
Interim Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Client Services
System Replacement category exceeds $50,000.00.
Items 49, 50, 51 and 52 were heard together. See Item 52.
51. Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation – Services to the Blind – FY 02 – Addition of $25,619.00 in Federal SSA Reimbursement, addition of $621,872.00 in Federal Section 110, transfer of $57,192.00 from the SSA/VR Reimbursement category to the Client Services System Replacement category, and transfer of $25,282.00 from the Reserve category to the Client Services System Replacement category to align State Work Program authority with available Federal Section 110 and SSA Reimbursement funds and augment Federal SSA Reimbursement Work Program authority based on projected revenue to replace the existing 30-year old vocational rehabilitation client services computer system. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Client Services System Replacement category exceeds $50,000.00.
Items 49, 50, 51 and 52 were heard together. See Item 52.
52. Department of Employment, Training and
Rehabilitation – Services to the Blind – FY 03 – Transfer of
$37,193.00 from the SSA/VR Reimbursement category to the Client Services System
Replacement category to provide contingency funding for the Client Services
Computer System Replacement Project started with State Fiscal Year 2002 Work
Program B80240. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Client Services System
Replacement category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that
category.
Marty Ramirez, Chief Financial Officer, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation identified himself for the record and introduced Maynard Yasmer, Administrator, Rehabilitation Division, and Bill Vance, Administrator, Information Development and Processing Division.
Mr. Ramirez pointed out that the work program identified in Item 49 had been amended downward in the amount of $315,000 for costs that were associated with existing staff participating in the project to replace the Vocational Rehabilitation Client Services Computer System. Mr. Ramirez explained that the $315,000 should have been excluded when the work program was prepared. Item 49 should be revised to reflect a transfer of $513,296 from Reserve (86), Client Service System Replacement (73) and addition of $273,030 in Federal SSA Reimbursement and $855,046 Federal Section 110 Grant with corresponding augmentation of $1,128,026 to Client Services System Replacement (73).
Mr. Ramirez reported that in December 2000 the Interim Finance Committee approved $57,408 for a study of the Vocational Rehabilitation Client Services Computer System. Based on the results of that study, the Bureau was before the Committee to submit a work program for an appropriate replacement system. Mr. Ramirez testified that the replacement system was projected to take approximately two years to implement at a cost of almost $2.3 million with an additional 18 percent contingency factor.
Mr. Ramirez discussed the benefits of the new system which included elimination of Social Security numbers, integration into the State’s Integrated Financial System, consolidation of data that would eliminate redundancy and allow for improved caseload balancing between the counselors, access to available resources, improved accuracy in tracking expenditures, compliance with the Federal Rehabilitation Services Administration-911 (RSA) reporting requirements, and elimination of delays resulting from manual processes associated with the old system.
There were no questions from the Committee.
MR. HETTRICK MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEMS 49, 50, 51, AND 52 WITH ADJUSTMENT DOWNWARD FOR ITEM 49 AS PREVIOUSLY INDICATED.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
In response to a request from Chairman Arberry for a breakdown in the adjustment to Item 49, Mr. Ramirez reported for the record that the adjustment for Item 49 was to amend category 73 downward to $1,641,372 and category 86 to $513,296.
53. Department of Corrections – Director’s
Office – FY 02 – Transfer of $12,224.00 from the Video Teleconference -
High Desert State Prison category to the Inmate Transportation category,
transfer of $12,224.00 from the Video Teleconference - Ely State Prison
category to the Inmate Transportation category, and transfer of $12,224.00 from
the Video Teleconference - Lovelock Correctional Center category to the Inmate
Transportation category to cover projected requirements for Inmate
Transportation. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Inmate Transportation category
exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Item 53 was withdrawn.
54. Department of Corrections – Prison Medical Care – FY 02 – Addition of $35,222.00 in Miscellaneous Refunds to accept reimbursement for recalled x-ray table at High Desert State Prison and to fund replacement table in equipment; balance of refund to be reverted to the General Fund. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Equipment category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Darrel Rexwinkel, Assistant Director, Support Services, identified himself for the record and introduced Glen Whorton, Assistant Director, Operations, Nevada Department of Corrections. Mr. Rexwinkel reported that the Department of Corrections requested approval to accept reimbursement in the amount of $35,222 for a recalled x-ray table that was part of a construction project at High Desert State Prison.
Mr. Rexwinkel reported that the replacement cost for a new x-ray table was $34,0000, and based on a recommendation from Fiscal Analysis Division staff, the $1,222 balance of the refund would be held in reserve for reversion to the Bond Interest and Redemption Fund since the original table was purchased with General Obligation Bond funding.
MR. MARVEL MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 54.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
55. Department of Corrections – Warm Springs Correctional Center – FY 02 – Addition of $30,383.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer Administrative Aid I position from Nevada State Prison to Warm Springs Correctional Center to perform clerical duties. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Personnel Costs category includes new staff.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
56. Department of Corrections – Nevada State Prison – FY 02 – Deletion of $30,383.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer Administration Aid I position from Nevada State Prison to the Warm Springs Correctional Center to perform clerical duties. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount deducted from the Personnel Costs category includes new staff to another budget account
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
57. Department of Corrections – Warm Springs Correctional Center – FY 03 – Addition of $31,975.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer Administrative Aid I position from Nevada State Prison to Warm Springs Correctional Center to perform clerical duties. Requires Interim finance approval since the amount added to the Personnel Costs category includes new staff.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
58. Department of Corrections – Nevada State Prison – FY 03 – Deletion of $31,975.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer Administrative Aid I position from Nevada State Prison to Warm Springs Correctional Center to perform clerical duties. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount deducted from the Personnel Costs category includes new staff to another budget account.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
59. Department of Corrections – Southern Desert Correctional Center –- FY 02 – Deletion of $306,399.00 in Budgetary Transfer and transfer of $45,769.00 from the Inmate Drivens category to the Reserve category to transfer the Boot Camp funding/expenditure authority from Southern Desert Correctional Center (SDCC) to Indian Springs Conservation Camp and to reserve Inmate Drivens budgeted for the 60 beds being transferred as Indian Springs was fully funded. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount deducted includes new staff to companion work program.
Items 59, 60, 61, 62, and 63 were heard together. See Item 63.
60. Department of Corrections – High Desert
State Prison – FY 02 – Deletion of $101,848.00 in Budgetary Transfer to
transfer the Boot Camp funding/expenditure authority from High Desert State
Prison to Indian Springs Conservation Camp.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount transferred from
Budget Account 3762 to Budget Account 3725 exceeds $50,000.00.
Items 59, 60, 61, 62, and 63 were heard together. See Item 63.
61. Department of Corrections – Indian
Springs Conservation Camp – FY 02 – Addition of $408,247.00 in Budgetary
Transfer to transfer the Boot Camp funding/expenditure authority from Southern
Desert Correctional Center (SDCC) and High Desert State Prison to Indian
Springs Conservation Camp. Requires
Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Budgetary Transfer
category includes new staff.
Items 59, 60, 61, 62, and 63 were heard together. See Item 63.
62. Department of Corrections – Southern
Desert Correctional Center – FY 03 – Deletion of $608,807.00 in
Budgetary Transfer and transfer of $63,763.00 from the Inmate Drivens category
to the Reserve category to transfer the Boot Camp funding/expenditure authority
from Southern Desert Correctional Center (SDCC) to Indian Springs Conservation
Camp and to reserve Inmate Drivens budgeted for the 60 beds being
transferred as Indian Springs was fully funded. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount deducted
includes new staff to companion work program.
Items 59, 60, 61, 62, and 63 were heard together. See Item 63.
63. Department of Corrections – Indian Springs Conservation Camp – FY 03 – Addition of $608,807.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer the Boot Camp funding/expenditure authority from Southern Desert Correctional Center (SDCC) to Indian Springs Conservation Camp. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Budgetary Transfer category includes new staff.
Darrel Rexwinkel, Assistant Director, Support Services, reported that the work programs in Items 59 through 63 requested transfer of budgeted authority for the Boot Camp Program from the Southern Desert Correctional Center (SDCC) to the Indian Springs Conservation Camp (ISCC). Works programs in Items 59 through 61 implemented the budgetary transfer for Fiscal Year 2002 and work programs in Items 62 and 63 continued the transfer in Fiscal Year 2003.
Mr. Rexwinkel pointed out that the Boot Camp, prior to the 2001 Legislative Session, was operated at the ISCC, and during the Legislative Session, the Department of Corrections requested authority to move the Boot Camp to the SDCC beginning July 1, 2001. At that time the Boot Camp was operating at High Desert State Prison (HDSP) on an interim basis and remained there through October 11, 2001, when it was moved back to ISCC to a multi‑purpose building that was converted into a housing unit.
Mr. Rexwinkel recalled that the Department had testified during the 2001 Legislative Session that SDDC was being converted to a more therapeutic type facility, and the Boot Camp could function within Unit 7 along with the Youthful Offender Program. Mr. Rexwinkel explained that the Department did not move the Boot Camp back to SDCC because the Youthful Offender Program was growing at that site.
In summary, Mr. Rexwinkel explained that Item 60 transferred the cost of seven Correctional Officers from HDSP to ISCC for the period October 12, 2001 to December 31, 2001 and Item 59 transferred eight Correctional Officers, one Senior Correctional Officer and one Lieutenant from SDCC to ISCC effective January 1, 2002, with the exception of the Lieutenant who was transferred over to ISCC on October 12, 2001, at the same time the Boot Camp inmates were transferred from HDCC to ISCC.
The Department also transferred the Boot Camp Operating Category 40 costs to ISCC for all of Fiscal Year 2002 and 2003 and de-augmented Category 50, Inmate Driven Costs, from SDCC and placed those costs in reserve at SDCC for Fiscal Year 2002 and 2003.
Work Program Item 61 requested budgetary transfer to cover the cost of the seven Correctional Officers from HDSP to ISCC for the period October 12 through December 31, 2001 and received eight Correctional Officers, one Senior Correctional Officer and one Lieutenant from SDCC and Category 40 Inmate Driven Costs. Work Program Items 62 and 63 continued the program into Fiscal Year 2003.
In response to a question from Mr. Marvel concerning housing for the Boot Camp inmates, Mr. Rexwinkel advised that a multi-purpose building at the ISCC was converted to living quarters.
In response to a question from Mr. Marvel concerning the number of Boot Camp inmates at ISCC, Mr. Whorton advised that currently there were 49 inmates in the Boot Camp Program. Mr. Whorton explained that while there had been a capacity for sixty beds in five trailers at the old camp, the multi‑purpose building at ISCC provided a capacity for eighty inmates if the program grew to the level.
In response to a question from Mr. Marvel concerning staff, Mr. Rexwinkel explained that the Department requested staffing of 9.6 Correctional Officers and one Lieutenant for the Boot Camp Program at SDCC. Mr. Rexwinkel acknowledged that while there had been several changes that created some confusion; the Department’s plan was to move the Lieutenant, eight Correctional Officers and a Senior Correctional Officer to ISCC to provide two staff for each shift, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Chairman Raggio noted that staffing levels for the Program had remained at eight from the inception of the Program in 1989 through December 31, 2001 and questioned why additional staff was necessary now that the inmates were all located in one room.
Mr. Whorton explained that over time the Boot Camp Program had experienced performance difficulty, and in 1998 reached a success rate of graduating only one out of five inmates placed in the Program. Mr. Whorton indicated it was the Department’s belief that increased supervision would reduce the possibility of incidents and increase the possibility of positive performance. In 2001, the Program experienced a “dramatic” graduate rate increase of up to 67 percent, which Mr. Whorton attributed to the performance of the Director and her desire to reorganize the Boot Camp Program. Mr. Whorton advised that the Program was currently operating on a 12-hour shift, and he pointed out that if a single officer was assigned the duty, that officer would be responsible for sixty or more inmates for 12 hours a day without any assistance which was neither practical or safe for inmates or staff.
The Chairman suggested that six Correctional Officers, one Lieutenant, and one Senior Correctional Officer be transferred from SDCC to ISCC to provide two additional staff to operate the Program until the following meeting of the Committee. In the meantime, Chairman Raggio suggested that Department of Corrections representatives work with the Committee’s staff to determine whether an augmentation was necessary.
Mr. Rexwinkel indicated his appreciation for the suggestion and agreed to work with staff.
Ms. Giunchigliani suggested that the entire boot camp issue be revisited at the following meeting of the Committee. Specifically, Ms. Giunchigliani requested more detailed information concerning success rates that were mentioned earlier as well as information concerning recidivism rates.
Mr. Ghiggeri noted that adjustments to the work program were detailed in a summary sheet (Exhibit G) that had been discussed with the Department of Corrections and the Budget Division who were in agreement with the adjustments.
It was Mr. Rexwinkel’s understanding that the adjustments referred to Categories, 01, 04, 50 and 99 which would encompass moving a fewer number of Correctional Officers from SDCC to ISCC leaving the remaining Correctional Officers at SDCC for the time being.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO APPROVE ITEMS 59 THROUGH 63 WITH ADJUSTMENTS OUTLINED BY STAFF.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
64. Department of Corrections – Prison
Industry – FY 02 – Transfer of $171,000.00 from the Retained Earnings
category to the Lovelock Correction Center Garment Factory category to complete
the set-up, including inventories, equipment, operating supplies, and
production costs for the garment manufacturing industry at the Lovelock
Correctional Center. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Lovelock Correctional
Center Garment Factory category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level
for that category.
Howard Skolnik, Assistant Director Industrial Programs, Department of Corrections, reported that the work program in Item 64 requested $171,000 from the Retained Earnings Category in Prison Industries to continue the funding and start-up of the garment industry at the Lovelock Correctional Center.
In response to questions from Chairman Raggio, Mr. Skolnik advised that the garment industry at the Lovelock Correctional Center would initially manufacture inmate shirts and eventually manufacture an entire inmate clothing line. Mr. Skolnik advised that currently inmate clothing was purchased from a private source and that the inmate clothing manufactured at the Lovelock Correctional Center would be competitively priced.
