MINUTES OF THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS Sixty-eighth Session January 25, 1995 The Committee on Ways and Means was called to order at 7:47 a.m., on Wednesday, January 25, 1995, Chairman Marvel presiding, in Room 352 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Morse Arberry, Jr., Chairman Mr. John W. Marvel, Chairman Mrs. Jan Evans, Vice Chairman Ms. Sandra Tiffany, Vice Chairman Mr. Dennis L. Allard Mrs. Maureen E. Brower Mrs. Vonne Chowning Mr. Jack D. Close Mr. Joseph E. Dini, Jr. Mr. Thomas A. Fettic Ms. Chris Giunchigliani Mr. Lynn Hettrick Mr. Bob Price Mr. Larry L. Spitler COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst Gary Ghiggeri, Deputy Fiscal Analyst OVERVIEW OF AUDIT DIVISION ACTIVITIES Mr. Gary Crews, Legislative Auditor, introduced Mr. Paul Townsend, Principal Legislative Auditor. He explained Mr. Townsend had been instrumental in some of the audits which had been completed over the past two years. Mr. Crews said he appreciated the committee providing him the time to present a brief overview of the Audit Division. He noted the Division's primary mission was to improve accountability over public funds and the operation of state government. He explained the Audit Division prepared a plan every two years outlining the agencies to be audited for submittal to the Legislation for approval. Once an audit is completed, the Division presents it to the Audit Subcommittee of the Legislative Commission at a public meeting. Eight to nine months thereafter the agencies are invited back for a hearing to review what audit recommendations have been implemented. Mr. Crews stated several years ago the Legislative Commission had become concerned that many state agencies were not appropriately addressing audit recommendations and taking corrective action. Consequently, the Commission suggested the money committees form audit subcommittees to follow up on audits during budget hearings. Mr. Crews reported over the past biennium the Audit Division had issued audit reports containing over $75 million of audit findings, including identification of ways to eliminate millions of dollars of waste or increase revenue collections. The Division has also identified millions of dollars more in potential savings to Nevada citizens. He distributed to members of the committee copies of a binder entitled Legislative Counsel Bureau Audit Division Audit Report Summaries which summarized the results of the audits conducted over the past two years (a copy of which is on file in the reference library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau). Mr. Crews addressed the more significant issues which had arisen over the biennium as well as some of the budget accounts to be heard by the committee in the coming week. He referred to page 15 of the Audit Report Summaries, State Mail Room. He indicated this audit had identified the State Mail Room had failed to take maximum postage discounts available through new technology and working with the U.S. Post Office. Additionally, the State Mail Room does not require state agencies to prepare outgoing mail on machine-readable format, an essential element for reducing postage costs. The Audit Division estimated the state could save approximately $574,000 over the next biennium if state mail operations were consolidated and automated and if inter-departmental mail was transported using state employees and commercial carriers rather than relying exclusively on private vendors. Mr. Crews then directed the committee's attention to page 32, Department of Taxation. He explained this audit report had recently been released to the public. In the report the Audit Division indicated non-compliance with Nevada's business tax law was at significant levels due to the Department of Taxation's lack of effective enforcement measures. Current methods do not ensure businesses subject to the tax are identified or pay the proper amount. As a result, approximately 10 percent of businesses required to pay the tax in 1993 failed to do so. Approximately one in three of the businesses which did pay paid less than the amount required by law. Mr. Crews explained this information was compiled from many sources, including the records of the Department of Taxation--which would have allowed for the detection of non-compliance through computer matching. He noted the Department of Taxation had not utilized the computer matching technique, but instead relied on audits to identify business tax violations. The Audit Division estimated business tax collections could be increased by $3.6 million during the next biennium if improved enforcement methods, such as computer matching, are used. Ms. Giunchigliani inquired how numbers of employees were determined concerning the payment of the business tax. Mr. Crews explained businesses who were not paying could be identified by matching Taxation records with the records of the Employment Security Department. The match could provide approximate numbers of employees. Mr. Crews noted the Audit Division was concerned that as the automation systems of the two departments became more differentiated it would become more difficult to match records. Ms. Tiffany questioned whether it was unusual for collections to be off when a new tax was imposed. Mr. Crews responded whenever a new program was implemented there would be problems to work out. He pointed out while the Department of Taxation's initial efforts to identify businesses had been good, it had not continued that level of effort as new problems arose. Mr. Crews then referred to page 60 of the audit summary, Housing Division. He noted concerns related to the agency's performance indicators and goals and objectives. The Audit Division found the Housing Division's Single Family Affordable Housing Program experienced a significant decline in participation, beginning in 1992. The number of families financing homes through the program dropped from 1,250 in 1991 to 99 in 1993. Mr. Crews noted while falling interest rates and other economic conditions caused much of this decline, some Housing Division policies may have also contributed to low program participation. The Audit Division identified opportunities to increase participation by changing existing program policies or establishing new policies. A key finding was that while six states surveyed purchased an average of 2,721 mortgages in 1992 and 1993, Nevada purchased only 376. Wyoming and Idaho--states with smaller populations than Nevada--purchased an average of nearly nine times the number of mortgages purchased by Nevada during 1992 and 1993. Mr. Crews referred to page 78 of the audit summary, Child Welfare Services. The Audit Division found the agency could increase Title IV-E funding to offset General Fund appropriations by approximately $300,000 over the biennium through more aggressive case management. An additional $290,000 in federal Title IV-E funding could be generated if retroactive Title IV-E eligibility adjustments had been taken. He noted this committee had taken action on these findings and reduced funding in the current budget. He suggested the committee follow through by determining how the agency was doing now at obtaining Title IV-E funding. Mr. Crews stated the Employment Security Division audit was also important. The Audit Division found the Employment Security Division had failed to comply with depository laws and regulations resulting in lost interest and unnecessary bank service charges totaling nearly $800,000. Additionally, the Employment Security Division did not follow statutory requirements and as a result it erroneously transferred $1.1 million of state funds to the Federal Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund. The Audit Division recommended conversion of weekly payments to claimants to biweekly payments in order to save approximately $130,000 per year. Ms. Giunchigliani questioned whether the audit had taken staffing shortages resulting from state government reorganization into consideration. Mr. Crews replied that was not a consideration, but