MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS AND SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE Sixty-eighth Session February 13, 1995 The joint meeting of the Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance was called to order at 8:00 a.m., on Monday, February 13, 1995, Chairman John Marvel presiding in Room 119 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Morse Arberry, Jr., Chairman Mr. John W. Marvel, Chairman Mrs. Jan Evans, Vice Chairman Mrs. 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 SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen Senator William R. O'Donnell Senator Dean A. Rhoads Senator Bob Coffin COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Senator Bernice Mathews (Excused) GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Stevens, Fiscal Analyst Gary Ghiggeri, Deputy Fiscal Analyst OTHERS PRESENT: Merlene Olmstead, Ford Motor Credit Daryl Capurro, Nevada Motor Transport Association and NFADA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - Page 2021 Tom Stephens, Director, and Gerry Colquhoun, Budget Director, Nevada Department of Transportation, introduced themselves to the committee. Mr. Colquhoun said the purpose of the Budget Summary for the 1995-97 biennium (Exhibit C) was to provide greater detail to the Executive Budget. (The original document is on file in the Research Library.) Mr. Stephens indicated their budget request for the next biennium was $772 million from the Highway Fund. He said the department is charged with the planning, design, construction and maintenance of the state's highway system consisting of approximately 5,429 miles of highway. Additional special federal funding received over the last five years amounting to $42 million was applied to a number of projects. Mr. Marvel asked about the fate of ISTEA. Mr.Stephens replied ISTEA, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act which governs the federal highway funding, is authorized through 1997. Analysis and negotiations for the 1998 reauthorization will begin in 1996. He added the act designates the allocations from the Federal Highway Trust Fund to the various states. The formulas which allocate the funds among the states are based on vehicle miles, lane miles and past funding. Although ISTEA authorizes a certain level of funding, appropriations and expenditures are controlled by the President's budget. He noted there are certain forces in Washington who are trying to balance the budget and control the deficit using the Highway Trust Fund. Other forces want to see the Highway Trust Fund, which is supported by federal gas taxes, go completely off line and be a stand-alone item. Mr. Colquhoun said the stand alone trust fund would be very favorable to Nevada. Mr. Stephens recounted a recent announcement made by Secretary Pena of the United States Department of Transportion which dealt with the complete reorganization of his agency. He said, although it has not been officially approved, the proposal was to eliminate the Federal Railroad, Federal Transit, and Federal Highway administrations combining them into an intermodal surface transportation administration. He said competition with larger states would be a negative factor should transit be fully funded from the Federal Highway Trust Fund. Mr. Stephens reported the state highway network to have 12,974 lane miles. One of the department's major efforts is to maintain the existing highways in which 1,400 lane miles are in need of an overlay and 1,158 lane miles in need of reconstruction. He said this figure is down considerably from past years, however, 20% of the system needs major maintenance which, in 1993 dollars, equates to $340 million. In regard to the requested 68 new positions, Mr. Stephens said 60 are currently vacant and 1,500 are filled. He reported filling less positions since he joined the department six weeks ago and will continue for the next few months until he can get a better feel for the justification of staff numbers. In reply to Chairman Marvel's question on whether the addition of 68 new staffers would reduce overtime, Mr.Stephens responded he did not know and would supply an answer once he had the facts. Mr. Stephens testified the department's maintenance staff had not increased in the last four to five years and their first priority was to add positions in Las Vegas. He reported gas taxes have risen 58% in the last four years; DMV revenues, 32%; federal aid, 54%; and yet only 27 new positions have been added in the last four years which equates to a 3% increase in the size of the department. The increase in workload has been augmented by the addition of consultants, however, it is not cost nor quality effective to continue. On the subject of the operating category, Mr. Stephens pointed out the large and costly purchases of materials such as oil, asphalt, sand and gravel. He said they are requesting the replacement of existing equipment and some new equipment as well. Their replacement policy is based on 100,000 to 150,000 miles for vehicles and some are based on hours, depending on the equipment. Mr. Marvel questioned the increase in the sale of gas and oil with no corresponding increase in revenues. Mr. Stephens explained the department sells gas and oil to other agencies in the state. He said he did not know why there was no corresponding increase. Mr. Colquhoun said the revenue is driven by the expenditure side and there is an increase in the revenues corresponding to the increase in sale of