In response to questions from Mr. Marvel, Mr. Skolnik advised that currently there were 12 inmates assisting in setting up the plant, equipment had been identified, materials had been priced at approximately $3.55 per shirt, direct labor costs would be approximately 32 cents a shirt, and there would be some money left over for overhead. Mr. Skolnik further advised that the manufacturing of shirts would not cover the overhead of the operation and pointed out that starting up any new industry was not immediately profitable. However, Mr. Skolnik indicated it was expected that the garment industry would become profitable within the three year target date set by the Prison Industry Advisory Board.
In response to a question from Mr. Marvel, Mr. Skolnik agreed to provide him a copy of the business plan for the Lovelock Correctional Center Garment Factory.
In response to questions from Ms. Giunchigliani, Mr. Skolnik indicated that the Prison Industry Advisory Board had approved the new garment industry program. Additionally, Mr. Skolnik advised that many of the programs initiated by Prison Industries lost money during the first several years of operation. While some programs continued to operate at a loss, Mr. Skolnik said that eventually even those programs managed to turn profits. Mr. Skolnik further advised that there were no manufacturers of inmate clothing in Nevada, and it was the position of the Prison Industry Board that competing with industries in other states was an acceptable practice.
Chairman Raggio noted that the program had the potential to employ between 50 to 75 inmates, which he indicated was commendable.
Mr. Parks asked if the possibility existed to expand the industry so that the product would be marketable to other institutions.
Mr. Skolnik advised that interest had already been expressed by the Clark County Detention Center and from a private vendor that serviced private prisons in California.
MR. PARKS MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 64.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
65. Department
of Public Safety – Highway Patrol Division – FY 03 – Deletion of
$75,513.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer salary authority to Public Safety
Director’s Office budget associated with the transfer of a position to act as
Public Information Officer for the Department.
Requires Interim Finance approval pursuant to Section 42,
2001 Appropriations Act.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
66. Department of Public Safety – Director’s
Office – FY 03 – Addition of $75,513.00 in Budgetary Transfer to
transfer salary authority to Public Safety Director’s Office budget from
Highway Patrol to reclassify a position to act as Public Information Officer II
for the Department. Requires Interim
Finance approval pursuant to Section 42, 2001 Appropriations Act.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
67. Department of Public Safety –
Administrative Services – FY 02 – Transfer of $7,470.00 from the
Out-of-State Travel category to the In-State Travel category and transfer of $41,400.00
from the Out-of-State Travel category to the Operating category to develop a
package of professional recruiting materials to be used to recruit extensively
within the State. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount transferred from the Out-of-State category
exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
68. Department of Public Safety – Parole and
Probation – FY 02 – Deletion of $18,678.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer
salary authority to Public Safety Internal Affairs budget associated with the
transfer of position number 0413 to act as clerical support. Requires Interim Finance approval pursuant
to Section 42, 2001 Appropriations Act.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
69. Department of Public Safety – Internal
Affairs – FY 02 – Addition of $18,678.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer
salary authority to Public Safety Internal Affairs budget from Parole and
Probation associated with the transfer of position number 0413 to act as
clerical support. Requires Interim Finance approval pursuant to Section 42,
2001 Appropriations Act.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
70. Department of Public Safety – Parole and
Probation – FY 03 – Deletion of $46,132.00 in Budgetary Transfer to
transfer salary authority to Public Safety Internal Affairs budget associated
with the transfer of position number 0413 to act as clerical support. Requires Interim Finance approval pursuant
to Section 42, 2001 Appropriations Act.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
71. Department of Public Safety – Internal Affairs – FY 03 – Addition of $46,132.00 in Budgetary Transfer to transfer salary authority to Public Safety Internal Affairs budget from Parole and Probation associated with the transfer of position number 0413 to act as clerical support. Requires Interim Finance approval pursuant to Section 42, 2001 Appropriations Act.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
72. Department of Public Safety – Criminal History Repository – FY 02 – Addition of $281,893.00 in Transfer from Office of Justice Assistance and addition of $31,321.00 in Transfer from Public Safety to facilitate the development of a comprehensive needs assessment for the developing and implementing of the National Incident Based Reporting System as needed to submit crime data to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and to fund overtime to process backlog of fingerprints. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00.
The Chairman announced that Items 72 and 73 would be heard together. See Item 73.
73. Department of Public Safety – Forfeitures – FY 02 – Transfer of $31,321.00 from the Reserve category to the Nevada Highway Patrol State category to provide State-matching funds required by Budget Account 4709 Criminal History Repository for two grants from Office of Criminal Justice. (See Work Program C21324.) Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00.
Colonel David Hosmer, Nevada Highway Patrol, identified himself for the record and introduced Lieutenant Rick Keema, Acting Manager, Criminal History Repository, and Leticia Johnson, Program Officer.
In response to questions from Chairman Raggio, Lieutenant Keema explained that the federal government was attempting to move from the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) system to the National Incident Base Reporting System (NIBRS). While implementation of the NIBRS was not currently a mandate, Lieutenant Keema indicated federal grant money was available to encourage state and local governments to explore the feasibility of developing and implementing the NIBRS.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio concerning whether local law enforcement agencies had to raise funding to implement NIBRS, Lieutenant Keema advised that some local law enforcement agencies were currently close, within their own records management systems, to being able to collect the required data. Lieutenant Keema further advised that the intent of the NIBRS grant was to fund a consultant to work with the larger agencies that were close to being NIBRS compliant.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio concerning the importance of NIBRS compliance, Lieutenant Keema explained that the NIBRS was an incident based reporting system that collected and analyzed data on each single crime occurrence in the United States.
Ms. Johnson added that the funding from the grant would be used to improve the accuracy, quality and timeliness of the crime data received by the Criminal History Repository. Ms. Johnson explained that crime data received under the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) system was based on aggregate numbers and data collected by the NIBRS would be reported by incident. Ms. Johnson reported that the grant would fund a needs assessment to determine viability of the NIBRS in Nevada, assess any impediments for local law enforcement agencies to become part of the program and would identify the costs involved in statewide implementation.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio concerning the grant proceeds awarded to the Henderson Police Department, Lieutenant Keema advised that there were two sources of funding, and the award to Henderson was a separate NIBRS grant funded through the Office of Criminal Justice Assistance.
In response to questions from Mr. Marvel concerning operation of the Criminal Repository, Lieutenant Keema responded that fees were charged for services provided that included for example, Brady Bill background checks.
In response to additional questions from Mr. Marvel, Lieutenant Keema indicated that while a lack of staff and increased requests since the September 11 incident had contributed to the backlog in Brady Bill background checks, the backlog had been reduced.
In response to questions from Ms. Giunchigliani, Lieutenant Keema advised that the NIBRS was not currently mandated by the federal government, but projected that it could be mandated within five to seven years.
In response to questions from Ms. Giunchigliani concerning continued utilization of the UCR system, Ms. Johnson advised that the NIBRS and UCR systems were compatible and NIBRS would have the ability to withdraw the UCR summaries.
In response to questions from Ms. Giunchigliani concerning the grant awards, Lieutenant Keema explained that there were two separate grant awards, one for $118,800 that would fund the comprehensive needs assessment study and a second grant that totaled $163,000 to fund expenses to clear a backlog of criminal fingerprints.
Ms Giunchigliani questioned whether local governments would be requesting money from the state to bring their systems into NIBRS compliance.
Lieutenant Keema explained that the consultant would be hired to determine the least difficult path for local governments to become NIBRS compliant and to integrate their systems in order to submit data to the Repository and have that data ultimately sent to Washington.
In response to additional questions from Ms. Giunchigliani concerning state and local government involvement, Lieutenant Keema advised that involvement in the process was beneficial since the state wanted to be in a position to capture data submitted by local agencies who became NIBRS compliant.
Ms. Giunchigliani questioned the grant award to one jurisdiction before the state had developed a plan concerning needs and obligation.
Lieutenant Keema explained that the state was prompted to explore the NIBRS by the City of Henderson who had a desire at their level to begin collecting and disseminating NIBRS information. Lieutenant Keema advised that the NIBRS grant mandated that any local agency requesting grant funding had to apply for it through the state.
Ms. Giunchigliani noted that the NIBRS system was not mandatory and expressed some grave concerns with regard to expectations and the lack of a plan to assist local governments in transitioning to the NIBRS.
Chairman Raggio noted that $163,000 of the request was to fund overtime expenses to clear a backlog of criminal fingerprints and dispositions. In response to the concerns expressed by Ms. Giunchigliani, the Chairman questioned whether deferral of the NIBRS request would also negate the request for the $163,000.
It was Lieutenant Keema’s understanding that the grants were separate and approval of one would not affect the other.
In response to a question from Senator Neal concerning the backlog of criminal fingerprints and dispositions, Lieutenant Keema attributed the backlog to encountering technological problems in switching over to a new system to collect data from the various state correctional institutions as well as staffing problems.
In response to additional questions from Senator Neal concerning fingerprint cards, Lieutenant Keema discussed the fingerprint classification process and advised Senator Neal that after completion of the process, the fingerprints were sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Lieutenant Keema reiterated that the backlog occurred in the process of switching to a new technology system and, in part, during the actual process of submittal to the Repository.
In response to questions from Senator Neal, Lieutenant Keema indicated there were nine fingerprint technicians and while the process was now automated, problems continued to be experienced with the new computer system.
Senator Neal expressed concern with regard to the fingerprinting process and the work of the technicians.
Chairman Raggio recommended approval of the second grant award totaling $163,093 to fund overtime expenses on the part of the Criminal History Repository staff to clear a backlog of criminal finger prints and dispositions. The Chairman also recommended an adjustment in Item 73 for the match of $18,121 and deferral of the balance of the request to the following meeting of the Committee.
MRS. CHOWNING MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM 72 FOR THE SECOND GRANT AWARD TOTALING $163,093 AND TRANSFER FROM PUBLIC SAFETY OF $18,121 TO FUND OVERTIME EXPENSES; AN ADJUSTMENT TO ITEM 73 TO $18,121 AND DEFERRAL OF THE BALANCE OF THE REQUEST TO THE FOLLOWING MEETING.
SENATOR O’DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Senator Neal voted nay).
(Ms. Giunchigliani voted nay)
74. Department of Public Safety – Forfeitures – FY 02 – Transfer of $45,685.00 from the Reserve category to the Nevada Division of Investigation Federal category to provide notebook computers, sound reduction for building 107, office directories, interview/conference room furniture, and lights and sirens for Nevada Division of Investigation. Requires Interim Finance approval since the cumulative amount transferred to the Nevada Division of Investigation Federal category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
75. Department of Public Safety – Highway Patrol Division – FY 02 – Addition of $111,407.00 in transfer from Traffic Safety to allow for concentrated traffic enforcement activities with emphasis on Driving Under the Influence, speeding and occupant protection. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
76. Department of Public Safety – Highway Patrol Division – FY 02 – Addition of $47,000.00 in Transfer from High Level Nuclear Waste to increase authority for oversight activities related to shipments of transuranic waste to New Mexico. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
Note: The Chairman announced that while Item 76
had been approved under the omnibus motion for approval under Item D, there was
an error in the narrative which should actually read Transfer from Low Level
Nuclear Waste not High Level.
77. Department of Public Safety – Highway Safety Grants – FY 02 – Addition of $436,395.00 in Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program Grant to balance forward remaining authority for programs designed to decrease the number of commercial-related fatalities and crashes. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
78. Department of Public Safety – Highway
Safety Grants – FY 02 – Addition of $495,714.00 in Motor Carrier Safety
Assistance Program to continue programs designed to decrease the number of
commercial-related fatalities and crashes.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the cumulative amount of grant
exceeds $100,000.00.
Mr. Ghiggeri reported an adjustment for Item 78 that reduced the revenue from $495,714 to $473,562 and a reduction for the expenditure in Category 58 to $398,562.
Commander Larry Whitson, Commercial Enforcement Bureau, Nevada Highway Patrol identified himself for the record and expressed agreement with the adjustment as outlined by Mr. Ghiggeri.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED APPROAL OF ITEM 78.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
79. Department of Public Safety – Justice Assistance Act – FY 02 – Addition of $186,651.00 in Nevada Criminal History Improvement Program to adjust authority for Nevada Criminal History Improvement Program Grant to actual amount awarded. Requires Interim Finance approval since the cumulative amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
80. Department of Public Safety – Technology Division – FY 02 – Addition of $647,317.00 in Transfer from Office of Criminal Justice Assistance to receive National Criminal History Improvement Program Grant funds. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00.
Alan Rogers, Data Processing Manager,
Department of Public Safety, identified himself for the record. Mr. Rogers reported that the request was to
accept National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP) grant funds in the
amount of $647,317 to provide an upgrade for compatibility with the National
Crime Information Center’s 2000 upgrade and would move the Department’s
technology into a client server and web based type application. Mr. Rogers explained that the
improvement was necessary to become compliant with the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and to bring local agencies into compliance in order that
information could be passed from the local agencies, to the state and on
through to the federal government. A 10
percent match required for the grant was provided through S.B. 7 during
the 17th Special Session.
Mr. Rogers explained that the NCHIP Program was an ongoing annual
program that required matching funds in 2000 and until that time had been a no‑match
program.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio concerning compatibility requirements, Mr. Rogers advised
compliance would be met for July 2002 requirements.
Chairman Raggio questioned the Department’s
use of the funding and asked for assurance that the use of the funding did not
supplant the provisions of the grant.
Mr. Rogers explained that as a result of a
scheduling problem with respect to the grants and the budgets, the Department
did not have matching funds at the time the grant was awarded. The time period for expending the funds was
extended, and matching funds were provided and received after the 2001 17th
Special Session of the Legislature. Mr.
Rogers provided additional explanation that the matching funds were requested
in excess of what was actually needed.
In response to a question from the Chairman,
Mr. Rogers provided assurance that the excess funding remaining from the
appropriation of $203,123 would be reverted and that the Budget Division was in
the process of preparing the work program.
Ms. Giunchigliani also requested assurance
that the use of the grant funding did not supplant provisions of the
grant. Mr. Rogers provided the
assurance requested and reiterated the situation was one in which the
Department had overestimated the match.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 80.