noted as part of the Department of Taxation audit the Audit Division had indicated in Fiscal Year 1994 collections from sales tax audits declined by $7 million from the previous year. This drop occurred during the period when the audit functions of the State Industrial Insurance System and the Employment Security Division were consolidated into the Department of Taxation. The Audit Division recommended the consolidated audit function of the Department of Taxation and its effect on sales tax collection, State Industrial Insurance System premiums, and Employment Security Division contributions be considered for further review. Mr. Crews referred to page 85 of the audit summary, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety. The Audit Division identified the Registration Division of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety lacked policies and procedures to ensure vehicle privilege taxes are properly assessed. As a result, the Department misapplied statutory tax formulas, allowed a computer error to go undetected, and established a policy which inappropriately evaluated the tax on many new vehicles. Due to these problems, the Department incorrectly assessed millions of dollars in privilege taxes over the past several years. Between 1987 and 1991 the Department charged incorrect privilege taxes on nearly every vehicle less than nine years old. The Audit Division estimated net underpayments during that period to be in excess of $9 million. Mr. Crews then referred to the audit report summary for the State Printing and Micrographics Division at page 12. The Audit Division found the Division had not utilized information available from its automated cost accounting system to set rates and monitor production efficiency. As a result, billing rates were not appropriate or equitable and state agencies did not always receive cost-effective or timely printing services. The Print Shop lost over $200,000 in 1993 because rates charged often did not recover the costs of doing the work. Continued losses could force the Division to seek funding from other sources, such as the General Fund, to remain in business. Due to mounting losses, the Division has not adequately funded its equipment replacement account in recent years, and the shortage of funds in this account will make it difficult to replace aging equipment. Mr. Hettrick asked what audits were currently in progress. He indicated he was interested in knowing the scheduling of the Forestry Division audit. Mr. Crews indicated the next audit to be completed would be the audit of the Supreme Court. The Forestry Division audit would be completed in the near future. Chairman Marvel noted the findings of past Forestry Division audits might still be relevant. Mr. Crews moved on to the State Motor Pool Division audit report at page 18. The Audit Division found the Motor Pool had not developed administrative controls to ensure economical utilization of Motor Pool vehicles. Controls are not in place for monitoring vehicle use, establishing vehicle rental rates, and ensuring vehicles are replaced at the proper time. The Motor Pool could save as much as $612,500 by monitoring vehicle use and revising its rental rate structure. Additional cost savings could be realized by calculating the optimal replacement period for Motor Pool vehicles. The Audit Division found that, as of February 1992, 318 state agency and Motor Pool vehicles (excluding Highway Patrol vehicles) had been authorized for home storage. It was estimated these vehicles are used to commute 1.1 million miles annually at a cost of $300,000. Cost savings could be realized by improving the state's policies for home storage of state vehicles. Chairman Marvel noted there had been a change in administrators at the State Motor Pool. Mr. Crews suggested part of the problem could be the way in which individual agencies enforce regulations. Mr. Crews emphasized that he had reported on only a sample of audits which had been conducted over the past two years. Chairman Marvel recommended to committee members that they utilize the audit reports in congruence with the information to be learned at budget hearings. Ms. Giunchigliani asked if any proposed legislation would be forthcoming regarding banking services. Mr. Crews indicated a bill draft request had been submitted. Mr. Price asked what the Audit Division's philosophy regarding home storage of state vehicles was. Mr. Crews responded emergency responses of off-duty employees had been used to justify much of the home storage of vehicles. The Audit Division had not verified the existence of that justification. Mr. Stevens indicated the Fiscal Division had asked each agency to provide information regarding which employees--other than Highway Patrol troopers--took vehicles home. That information was available for the committee's use. Chairman Marvel noted the Audit Division performed a very valuable service to the committee. Ms. Tiffany inquired whether the Audit Division had met with the Budget Division regarding establishing internal controls for state agencies. Mr. Crews stated there had been some contact between the Divisions to ensure there were no duplications in scheduling. He noted the Audit Division's biennial report listed the agencies where problems with internal controls had been discovered. He could not say whether the Budget Division had reviewed that report. Chairman Marvel then welcomed Mr. Ron Steele, formerly of the Audit Division, and now serving as a Program Analyst for the Fiscal Analysis Division. CONTROLLER'S OFFICE - PAGE 73 Mr. Ken West, Chief Deputy Controller, indicated the Controller had been delayed, therefore, he would begin the budget presentation on the Controller's behalf. Mr. West reported one of the goals and objectives of the Controller's Office was to comply with the Cash Management Improvement Act. He explained that act had been developed over many years in consultation with other states and the federal government. The act dealt with the timing of receipt and disbursements of federal grant funds in order to ensure neither the federal government nor the state would lose an opportunity to invest monies prematurely. Mr. West stated the interest calculations had recently been completed. He noted interest was a measure of how well the state was managing draw downs from the federal government and the timely expenditure of funds. He stated the results of the interest calculations were mixed. Some agencies, such as the Department of Education, had done very well in drawing down their federal grant monies. He stated the Welfare Division had done well in the Medicaid program. Some agencies were lax in drawing down their federal money in a timely manner. The Controller's Office was working to correct this problem. Mr. West explained the Controller's Office had completed an accounting system to track each federal grant as though it was a separate bank account. He noted the number of programs was expected to increase each year. Chairman Marvel noted this information could have been included in the performance indicators in the Executive Budget. He pointed out the performance indicators were statutorily mandated. Mr. Darrell Daines, State Controller, apologized for arriving at the hearing late. He stated the 67th Session of the Nevada Legislature passed legislation offering constitutional officers the same privileges enjoyed by the Legislature and the Supreme Court. One bill, which was signed by the Governor, allowed constitutional officers to submit requests for legislation directly to the Legislature rather than to and through the Governor's Budget Division. The second bill (S.B. 52 of the 67th Session of the Legislature) allowed the constitutional officers to submit their budgets directly to the Legislature, with a copy to the Budget Division and the Governor. The Governor vetoed the second bill. The constitutional officers were now asking the Legislature to override that veto. Mr. Daines explained if the vetoed bill was not currently in limbo, the constitutional officers' budgets