gas and oil. This line item cannot be seen broken out in the budget, however, the total resources can be seen included in the highway fund line item on page 2028 of the Executive Budget. Referring to the summary which includes the basic budget and maintenance budget, Mr. Colquhoun said the sale of gas and oil work program is presently $950,000, last year it was $971,000 and they are projecting $1,029,000. Chairman Marvel found a discrepancy in the M-100 decision unit; gas and oil were not being reported as revenue. Mr. Joel Pinkerton, Budget Analyst, State Budget Division, said it was an oversight on his part and would make the correction to this section of the budget. In respect to the Highway Fund, Mr. Stephens explained major expenditures have to be based on a project to project basis rather than on a year by year basis. He said there are strings attached to most everything in the budget. Mr. Marvel asked whether there were increased allocations for honor camp crews and if there were adequate numbers being provided. Mr. Jim Dotson, Assistant Director for Operations, testified crews were being utilized fully in District 1 of the Las Vegas area. He reported there were times when requests for crews were not filled. He added in District 2, the Lake Tahoe region, crews are utilized for tree removal and fence repair and in District 3 they are assigned to paint guard rails. Mr. Stephens reported the crew support situation in District 1 was not adequate, they are not spending as much money on the crews as they had projected and they could use more trash pick-up and landscaping help in Las Vegas. Mr. Marvel pointed out they would be reviewing the prison budgets the following Friday. Mr. Stephens maintained the camp in Jean was not providing the amount of men it had previously and did not know the underlying reason. Mr. Marvel asked whether the department was spending highway funds for the preservation of the desert tortoise. Mr. Stephens replied the department spends state monies for habitat, especially in the Las Vegas area where the tortoise is considered an endangered species. He said the agency pays into a mitigation fund based on the number of projects in the Las Vegas area. When asked by Mr. Marvel how much was spent, Mr. Colquhoun said close to $250,000 to $300,000 was coming from the capital outlay category. He added the fee is paid directly to Clark County and involves the land used for the department's pits and roadway projects - everything related to highway work is included in the formula. When asked by Mr. Marvel whether this was a legitimate expense, Mr. Stephens answered affirmatively. Since this was a federal mandate, he concluded, it must be complied with if work is to be performed in Clark County. Mr. Marvel asked whether this amount was budgeted for the next biennium. Mr. Stephens replied the costs will be similar, however, it is not broken out specifically in the budget. Mr. Stephens said he would supply a full explanation and breakdown. Assemblyman Hettrick questioned the drug and alcohol program and consultant costs under the maintenance 502 decision unit on page 2024 and communication personnel line item on page 2028. Mr. Stephens noted these were being corrected. He said the state withdrew the communications positions and did not supply funds to pay for Information Services reimbursements. He stated they should have taken the positions but not the money allowing DOT to pay for the services as they were provided as DIS is a reimbursable agency. Mr. Hettrick asked where the costs for rent and communications equipment were with respect to the 9 positions within his department. Mr. Stephens stated this was an oversight. Mr. Hettick questioned the whereabouts of the communication equipment costs. Mr. Stephens said it was his understanding the Budget Office made the necessary adjustments to the budget to make sure the transfers in and out of positions reconcile back to the cost. Mr. Hettrick requested more detail regarding the maintenance 502 and billing for consultants under the Land and Building Improvement categories. Mr. Stephens said all consultant services were contained in the Land and Building Improvements budget of $242 million. He said this was no departure from past practices. He testified DOT probably could not work on a project by project basis because they do not know what the income is going to be two years in advance. He pointed out it is a reimbursable program and depends on what the department is able to retain from the federal government. He said the situation is extremely complex. The State Transportation Board, composed of four constitutional elected officers and three appointees, provide the project oversight. Mr. Stephens acknowledged the funds provide a great deal of flexibility for the department to get its job done. Mr. Marvel asked Mr. Pinkerton whether he thought having two budget accounts, one for administration and one for road construction would facilitate the budgeting process. Mr. Pinkerton agreed with Mr. Marvel; breaking the budget into more categories would be helpful. Mr. Hettrick commented their committee commonly receives greater detail from agencies with smaller budgets. Mr. Stephens said his department attempted to provide more detail in their supplemental budget document. Assemblyman Close requested more information on the justification for 68 new positions with respect to the corrective maintenance percentages. He asked how DOT planned to deal with all the miles needing surfacing. Mr. Stephens