SENATOR O’DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
81. Department
of Conservation and Natural Resources – Bureau of Mining
Regulations/Reclamation – FY 02 – Transfer of $12,848.00 from the Operating
category to the Information Services category and transfer of $320,902.00 from
the Operating category to the Reserve category to provide for replacement of
computer workstations per Department of Information Technology Audit and
recommendations and reduce contracts in operating to bring expenditures in line
with anticipated revenue pending the timing of a fee increase. Requires Interim Finance approval since the
amount deducted from the Operating category exceeds $50,000.00.
Mr. Allen Biaggi, Administrator,
Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, identified himself for the record
and introduced David Gaskin, Chief, Bureau of Mining
Regulations/Reclamation. Mr. Biaggi
advised the members of the Committee that Item 81 covered authority to transfer
$12,120 from Operating to Information Services to address Department of
Information Technology’s audit recommendations to replace the Division’s
computer workstations. The work program
also requested the transfer of $333,750 from Operating Contracts to Reserve to
address potential budget shortfalls as a result of depressed minerals pricing
throughout the mining industry.
In response to the Chairman’s
statement concerning an adjustment, Mr. Ghiggeri indicated Mr. Biaggi had
addressed the adjustments in the transfer from Operating to Information Services.
In response to a question from the
Chairman concerning adjustments to reclamation and permit fees, Mr. Biaggi
indicated that a dialogue had been opened with the Mining industry to address
the fees. Mr. Biaggi reported that
there had not been a fee increase in the program in ten years, and when the
fees were initiated, the dramatic decline in metals prices during the last few
years had not been anticipated. Mr.
Biaggi indicated it was hoped some agreement and modification of the fees could
take place in order to cover the program.
Mr. Marvel questioned the number of
bankruptcies that had occurred and whether those bankruptcies had impacted the
Division’s reserve.
Mr. Biaggi advised that the
bankruptcies had dramatically impacted the Division’s reserve and turned the
microphone over to Mr. Gaskin who provided additional explanation.
Mr. Gaskin indicated a decrease of
approximately 25 percent in permit fees had occurred during the past several
years as a result of bankruptcies.
While a continuation of the dramatic number of bankruptcies that
occurred in 1999 had leveled off, Mr. Gaskin said the Division’s revenue stream
had continued to decrease.
In response to questions from Mr.
Marvel concerning reclamation, Mr. Gaskin advised there were several mechanisms
employed by the Division that included a reclamation bonding requirement set up
for individual operators whose bond would be reclaimed if the site was
abandoned or if the operation went bankrupt.
Additionally, an Interim Fluid Management Fund was used to cover
reclamation situations that were not bonded.
Mr. Biaggi discussed a disturbing
trend seen not only in the Mining industry but other industries as well in
which bonding companies went into receivership or bankruptcy and which had also
impacted several major mines in Nevada.
In response to questions from Mr.
Marvel, Mr. Biaggi indicated that dialogue had taken place with the Mining
Association concerning the appropriate way to address modification of fees. Mr.
Biaggi advised the Division would not go forward with a fee increase unless
there was widespread consensus within the industry to do so, and he was hopeful
that a consensus agreement could be reached.
MR. BEERS MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 81 WITH
THE ADJUSTMENTS REFERENCED IN THE TESTIMONY.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mr. Beers requested comments from Mr. Biaggi
in reference to the recent increase in gold prices.
Mr. Biaggi advised that the price of gold had
increased $10 in the past several days, and encouraged the purchase of gold,
silver and copper.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Raggio announced at 1:00 p.m. that the Committee would be in recess until approximately 1:30, and would begin the afternoon session with Item F.
82. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources – Forestry – FY 02 – Addition of $275,000.00 in Bureau of Land Management Grant - Federal to establish a seasonal position, contractual authority for Statewide Fire Plan and flow through funding for Eureka and Lincoln County for assessment and implementation of Fuels Reduction Program. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount of grant exceeds $100,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
83. Department
of Conservation and Natural Resources – Water Resources – United States
Geological Survey Cooperative – FY 02 – Addition of $114,400.00 $144,400.00
in Reimbursements and addition of $154,300.00 in Transfers from Other Budget
Accounts to provide for cooperative hydrologic study efforts between water
resources and United States Geological Survey in Southern Nevada and United
States Geological Survey Rent Reimbursement.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the
Operating category exceeds $50,000.00. (Revised
1-24-02)
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
84. Department
of Conservation and Natural Resources –
Wildlife – FY 02 – Transfer of $20,000.00 from the Reserve category to the Salaries category
to convert two .75 FTE seasonal employees to full-time permanent staff; Administrative
Aide I and an Accounting Assistant II due to absence of ASO III on active duty
in a budget preparation year. Requires
Interim Finance approval since the amount transferred to the Salaries category
and includes new staff. (Revised
1-25-02)
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
85. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources – 1997/1999 Park Improvements – FY 02 – Transfer of $10,500.00 from the Spring Valley category to the Kershaw Ryan category to reallocate carry forward of park improvements from Spring Valley to Kershaw Ryan State Park for Americans Disability Act Retrofit Projects. Requires Interim Finance approval pursuant to S.B. 200, Chapter 336, Section 3, 1997 Session.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
86. Office
of the Military – FY 02 – Addition of $100,000.00 in Department of Defense to allow for the receipt
of additional Federal funds to support operating and maintenance expenses at
the Army National Guard’s Regional Training Institute and the Training Center
Facilities at Stead, Nevada based on a per square footage revision provided by
the National Guard Bureau, Washington, DC.
Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Training
Site category exceeds $50,000.00.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
87. Office of the Military – FY 02 – Addition of $20,000.00 in Department of Defense to allow for the receipt of additional Federal funds that will be used to provide additional operational and administrative expenses in support of the Project Challenge Youth At‑Risk Program. Requires Interim Finance approval since the amount added to the Project Challenge category exceeds 10% of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
88. Office
of the Military – FY 02 – Addition of $40,000.00 in Department of Defense to fund desert tortoise
habitat mitigation and spill containment equipment and supplies for the Nevada
Army National Guard. Requires Interim
Finance approval since the amount added to the Environment category exceeds 10%
of the legislatively approved level for that category.
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
II. Reclassification:
Refer to motion for approval under Item D.
|
Agency |
Agency/Account Number |
Position Number |
Present
Class, Code,
EEO-4, Grade
& Salary |
Proposed
Class, Code,
EEO-4, Grade
& Salary |
|
Department of Business and Industry, Energy Office |
756/4868 |
0010 |
Administrative Services Officer I, 7.218, grade 37, step 5, $49,610.88, Employee/Employer -Paid |
Staff II, Associate Engineer, 6.228, grade 37, step 5, $49,610.88, Employee/Employer -Paid |
|
Department of Human Resources, Division of Health Care Financing and Policy |
403/3243 |
0014 |
Pharmacist II, 10.703, grade 42, step 1, $47,439.36, Employer-Paid |
Social Welfare Program Chief II, 12.302, grade 40, step 1, $43,388.64, Employer-Paid |
|
Department of Human Resources, Division of Health Care Financing and Policy |
403/3243 |
0209 |
Medicaid Services Specialist III, 12.330, grade 34, step 1, $33,449.76, Employer-Paid |
Auditor II, 7.154, grade 34, step 1, $33,449.76, Employer-Paid |
|
Department of Human Resources, Division of Child and Family Services |
409/3646 |
1010 |
Administrative Assistant II, 2.212, grade 25, step 1, $23,135.04, Employer-Paid |
Psychiatric Caseworker II, 10.185, grade 33, step 1, $32,092.56, Employer-Paid |
|
Department of Human Resources, Division of Child and Family Services |
409/3646 |
1012 |
Administrative Assistant II, 2.212, grade 25, step 1, $23,135.04, Employer-Paid |
Psychiatric Caseworker II, 10.185, grade 33, step 1, $32,092.56, Employer-Paid |
|
Department of Public Safety, Parole and Probation Division |
650/3740 |
0178 |
Program Assistant III, 2.218, grade 27, step 9, $34,890.48, Employer-Paid |
Program Officer I, 7.649, grade 31, step 7, $38,064.24, Employer-Paid |
|
Department of Public Safety, Parole and Probation Division |
650/3740 |
0374 |
Program Assistant III, 2.218, grade 27, step 9, $38,168.64, Employee/Employer- Paid |
Program Officer I, 7.649, grade 31, step 7, $41,634.72, Employee/Employer- Paid |
|
Department of Public Safety, Parole and Probation Division |
650/3740 |
0385 |
Program Assistant III, 2.218, grade 27, step 3, $29,712.24, Employee/Employer- Paid |
Program Officer I, 7.649, grade 31, step 1, $32,259.60, Employee/Employer- Paid |
|
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Director’s Office |
0004 |
Executive Assistant, 2.209, grade 31, step 5, $34,890.48, Employer-Paid |
Management Analyst I, 7.637, grade 33, step 5, $38,064.24, Employer-Paid |
|
|
Department of Transportation, Planning Division |
800/4660 |
813037 |
Transportation Technician II, 7.715, grade 27, step 9, $34,890.48, Employer-Paid |
Electronics Technician II, 6.981, grade 31, step 7, $38,064.24, Employer-Paid |
*E. APPROVAL OF ACEPTANCE OF A GIFT (NRS 353.335 AND ACQUISITON OF UNDEVELOPED REAL PROPERTY (NRS 407.063) DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES – Division of State Lands and Division of State Parks – Acceptance of gift in excess of $10,000.00/donation of an easement.
The Chairman noted
Item E had been withdrawn.
F. STATEMENT OF CONTINGENCY FUND BALANCE.
The meeting of the Interim Finance Committee was reconvened and called
to order by Chairman Raggio at 2:00 p.m.
Mr. Ghiggeri provided the following overview of the Statement of
Contingency Fund Balance (Exhibit H):
·
$8.9 million
- Unreserved General Fund Balance (prior to any allocations approved on
February 5, 2002);
·
$63,000 -
Requests before the Committee;
·
$8.8 million
– General fund Balance if requests approved;
·
$2 million –
Unreserved Balance Highway Fund;
·
$1.4 million
– China Spring Authority (request pending for $1.4 million);
·
$1 million –
Washoe County Juvenile Facility (no requests pending);
·
$358,000 –
Nevada Check Up –(no requests pending);
·
$13 million
–School Districts Health Insurance (request pending for $13 million);
·
$6.5 million
–School Districts Energy Costs (request pending for $6.5 million); and
·
$5 million –
School Districts At Risk Programs (request pending for $3.2 million).
*G. REQUESTS FOR ALLOCATION FROM THE CONTINGENCY FUND.
1. Commission
on Judicial Discipline – Anticipated Legal Expenses.................... $50,000.00
Alan B. Rabkin, General Counsel and Executive
Director, Commission on Judicial Discipline, identified himself for the
record. In an opening statement, Mr.
Rabkin informed the Committee that during the past two years, the Commission
had been engaged in a combined state and federal lawsuit, which had nearly
depleted the Commission’s budget line item for attorney expense. Mr. Rabkin was hopeful that at the
conclusion of the federal court case, the Commission would be entitled to costs
and possibly legal fees that could be returned to the state. Nevada Revised Statute
(NRS) 1.4683(6) provided the authority the Commission needed to
request the additional funds.
In response to a question from the Chairman,
Mr. Rabkin advised that the Commission on Judicial Discipline was named in a
federal court action claiming that the Commission had acted outside the scope
of its jurisdiction in bringing judicial misconduct proceedings against the
judge in question. A related state
court matter was instituted that went before the State Supreme Court. The State Supreme Court did not find any
problem with the Commission’s actions; however, the court replaced two
Commissioners “out of an abundance of caution” and returned the matter to the
Commission for hearing. The federal
court agreed the Commission should hear the case but retained jurisdiction to
ensure the case was properly adjudicated.
In response to questions from the Chairman
concerning the $50,000 request, Mr. Rabkin reported that favorable rates
had been negotiated with one of the state’s leading firms and for that reason,
it was anticipated a “large part” of the funding could be returned to the state. Mr. Rabkin further advised that Lionel,
Sawyer and Collins represented the Commission at the federal court level and
Mary Boetsch, of Sinai, Schroeder, Mooney, Boetsch, Bradley & Pace,
represented the Commission at the state level.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED APPROVAL OF G 1.
CHAIRMAN ARBERRY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2.
Department of
Conservation and Natural Resources –
Division
of Forestry – Stale Claims................................................................ $12,931.00
Steve Robinson, Administrator, Division of
Forestry identified himself for the record and introduced Pete Anderson, Deputy
Administrator and Tom Purkey, Administrative Services Officer. Mr. Robinson advised that the request for
allocation would be used cover stale claims related to payroll overtime
expenses, reimbursement of volunteer fire departments for use of their
equipment and reimbursement to the federal General Services Administration.
MR. MARVEL MOVED APPROVAL OF G 2.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
See Item L.14 {c}.
3.
Department of
Education – Allocation to Local School Districts for Health Insurance - S.B. 587, 71st Session............................................................................................................. $13,000,000.00
Doug
Thunder, Deputy Superintendent, Administrative and Fiscal Services, Nevada
Department of Education identified himself for the record and indicated he
would testify on Items 3, 4 and 5.
Mr. Thunder outlined the procedure used to
provide allocations to school districts for expenses related to employee health
insurance coverage during the 2001-2003 biennium. Mr. Thunder reported that the
school districts were invited to submit applications, due on December 1, for
the funding. In accordance with the
specifications of S.B. 587, 2001 Legislative Session, a committee of
representatives from the State Budget Office, the Fiscal Analysis Division,
Legislative Counsel Bureau, and the Department of Education met for the first
time on January 2 to provide a preliminary overview of the applications and to
determine whether additional information was required. The committee requested additional
information from the districts and met again on January 17 to review the
applications and to develop formal recommendations. A copy of the recommendations (Exhibit J) was provided to
the members of the Interim Finance Committee.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio, Mr. Thunder affirmed the applicants for the one-time appropriation met
the eligibility need requirement.
Mr. Thunder advised that an adjusted request of $21,347,115 was
apportioned among the districts for a total of $13 million over the biennium,
or $6.2 million in Fiscal Year 2002 and $6.8 million in Fiscal Year 2003. Mr. Thunder pointed out the recommendations
included a stipulation that any funding that remained from Fiscal Year 2002
could be used in Fiscal Year 2003; however, any funding that remained at the
end of June 30, 2003, would be reverted.