would be considerably different. The budget requests would not be for more money but would better meet the needs of the elected officials. Mr. Daines noted for the record the budget he was presenting today had been rearranged by the Budget Division. Some of the requests made by the Controller's Office had been moved out of the budget and placed into a category referred to by the Budget Division as the one-shot budget. Other requests had disappeared from the budget altogether and the Controller was left with no opportunity to present them to the Legislature, except at this hearing. Mr. Daines also noted in 1992 and 1993 the state experienced fiscal difficulties. At that time the Governor requested state agencies to reduce spending and leave vacant positions unfilled. While the Governor did not make the same request of the constitutional officers, the constitutional officers volunteered to live by the same reduction. Now, several items in the Controller's Office budget have been reduced by the amounts not spent during 1992 and 1993 when the office voluntarily held back on expenditures. Mr. Daines indicated he would ask the Legislature to replace those monies. Mr. Daines reported the Controller's Office budget was labor-intensive. Over 76 percent of the budget was devoted to salaries, 5 percent was for forms and checks which were furnished to other state agencies. The remaining operational expenses were comprised of rent, insurance, and maintenance costs. Mr. West continued his report on goals and objectives. He stated the Controller's Office had looked at the possibility of issuing a summary report for taxpayers but it was unsure of the demand for the report and timing of the publication coincided with the election. Therefore, the report had not been issued. The Controller's Office had planned to improve its accounting system but had not received funding to replace software. He pointed out the reorganization of the Executive Branch of state government had created an increased workload for the Controller's Office since all of its reports and cost-accounting was keyed to organizational structure which had to be redone. Mr. Daines reported since 1983, with the exception of two years in which upgraded computer equipment had been purchased, the Controller's Office budget had remained flat. On a constant dollar basis the operating costs had remained the same while the office was doing approximately 60 percent more work. Mr. West explained the base budget was essentially the same as the 1994 budget. He noted the Governor had included approximately $33,000 of vacancy savings in the 1994 budget. He explained in 1993 the Controller's Office had left two positions vacant due to the state's fiscal difficulties. One of those positions was filled in 1994. Two retirements also occurred in 1994. He explained this situation was unusual, and the Controller's Office had no turnover in the previous two years. The Controller was requesting that the $33,000 vacancy savings be returned to the budget. Mr. West reported the Controller's Office annualized the cost of forms. In fiscal year 1994 orders for forms were delayed and actual expenditures were, therefore, approximately $6,000 less than they should have been. He noted the Budget Division had added that $6,000 back to the maintenance portion of the budget. Mr. West stated the maintenance portion of the budget included allowances for inflation. He pointed out the Governor's recommendation included no inflationary costs for printing expenses. He explained a substantial portion of the budget was to cover the cost of forms and printing. Chairman Marvel asked if the Budget Division had given consideration to adjustments in the Printing Division's rate base when preparing the Executive Budget. Mr. Don Hataway, Chief Assistant Budget Administrator, responded rate changes had occurred after the Executive Budget had been prepared. Chairman Marvel noted adjustments might have to be made in the budget. Mr. John P. Comeaux, Budget Director, said he had reviewed the effect of the Print Shop's change in billing rates in total and decided generally the impact was not significant enough to include an overall inflationary item in the Executive Budget. He added he had not attempted to determine which agencies might be heavily impacted and certain budget accounts might have to be adjusted. Mr. Daines noted the Controller's Office was one of the agencies which would be heavily impacted by printing rates. Chairman Marvel expressed certainty the Budget Division would make an allowance in the budget if significant change was required. Mr. West said the Print Shop had advised him 1995 rates would increase 12 percent over 1994 rates, 1996 rates would increase 15 percent over 1994 rates, and 1997 rates would increase 18 percent over 1994 rates. A review of current invoices from the Print Shop reflected an increase of 13 percent over 1994. Chairman Marvel asked Mr. West to translate those figures into dollar amounts. Mr. West reported the dollar amounts would be $9,300 for Fiscal Year 1996 and $11,100 for Fiscal Year 1997. Mr. West also noted the inflationary costs associated with hardware and software maintenance contracts were not included in the maintenance budget. The Controller's Office was requesting $3,700 be placed back in the budget in the first year of the biennium and $6,000 in the second year to cover those costs. Mr. West then referred to the enhancement portion of the budget. He indicated he had been informed by the Budget Division that certain enhancement items had been taken out of the budget account and transferred to one-shot appropriations. Chairman Marvel asked Mr. West to identify those items. Mr. West indicated the agency had requested $38,238 for equipment and software. Mr. Hataway stated that item was located at page A31 of the Executive Budget. Mr. West stated the Governor's recommendation did not include $9,000 for the purchase of three new personal computers, which the agency had requested. Mr. Daines said he was proposing to tie the three new personal computers into the Treasurer's Office local area network in order to extend the useful life of the computers by approximately three to five years. Mr. West reported the agency's enhancement requests included funding for an additional Accountant III position. The position would assist with federal and tax law compliance and compliance with a new Securities and Exchange Commission program which was scheduled to go into effect July 1, 1995. The Governor recommended delaying hiring the position until the second quarter of Fiscal Year 1996. Mr. West stated the position was needed on July 1, 1995. Mr. West stated the enhancement budget also deleted one Computer Operator position since computer operation was now automated. Ms. Giunchigliani inquired whether the Controller's Office was involved in the integrated financial system implementation. Mr. West responded affirmatively. Ms. Giunchigliani asked what the Controller's position was regarding the transfer of the payroll function from the Department of Personnel to the Controller's Office. Mr. Daines stated that some time prior to 1983 the Legislature had transferred the funding to operate the payroll system from the Controller's Office to the Department of Personnel. He noted, however, the constitutional responsibility for the payroll remained with the Controller. He suggested administrative control of the payroll system should be returned to the Controller, and noted he had requested that action in the budget. That request had been removed from the budget by the Budget Division. Mr. Hataway stated the Controller was confusing the agency request and the Governor's recommendation columns in the budget. He said the Controller's request was reflected in enhancement Item E-999. None of the agency request had been removed from the Executive Budget, but it was not included in the Governor's recommendation. Ms. Giunchigliani stated the committee would investigate the statutory and constitutional authorities governing responsibility