replied the maintenance account was projected at a certain level; a figure of $100 million came to his mind. He added there were requirements for state funds on capacity projects that come up along the way. The maintenance account is used in conjunction with federal funds in order to add capacity to a road between sessions. He assured Mr. Close the money was being used on needed projects. Mr. Close asked for comparisons in regard to the efficiency rates of other states. He said he was concerned with Nevada's 17% and 40% figures. Mr. Stephens remarked he could not provide national comparisons, nor could the state be compared to any other in the nation. He pointed out Nevada is the fastest growing state - 20% in the last four years, 50% in the last decade and that Las Vegas pays for much of their local transportation expenses by collecting room, sales, gas and development taxes. Mr. Close asked whether the department intended to increase their corrective maintenance percentages in the coming biennium. Mr. Stephens said it depended on how the State Highway Board was prioritizing their projects with the money that had come in. Mr. Hettrick requested Mr. Stephens submit information on the utilization of inmate crews (including past problems and difficulties) for a meeting he had on February 17. Mr. Stephens said he would comply. Mr. Stephens was asked to discuss the 68 new positions. He referred to a document (Exhibit D) which prioritized the need for each position. He mentioned past problems with maintenance worker management and the need for roadway and sweeping crew expansion especially in the evening hours. Mr. Stephens pointed out there were few maintenance workers on the list of new positions. He reported taking existing vacant positions and turning them into management positions for Las Vegas: a vacant traffic engineering position is being upgraded and a second traffic engineering position and administrative services officer are being added. Out of the top nine positions, three are for an evening sweeping crew and the others are for a roadway crew and their supervisor. Mr. Stephens said a crew of 8 presently maintains the highways at night; there were two major personnel losses during the last six months due to accidents. In respect to the consultant and management group, page D-10, Mr. Stephens broke down the $257 million figure in the land and improvements category. He noted consultants were not being managed in the most effective manner and stated he would like to see his department follow the method used by the Public Works Board. He stated the need for six new staff to manage the contracts, check on the quality of work and keep the outside consultants on schedule. Senator Raggio asked for a clarification of consultant positions; would there be a corresponding reduction in the consultant agreement costs? Mr. Stephens said the initial request was to have more roadway design crews in-house; the six new positions would have a positive effect on the department's efficiency. Senator Raggio stated he did not want to take money out of the project and questioned the source of consultant management salaries. Mr. Stephens maintained salary savings will result from closer supervision of scheduling and project designs. Mr. Marvel asked Mr. Stephens to add salary figures to the supervisory positions for subcommittee study. Mr. Stephens justified the need for the hydrology group, material and testing, traffic and safety, district consultant specialists, assistant resident engineer positions, planning position, transportation analyst, photogramatist position, air quality, transportation research position and public information staff. Mr. Spitler asked for an explanation of NDOT's role in Clark and Washoe counties' air quality program. Mr. Stephens said the department was mandated to overview all programs within the state and yielded to NDOT's Assistant Director for Planning, Mr. Tom J. Fronapfel. Mr. Fronapfel stated various departments of transportation in the country are required to conduct both project level analyses on new projects as well as analyses on regionally significant projects which may or may not affect air quality issues. The requested position would coordinate the activities in both urban and rural areas to ensure the requirements under ISTEA and rules for the Clean Air Act were being met (partial federal mandate). Mr. Spitler inquired whether there were any duplication of services. Mr. Fronapfel replied there were not. He added the United States Environmental Protection Act will be promulgating additional clean act requirements for the rural areas within the next year. Research regarding traffic crossing county lines and their impact on air quality standards are analyzed at local levels; NDOT is responsible for the coordination of activities. Mr. Spitler pointed to a duplication in services and stated Clark and Washoe counties should have the responsibility; the state should take a stronger stand with what the federal government mandates. Mr. Fronapfel added there are two sources of funding and two separate sets of mandates on the federal level. He reported the funds Clark and Washoe counties receive for their monitoring activities come from smog certificates as well as federal funding from EPA. The federal government set standards for air quality requirements both in the air quality legislation as well as the transportation legislation. They translated those requirements back into DOT having to implement a portion of the