In response to a question from the Chairman,
Mr. Thunder clarified that two adjustments had been prepared using information
that had been secured from the districts prior to the December 1 deadline. Each request was compared to the difference
between the projected cost of employee health insurance and the budgeted
allocation to arrive at an “adjusted” request amount. The adjusted request for each applicant represented the lesser of
the amount of the budgeted shortfall or the school district’s request.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio, Mr. Thunder affirmed that each school district would receive about 61
percent of its adjusted request amount.
In response to a request by Chairman Raggio,
Mr. Thunder stated for the record that
$6,173,621 was allocated for Fiscal Year 2002 and $6,826,379 was
allocated for Fiscal Year 2003 which covered both years of the biennium.
Chairman Raggio indicated for the record that
a strong message was to be sent to the school districts that made it clear the
funding was to be used in each year as indicated.
Mr. Thunder advised that it had been made
clear in the subgrant awards that the allocation for Fiscal Year 2002 had to be
expended in 2002, but that any balance could be carried over to Fiscal Year
2003.
Mr. Ghiggeri indicated that the IFC
resolution, as drafted, provided that “unspent funding for Fiscal Year 2002
would revert for allocation at the end of Fiscal Year 2003 and would not just
carry forward to Fiscal Year 2003.”
Mr. Thunder advised that the committee that
developed the recommendations had worked with the assumption that funding not
used in Fiscal Year 2002 could be used in Fiscal Year 2003.
Ms. Giunchigliani disclosed for the record
that as a teacher employed by the Clark County School District she received
health insurance benefits. It was
Ms. Giunchigliani’s opinion that any balance of Fiscal Year 2002 funding
should be carried forward since the $13 million disbursement was not adequate
to cover the school districts’ requests.
It was Chairman Raggio’s opinion that any
funding not expended in Fiscal Year 2002 should revert but would be available
in Fiscal Year 2003 for further allocation, if necessary.
Mr. Ghiggeri indicated the IFC resolution was
drafted to provide that any funding allocated for Fiscal Year 2002 that was not
expended would revert and then could be reallocated in Fiscal Year 2003.
Don Hataway, Deputy Budget Administrator,
Budget Division, pointed out that the legislation provided that the
appropriation was good for the two years of the biennium and that any residual
at the end of that period reverted on June 30, 2003. Mr. Hataway recommended approval of the funding as outlined in
Mr. Thunder’s presentation.
Mr. Hataway agreed with a statement by
Chairman Raggio to guard against the expenditure of Fiscal Year 2003 money in
Fiscal Year 2002, however, Mr. Hataway indicated that given the demand versus
the funding, it seemed appropriate that any residual from Fiscal Year 2002
could be used in Fiscal Year 2003.
The Chairman agreed and indicated the
resolution should be redrafted to provide that any balance in the funding at
the end of Fiscal Year 2002 would be carried over to Fiscal Year 2003 but that
it should be made clear that Fiscal Year 2003 money could not be expended in
Fiscal Year 2002.
Mr. Thunder agreed.
Mr. Hataway advised that the Budget Division
would prepare two work programs, one for Fiscal Year 2002 for $6.1 million and
one for Fiscal Year 2003 for $6.8 million and in that way, the $6.8 million
would definitely not be available for allocation in Fiscal Year 2002.
In response to a question from Mr. Marvel,
Mr. Thunder clarified that not all the school districts applied for the funding
because some did not meet eligibility requirements, and the funding was
disbursed among the districts that applied.
4.
Department of
Education – Allocation to Local School Districts
For Energy Costs – S.B. 8 17th
Special Session....................................... $6,500,000.00
Senate Bill 8 of the17th Special
Session appropriated $6.5 million from the General Fund to the IFC to be
provided as a one-time distribution to school districts to meet energy costs
greater than the amounts budgeted for the 2001-03 biennium.
Mr. Thunder advised that the procedure used
to provide the funding for energy assistance to the eligible school districts
was the same as the one used for distribution of health care funding (Exhibit
K). Mr. Thunder reported that the
$6.5 million was divided among the school districts with a total of $1.7
million to be distributed in Fiscal Year 2002 and $4.8 million in Fiscal Year
2003. The total amount of the adjusted
request was $25,421,293, which covered 25.57 percent of each district’s
request.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio concerning the charter school application, Mr. Thunder indicated the
charter school request for $12,000 was not considered after it was learned
electricity charges were incorporated in their lease payments.
Mr. Thunder expressed agreement with the
Chairman’s understanding that the allocations were to be provided by fiscal
year with the same understanding as outlined in the discussion for health care
coverage.
5. Department
of Education – Allocation to Local School Districts
for Existing Education Programs at Risk of
Termination – S.B. 9,
17th Special Session................................................................................. $3,206,085.00
Bill Arensdorf, Team Leader, Finance
Accountability and Audit Division, Department of Education, identified himself
for the record. Mr. Arensdorf was
before the Interim Finance Committee as a representative of the committee that
had reviewed the school district applications for funding from a $5 million
appropriation provided in Senate Bill 9, 17th Special
Session. The funding requested by the
school districts was to be used for existing educational programs at risk of
termination because of a lack of funding.
Mr. Arensdorf reported that procedures and
criteria approved by the Board of Examiners and the Interim Finance Committee
were used to solicit proposals from school districts and charter schools for
allocations from the $5 million fund.
Proposals that totaled approximately $7.8 million were received from six
school districts that represented 18 programs, some educational and others non‑educational,
such as transportation, athletics and maintenance.
The recommendations for funding (Exhibit
L) were provided in the Committee’s packets. Representatives from the
Department of Education, the Budget Division and the Fiscal Analysis Division
reviewed the requests and recommended $3,206,085 be awarded to the six school
districts for at-risk education programs.
Mr. Arensdorf pointed out that as a result of the timing of the
applications, which were due December 1, the at‑risk programs would be
operated in school year 2002-2003 and not in the current school year. Mr. Arensdorf explained there was a
consensus among the districts that the programs that had to be reduced for the
current year had already taken place, and it would be too difficult to start
them up in the middle of the year. With
agreement that it would be best to operate the programs during the following
school year, a balance of $1,793,915 remained from the original appropriation.
Mr. Arensdorf affirmed Chairman Raggio’s
understanding that the balance of the funding was available in the event other
appropriate applications were received for Fiscal Year 2003. Mr. Arensdorf added that the Board of
Examiners was in receipt of a letter from Washoe County School District
Superintendent, Tim Hager, who requested that the remaining $1.7 million be
made available to the school districts for educational programs at risk of
termination that were not covered in the current budget for the following
year. Mr. Arensdorf pointed out
that the districts were currently in the process of budget preparation and did
not know exactly what those deficits would be.
Representatives from both Washoe County and Clark County School
Districts were in the audience, and Clark County School District also supported
the recommendation that the $1.7 million be available for redistribution or
reapplication.
In response to questions from Chairman
Raggio, Mr. Arensdorf indicated
additional applications would be considered.
It
was Chairman Raggio’s understanding that the remaining authority of $1,793,915
would be available for appropriate application and that the committee who
reviewed the initial applications could remain in session to consider
additional applications. There were no
objections from the members of the Interim Finance Committee.
Mr. Ghiggeri requested clarification in an
effort to assist the Legal Division’s preparation of the resolution. Using a hypothetical situation, Mr. Ghiggeri
indicated that if for example, Churchill County was awarded $142,000 in Fiscal
Year 2002 for health care coverage and $178,000 in Fiscal Year 2003, any
unspent funds from Fiscal Year 2002 were to be balanced forward to Fiscal Year
2003 for Churchill County’s use.
Additionally, there was not to
be a re-mixture of the funding between the different counties and the
allocations to the counties would remain the same.
Mr. Thunder affirmed the understanding
expressed by Mr. Ghiggeri and Chairman Raggio that the carry over of funds to
Fiscal Year 2003 would be for the use of each particular county as originally
requested. Mr. Thunder set the deadline
for the next round of applications for allocations from the remaining $1.7
million as April 1 to coincide with budget preparation.
Chairman Raggio agreed that the April 1
deadline appeared appropriate.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO APPROVE THE
RECOMMENDED ALLOCATION OF FUNDING TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ON THE BASIS THAT
FISCAL YEAR 2002 BALANCES FOR EACH PARTICULAR SCHOOL DISTRICT COULD BE CARRIED
OVER TO FISCAL YEAR 2003 FOR EACH DISTRICT IN WHICH A BALANCE OCCURRED, AND
WITH RESPECT TO THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR AT-RISK PROGRAMS, THE BALANCE OF
$1,793,915 WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR APPROPRIATE PROCESSING UNTIL APRIL 1.
MR. BEERS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*H. STATE
PUBLIC WORKS BOARD.
1. CIP 99-H1 (New Highway Patrol Headquarters
Building in Las Vegas) – Request for change in scope to eliminate shell space
and to add NDOT portion of facility, for authorization to receive $4,437,327
from NDOT for its portion, and for authorization to use site acquisition funds
for construction.
Daniel O’Brien, Manager, State Public
Works Board (SPWB) identified himself for the record. Mr. O’Brien indicated that the request for a change in scope and
site location for the new Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP) headquarters building in
Las Vegas had been discussed during the last two meetings, and he was before
the Committee to request approval to change the scope of the project.
Mr. O’Brien indicated that after the
recommendation to combine the project for the new NHP headquarters with the
Nevada Department of Transportation’s (NDOT) construction of the Freeway and
Arterial System of Transportation (FAST) traffic management center, the
modification had been discussed in many meetings. Mr. O’Brien added that while the projects had been approved
in different locations and in different forms, the request for consolidation
would provide a more useful facility for both NDOT and the NHP.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio concerning the reduction of the facility from 60,000 square feet to
40,000 square feet, Colonel David Hosmer indicated that he believed 40,000
square feet of space would meet the Highway Patrol’s needs since the original
plans called for 20,000 square feet of shelled space for future expansion. Colonel Hosmer referred to a 1995 study
concerning square footage and manpower needs and reported that the NHP was
currently in line with the study. It
was Colonel Hosmer’s position that a 40,000 square-foot facility should meet
the needs of the Highway Patrol for “several years.”
In response to a statement from Chairman
Raggio concerning consolidation of the NHP and NDOT facilities, Mr. O’Brien
indicated consolidation of the projects would provide onsite and offsite cost
savings as well as cost savings within the building. Copies of photographs (Exhibit M) taken on a recent tour
of the existing NHP facility were distributed.
Mr. O’Brien advised that the new facility
would allow the NHP to benefit from NDOT’s FAST traffic management center. Through the use of a combined dispatch and
communication center, NDOT’s computer screens would provide the NHP with the
ability to see traffic accidents as well as road and traffic conditions on
screen.
The Chairman noted that the space for the
new facility would be decreased by one third from 60,000 to 40,000 square feet
while the cost to construct the NHP portion of the building had increased from
$8.7 million to $10.7 million.
Richard Romito, representing KGA
Architecture, identified himself for the record. Mr. Romito indicated the IFC packets included project cost
estimates (Exhibit N) for the combined facility (NHP/NDOT) as well as
the separation of the two facilities.
Chairman Raggio asked for specifics in
reference to why less square footage for the NHP portion of the building would
increase the cost of the project from $8.7 million to $10.7 million.
Mr. Romito explained that although the
project was being reduced by 20,000 square feet, the portion of the project that
was being eliminated was shelled space which was “significantly less expensive
than the remainder of the project.”
Additionally, Mr. Romito pointed out that the project was
originally budgeted in 1999 and inflationary factors projected to 2003 and potentially
2004, combined with construction costs had significantly increased the cost of
the project.
Mr. Romito testified that the new budget
for the project was “realistic” and was based on three comparable public safety
facilities in southern Nevada, which he said were “good, solid, utilitarian”
buildings that had not wasted taxpayer money.
Mr. Romito indicated the NHP building was “now budgeted at very
equivalent costs” to those public safety facilities.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio concerning Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment (FF&E), Mr. Romito
indicated the cost for FF&E was not included in the request for a change in
scope. In response to what the FF&E
cost would be for the Highway Patrol portion of the project, Mr. Romito indicated
the allocated cost for FF&E was about $970,000 and reiterated that the
FF&E was not a part of the request before the Committee.
Chairman Raggio questioned how many years
the building would meet the growth needs of the NHP, given the reduced square footage.
Colonel Hosmer indicated a comfort level
in stating the building designed with future expansion in mind could “probably”
meet the needs of the NHP for eight to ten years.
Chairman Raggio expressed the Committee’s
concern over the elimination of the 20,000 square feet of shelled space, which
the project had originally been designed to include, and accepting statements
that the reduced space would meet the growth needs of the NHP for the next
eight to ten years.
Mr. Romito clarified, for the record, that
the project had not yet been designed, however, he said the project, envisioned
in 1999, was developed based on a 1995 study by a separate architect. The 1995 study illustrated a progression of
growth over a twenty-year period and projected that in 2001-2002, the NHP
staffing level in southern Nevada would reach approximately168 personnel. Mr. Romito stated that current NHP staff
totaled 163, which he said appeared to be on track.
While Mr. Romito indicated guarantees
could not be provided, he said the 40,000 square feet of space appeared to be a
“good, prudent,” design to meet the projected needs of the NHP. Mr. Romito further advised that while the
20,000 square feet of shelled space was a good economic business decision in
1999 that had allowed for the contingencies of potential growth, inflationary
factors and other issues over the four-year period no longer permitted
inclusion of the shelled space in the building design.
Mr. Romito indicated that a primary topic
of conversation between the NHP and KGA Architecture was a ten-year plan. Mr. Romito further indicated that he thought
it could be guaranteed that in ten years the NHP would request additional
space; however, what might occur between that time and the present could not be
predicted. Mr. Romito advised that KGA
Architecture would include a design for expansion in the current project plans
and pointed out that the site was large enough to allow for future expansion.