for the payroll system. She noted legislation would be proposed to consolidate the Treasurer's Office and the Controller's Office. Mr. Daines noted this was a constitutional issue which could not occur for several years. Mrs. Evans asked how many Accountant III positions were currently included in the budget. Mr. Daines said there were currently seven Accountant IIIs. Mrs. Evans asked how many Chief Accountant positions were in the budget. Mr. Daines said two Chief Accountant positions were in the budget. Mrs. Evans inquired about the function of the Account Technician position. Mr. West said he was not aware of an Account Technician position in the budget. Mrs. Evans asked what the function of the Assistant Controller was. Mr. West replied the Assistant Controller assisted him in monitoring the Cash Management Improvement Act and worked with agencies to identify federal grant programs. The Assistant Controller also reconciled the cash with the bank account on a monthly basis. Mrs. Evans requested a job description for the Assistant Controller position. Mr. West stated there was no job description for the position since it was unclassified. Mr. Daines remarked the position had originally been a "gofer" position and served whatever function the Controller required. The position was now filled by an accountant who performed accounting functions as well as administrative functions in support of the Chief Deputy Controller. Mr. Daines said he would write a job description for the position. Mrs. Evans said she had received information that the position still largely served a "gofer" function. Mrs. Evans inquired about the request for overtime. She asked if the Documentation Librarian was cross-trained. Mr. West stated the Documentation Librarian was being cross-trained as a Computer Operator to provide fill-in support in the event the Computer Operator was ill. He explained it was less costly to pay overtime than to fill an additional position. Mrs. Evans stated the most serious criticism of the agency which she had heard was the lack of cross-training and uneven workloads. She said she was unconvinced an additional Accountant III position was justified. Mr. Allard asked if cross-training was included in the training expense category of the base budget. Mr. Daines explained the Controller's Office was divided into four sections. The accounting section served a strictly accounting function. The agency services section dealt with the state agencies. The data processing section maintained equipment and did the computer programming. He said Mr. West had previously explained the duties of the administrative section. Mr. West reported most of the training money in the budget was used for continuing education of accounting and programming staff. Training expenses would not be incurred for cross-training within the office. Chairman Marvel asked Mr. West to continue with his budget presentation. Mr. West again noted the Controller was asking that the payroll system be returned to his office. Mr. Hataway noted a quirk in the budget format made it appear the Controller's staff would total 35 positions. In fact, the total positions would be only 34. If the Accountant III position was approved, the Data Processing Technician position would be eliminated. The Data Processing Technician position would remain if the Accountant III position was not approved. NEVADA COUNCIL ON THE ARTS - PAGE 455 Ms. Joan Kerschner, Director, Department of Museums, Library and Arts, introduced Ms. Susan Boskoff, Executive Director, and Ms. Cheryl Miglioretto, Grants Analyst. Ms. Boskoff testified every state and territory of the United States had an arts council. She noted the Utah Arts Council was the oldest in the nation. The Nevada State Council on the Arts was formed in 1967 with the mission to enrich the cultural life of the state through leadership that preserves, supports, strengthens, and makes accessible excellence in the arts for all Nevadans. The Council's goals were to enhance an environment in which artists' works were valued and supported; to encourage diverse organizations which produce, present, and promote excellence in the arts; and to increase access to all Nevadans to excellence and diversity in the arts. Ms. Boskoff distributed to the committee copies of the Nevada State Council on the Arts Annual Report for 1994 (a copy of which is on file in the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau). She noted the annual report listed all grants and services by county as well as a variety of statistics and a description of the programs. Ms. Boskoff explained the grants program was comprised of seven matching grant categories. The Arts in Education program placed artists in residencies ranging from one week to four months. Special project grants were awarded to teachers, schools, and organizations allowed teachers to attend art workshops for certification credits. The Folk Arts program operates a folk arts archive documenting traditional cultural, ethnic, tribal, family, occupational, religious, and regional artists as well as folk art apprenticeships to perpetuate traditional art forms by funding master artists to teach skills to advanced apprentices. It also conducts surveys and co-sponsors events such as the Las Vegas Folk Arts Festival and the Sierra Folk Arts Festival. Ms. Boskoff stated a new program, "Tumblewords: Writers Rolling Around the West," would utilize Nevada writers in communities which may not have experienced literary events in the past. The Community/Professional Development Services program provides assistance to arts organizations in all phases of development. She said a new design arts program had been developed to help educate, form, and support various design projects. The Council was also facilitating two public art projects. Ms. Boskoff explained the Council was involved in a campaign to identify, document, and protect all publicly accessible sculpture in the United States. She noted the Council operated the legislative exhibit on the second floor of the legislative building. The Council also published two newsletters and coordinated the Governor's arts awards. Ms. Boskoff stated in the spirit of reorganization the Council and staff had embarked on a process to evaluate and refine the agency's structure, programs, and delivery of services. Ms. Tiffany noted the measurement indicators in the budget appeared to indicate a reduction in number of users. Ms. Boskoff explained the figures listed in the measurement indicators did not reflect actual grants distributed. She explained she was currently evaluating the system used to project the measurement indicators and hoped to develop more accurate indicators over the next two years. Mr. Marvel asked if the Governor had recommended funding most of the agency's request. Ms. Boskoff responded the Governor's recommendation did cover most of what the agency requested. She expressed support for the Executive Budget. Chairman Marvel asked if the agency had moved from Reno to Carson City. Ms. Boskoff responded affirmatively. Chairman Marvel noted the agency had moved into the library building in Carson City and then moved out of the library building. He asked if there was money in the current budget to cover the moving costs. Ms. Miglioretto reported rent for the library space had been paid for a year and the unused portion was refunded to the Council. Chairman Marvel inquired whether the rent at the new location was higher than the rent at the library. Ms. Miglioretto stated the new rent was higher. She explained funding was located within the budget to cover the difference. Chairman Marvel questioned whether funding for rent expenses in the coming biennium would be adequate. Ms. Miglioretto reported rent would be $35,636 per year in the coming biennium. The rent expense would include janitorial expense and utilities. She explained the base budget provided $18,414 to cover rent in a non-State-owned building. The base budget also included $6,000 for professional services. Those funds would be applied to