program as well. Mr. Fronapfel said they are trying to avoid any duplication with the county activities. He noted NDOT does not conduct monitoring, however, they coordinate planning activities and make sure the requirements are met. Assemblywoman Guinchigliani asked for clarification of how the monitoring is financed. Mr. Fronapfel said the Clark and Washoe County programs are funded through a combination of EPA and smog certificate fees. He said their agency monitors the conformity actions in attainment and non-attainment areas in concert with any new projects that come up for consideration both in rural and urban areas. Statewide monitoring of air quality issues are done by the Division of Environmental Protection in Carson City. Mr. Hettrick asked about equipment requirements for new personnel under the operating category. Mr. Stephens said if it was not listed in the supplemental budget, they would have to use substitutions. He said the bottom line budget figure will remain the same; they will have to buy less expensive equipment and reduce the number of replacements. Referring to page B-10 of the handout, Mr. Hettrick said it would be helpful if Mr. Stephens could provide the subcommitte with the projected figures for 96-97. Mr. Stephens agreed to comply. Ms. Guinchigliani asked Mr. Stephens to address the size of maintenance crews and the number of night maintenance crews. Mr. Stephens responded the only one was in Las Vegas. Ms. Guinchigliani agreed with Mr. Stephens that this was not enough. Senator Jacobsen said there were as many inmates in camp as there were working. He expressed his dissatisfaction with the composition of the Department of Transportation Board. He noticed none were present in the audience and did not believe they were qualified. He stated a functional board was needed. Ms. Tiffany asked Mr. Stephens why the board went from $4,000 to $20,000 in the budget. Mr. Colquhoun replied historically they budgeted $20,000 for the Highway Board expenses. The additional money needed for an emergency situation would be expended on a contingency basis; they attempt to keep their meetings to a minimum. Ms. Tiffany stressed the subcommittee needed to scrutinize the effectiveness of the Board more carefully. Mr. Close stated his concerns: the cost effectiveness and utilization of the airplane, the reason DOT is working on safe water, and the cost effectiveness of the Washington, D.C. office. Mr. Stephens stressed now was not the time to reduce the Washington office as Nevada was the largest interactor with the federal government as far as land and use policies and funding. Mr. Close remarked he would like to have the cost effectiveness of the office outlined and clarified. He pointed out he had not mentioned cutting it. Mr. Stephens responded that the results will be millions of dollars on the positive side. Mr. Stephens drew the joint committee's attention to the last page in the personnel category. He justified the necessity for the lighting maintenance crew and standard resident engineer crew. Highlighting major projects in the 95 Work Program (Exhibit E), Mr. Stephens listed the dollar amounts county by county. Ms. Guinchigliani drew Mr. Stephens' attention to a noise problem affecting her constituents along Loch Lommond. She asked Mr. Stephens to investigate whether the sound abatement work was promised by NDOT or the contractor. Mr. Stephens agreed to look into the situtation. Senator O'Donnell stated his constituents were promised landscaping on the freeway near the Sandhill Flamingo area. He said he was aware of the Loch Lommond complaints and asked whether this pattern could be remedied. Mr. Stephens explained the importance of the Spaghetti Bowl interchange in Las Vegas. Senator Raggio asked when the Highway 395 project in Washoe County would be completed. Mr. Stephens reported Granite Construction is scheduled to complete construction in the late fall for the portions they are presently working on. He said the project beyond the Mt. Rose Highway (on a completely new alignment) is not currently funded. He estimated the cost to be $175 million. Senator Raggio asked whether any right-of-way had been obtained. Mike McCall, NDOT Assistant Director for Engineering, addressed the question. He reported the project will begin in ten to twenty years due to the Spaghetti Bowl and Carson Bypass projects having priority. He reported they are underway with right-away-acquisition. Acknowledging the increase in traffic from 30,000 to 60,000, Mr. McCall stated safety improvements will be made in the interim. Mr. Hettrick asked for the projected right-of-way costs for the portion from the Mt. Rose junction to where it will connect with Washoe Valley. Mr. McCall stated the cost will be between $15 and $20 million. Mr. Stephens stated "Q" federal funds (advanced acquisitions) allow the state to buy the right-of-way land on a loan basis. He reported Carson City has come up with a proposal to build an at-grade expressway which would encircle the town on the right-of-way . Due to budget constraints the road would extend from the base of Lakeview Hill to Fairview Drive and would utilize a 5 cent gas tax for funding. Mr. Stephens explained it was decided a few years ago to float bonds and front end all the money for certain projects rather than wait for receipt of anticipated federal money. He reported bond payments come due out of NDOT's annual budget and amount to approximately $35 million. Bond funded projects include the Spring Mountain