Mr. Romito mentioned that in areas of programmatic changes, the vault used for
NHP evidence was originally to be used only by the NHP and was currently
projected to be used by all of the southern Nevada police facilities. Mr. Romito advised the Committee that KGA
Architecture would plan for an expansion in the design of “all of the primary areas in the facility”
in order that future expansion would “simply” be “an addition to the existing
facility” without a return to “ground zero again.”
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio concerning the Committee’s authority to change the scope of the project,
Ms. Erdoes advised that the change in scope, albeit a large change, was within
the Committee’s authority.
In response to Ms. Giunchigliani’s request
for clarification concerning the rationale for the deletion of the 20,000
square feet, Mr. Romito explained that the increased costs during the four-year
period since 1999 included all of the costs associated with the project
including construction as well as on and off-site costs.
In response to additional questions from
Ms. Giunchigliani concerning the “real dollar” and square footage numbers under
discussion, Mr. Romito pointed out that Project Number 99-H1 covered the
combined NHP/NDOT projects, which included square footage transferred from
another project for a total project cost of $15,207,691 (Exhibit N).
In response to a question from Ms.
Giunchigliani, Mr. O’Brien confirmed the combined NHP/NDOT cost estimate was
one that had not been approved in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
legislation during the 2001 Legislative Session.
In response to a question from Ms.
Giunchigliani, Mr. Romito confirmed that the total project cost estimate for
the combined NHP/NDOT facility was $15,207,691 for 62,193 square feet of space.
In response to additional questions from
Ms. Giunchigliani concerning total cost, Mr. O’Brien responded that the
$15,207,691 total project cost estimate included all of the costs associated
with the project, i.e., all contingencies, all construction permits, State Fire
Marshal Plan check, life safety plan check and architectural fees.
Mr. Romito pointed out that the FF&E
for the NHP portion was a separate request that totaled approximately $970,000.
Mr. O’Brien advised that the $970,000
request for FF&E would be presented to the 2003 Legislative Session.
Mr. Romito further advised that the second
item under Item H was for Project Number 97-H4 (Exhibit N), which
covered 3,900 square feet of expanded space for a shop and communications
facility originally funded in 1997. Mr.
Romito explained that it appeared prudent to combine all of the facilities onto
the same site at the same time, and, therefore, it was requested that the 3,900
square feet and $605,106 allocated for the project in 1997 be brought forward
and consolidated into a single large project.
In response to questions from Ms.
Giunchigliani concerning determination of the consolidation plan, Mr. O’Brien
advised that the decision to request consolidation of the project had occurred
fairly recently.
Ms. Giunchigliani expressed concern that
information concerning Public Works Board projects was received on a piecemeal
basis during the legislative session, and members of the IFC were asked to
reflect on those projects during their meetings without an accurate reflection
of what had taken place. Ms.
Giunchigliani discussed the legislative need to be prudent with taxpayer money
and discussed information she had received concerning the per square-foot cost
of a new federal building in the range of about $237 to $273 a square foot
compared to $310 per square foot for the NHP/NDOT facility.
Mr. Romito clarified that the calculation
for the NHP facility was about $257 a square foot not including FF&E, which
Mr. Romito explained was typically not included in projected construction
costs.
Ms. Giunchigliani indicated that costs
such as FF&E had to be anticipated in the budgetary process and those costs
had not been discussed during the 2001 Legislative Session. Ms. Giunchigliani expressed concern over the
additional costs as well as what appeared to be a lack of prudence during the
initial planning stages of the project.
In response to a question from Senator
Neal concerning whether the project would be considered “design built,” Mr.
O’Brien advised that it had been determined best that the facility be designed
as “a bid and build” project because of the intricacies associated with the
FAST traffic management center as well as requirements by the NHP.
Chairman Arberry recalled that when the project for the NHP facility originally went before the Joint Subcommittee on Capital Improvements during the 1999 Legislative Session, the Subcommittee attempted to have the number of square feet for the facility reduced. Chairman Arberry expressed his strong concern in reference to the fact that the number of square feet had not been reduced in 1999 and the current request to change the scope of the project by deleting 20,000 square feet of space.
Since there appeared to be so many variables, Chairman Arberry suggested that the request be deferred until the following legislative session in 2003, which would provide an opportunity for all the parties to return to the Legislature with a feasible proposal.
Chairman Raggio indicated that while Chairman Arberry’s suggestion was worth consideration, a letter from NDOT (Exhibit N) included in the Committee’s material indicated they would move forward with the Freeway and Arterial System of Transportation traffic management center, if the NHP portion of the project was delayed further. Additionally, the Chairman noted that the State Public Works Board had estimated that delaying the project for two years would add approximately $3.3 million to the cost of the NDOT portion of the project.
Mr. O’Brien, while sympathetic to the concerns expressed by Chairman Arberry, explained that representatives of the Public Works Board and KGA Architecture had tried to remove the “smoke and mirrors” and to be “upfront with all of the issues.” It was Mr. O’Brien’s opinion that the project was viable now, and that they had “tied everything down.” Mr. O’Brien referred to the poor location of the current NHP facility and crowded conditions depicted in the photographs (Exhibit M) that had been distributed. Additionally, Mr. O’Brien indicated that the NDOT project would go forward even if the request for a change in scope for the NHP facility was not approved.
If the site was not utilized as a combined site, Mr. O’Brien indicated that NDOT might have to re-evaluate their project because of the off-site conditions and costs. Mr. O’Brien discussed the feasibility of combining the two facilities and sharing off-site costs. Had the potential for combining the projects been known 1999, and if he had been the Public Works Board Manager at that time, Mr. O’Brien indicated he would have informed the members of the Committee and promised to do so should a similar situation occur in the future. However, Mr. O’Brien explained that it was determined only after the two projects were approved that joining forces would provide a significant cost benefit.
Chairman Arberry anticipated that even if the change in scope was approved, with the number of delays that had already occurred, it would be 2004 by the time the project was designed and completed. Chairman Arberry indicated that he could not support the request and reiterated his earlier suggestion to defer the project until the following legislative session to provide an opportunity for a more feasible plan.
Senator O’Donnell respectfully disagreed with the suggestion to defer the issue. Senator O’Donnell discussed the various legislative hearings that had determined the need for a 60,000 square-foot facility in Las Vegas, which had eventually been pared down to 40,000 square feet. Senator O’Donnell indicated that it appeared now that the NHP had requested a 40,000 square-foot building, they were being “punished” for doing what they were requested to do during the 1999 Legislative Session. Senator O’Donnell further indicated that it was important to approve the change in scope and to provide the plans for a plan check as soon as possible in view of the impact the county hiring freeze had on the Clark County Planning Department. Using a personal example, Senator O’Donnell referred to a set of building plans that had been in the office of the Clark County Planning Department since September 26, 2001, and had yet to be approved. It was Senator O’Donnell’s opinion that if the Committee did not move forward with the request, it would be 2005 before the building would be completed and the southern Nevada office of the NHP could not wait that long.
Chairman Arberry wanted to ensure the project was done correctly and indicated that while he was not trying to penalize the Highway Patrol, it was his opinion that approval of the request by the Committee would result in a request to amend the project during the 2003 Legislative Session.
Senator Rawson discussed approving only the design portion of the project, which he said would provide the Legislature the time to deal with the problem during the next legislative session without delaying the project significantly.
Chairman Raggio expressed reservations concerning a delay of the request and was persuaded that there was cost effectiveness in combining the project and sharing the off‑site and on‑site costs. Additionally, Chairman Raggio expressed concern with the fact that if the NHP portion of the building was deferred, NDOT would proceed with the construction of a building dedicated solely to the operation of the FAST traffic management center. His largest concern, however, was that delaying the project until the following year would increase the cost by an additional $3.3 million. It was the Chairman’s opinion that the question of whether a 40,000 square-foot facility was adequate was offset by the fact that if the facility was delayed until a future time, the NDOT portion of the facility would not be included in the project, and the overall cost of the project would be increased. The Chairman favored approval of the design.
Chairman Raggio requested the Legislative Counsel’s opinion concerning the Committee’s authorization to approve $1.375 million in site acquisition funds for the purpose of funding project cost overruns as well as some of the costs for adding shop facilities to the scope of the project.
Ms. Erdoes advised that under the request for a change in scope for CIP 99-H1, the Committee had the authority to approve the use of site acquisition funds for construction costs; however, under CIP 97-H4, the Committee did not have the authority to approve the change in location requested for that project. Ms. Erdoes pointed out that the legislative record showed it was the intent of the Legislature, in approving the 1997 CIP bill, that project funds were site specific. It was Ms. Erdoes’ opinion the Interim Finance Committee did not have the authority to use the CIP 97-H4 funds as requested by the Public Works Board.
In response to a
question from Chairman Raggio, Mr. Romito advised that non approval of the
request to use the funds from CIP 97-H4 for some of the costs for adding shop
facilities to the scope of the new Highway Patrol facility would simply
eliminate the ability to move the garage space to the new facility. Instead, the cars would be maintained at a
site several miles from the new headquarters.
Chairman Raggio discussed the Committee’s dilemma and indicated that all were in agreement the facility was needed, and a long dialogue had been permitted in order to provide a commitment on the need for any additional space in excess of 40,000 square feet; however, the Chairman expressed grave concerns in deferring the project and facing an estimated additional cost of $3.3 million.
Chairman Arberry discussed the fact that the garage facility, approved in the 1997 CIP legislation, was another building that had not yet been built and reiterated his strong reservations concerning the Public Works Board’s track record. Chairman Arberry indicated the Public Works Board needed to understand they could not continually approach the IFC with new plans and that based on the fact that the 2003 Legislature would meet in twelve months, the project could wait.
In response to a question from Ms. Giunchigliani concerning approval of the design only, Chairman Raggio, indicated that approval of the design only portion of the project would prohibit the Public Works Board from going beyond the design stage, and the NDOT would proceed with their FAST traffic management center.
Ms. Giunchigliani
questioned how the development of combining the NDOT’s traffic management center and the NHP facility project had come
about.
Rick Combs, Program Analyst, Fiscal
Analysis Division, identified himself for the record. In response to the question concerning advance planning, Mr.
Combs advised that the Legislature often approved advanced planning of a
project. One disadvantage was that
funding spent on the design portion would be gone if it was determined not to
go forward with the project or to change it significantly. However, the advantage was that advance
planning provided the Joint Subcommittee on the Capital Improvement Program
much more information to work with because the process included a determination
by professionals of needs in terms of square footage as well as firm
construction costs.
In reference to how the NDOT and NHP
projects were combined, Mr. Combs advised that the former manager of the Public
Works Board near the end of the 1999 Legislative Session mentioned something to
the effect that the NDOT also wanted to build their FAST traffic management
center and that it would be beneficial to have the traffic management center
and the NHP facility at the same location.
Mr. Combs did not recall that any testimony was actually provided
concerning the combined facilities.
Additionally, Mr. Combs did not recall any mention of combining the
facilities in the same building. Mr.
Combs explained that, from the discussion with the former manager, he had
envisioned the facilities would be at the same location but not in the same
building.
While Ms. Giunchigliani shared the
concerns that had been expressed, she was also of the opinion that rather than
reduce the size of the project, all parties concerned with the property should
have it funded correctly. Ms. Giunchigliani
indicated that even if the project was more costly, the cost would be based on
a realistic number, the correct square footage and on need rather than a
reduction in size and a return to the Legislature in four years.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO APPROVE A CHANGE IN
THE SCOPE OF CIP 99-H1 WHICH WOULD ELIMINATE 20,000 SQUARE FEET OF SHELL SPACE,
INCLUDE THE NDOT PORTION OF THE FACILITY, AND ALLOW THE USE OF SITE ACQUISITON
FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
(The members of the Senate carried the
motion unanimously.)
(Chairman Arberry, Ms. Giunchigliani and
Mrs. De Braga voted nay.)
THE MOTION CARRIED.
2.
CIP 97-H4
(Expand Shop and Communication Facilities at Current Highway Patrol
Headquarters Building in Las Vegas) – Request to change location to the site of
the new Highway Patrol Headquarters Facility.
Mr. O’Brien requested IFC approval to change
the location of the garage facility, CIP 97‑H4, to the Decatur site
rather than the Sahara site. Mr.
O’Brien advised that it made sense to have the NHP maintenance facility located
at the same site as with the NHP vehicles.
In response to the Chairman’s request for her
opinion, Ms. Erdoes suggested that the Committee did not have the authority to
accommodate the request based on legislative history that showed the 1997 CIP
for CIP 97 H4 was site specific.
In response to a question from the Chairman
on whether he understood Legislative Counsel’s advice, Mr. O’Brien indicated he
did and discussed drafting future CIP legislation to provide wording that would
give the IFC authority to change site locations.
In response to a question from the Chairman,
Mr. O’Brien indicated that since it would not be a good business decision to
build a shop at the Sahara site, discussions would take place to defer the
project and to submit a CIP request in 2003 for shop space located at the new
NHP headquarters facility.
The Chairman agreed and deferred the request
3.
CIP 97-C20L
(Southern Nevada Veterans’ Cemetery Expansion, Phase III-C) – Request approval
to receive federal grant funds for construction of an automated gravesite
locator.
Mr. O’Brien requested approval to receive
Federal Grant NV 98-07 to increase CIP 97‑C20L, the Southern Nevada
Veterans’ Memorial Cemetery Expansion, by $28,474. The grant award would provide for construction of an automated
gravesite locator kiosk information system and would increase total funding
from $2,063,999 to $2,092,473.
At the Chairman’s request, Mr. O’Brien agreed
to look into the receipt of grant money to upgrade the Fernley Cemetery.
MR. PARKS MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM H 3.
SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4.
CIP 99-C12
(UNLV Law School Renovations) – Request approval to receive funds from the Law
School for additional project contingency and to authorize UNLV to perform
sprinkler system installation in a portion of the facility.
Mr. O’Brien requested approval to receive
$200,000 from UNLV for the William S. Boyd School of Law project. Mr. O’Brien explained that cost overruns
were encountered with a State Fire Marshal requirement for the installation of
sprinklers and fire alarms on two unoccupied floors. Mr. O’Brien indicated that because the sprinklers and fire alarms
had not originally been included in the plans, the contingency for the project
had been substantially reduced in keeping with the Fire Marshal’s
requirement. Mr. O’Brien indicated
that the $200,000 offer of funds from UNLV would allow the project to move
forward with a sufficient contingency.