rent. The enhancement budget contained $7,800 for rent and the maintenance budget contained $3,091 for operating expense. The base budget also included $363 for utilities. Mr. Stevens stated the committee would need to know how the $6,000 budgeted for professional services was anticipated to be used. He also noted the $3,091 was probably not intended to cover rent expense but rather to cover general operating expenses associated with the new Cultural Resource II position. Ms. Miglioretto stated the $6,000 for professional services was formerly used to pay honoraria or per diems for peer professionals brought into Nevada for grants hearings. The Council now intended to use federal funding and state/federal matching funds ($45,000) contained in the maintenance budget under the community programs category. Ms. Giunchigliani asked why the Council had moved out of the library building. Ms. Boskoff responded the move was to accommodate the growth of the library staff and the historic preservation staff. She explained the space assigned to the Council was not designed for its purposes. The new space allowed room for growth and for a resource library. Ms. Giunchigliani inquired how much square footage was available in the new space. Ms. Miglioretto said the new space totaled 2,300 square feet. The rent was $1.28 per square foot. Chairman Marvel asked where the new location was. Ms. Miglioretto said the new location was at Curry and Robinson Streets, behind the State Museum. Ms. Giunchigliani questioned under what authority the agency had carried funds forward. Ms. Boskoff stated she had just become aware of this problem. She explained the Challenge Grant Program--one of the Council's most vital programs-- was designed to be a three-year program since the challenge was for grantees to raise three times the grant in new monies. Several grantees required three years to raise the money. Ms. Giunchigliani asked Ms. Boskoff if she was aware there was no statutory authority to carry funds forward. Ms. Boskoff said she was aware there was no statutory authority. She said the Budget Division had approved moving the balance forward. Mr. Jere Schultz, Budget Analyst, Budget Division, testified the request to move the funds forward had been approved on the basis of historical approvals. He noted while there was no statutory authority, there was a liability to carry the funds forward since the grants were three-year grants. Ms. Giunchigliani inquired whether the funds could be managed without revising the statutes. Mr. Schultz said he would work with Fiscal Division staff to resolve this matter. Mr. Close noted in the maintenance budget Item M-200 reflected a substantial difference between the agency request and the Governor's recommendation for personnel expenses and operating expenses. He asked for an explanation of those differences. Ms. Boskoff responded two Cultural Resource positions had been requested. The Governor recommended funding only one of those positions. She explained the operating expense category included a request for increased funding for printing, postage, telephones, etc. She indicated the agency would be able to function with the $3,091 recommended by the Governor. Chairman Marvel requested a written report from the Council explaining how the transfer of the $6,000 from professional services to rent would affect programs. Ms. Boskoff agreed to provide the report. ETHICS COMMISSION - PAGE 13 Thomas "Spike" Wilson, Chairman, distributed to the committee copies of a letter dated January 24, 1995 (Exhibit C). Chairman Marvel noted the Commission's letter outlined its measurement indicators. Mr. Wilson introduced Ms. Lee-Ann Keever, Executive Secretary, and Mr. Tracy Raxter. Mr. Wilson explained the budget was comprised of two parts, the operating budget for the coming biennium and a supplemental request contained in Exhibit C for interim funding for the current fiscal year. He indicated the Commission did not have sufficient funding to continue meetings for the balance of Fiscal Year 1995 even though several probable cause matters were currently pending. Chairman Marvel inquired whether a bill draft request had been submitted for a supplemental appropriation. Mr. Don Hataway, Chief Assistant Budget Administrator, Budget Division, reported legislation was being drafted; however, the Commission's concern was that there would not be sufficient money to operate pending approval of the supplemental appropriation. He explained standard operating procedure was to present requests for supplemental appropriations to the Legislature rather than going to the Interim Finance Committee Contingency Fund for allocations. Chairman Marvel stated the Fiscal Analyst could expedite the bill drafting process. Mr. Wilson said that would be helpful. Mr. Hataway indicated the amount requested was $7,283.57. Mr. Price asked if funding had been requested to cover the cost of a FAX machine. Ms. Keever said funding for a FAX machine had been requested in the second year of the biennium. Mr. Raxter stated all equipment requests had been placed in a one-shot appropriation. Mr. Hataway said the Governor's recommendation covered everything requested by the agency. Mr. Raxter explained the only significant change to the adjusted base budget was a position reclassification. He stated the position was currently existing and classified as a Computer Systems Technician. The position was actually performing the Executive Secretary function. Therefore, the agency was requesting the position be reclassified to the Program Officer series. Chairman Marvel questioned whether new office space had been acquired. Ms. Keever responded the Commission was currently negotiating for office space. She noted the current space was eight feet by ten feet and housed two staff members and associated office equipment. Mr. Raxter referred to Item M-200 in the maintenance budget. He stated the agency was requesting funding to cover the cost of six additional meetings per year. He explained the number of opinion requests filed with the Commission had increased significantly. Additionally, the agency was seeking funding for the cost of the increased office space. Chairman Marvel questioned whether the position reclassification should have been included in the enhancement budget rather than the base budget. Mr. Hataway stated the request had been treated as a non-significant reclassification which did not require formal review. Mr. Wilson indicated he was not previously aware of the reclassification request. Mr. Raxter referred to Item E-125 in the enhanced budget. He stated the Commission had requested funding for out-of-state travel expenses for two Commission members to travel to the annual conference on government ethics laws. The Commission also requested funding to cover the cost of printing involved in revising the financial disclosure form and publishing a booklet about ethics in Nevada to be available to candidates for office and current office holders. Ms. Giunchigliani asked what forms the Commission required. She noted the Elections and Procedures Committee was reviewing the issue of "unfriendly" forms. Ms. Keever replied legislators were required to file financial disclosure statements and statements disclosing any money received in representing an individual before a state agency. She said the Commission was considering printing the financial disclosure forms on NCR paper in order to create three copies. Mr. Close asked for an explanation of the agency's request for funding for investigative services. Ms. Keever testified the funding would be used to hire a private investigator. She expressed uncertainty about whether the contract would have to be put to bid. She noted historically the funding had been in the budget. The Commission had availed itself of those funds for the first time in 1994. Mr. Close asked how many meetings were anticipated to be held in the coming biennium. Mr. Wilson estimated 18 meetings per year would be required. The Commission was currently meeting monthly and that frequency of