Interchange, Las Vegas Expressway and Mt. Rose project. Mr. McCall stated bond repayments are reflected in the budget as a fund level transfer. He called Mr. Marvel's attention to the expenditure section in the supplemental budget, B-1, where at the fund level the bonds are transferred out and are not a part of NDOT's operating budget. He added they do not impact the fund; they are paid off with federal money. The state picks up the 5% match as well as the interest. Ms. Guinchigliani asked how state roads were declared. Mr. McCall said they had to be approved by the Transportation Board and comply with maintenance standards. Ms. Guinchigliani suggested further study of this issue. Mr. Stephens said there are many roads that should be part of the state system because they serve a major amount of traffic that connects one state highway to another. Mr. Daryl Capurro, Managing Director, Nevada Motor Transport Association maintained the current plan for reorganization of the Federal Department of Transportation presents considerable problems with respect to the federal Highway Trust Fund. He advised the committee to keep in very close contact with their congressional delegation as the proposal works its way through Congress. He felt the implications for Nevada are far more severe than for the nation's larger states. Issues emphasized by Mr. Capurro dealt with moving the point of tax collection for both diesel and gasoline tax to the "terminal rack level" or "point of first import" into the state. He stated currently diesel tax is collected at the pump and gasoline tax is collected at the distributor or wholesaler level. The federal tax is collected at the terminal rack level. He reported there has been a 10 to 20% evasion of the fuel tax through daisy chaining procedures. By going to the terminal rack level, the highest level point at which the tax may be collected, much of the evasion can be eliminated. He said shortage of collections was estimated to be $8 million. He said the second issue was to move the collection of gasoline tax from the Department of Taxation to the Department of Motor Vehicles. He noted the Department of Motor Vehicles, a Highway Fund agency, collects the diesel tax. The Department of Taxation is a General Fund agency and there was clear indication throughout the interim committee process that the Department of Taxation collects approximately $900,000 a year more than they spend for the administrative purposes of collecting gasoline tax. The $900,000 does not go to the Highway Fund; it is used to fund the rest of the Department of Taxation's activities. He maintained, in their view, this was a $900,000 per year diversion from the Highway Fund and unconstitutional under Article 9, Section 5 of the Nevada Constitution. Mr. Capurro's last point dealt with the elimination of the Highway Patrol's Supplementary Fund. He said it was view of the interim committee to eliminate the fund and that the Highway Patrol be funded through the normal budgetary process through the Highway Fund. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, DIRECTOR'S OFFICE - PAGE 1679 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, ADMINISTRATION - PAGE 1691 Mr. Marvel said the performance indicators and mission statements completely lack the meaningful information for the money committees. Mr. Jim Weller, Director, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, introduced Mr. Ray Sparks, Deputy Director of Public Safety, Mr. Bob Anselmo, Deputy Director of Motor Vehicles, and Mr. Bill Gosnell, Chief of the Administrative Services Division. He reported the department has approximately 1,650 employees, 600 in the Motor Vehicle Branch and 1,050 in the Public Safety Branch. With respect to actual facilities, Mr. Weller reported they have new buildings in Reno, the NHP building; Douglas County, Motor Vehicle Services; Tonopah which will house several of the department's divisions; Winnemucca housing several of the department's divisions; North Las Vegas, a CDL commercial driver's license and motor vehicle express service office; and the Las Vegas West Flamingo office. He reported the Galetti Way motor vehicle office has been remodeled and the Henderson motor vehicle express office has been expanded. The Capital Improvement Program includes a full service motor vehicle office in Henderson, a remodel of the East Sahara office in Las Vegas and remodels to building 107 at the Stewart facility as well as a remodel to the headquarters building in Carson City. The Motor Vehicle budgets have been submitted in accordance with the 22% budget caps; this included the Governor's proposed pay increases. Subsequent to going through the budget review process, Mr. Weller said the department found itself $500,000 to $600,000 under the cap or nearly at the 22% limit. Mr. Weller stated, since the last session, the department has continued ways to improve their motor vehicle service in their two major problem areas: titling and customer service in Las Vegas. Among their other initiatives they have developed a 5- point plan which includes internal reorganization; a field service division covering driver's license and registration and a headquarters services division which would handle headquarter's matters. He noted they are on track with additional and remodel facilities, modernized infrastructure, staff training and development (specifically cross training), and level 2 funding which will arrive at approximately 25% (3% over the 22% budget caps). With respect to