In response to a question from the Chairman, Mr. O’Brien cited a letter (Exhibit O) from Richard J. Morgan, Dean and Professor of Law, William S. Boyd School of Law, which confirmed the Law School would pay for the installation of the sprinkler system on the first and second floor of the rectangular building and would commit an additional $200,000 to the contingency.
MR. DINI MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM H 4.
MRS. CHOWNING SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5.
CIP 01-C30L
(Remodel Former EICoN Buildings for UNLV Dental School) – Request approval to
receive funds from UNLV for portion of project costs.
Mr. O’Brien requested IFC approval to accept
an additional $7 million in funding from the UNLV School of Dentistry for the
remodel of the former EICoN buildings in Las Vegas for use as a dental school
facility. Mr. O’Brien indicated
discussion concerning the remodel of the former EICoN buildings had occurred
during the November 26, 2001, meeting of the IFC when authorization was granted
to proceed with the project.
Dr. Anthony Flores, Vice President for Finance, UNLV, identified himself for the record. In response to a question from the Chairman concerning a change in the cost estimate for the dental school facility, Dr. Flores indicated there had been significant confusion concerning information provided to the Board of Regents and the IFC as well as internal estimates on campus. However, Dr. Flores indicated that the estimates the IFC had received remained in tact, and the $11,250,000 for renovation remained the amount intended to be spent on the renovation project.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio concerning whether additional funding was needed for Buildings A and B, Dr. Flores testified that additional funds were not needed, and it was intended that the project would be completed with funding in the amount of $11,250,000.
In response to a question from Chairman Raggio, Dr. Flores confirmed the request was that the Interim Finance Committee authorize the SPWB’s acceptance of $7 million.
Juanita P. Fain, Ph.D., Vice President for
Administration, confirmed and reiterated that $11,250,000 was all that was
required to complete the renovation to develop a four-year dental school
program in both Buildings A and B.
In response to Ms. Giunchigliani’s request
for clarification concerning the confusion surrounding the funding, Dr. Fain
expressed regret concerning the confusion that had occurred. Dr. Fain was confident that the project
could be completed with the major portion of the $11,250,000 allocated for
renovation of Building A with perhaps a small portion for establishment of
faculty offices in Building B.
In response to a question from Ms.
Giunchigliani, Dr. Fain advised that there would be no attempt to return to the
Legislature to request additional funding for construction costs. While Dr. Harter testified at the
November 26, 2001, meeting of the IFC that a return to the Legislature with a
request for equipment funding would occur, Dr. Fain advised they would not return
for construction or renovation funding.
However, Dr. Fain pointed out some changes to the program could occur as
the result of a pending accreditation visit in April 2002. Dr. Fain advised that if there were any
changes to the program, the Interim Finance Committee would be notified
immediately. However, Dr. Fain
reiterated that UNLV would not request any additional funds for construction or
renovation of the dental school.
In response to a question from Ms.
Giunchigliani concerning a student fee increase to offset the costs of the
dental school facility, Dr. Flores, advised that authorization was received in
the last budget for the University to increase their capital improvement fee
fund by $1 for the current fiscal year of the biennium and another dollar for
the following year of the biennium. Dr.
Flores explained that as part of the University revenue‑financing plan, a
portion of that $1 paid by each student would be earmarked to offset the debt
service payment for the Dental School project.
In response to a question from Ms.
Giunchigliani concerning a subsequent need for an increase in that dollar
amount, Dr. Flores indicated that the University’s existing capital improvement
fee fund was used for ongoing capital projects on campus, and the new $2
increase was earmarked for the dental school project.
While Ms. Giunchigliani indicated her
appreciation for the clarification, she expressed some concern over that fact
that not every student would take advantage of the dental facility.
MR. DINI MOVED APPROVAL OF ITEM H 5.
MRS. DE BRAGA SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Ms. Giunchigliani voted
nay.)
6.
CIP 99-C38L
(DRI Southern Nevada Science Center) – Request approval to receive funds from
DRI for additional project costs and to authorize DRI to retain interest earned
on the funds.
Mr. O’Brien requested authority from the IFC
for the SPWB to receive $1 million in additional funds from the Desert Research
Institute (DRI) for a total of $2 million for CIP 99-C38L, the DRI
Southern Nevada Science Center. Mr.
O’Brien pointed out that DRI had secured a loan to provide the $1 million
needed for construction cost adjustments.
The DRI requested, through a letter to the SPWB dated January 11, 2002,
that the state refund any interest earned on the money to DRI to minimize DRI’s
interest costs during construction.
Mr. Ghiggeri, Fiscal Analyst, indicated that
representatives of the Legal Division had advised staff that the Interim
Finance Committee did not have the authority to act upon the request to refund
interest earned on the funding. Mr.
Ghiggeri discussed the possibility that the University could advance the money
to the SPWB on an as-needed basis to enable the University to draw the
interest.
Alan Austin, Vice President for Finance and
Administration, Desert Research Institute identified himself for the
record. In response to a question from
the Chairman concerning the use of the additional funding, Mr. Austin clarified
that the full cost of the project had not been available until last fall when
the construction documents were in the process of being prepared, and the costs
came in at a higher number than anticipated.
In order to cover the extra project costs, the DRI borrowed the
difference through a bank loan. Mr.
Austin requested that the IFC allow the SPWB to accept that extra $1 million
the DRI had already secured as a bank loan.
MR. MARVEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST TO
ALLOW THE SPWB TO RECEIVE FUNDS FROM DRI FOR ADDITIONAL PROJECT COSTS; HOWEVER,
TO DISALLOW THE RETURN OF INTEREST INCOME TO DRI.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
7.
CIP Project
Status Reports.
Mr. O’Brien reported that the State Command
Complex, a $9 million project on Edmonds Drive in Carson City, was
approximately four to five months behind schedule. Mr. O’Brien pointed out that the project contractor had been
brought before the SPWB and had been put on notice concerning their poor
performance and the Board’s pursuit of liquidated damages in the amount of
$300,000. Mr. O’Brien indicated that
unless the contractor could show extenuating circumstances, the liquidated
damages could not be negotiated, and it appeared unlikely extenuating
circumstances could have delayed the project by five months.
Mr. O’Brien reported that the architect for
the Redfield Campus Project passed away, and the firm the architect was
associated with was bankrupt. Mr.
O’Brien indicated that while the SPWB had invested in the design of the
Redfield Campus Project, they did not have a complete set of working documents;
however, permission had been received from the bankruptcy court to retrieve the
AutoCAD files. Additionally, the SPWB
was negotiating, after receiving approval from the State Board of Architecture,
to obtain the services of another architect to take over the project. Mr. O’Brien pointed out that there would be
costs associated with a new architect.
Additionally, Mr. O’Brien reported that there was no performance bond
required for consultants, only errors/omission and liability insurance. The Attorney General’s office was looking
into the situation, and Mr. O’Brien indicated the SPWB would continue to
provide the IFC with information concerning the status of the project.
Concerning qualification of bidders, Mr.
O’Brien reported that all regulations and forms were adopted by the SPWB, and
beginning in May 2002, any projects going out to bid would require a qualified
bidder.
Mr. O’Brien reported that the heating problem
at the Nevada Mental Health Institute’s Dini‑Townsend Hospital had been
taken care of by the SPWB’s mechanical engineer and consultant; however, the
design-related heating problem was the responsibility of the design
professional. Mr. O’Brien
explained that the SPWB staff had managed to raise the temperature of the rooms
so that the patients did not have to be moved and that final design
improvements, which included re-routing mechanical coils, would be made during
the week at an estimated cost to the design professional of about $15,000. Mr. O’Brien pointed out there would be no
cost to the state.
In response to questions from the Chairman,
Mr. O’Brien indicated some funding remained in the project. Mr. O’Brien discussed the possibility of
using funding for problems concerning the mechanical system that could be
considered over and above the responsibility of the designer and/or the
contractor, and that determination would be made later during the week.
In reference to the cooperative parking project with Carson City which had been discussed during previous meetings, Mr. O’Brien reported that after several meetings Carson City decided the project was not viable and would revert the state’s share of the funding.
In reference to the
life/safety issue concerning the bowling alley, Mr. O’Brien advised that
demolition of the bowling alley had taken place during the previous week. A Quonset hut remained on the property for
use by the Boys and Girls Club.
Mr. O’Brien advised that the Quonset hut would be removed if the
Boys and Girls Club did not need it.
CIP 01-CO8 – Nevada Veterans’ Nursing Home
Mr. O’Brien reported a positive status for
the Nursing Home and projected that the SPWB and the State Fire Marshal would
issue a Certificate of Occupancy on March 15, 2002. Mr. O’Brien reported the following activities had taken place:
·
Problems with
the doors had been corrected;
·
Cracks in the
wall had been caulked, and acoustical paneling ordered;
·
Fire riser room
had been expanded; and,
·
Meeting fire
flow requirements with installation of additional piping rather than a booster
pump had been investigated. Project
could save $50,000 to $100,000.
Mr. O’Brien reported that a number of items
on the punch list were being taken care of and that the mechanical contractor
was commissioning the building’s hot water and heating systems, two items
necessary for the licensure of the building.
8.
Semi-annual
report regarding the activities of the Facilities Condition Analysis Program.
Mr. O’Brien discussed the semi-annual
progress report on the condition of state facilities (Exhibit P) and reported
that while a complete staff for the Facilities Program had not been hired until
December 2001, 176 reports had been completed.
Mr. O’Brien informed the Committee that the Program’s supervisor was
committed to the project and that the staff was working diligently to keep the
program moving.
Mr. O’Brien also reported that since there
was a plan to dispose of the National Guard Armory, the time that would have
been allotted to an analysis of that building would be used for another
facility instead.
In response to questions from Ms.
Giunchigliani concerning the identification and meaning of cost summaries for
the various facilities, Mr. O’Brien advised that facilities were being analyzed
to determine which needed to be “mothballed” to avoid additional
deterioration. Specifically, Mr.
O’Brien indicated that roof repair and sealing windows was typical of
preventative methods to avoid further deterioration. However, Mr. O’Brien indicated a long-term plan had not yet
been developed to request funding to bring the buildings, many of which were
historical, up to code.
Ms. Giunchigliani questioned the number of
completed reports versus the number of facilities that still required review,
and the basis on which the 176 facilities had been selected for review.
Ward Patrick, Chief of Design, SPWB,
identified himself for the record and responded that there were 2,000
state-owned facilities in the SPWB database including lean-to shacks and
outhouses in the parks. Additionally,
Mr. Patrick explained that approximately half of the structures, identified in
the database, were substantial buildings 5,000 square feet or more and were all
ages including the buildings at Stewart that bordered 100 years. Mr. Ward advised that the inspection
was designed to look at buildings that would provide the most benefit for the
maintenance. Mr. Ward explained that Prison
and Mental Health buildings were predominantly focused on since most of the CIP
maintenance projects were directed to those areas. Mr. Ward also pointed out that a group of buildings on a campus
provided the SPWB with “some economies.”
While a cost summary of $32 million for the
facilities had been identified, Ms. Giunchigliani indicated that for
future reference it would be helpful for the Committee to know the SPWB’s
specific criterion concerning how the facilities were placed on the list. Additionally, Ms. Giunchigliani questioned
the reason for an analysis when it appeared as though a plan had not been
developed to provide the needed maintenance.
Mr. Patrick advised that at the last meeting
of the SPWB, the Board recognized their responsibility to ensure that the
information contained in the report on the condition of facilities was valuable
and to provide specifics concerning recommendations for maintenance
projects. It was Mr. Patrick’s
understanding that 400 buildings had been reviewed and that an accountability
statement would be prepared that detailed the number of projects completed, the
buildings recommended for funding as well as an explanation concerning those
that were not recommended for funding.
*I. CHINA
SPRING YOUTH CAMP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (S.B. 560, 1999 Session).
1.
Report on funds
disbursed from September 25, 2001 allocation in the amounts of $282,897.11 and
$587,316.59.
2.
Request for
advance of funds in the amount of $1,400,642.32.
Steven J. Thaler, Director, China Spring Youth Camp,
identified the request as funds in the amount of $282,897.11 and $587,316.59
approved and disbursed from the IFC’s September 25, 2001 allocation and a
request for an advance of funds in the amount of $1,400,642.32. Mr. Thaler advised that the request for the
$1,400,642.32 would complete the project.
SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR THE
ADVANCE OF FUNDS PURSUANT TO THE INTERIM FINANCE COMMITTEE’S ESTABLISHED
PROCEDURE.
MR. HETTRICK SECONDED THE MOTION.
THEMOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
The Chairman advised that the motion was approved and the
report on disbursement of the funds was accepted.
*J. REQUEST FOR ALLOCATION FROM TOBACCO
SETTLEMENT FUNDS - A.B. 474 (Chapter 538, 1999 Session).
1.
KNPB Channel 5
- $388,204.
2.
KLVX Channel 10
- $1,000,000.
Rick Schneider, President and General Manger,
KNPB Channel 5, Public Broadcasting, Reno identified himself for the record and
introduced Scott Craigie, KNPB Board Member, and Tom Axtell, General Manager,
KLVX Channel 10, Las Vegas.
Mr. Schneider reported that in 1999 the
Legislature appropriated $1 million to each of the two stations to convert the
public broadcasting system in Nevada to digital television. The appropriation was made with a provision the
funds could only be disbursed on the basis of a 3:1 match.
Mr. Schneider testified that KNPB reported in
December 2000 that a portion of the match had been raised, and at that time the
Committee made a partial disbursement of funds. Mr. Schneider reported
that the remainder of the match had been raised by KNPB, and he was before the
Committee to request KNPB’s final disbursement of $388,204.
Mr. Axtell extended his appreciation to the
Committee for their support and noted that the match requirement provided that
the State of Nevada would appropriate $1 million for disbursement to each
station if each television station could raise $3 million in local
contributions. Additionally, there was
an agreement that the stations would run a number of television spots related
to anti-smoking without charge to the state for ten years and to provide 25
percent of air time to the state for educational programming at no charge.