meetings was insufficient. Chairman Marvel inquired about the cause of the increased activity. Mr. Wilson replied the Commission's workload was experiencing natural growth. He stated, frankly, the workload would not improve from a political sense. People have tended to use the Commission politically, which has been one cause of the increased workload. Mr. Wilson noted the Commission's recent opinion contained a footnote questioning whether the Commission should be involved in political disputes. He expressed distress about the current trend. He noted the Commission operated under a rule of confidentiality which was not followed by the media. He suggested this was a matter which should be reviewed further by the Legislature. Chairman Marvel noted the Commission's role had increased in importance over the years and provided a measure of comfort to legislators. Mr. Wilson said he did not like seeing the Commission used for political purposes although from time to time that could not be prevented. BENEFIT SERVICES FUND - PAGE 481 Mr. David Thomas, State Risk Manager, testified this was a difficult budget to understand. Chairman Marvel noted there were three areas in the budget which the committee was unable to reconcile: 1) how revenues were calculated; 2) why claims had increased so dramatically; and 3) the high reserve balances. He appointed a subcommittee to review these issues. He appointed Mr. Allard and Ms. Giunchigliani as co-chairmen of the subcommittee and Mr. Spitler, Mr. Close, and Mr. Price as members. He asked that this budget be redrafted by the end of the recess period. Mr. Thomas and Mr. Comeaux both agreed to the Chairman's request. Mr. Thomas introduced Mr. Ronald Dewsnup of W. F. Corroon, the actuarial consultant to the Committee on Benefits. Mr. Thomas reviewed the functions of the Risk Management Division. He explained the Division resided within the Department of Administration. It was comprised of 17 full-time staff members who were responsible for the management and control of insuring or self-insuring against the risk of loss to the state's assets. He said the Division was organized into three distinct but inter-related functions: insurance and loss prevention, employee benefits, and worker's compensation. Mr. Thomas explained numerous line items in the agency request had been rolled into the standard line items contained in the Executive Budget. He noted, as an example, the self-insured program costs reflected in the base budget were comprised of various line items, including claims, contractual services, and operating costs. He noted claims had been held constant from Fiscal Year 1994 levels. Chairman Marvel asked when the results of the operational audit performed by Ernst & Young would be available to the committee. Mr. Thomas replied the Committee on Benefits would meet on February 22, 1995, at which time it would receive a report from Ernst & Young on the data collection of the audit. He anticipated the final report would be completed in mid-March. He agreed to provide copies to the committee prior to closure of this budget. Mr. Thomas stated the operating expenses category in the Executive Budget was comprised of various line items. Mr. Thomas said the principal difference between the base budget and the Fiscal Year 1994 actual resulted from increased reserves. Mr. Jim Manning, Budget Analyst, Budget Division, reported the base revenue for insurance premiums was overstated in Fiscal Year 1996 by $6,800,962 and in Fiscal Year 1997 by $12,581,757 (see Exhibit D). He explained this oversight was the result of moving a portion of the self-insured program costs from the base budget to Item M-101 in the maintenance budget. In the process revenues were recalculated in Item M-101 but not simultaneously reduced in the base budget. Ms. Giunchigliani noted the subcommittee would be discussing the reserve fund. Mr. Manning said the corrected figures would reflect a reserve fund of $17.5 million. Ms. Giunchigliani asked Mr. Manning to provide the percentage increase of the reserve from $17 million to $30 million reflected in the Executive Budget. Mr. Thomas explained the actual reserve amount in the budget summary should be $17,502,977 rather than the $24,303,939 currently reflected. He noted the actuary recommended retaining a reserve fund totaling approximately 2.5 months worth of total claims, which would equal approximately $13 million to $14 million. He distributed to the committee copies of significant plan design changes implemented over the past two years in an attempt to bring the reserve balance closer to the $13 million to $14 million level (see Exhibit E). He explained it would be very difficult to project the reserve balance exactly because of fluctuations in medical claims. Ms. Giunchigliani asked Mr. Thomas to provide a copy of the actuary's report of claims projections to the subcommittee. Mr. Thomas agreed to do so. Mr. Thomas referred to Item E-125 in the enhanced budget. He noted a portion of this budget was used as a pass-through account from the State Employees Workers' Compensation account to fund the State Employees Workers' Compensation Safety and Loss Control Program. The Committee on Benefits purchased workers' compensation insurance from the State Industrial Insurance System but had the responsibility for working with the various state agencies and central payroll to control workers' compensation claims and costs. Chairman Marvel inquired whether one rate was charged for all employees. Mr. Thomas said generally one rate was charged. A different rate was charged for volunteers. Chairman Marvel asked which employees comprised the highest risk groups. Mr. Thomas said risk experience was highest for Prison employees, Forestry employees, and Mental Health and Mental Retardation employees. Mr. Thomas stated the enhancement budget reflected an agency request for an additional Program Officer II position and associated travel and operating costs. He explained the program had been managed by one Management Analyst and this person needed help. The new position would perform a variety of field activities in the areas of safety training and evaluation of program efforts of various state agencies. Mr. Thomas indicated he would provide to the subcommittee the quarterly report of the agency's efforts in implementing written safety programs and safety committees in state agencies. Mr. Spitler asked what inflationary percentage was used to arrive at the self-insured program cost. Mr. Thomas replied there was no inflation in the base budget. Item M-101 in the maintenance budget reflected self-insured program costs of $19,904,421 consisting of claims and contractual increases with various vendors. Mr. Spitler stated he was interested in knowing the inflation rate applied to medical care costs. Mr. Thomas said the inflation factor for medical care costs was eight percent. The inflation factor for dental claims was five percent and for vision care was four percent. Mr. Spitler noted page A19 of the Executive Budget referenced a medical inflation rate of 10.3 percent in 1995-96 and 5.6 percent in 1996-97. He questioned why those figures were not factored into this budget account and if the figures might be incorrect throughout the Executive Budget. Mr. Comeaux stated the 10.3 percent and 5.6 percent were the inflationary rates which the Budget Division had intended to apply to any appropriate medical category. He said he would research this matter and report back to the subcommittee. Mr. Spitler asked the agency to respond to this question as well. He noted this bundling of expenditures could represent miscalculations totaling millions of dollars if, in fact, the inflationary factors were incorrect. Mr. Thomas reiterated the budget detail had been included in the agency's request to the Budget Division. The various categories had been rolled together in the Executive Budget. He would provide to the subcommittee that detail which would clearly reflect the inflationary factor strictly for medical costs. Ms. Giunchigliani requested the