titling, Mr. Weller noted they have received no additional resources for the program since 1985; some of the equipment they are using is over 25 years old. On an interim basis the department has moved resources from other program areas and have begun a second shift. Mr. Weller stated the budgets presented during this legislative session will specifically assist the department in improving the forementioned problem areas. He offered to have Donna West, Assistant Chief of Driver's License Division and responsible for all southern Nevada Motor Vehicle operations (present in the audience) explain some of the specific initiatives. Mr. Marvel asked how the department anticipated decreasing the waiting lines in Las Vegas. Mr. Weller responded it would take additional personnel and a modernized infrastructure - computers, equipment, etc. Mr. Marvel asked whether these items were built into the department's budget. Mr. Weller answered it was in part; the level 2 put the department at 25%. Mr. Gosnell said the solution is not built into the budget; there are some interrelated expansions. He said the solutions presented were above the 22% cap and, therefore, not by themselves within the budgets. Mr. Weller explained they looked at the 3% above because one of the recommendations out of the Interim Highway Financing Committee was they do away with the 22% cap. Mr. Marvel asked for information on budget account 201-4706. Mr. Gosnell stated he would handle the director's and administrative services budget and the program manager would handle the others. He reported the director's office and administrative services budgets are the only budgets affected by the proposed reorganization in the two departments. The director's office presently has 28 positions; after reorganization there will be 6 positions in 4706 and 6 positions in a new budget account 4719. He mentioned the hearings positions will be moved to another area; the personnel officers will be coming out of the director's office and be split two different ways. Mr. Gosnell reported two narcotics control positions will go to the Division of Emergency Management (DEM) under this proposal. The one new position that is a result of the reorganization is the director of DMV (the new position created under the Governor's proposal for two departments) - the rest are existing positions that are being split and allocated in two different directions. The E956 module would move the pro rata share of operating cost to the other director's office. Summarizing, Mr. Gosnell said the two budgets deal with existing positions reallocated within the two departments and one additional new position. Mr. Marvel questioned whether Mr. Gosnell had his transfers balanced. Mr. Gosnell replied it was a fair allocation of the existing resources between the two. Senator Raggio was concerned with the number of new position requests received during the subsequent legislative session as the result of the creation of two departments. He asked for the department's assurance that no new positions be requested in the 1997 legislative session should the reorganization be sanctioned. Mr. Weller said when they originally looked at splitting the two departments, seven new positions were requested (including the new director for the other department). Upon review, they were advised they should look at reorganization without any additional cost. He concluded if they are given the equipment and personnel requested in this budget, they can go forward without additional positions. He added they will try; this was not a definite "yes" or "no". Senator Raggio asked how the public's interest would be served by the bifurcation. Mr. Weller stated the proposal was rejected during the 1993 Legislature. He responded the department will be able to concentrate their efforts in particular areas by putting like services together; the needs and responsibilities of the two are very different. Senator Raggio asked what effect the reorganization would have on shortening the lines. Mr. Weller stated the new equipment, addition of personnel, and streamlining driver's licensing methods will remedy the situation. Mr. Marvel asked Mr. Gosnell to elaborate on the budget summary, page 1685; why the state allocation costs were a negative. Mr. Gosnell replied he could not answer the question since the budget office does the cost allocation adjustments. Mr. Joel Pinkerton of Budget Division explained the transfer to special services (a negative) occurred when his office broke positions out of the budget and sent them to the other director's budget. He said he would provide a better explanation at a later date. Chairman Arberry questioned the recommended auditor position. Mr. Gosnell reported they have one internal auditor position within the department. They have requested a second position due to the number of internal audits which are a result of the former reorganization. He reported they are working closely with DEM to clear up some of the audit problems that resulted from last session. He said the second financial auditor was strictly a financial compliance type for internal review. The end result would be one internal auditor for each department. Chairman Arberry asked whether the additional auditor was requested for the purposes of investigating non-commissioned offices. Mr. Weller replied the internal auditor they presently have on staff is used for allegations against non-commissioned personnel (non-sworn side). This would be just one of the jobs assigned to the