Mr. Axtell reported that KLVX Channel 10
currently had cash and gifts totaling $6,051,121 and requested disbursement of
the $1 million challenge grant.
Chairman Raggio discussed issues of concern
to the Committee and requested that the representatives from each station first
address the requirement concerning the number of anti‑smoking public
service announcements that were to be aired each day.
Mr. Schneider advised it was their
understanding that each station must air four anti-tobacco spots per day for
ten years, which was the practice that had been carried out.
The Chairman noted the language in A.B.
474, 1999 Session provided that anti-tobacco announcements were to be
broadcast eight times a day for ten consecutive years for a total of 30,000
announcements beginning as soon as practicable after the date on which the
stations received the funding. Chairman
Raggio asked if the stations had complied with the requirement.
Mr. Craigie advised that the stations had
aired four public service announcements per day per station and recalled that A.B.
474, 1999 Session was one of the bills that had been rewritten on the last
day of the session. Mr. Craigie
indicated he was surprised when he reread the law and the language did read
that the anti-tobacco announcements were to be aired eight times a day per
station. However, Mr. Craigie indicated
that at the time the legislation was drafted, eight public service
announcements were to be aired statewide each day for the two stations.
Mr. Craigie indicated the station
representatives had been before the Committee twice before to testify
concerning their statistics, progress and timing. During that time Mr. Craigie indicated both stations had been
focused on eight spots per day statewide.
The Chairman requested clarification
concerning the understanding representatives of the public television stations
had in reference to the number of anti-tobacco spots that would be broadcast.
Mr. Craigie testified it was the clear
understanding by representatives of the stations that the intent of the
legislation was to air anti-smoking public service announcements four times a
day per station.
The Chairman asked that station
representatives address the practical difficulty of airing eight spots per day
per station if the language was interpreted in that manner.
Mr. Schneider advised that four spots per day
per station appeared to be an efficient use and way of putting the message out
while eight spots per day per station would become impractical and “somewhat of
a burden” not only to the station but to the viewer as well. Additionally, Mr. Schneider indicated airing
the announcements eight times a day would be deluding, over powering, and an
ineffective use of the medium.
Mr. Axtell distributed copies of an analysis
(Exhibit C) that detailed the fair market value of airing four tobacco
education spots a day versus eight over a ten-year period. The chart illustrated the current value of
airtime charged to underwriters over a ten-year period at $2,298,000 compared
to $5,922,000 if the announcements were increased to eight per day, unadjusted
for population or inflation over the ten-year period. Additionally, Mr. Axtell indicated that currently there were only
three spots available in the total inventory.
In response to a question from the Chairman
concerning a loss of revenue, Mr. Axtell advised that currently the station had
available time during daytime children’s programming. However, the station was
sold out during prime time programming on a number of days, which meant they
would be unable to offer those spots to corporate underwriters ultimately
resulting in a loss of cash to the station for operating expenses.
The Chairman questioned whether each station
could certify that they had met the requirement of at least airing
announcements four times each day.
Representatives of both stations advised they
could certify that the announcements were aired four times each day.
The Chairman asked Brenda Erdoes, Legislative
Counsel, to address the Committee’s authority in view of the interpretation by
representatives of KNPB and KLVX to run the announcements four times a day.
After a review of the legislative history
concerning the legislation, it was Ms. Erdoes’ opinion there was enough
ambiguity to reach a conclusion that four announcements per station was the
intended result of the language.
The Chairman asked Mr. Axtell to address the
issue concerning using the land donation as a part of the match.
Mr. Axtell advised that if it was determined
that the land donation did not meet the match requirement, KLVX would not
contest the Committee’s decision and would reduce their request for funding to
a lower amount. Mr. Axtell indicated
the station had a number of other grants pending and would have to return to
the Committee for the remainder of the disbursement.
In response to a question from the Chairman
concerning use of the land, Mr. Axtell explained the land would be used for the
digital television building and would not be directly available for the digital
transformation.
Ms. Erdoes advised that the language in the
legislation provided that the appropriation “could be dispersed only at a ratio
of $1 for every $3 of matching money.” It was Ms. Erdoes’ opinion that the
match had to be in terms of money available for the digital change-over rather
than land. It was Ms. Erdoes’
suggestion that only the money match be considered and not the value of the
land.
In response to a question from the Chairman
concerning the disregard of the land as part of the match, Mr. Axtell advised
the land was valued at $3,365,000 leaving $2,686,121 in cash from federal and
private sources. In response to an additional question from the Chairman, Mr.
Axtell expressed his understanding that additional funds would have to be
raised to attain the full disbursement from the state.
In response to a question from Senator Neal
concerning the disbursement of funds, Mr. Craigie explained that the
stations could request a disbursement at any time with whatever amount of cash
they had up to the $ 3 million. Mr.
Craigie further explained that KNPB Channel 5 had taken a partial distribution based
on the system. Mr. Craigie pointed out
that KLVX had raised $2,686,121 of match money, almost the full $3 million.
The Chairman advised that based on the Legal
Counsel’s opinion, the Committee could authorize distribution of the additional
$388,204 to KNPB Channel 5 and $895,373 to KLVX Channel 10.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO AUTHORIZE DISTRIBUTION
OF THE ADDITIONAL $388,204 TO KNPB CHANNEL 5 AND $895,373 TO KLVX CHANNEL 10.
MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (Ms. Leslie abstained.)
*K. LEGISLATIVE
COUNSEL BUREAU – CAPITAL APARTMENTS - Approval for Expenditure (S.B. 199,
2001 Session).
Lorne
Malkiewich, Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau, identified himself for the
record. Handouts in reference to Item K
were distributed to the members of the Committee (Exhibit Q). In a brief background presentation, Mr.
Malkiewich stated that in previous meetings, the Legislative Counsel Bureau
(LCB) had received IFC approval to acquire the Capital Apartments and to
proceed with demotion of two of the buildings.
Mr. Malkiewich reported that demolition, along with asbestos abatement
had been accomplished and had come in under budget for a total cost of $35,460.
Mr.
Malkiewich was before the Committee to request approval of the second phase of
the Capital Apartments project to construct a warehouse. While the original plan called for a
60’ x 120’ square-foot warehouse; it was determined a 80’ x
120’square-foot warehouse would better serve the needs of the LCB and would
facilitate closure of an existing rented space being used as a warehouse. Mr. Malkiewich reported that the LCB was
paying $55,000 a year for off-site storage for space on Highway 50, and
increasing the size of the requested warehouse, the LCB would save $55,000 a
year.
In
response to a question from the Chairman, Mr. Malkiewich reported that the
lease for the warehouse on Highway 50 would expire on August 31, 2002, and if
approval for the construction of the warehouse was received, the facility could
be erected by the time the lease expired.
Additionally, Mr. Malkiewich discussed plans to move materials to the
new warehouse that were currently stored on the third floor of the Legislative
Building which would provide additional space for staff.
In
response to questions from the Chairman, Mr. Malkiewich explained that
renovation of the two apartment buildings still standing would be requested in
the third phase of the project which could be deferred in view of the request
to increase the size of the warehouse.
In response to a question from Ms.
Giunchigliani, Mr. Malkiewich advised that initially $355,000 had been budgeted
for the smaller warehouse and the cost for the increase in size was
approximately $50,000, which would be offset in the first year with closure of
the facility on Highway 50.
In response to a question from Mrs. de Braga
concerning the length of time the new warehouse would meet the needs of the
LCB, Mr. Malkiewich stated that construction of the new warehouse would enable
the LCB to close the facility being rented for $55,000 a year and that additional
space requirements would be incremental.
Mr. Malkiewich further advised that the long-term plan for the property
was to close the two streets and build a larger structure for staff, which he
indicated was at least ten years in the future. In the meantime, the amount saved on the rental would offset the
cost of the building. Mr. Malkiewich
noted that the space allowed the LCB use of the property in the short term
before plans were developed for a long-term use.
In response to Senator Rawson’s expression of
concern in reference to the appearance of the temporary building, Mr.
Malkiewich advised that although the warehouse was metal, it would be faced
with an exterior that would be similar to the exterior of the Sedway Office
Building. Mr. Malkiewich indicated that
the aesthetics of the neighborhood had already improved since the demolition of
the two structures, and with the buildings and grounds maintained by LCB staff,
the area was expected to look very nice in the future.
In response to a question from Senator Rawson
in reference to any zoning problems, Mr. Malkiewich advised that Carson
City officials rezoned the area to accommodate the warehouse during a major
rezoning effort in which they were engaged.
Additionally, Mr. Malkiewich advised that a committee on which he
and Mr. Comeaux served was working to improve the appearance of downtown Carson
City.
Mr. Hettrick recommended approval of the
project after noting that utilization of the warehouse for eight years at a
cost saving of $55,000 a year or a total of $440,000 would provide the
following benefits:
·
Fund the entire
project;
·
Provide for
clearly needed additional space;
·
Provide greater
efficiency by eliminating the need to send staff to an offsite warehouse; and,
·
Neighborhood
beautification.
Mr. Parks questioned whether the metal
structure could be disassembled and subsequently used in another location at a
future time.
In response, Mr. Malkiewich advised that a
metal building was decided upon since it was anticipated the site would be used
in the future for a permanent structure, and a metal building would be easier
to disassemble than one constructed of wood on a solid foundation.
In response to a question from Senator
Jacobsen, Mr. Malkiewich advised that the 34-unit apartment building had been
in extremely poor condition and very little had been salvageable.
SENATOR JACOBSEN MOVED APPROAL OF ITEM K.
MR. PARKS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
L. INFORMATIONAL
ITEMS – Reports on Letters of
Intent and various reports from agencies (Exhibit R).
The Chairman noted the Items 5, 6a,b,c, 10c,
13a, 14, 15, and 16 would be called for presentation: The Chairman excused all members of the audience who were in
attendance for informational items that had not been identified for
presentation.
Item 5. Division of Buildings and Grounds
Recommended Use of the National Guard Armory – Letter of Intent
Mike Meizel, Administrator, Division of
Buildings and Grounds, identified himself for the record and referred to a letter
dated January 18, 2002 (Exhibit S) in which facts concerning the Armory
site were listed as well as an intent to sell the property. Mr. Meizel advised that while the
Armory was in a good commercial area and the property had been growing in value
during the last few years, the buildings ranged in age from 28 to 40 years, and
their single‑purpose design made renovation neither cost effective nor
practical.
Mr. Meizel indicated that proceeds from the
proposed sale of the property would be used to develop modern square footage in
the Capitol Complex. Additionally, Mr.
Meizel advised that some of the National Guard personnel would be moving to
their new building in May 2002, while staff from the U.S. Property and Fiscal
Office would move in 2003. Emergency
Management personnel would continue to occupy space until facilities could
either be found or developed for them in another area.
In response to a question from Chairman
Raggio, Mr. Meizel confirmed that the property could not be sold as long as
Emergency Management personnel occupied the building. In reference to a question from the Chairman concerning the cost
of maintaining an 88,000 square-foot building of which the Divison of Emergency
Management would occupy only 6,700 square feet, Mr. Meizel explained that
while Emergency Management occupied 6,700 square feet of a 12,300 square foot
office building, the buildings all together totaled about 54,000 square feet.
Chairman Raggio pointed out that according to
information provided by staff “the cost of maintaining the complex would exceed
the revenue generated by the building by $153,842 per year unless additional
tenants were moved into the complex or some method was devised to keep the
expenditures for the facility at a reduced level.” Chairman Raggio questioned whether anything could be done to
reduce the costs of maintaining the unoccupied portion of the complex.
Mr. Meizel explained that the unoccupied
buildings would not be maintained, and only the 12,300 square foot office
building occupied by the Division of Emergency Management would be maintained.
In response to a question from the Chairman
concerning plans to move Emergency Management, Mr. Meizel indicated that
representatives of the SPWB and the Division of Buildings and Grounds were working
to determine Emergency Management’s needs.
A determination would be made based on those needs concerning whether
state space could be utilized at perhaps the Stewart facility or whether a CIP
would be required. Mr. Meizel
explained that placement of other agencies in the Armory was impracticable and
would frustrate a focus to sell the property unless transitional space was
needed and renovation of the old buildings was not a requirement. In the meantime, Mr. Meizel indicated that
focus would remain with Emergency Management so that when the Military and the
U.S. Property and Fiscal Office (USFPO) moved out in a year, the problem of
where to place Emergency Management would be resolved.
In response to a question from Senator Rawson
concerning the availability of space in the new Armory, Mr. Meizel indicated it
was his understanding that there was no space available in the new Armory for
Emergency Management.
In view of earlier testimony that indicated a
site at the Stewart facility was being considered for Emergency Management, it
was Senator Rawson’s opinion that Emergency Management should be located in
close proximity to the Governor’s office and not at the Stewart facility.
Mr. Meizel reiterated that representatives of
the SPWB and the Division of Buildings and Grounds were working to develop
plans in response to Emergency Management’s needs.
In response to a question from Senator
Jacobsen, Mr. Meizel indicated he was unaware of any conversations that had
taken place concerning use of the memorialized name of the Bode Howard building
which currently housed the Division of Emergency Management.
It was Mr. Hettrick’s observation that with a
year to wait until the buildings were vacated and became an issue, a suitable
location would be found for Emergency Management and the $153,842 in
maintenance costs could be avoided. Mr.
Hettrick expressed his agreement with selling the property and also his
appreciation for Senator Jacobsen’s concern in reference to losing a building
that memorialized Bode Howard. However,
Mr. Hettrick indicated the sale of the valuable site was entirely more
beneficial to the state than to either maintain or demolish the old buildings
so that the site could be used for other purposes.
Item 6. Department of
Information Technology Quarterly Status Reports.
Chairman Raggio noted that staff
had received backup material, (Exhibit T) from the Department of Information
Technology the day before the meeting, which did not provide the staff or the
Committee an opportunity to review the material. The Chairman indicated his intent to defer the reports until the
following meeting of the Committee.