agency to provide to the subcommittee a detailed report of actual contractual costs, including requests for proposal and the previous bid which was awarded to Coresource. She also requested an explanation of how the reserve balance was calculated. Mr. Ron Dewsnup explained the reserve fund was determined by reviewing how payments of claims lagged and estimating trends to calculate a year-end figure. A factor was also applied to account for any unanticipated large claims. The resulting estimate was then divided by the amount of total overall claims expected over the course of the year plus appropriate administrative costs to obtain a monthly figure. Ms. Giunchigliani asked if health maintenance organization (HMO) rates and preferred provider rates were included in the calculation. Mr. Dewsnup said those rates were not included in the determination of the reserve factor since the amounts paid to the HMOs or the insured programs in the month in which the charge is made account for all claims over the course of the contract. The only responsibility of the self-funded plan is to remit the amount of the premium. Ms. Giunchigliani asked Mr. Dewsnup to provide a flow chart to the subcommittee breaking out the administrative costs and reflecting computation of the formula. She expressed concern at computations being based on lag time since there were no statutory requirements regarding timely payment of claims. Payment of claims could be delayed in order to build up the reserve inappropriately. Chairman Marvel inquired about the average length of time for paying claims. Mr. Thomas indicated the contract with Coresource required payment of 80 percent of all "clean" claims within 14 business days. He explained a "clean" claim was one for which all the information was provided and on which there were no questions. He said he was only aware of one month in which Coresource had failed the terms of the performance agreement. He noted the standard had been increased from the last contract and it was still to be determined if Coresource could meet the higher standard. Mr. Close asked why 1994 actuals were not included in the measurement indicators. He also asked for a comparison of reported projections to national standard averages. Mr. Thomas responded 1994 figures would not be available from the actuary until March 1995. He indicated he would provide information regarding comparisons to national standards to the subcommittee. Mr. Close noted as a physical therapist he was involved with wellness and prevention. He asked if a wellness program had been in place in 1994. Mr. Thomas responded there was a wellness program in place. He explained there had been a change of contractors, effective January 1, 1994. The former contractor had completed its responsibilities and provided final billing prior to July 1, 1993. The new contractor did not begin providing services until after June 30, 1994. Therefore, no costs were reflected in Fiscal Year 1994. However, in calendar years (plan years) 1993 and 1994 there was an extensive wellness program in place. Mr. Close pointed out costs appeared to have doubled from one year to the next. Mr. Thomas explained the former contractor, Carson-Tahoe Hospital, provided health fairs free of charge to state employees on a first come, first serve basis at the rate of $22.00 per employee until the funding of $110,000 was expended. In January 1994 the Committee on Benefits changed contractors through a formal bid process. The new contractor, Washoe Medical Center, agreed to provide the same health fairs with no limit on the number of employees for a cost of $55,000. Mr. Close expressed the hope the Committee on Benefits was acquiring data documenting the success realized from the investment in wellness programs and requested that data be submitted to the subcommittee. Mr. Spitler referred to page 481 of the Executive Budget. He noted the program description contained a statement that prison medical costs had been reduced. He asked how much the savings had been. Mr. Thomas said he believed the amount was over $2 million. He agreed to provide precise numbers to the subcommittee. Mr. Spitler asked how claims payments were monitored. Mr. Thomas replied Coresource was required to report to the Committee on Benefits on claims turnaround time. In addition, a yearly claims testing audit was performed by Kafoury Armstrong to determine whether penalties should be assessed. Mr. Spitler asked what the penalty was. Mr. Thomas said he would provide that information to the subcommittee. Mr. Spitler also requested Mr. Thomas to provide to the subcommittee information regarding the claims backlog. Mr. Thomas said the backlog should be approximately 12 to 14 days for "clean" claims. Mr. Hettrick asked what the average backlog for all claims was and the average backlog for claims which were not "clean." Mr. Thomas said it would be difficult to determine those numbers. He noted some claims could take up to six months to pay for various reasons. Mr. Hettrick inquired whether the Kafoury Armstrong audit report provided information regarding the average backlog for total claims and for "unclean" claims. Mr. Thomas replied the audit was based on a sample of all claims. Ms. Tiffany noted dependent care costs had fluctuated. She asked Mr. Thomas to provide to the subcommittee information regarding this fluctuation and whether dependent care costs were affected by reserves. Mr. Thomas responded dependent care premiums had not fluctuated, they had increased continually, except for this year, which was the result of changes implemented by the Committee on Benefits two years ago. Ms. Tiffany also asked Mr. Thomas to provide to the subcommittee information regarding the computer system, i.e., what operations were performed on the system, interface with Coresource, impact on claim processing time, etc. Mr. Thomas indicated he and Mr. Dewsnup would be available to meet with the subcommittee. Mr. Bob Gagnier, Executive Director, State of Nevada Employees Association (SNEA), testified that SNEA did not support the Governor's recommendation since it was less than the agency request and considerably less than what SNEA had requested. He reported the current contribution rate paid by the state was $226.50 per month. During the past two years the amount was increased by approximately $20.00 per month. During the preceding two years, there had been no increase at all, which required that benefits for state employees be reduced, dependent premiums increased, and reserves reduced. He reminded the committee the reserves had been utilized to fund increases in the 1991-1993 biennium. Mr. Gagnier noted the current budget proposed to increase the contribution rate by the state $27.40 per month in the first year of the biennium and $21.41 per month in the second year. He explained those amounts were $29.95 per month less than the Committee on Benefits' proposal and did nothing to improve the situation regarding dependents. Mr. Gagnier said 10 states paid not only the employee's full coverage, but the full coverage for the entire family. According to a 1994 study by Workplace Economics (a copy of which is available in the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau) 31 other states paid more for family coverage last year than what the Governor was proposing to pay for Nevada state employees next year. According to the United States Chamber of Commerce in their annual 1994 study of employee benefits the average percentage of total pay contributed by the employer towards employee insurance was 11.2 percent in private industry. The Executive Budget proposed a rate of 10.3 percent. Mr. Gagnier stated SNEA would like to see this legislative session take steps necessary to pay at least a portion of the families' coverage. He indicated a bill was being drafted which proposed a state contribution to pay for the first dependent. Mr. Gagnier noted health insurance was no longer considered a fringe benefit. Now it was a vital part of the compensation package. Mr. Gagnier indicated he would testify more extensively at upcoming bill hearings. Mr. Gagnier stated the Committee on Benefits had proposed an increase of $57.35 per month in the first year of the biennium and $21.41 per month in the second year. He said SNEA supported that proposal and proposed an additional $75.00 per month for those employees with dependents. Chairman Marvel asked Mr. Gagnier to submit pertinent information to the subcommittee. Mr. Gagnier agreed to do so. RETIRED EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE - PAGE 489 Mr. Comeaux informed the committee there appeared to be an error in this budget account. He requested additional time to work on it. Chairman Marvel referred this budget to the subcommittee. SUPPLEMENTAL FUND - INDIGENTS - PAGE 491 Mr. Thomas introduced Ms. Michelle Gamble, Program Assistant, Nevada Association of Counties (NACO). Mr. Thomas explained this was the supplemental fund for medical assistance to indigent persons. It also provided reimbursement to counties for certain unpaid hospital charges, excluding injuries sustained in motor vehicle accidents. He explained the fund was administered by a board of trustees. When a county had expended 90 percent of the amount available to it for medical assistance to the indigent, the Board of County Commissioners may apply for reimbursement of all or a portion of unpaid charges of any one person which exceed $25,000. The county must reimburse the hospital for the care given to the patient, but only to the extent it was reimbursed by the fund. Funding the account is a transfer to the State Treasurer from each county in an amount equal to $.01 per $100.00 of assessed value of all taxable property within the county. Mr. Thomas indicated the reserve in this account was $577,644. Ms. Gamble noted claims were paid annually from this fund. When claims were last paid in May 1994 they were prorated at approximately 35 cents on the dollar because NACO was advised there was no funding available to pay at a higher rate. If the reserve funds would have been made available at that time, NACO would have paid a higher proportion of the claims submitted. Mr. Spitler asked Ms. Gamble to provide historic documentation to the subcommittee regarding the percentage of claims paid versus what might have been paid. Mr. Spitler asked for an explanation of the budget categories "other - state" and "other - non-state." He noted "state" generally implied General Fund money. Ms. Gamble said there was no General Fund money in this account. Mr. Comeaux stated the actual general ledger description was "real property taxes" but that specific line item was rolled up into the other - state category. Mr. Spitler asked what was included in the "other - non-state" category. Mr. Thomas replied that category included Treasurer's interest distribution. Mr. Spitler questioned why there was no interest on the actual for 1994 if there was $577,644 in reserve. Mr. Thomas stated the Controller's Office had incorrectly credited all interest due on budget account 628-3244 (Supplemental Fund - Indigents) and budget account 628-3245 (Indigent Accident Account) to budget account 628-3245. That error would be corrected this year. Mr. Spitler asked Mr. Thomas to provide to the subcommittee a reconciliation of these account balances. Ms. Tiffany inquired how reserve funds might impact the hospital provider tax and intergovernmental transfers. Ms. Gamble said if the reserve money were transferred to the intergovernmental transfer program, the counties would have insufficient funding to pay medical claims for indigent people. INDIGENT ACCIDENT ACCOUNT - PAGE 493 Mr. Thomas reported the purpose of the Indigent Accident Account was to reimburse hospitals for care to indigent persons injured in motor vehicle accidents within the state. The fund is administered by a five-member board of trustees comprised of county commissioners appointed by the Governor. Once it has been determined an injured person is an indigent, the board may reimburse the hospital which rendered the medical care for a portion of its unpaid charges. Within available resources the fund participates when a claim exceeds $3,000. Reimbursement for claims less than $3,000 is a charge to the county. Funding for the Indigent Accident Account is a transfer to the State Treasurer from each county in an amount equal to $.015 per $100.00 of assessed value of all taxable property within the county. Mr. Thomas noted the budget summary reflected slight differences from the agency request. He explained these differences were the result of more up-to-date Department of Taxation assessed valuation numbers which the Budget Division was able to obtain prior to preparation of the Executive Budget but which were not available to the agency. He stated since the amount of revenue accruing to this fund was a known figure, the Budget Division determined the amount necessary for the base budget to balance to the Treasurer's interest and receipts from local governments. Receipts from local governments were included in the other - non- state category and represented the portion from the counties for unpaid charges for hospital care under $3,000. The remainder of revenues is reflected in Item M-200 of the maintenance budget as caseload increases. Mr. Thomas noted there was a substantial reserve in this account. He indicated it was recently discovered the reserve fund had accumulated over several years. There should be no reserve in this account. Therefore, the agency had requested a work program to transfer the reserve funds in their entirety ($3,062,999) to the claims category. Chairman Marvel asked if any of the reserve funds were currently obligated. Ms. Gamble stated the board of trustees met twice per year and was not due to meet until May 1995. She indicated approximately $500,000 in claims were currently pending. Washoe Medical Center has advised her it is waiting to process approximately $2 million in claims. She said she expected to receive additional claims and the University Medical Center would probably be submitting approximately $2 million in claims for the May board meeting. Chairman Marvel questioned whether sufficient funding was available in the reserve fund. Ms. Gamble responded there would be sufficient funding between the reserve and the work program. Mr. Spitler questioned the spending of reserve funds collected from property taxpayers without flowing it back properly to those taxpayers. Ms. Gamble said it was her understanding that property tax revenue received after claims payments were authorized by the May board meeting were automatically rolled over to the reserve account at year-end unbeknownst to NACO. Those funds were not made available at the next bi-annual board meeting to pay claims. Had the reserve funds been made available, NACO would have been able to pay more on claims. Chairman Marvel asked how this situation had occurred. Mr. Comeaux indicated he had not been aware of this situation prior to this hearing. He said he would research the matter and report back to the committee. Mr. Spitler suggested that prior to obligating any of the reserve funds the committee fully understand where the reserve came from, when it was collected, and the liability to which it applied. He said this should not be treated as a windfall. Chairman Marvel referred this budget account to the subcommittee. Mr. Close requested information regarding distribution of claims for the past three to four years be provided to the subcommittee for tracking purposes. INSURANCE LOSS AND PREVENTION - PAGE 495 Chairman Marvel referred this budget to the subcommittee. Chairman Marvel requested introduction of a bill to provide for forfeiture of good- time credit on account of frivolous civil action. MR. ARBERRY MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR FORFEITURE OF GOOD-TIME CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OF FRIVOLOUS CIVIL ACTION. MS. TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Dale Gray, Committee Secretary Assembly Committee on Ways and Means January 25, 1995 Page