Terry Savage, Director, Department of
Information Technology, identified himself for the record and introduced Brian
Spencer, Administrative Services Office, and Shelly Person, Chief of
Administration. Mr. Savage requested
the opportunity to provide a brief overview for each of the following items:
·
Item 6a-
Annual Cost Allocation Plan Review for Fiscal Year 2001 Costs – Mr. Savage reported that overall
collections were slightly over 2 percent different than expenditures. In terms of current operations for the
second quarter of Fiscal Year 2002, Mr. Savage reported the difference was
somewhat higher and within individual accounts, some of the variances were
reasonably substantial. In each case,
Mr. Savage indicated the cause had been identified and corrective action
proposed;
·
Item 6b –
Quarterly Status Report on Billing System, Q2 Fiscal Year 2002
Mr. Savage advised that the report on the
billing system included the Department’s forecasting process, rate model
development, collection of information on usage and billing to customers. Mr. Savage reported that year-old issues
that characterized bills as “usually late, incomprehensible and frequently
wrong” had been addressed; and,
·
Item 6c –
Decentralization Quarterly Status Report, Q2 Fiscal Year 2002
Mr. Savage reported that the decentralization
plan was part of a larger issue concerning the most efficient way to provide
information technology services, which involved decentralization, outsourcing
and re-centralization services.
Mr. Savage indicated that all of the services provided by the
Department were being reviewed and the results of that study would incorporated
within upcoming budget requests.
In reference to the Master Service Agreement
(MSA) tracking, Mr. Savage discussed the largest issue was related to technical
oversight. Mr. Savage explained that
programming staff, technically qualified to provide oversight, would be moved from
their current location to provide the required assistance and indicated their
work would be billable.
Mr. Savage agreed with the Chairman’s request
that Department of Information Technology be placed on the agenda for the
following meeting of the IFC and to work with the Committee’s staff in an
effort to address their concerns in reference to the cost allocation issue.
Item 10. (c) Health Division Quarterly Status
Report on the Health Facilities Hospital Licensing
Philip Weyrick, Administrative Services
Officer, Health Division, identified himself for the record and provided an
update on Budget Account 3216, Health Facilities Hospital Licensing. Mr. Weyrick reported that licensure fees,
approved at the October 10, 2001, Board of Health meeting, were implemented,
and for the most part collected.
However, the $1.6 million in licensure revenue collected year-to-date
was approximately $400,000 less than the $2 million projected in the Governor’s
budget.
In response to questions from Chairman Raggio
concerning management of the revenue shortfall and performance, Mr. Weyrick
indicated that in an effort to reduce expenses, 19 currently vacant positions
in the Bureau of Licensure and Certification would remain vacant. Mr. Weyrick
also advised that a backlog in annual inspections and complaint investigations
had accumulated.
In response to questions from the Chairman
concerning the effect of closing the Reno office, and the Division’s mission,
Mr. Weyrick advised that a savings of about $50,000 a year would be realized
from closure of the Reno office. Mr.
Weyrick further advised that in spite of the revenue shortfall, the Health
Division’s mission was being fulfilled. Mr. Weyrick explained the Division had
arranged to have four state licensure employees, who normally worked out of the
Reno office, to work at home. The
employees who spent much of their time in the field conducting surveys in the
Reno area had been set up with computer facilities in their homes.
In response to questions from the Chairman concerning
the revenue shortfall, Mr. Weyrick, pointed out that the Bureau of Licensure
and Certification had not increased fees since 1997; and the current fee
structure did not support the additional staff hired to cover the workload and
salary increases.
In response to additional questions from the
Chairman concerning how the Bureau’s performance was being affected by the
shortfall, Mr. Weyrick, advised there were 95 residential facilities for group
homes that had not been inspected which was an annual requirement. Additionally, Mr. Weyrick indicated that
approximately 836 Priority 1 and 2 complaints were registered with the Bureau
of Licensure and Certification during the current year and that 165 of the
Priority 2 complaints were not investigated within the ten-day time
period. However, Mr. Weyrick, explained
that all imminent-danger complaints were investigated within 24 hours as
required.
Chairman Raggio expressed the Committee’s
concern that the Bureau was not able to fulfill its mission and directed
representatives of the Health Division to be “completely open” and to work with
staff to provide the Committee with ongoing revenue and backlog reports.
Item 13. Department of Public Safety,
Division of Emergency Management – Emergency Assistance Account – Letter Dated
December 20, 2001, regarding November 26, 2001 IFC Meeting.
Frank Siracusa, Chief, Division of Emergency
Management, identified himself for the record and introduced Kamala Carmazzi,
Deputy Chief, Division of Emergency Management. Mr. Siracusa extended his apologies to the members of the
Committee for his absence during the November 26, 2001, IFC meeting. Mr. Siracusa explained that the Division of
Emergency Management hosted the Governor’s Conference on School Safety on the
same day.
Ms. Giunchigliani asked the Division’s
representatives to comment on the criterion used to determine whether the
events that generated expenses from the Emergency Assistance Account were
natural, technological or man-made emergencies or disasters as required by NRS
414.135(3).
Mr. Siracusa reported that staff reviewed
each individual situation within the criterion of the statute to determine
whether life or property or potential loss of life or property would be
affected.
Ms. Giunchigliani referred to expenditures
related to transportation expenses for staff to attend a statewide energy
summit and asked Ms. Erdoes, Legislative Counsel, to comment on expenditures
generated by the Emergency Assistance Account.
Ms. Erdoes advised that NRS 414.135(3) required
that the expenses be incurred during a natural, technological or man-made
emergency, and the transportation expenses questioned by Ms. Giunchigliani
appeared to be preparedness-related and not “contemplated” by the statute.
Ms. Giunchigliani pointed out that, under
statute, emergency dollars should not be used for administrative costs, and
transportation expenses appeared to be an administrative expense and in
violation of the law.
Mr. Siracusa indicated that Division staff
had interpreted Y2K as a potential threat or occurrence of a disaster.
Ms. Giunchigliani clarified the
transportation expenses under discussion related to a statewide energy summit
in Las Vegas, and while the dollar amount was minor, the issue was that the
expense was not in compliance with the statute. Ms. Giunchigliani advised that the Committee required some
assurance that funding for emergency management was available for emergency
management expenses and not administrative costs.
Mr. Siracusa agreed, however, reiterated his
interpretation that the statute covered a potential threat, or occurrence of a
disaster, or emergency.
Ms. Giunchigliani pointed out that
Legislative Counsel had provided an interpretation that funds generated from
the Emergency Assistance Account must be utilized during an actual event and
not in preparedness.
Chairman Raggio reinforced the need to make
certain that the criterion provided by the statute were followed for any
expenditure from supplemental emergency assistance.
Kamala Carmazzi, Deputy Chief, Emergency
Management, identified herself for the record and in an effort to assist the
Division in making the proper determinations, requested clarification, from
Legislative Counsel, on the definition of a disaster as defined under statute, which referred to a threatened occurrence versus
one that was actually in motion.
Speaker Perkins who raised questions during
the previous IFC meeting concerning expenditures from the Emergency Assistance
Account had an opportunity to speak with Mr. Siracusa in which a number of
his concerns had been addressed.
Speaker Perkins expressed his appreciation to Mr. Siracusa and asked
that Division representatives work with staff in an effort gain a mutual
understanding of expenses that could be covered by statute.
Item 14. (c) – Department of Conservation,
Division of Forestry; Status of Fire Billings/Reimbursements.
Steve Robinson, Administrator, Division of
Forestry, identified himself for the record.
The Committee was provided a status report that outlined Division of
Forestry billings and repayment of a previous contingency fund allocation (Exhibit
I). Mr. Robinson projected that the
Division of Forestry, after billings to the federal government, could be in a
position to return $1.5 million of the $2 million Contingency Fund allocation
provided to the Division in 2001. Mr.
Robinson informed the Committee that 650,000 acres in Nevada burned during the
previous year, similar to the number of acres that burned in the year before
that and more acres than in any other western state. During the past three years, Mr. Robinson reported that 3
million acres burned statewide.
In response to a question from the Chairman
concerning reclamation of the 3 million acres, Mr. Robinson advised that the
Division of Forestry had worked extensively with the Bureau of Land Management
and reseeded approximately 1 million acres within the last 24 months. While a lack of precipitation had prevented
much of the seed from germinating, Mr. Robinson indicated that with enough
water some of the seed could still grow.
Mr. Robinson reported that the Division of Forestry would enter
into an agreement with the Bureau of Land Management and the State Seed Bank to
supply seed to the Bureau. It was also
anticipated that the Division would assist some Nevada entrepreneurs in growing
seed for the federal government.
Item 15. Nevada Veterans’
Nursing Home – Quarterly Report on the Nevada Veterans’ Nursing Home – Letter
of Intent.
Charles W. Fulkerson, Executive
Director, Office of Veterans’ Services, identified himself for the record and
introduced, Jon Sias, Director, Nevada Veterans’ Nursing Home. In reference to an earlier question
concerning improvements at the Fernley Cemetery, Mr. Fulkerson advised
there was a plan awaiting approval in Washington, D.C. for $3 million
worth of improvements at the Fernley Cemetery.
Mr. Fulkerson referred to the Nevada
Veterans’ Nursing Home Quarterly Report (Exhibit U), which had been
distributed to the members of the Committee and would be reviewed by
Mr. Sias.
Jon Sias, Director, Nevada Veterans’ Nursing
Home, reported that many positive events had occurred since the November
report. As reported earlier by Mr.
O’Brien, the SPWB expected to issue a Certificate of Occupancy for the
Veterans’ Home on March 15 and the contractor projected a final project
clean-up on March 24. Mr. Sias
anticipated a move-in date of March 25 and admittance of five residents on
June 10.
Mr. Sias informed the Committee that the
California Department of Veterans Affairs had been contacted in an effort to
arrange a visit from an administrator of a new California skilled nursing home
that had just been through the license and certification process. An invitation was extended to the administrator
of the home to work with staff from the Nevada Veterans’ Nursing Home to assess
Nevada’s preparedness for the licensure, certification and Veterans
Administration recognition process.
Additionally, Mr. Sias pointed out that only a very small portion of the
Fiscal Year 2002 budget had been used.
In response to a question from Senator
Mathews concerning staffing, Mr. Sias reported a full staffing complement
would be brought on incrementally and as they could be attracted. The nursing shortage was discussed, and Mr.
Sias indicated that if the nursing shortage affected the Nevada Veterans’
Nursing Home, the number of residents that could be admitted would be dependent
on staffing availability. However, if
staffing problems did not occur, approximately four residents per day would be
admitted and staff would be increased approximately every 30 to 35 days.
Item 16. Public Employees’
Benefits Program.
Chairman Raggio advised the
members of the Committee that issues concerning the Public Employees’ Benefits
Program would be addressed in greater depth during the Interim Retirement
Committee meeting scheduled on February 6, 2002.
Mr. P. Forrest Thorne, Executive
Officer, Public Employees’ Benefits Program, referred to the information
reflected in the reports (Exhibit V) on Budgeted Versus Actual Costs by Budget
Category and Fund Balance and Reserve Levels.
In reference to the Fund Balance and Reserve Levels, Mr. Thorne reported
that the fund balance as of December 31, 2001, was $13.8 million compared to a
work program amount of $19.6 million. Mr.
Thorne attributed the difference to higher-than-anticipated claim payments
during October through December, the last quarter of the year. Dollar amounts were illustrated in charts (Exhibit
V) that showed both the dollar amounts and patterns over the last four
years. Mr. Thorne pointed out that
another contributing factor to the difference was the lag in reimbursement from
the Retired Employee Group Insurance Budget Account 1369. In an effort “to mitigate the impact of the
lag,” Mr. Thorne indicated procedures would be implemented to transfer the
funds to Budget Account 1338 (Self-Insurance) as a flat dollar assessment
in accordance with the legislatively approved budget.
Mr. Thorne advised that incurred but not
reported reserves (IBNR) as of June 30, 2001, totaled $20 million ($18.7
million for claims of IBNR and $1.3 million for administrative IBNR). Mr. Thorne pointed out that at the time the
report was completed, the Public Employees Benefits Program’s (PEBP) consultant
actuary (Segal) had indicated no significant reduction in the reserve. Mr. Thorne pointed out the second page of
the report (Exhibit V), illustrated that the third‑party
administrator, UICI, had substantially reduced claims inventory during the
final quarter – October through December, and the reduction “may have moved
IBNR amounts into paid amounts.” Mr.
Thorne advised that PEBP would continue to analyze and adjust the IBNR
accordingly. Mr. Thorne further advised
that he received the quarterly financial operations report from Segal on
February 5, 2002, and that report would be presented to the PEBP Board on
February 7, 2002. Mr. Thorne advised
that the report from Segal, based on further analysis, recommended that the
IBNR be reduced to $14.4 million with the same $1.3 million for
administrative IBNR.
Mr. Thorne also pointed out that claims
inventory for December 31 compared to the inventory as of June 30, 2001
illustrated a significant reduction in total claims inventory from 36,254 to
25,849.
In reference to the Incurred versus Paid
Claims Lag comparing December 2001 to June 2001, Mr. Thorne pointed out a
substantial increase in the amount paid as well as significant increases in
dollars in the older claims amounts.
Mr. Thorne advised that future
reports would break down the amounts that were paid for medical claims versus
prescription drug costs. Mr. Thorne
explained that there was some added volatility in the month‑to‑month
claim payouts attributed to drug costs being paid on a
two-week basis. Those drug costs were now adjusted to being
paid on a twice-a-month basis, which Mr. Thorne anticipated would illustrate a
better view of the trend through the year.
As requested by the Chairman,
Mr. Thorne agreed that the PEBP would provide a quarterly report on claims and
budget data.
In reference to questions from
Mr. Parks concerning the claims inventory levels, Mr. Thorne, explained that
the dollar value of the claims inventory on hand was estimated. It was
Mr. Thorne’s opinion that the current claim levels in the 23,000 to 25,000
range could be considered more the norm.
M. PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
There was no public testimony.
There was no further business before the committee. Chairman Raggio adjourned the meeting at 4:33 p.m.
_ ________________________________________
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
Interim Finance Committee
__________________________________
Brenda Erdoes, Legislative Counsel
Legislative Counsel Bureau, and
Acting Secretary, Interim Finance Committee