new internal auditor. Mr. Marvel said his question on negative cost allocations remained unanswered. Mr. Gosnell reminded Mr. Marvel the information would be forthcoming from Mr. Pinkerton. Senator O'Donnell expressed an interest in budget account 4706. He asked for a clarification of personnel distribution. Mr. Gosnell said the 28 positions are current figures; if action is taken on all the decision units, the remaining number will be 6 positions. He said the negative numbers in all the 900 modules go to another budget. Senator O'Donnell remarked he had seen the actual reduction in the number of staff in other agency budgets. Mr. Gosnell stated it was a rollup in terms of how it was handled by the Budget Office. Senator O'Donnell suggested if 6 positions were remaining in the budget, it should state "Governor recommends 6." He said he understood the testimony but could not see how it was expressed in the pages of the budget. Mr. Pinkerton agreed with Senator O'Donnell stating the figures were not clearly defined in the existing budget format. He explained when positions are transferred out of a budget, they are moving the equivalent revenue and expenditure but not touching the FTE. If it were to work as though the budget was approved with the transfers removed, the number would be reduced. Mr. Allard inquired whether the addition of new fees were reflected in the budget. Mr. Gosnell said the new bills being introduced concerning new fees were not reflected in the existing budget. The only assumption the department has made in their budget for 96 and 97 is the $6 check-off previously mentioned by Mr. Capurro. He added this was the only change in revenue flow they have made based on any BDR. Mr. Allard asked Mr.Weller to address the Brady Bill. Mr. Weller responded there was funding in the director's office to pay for the costs of hearing. The bill will remain exclusively in the public safety side in the next biennium. Mr. Marvel asked whether the bill was being used for hearings. Mr. Weller said there were allocations before the Interim Finance Committee before they put the budget together and there would be some sharing of costs for hearings or NDI Investigations. The $5,000 sharing allocation from the Brady funds were fixed. He said, this time through, they will be applied to the Public Safety side. He did not think there would be anything left in the director's office. Mr. Marvel asked whether it would continue. Mr. Weller said if a pawn shop or gunowner did not like the decision that was reached by Brady, the department had an administrative hearing process that would function. Mr. Marvel requested Mr. Weller to supply further information to the subcommittee. Mr. Price, referring to the M-200, asked whether the auditor position was connected to internal affairs. Mr. Weller said the auditor performs internal investigations on non-sworn personnel and examines figures and programs. Mr. Marvel questioned whether the salaries were left out in E955. Mr. Gosnell stated E955 would provide the current director, the internal auditor, word processing management assistant and deputy director to be funded in a new budget called Director of Public Safety. He said the negatives come out of 06 and they come in on 4719; knock them out of one and add them to another, it is a wash dollarwise. Mr. Fettic asked what the advantages were of moving the hearing officer out of the director's direct supervision and who will supervise that function? Mr. Weller said this was authorized by the Interim Finance Committee in January 1994 during which time they formed a special services division. The advantages were to transfer some of the administrative responsibility from the director's office; it was a manner of management control. He added Jim Hawk, Chief of the Special Services Division would currently be in charge of supervision; with the reorganization, they will return to the director's office on the motor vehicle side. Mr. Weller could not state who would supervise the positions under the new reorganization. Mr. Fettic asked what the Administrative Officer III, Jan Capaldi, would be doing under the proposed reorganization. Mr. Weller said she works on various administrative assignments, handles media inquiries, and public complaints; supervising the hearings officers was not a full time task. Mr. Fettic asked Mr. Weller to supply more supervisory information to the subcommittee. Ms. Guinchigliani asked for an explanation of the lab contracts. Mr. Weller said they deal with contracts on breathalizer calibrations. They do not deal with DUI's and blood samples; they are for the Committee on Intoxification. He said he believed this was a statutory mandate. Ms. Guinchigliani asked for more details for the subcommittee to ensure there was no duplication by narcotics or the Highway Patrol. Mr. Allard asked whether there were duplication of services created by the reorganization. Mr. Weller stated he did not see any; the lines would be impacted by the addition of new personnel and equipment. Mr. Allard stated he did not understand the reason for the separation. Mr. Weller said it would give the director the ability to concentrate on one set of problems. Mr. Allard questioned the cost of the addition of new buildings, stationery, and emblems. Mr. Weller agreed there would be added expense. Mr. Allard suggested it would be more cost effective to add the one position and equipment and not create two separate departments. Mr. Close asked for clarification regarding the Veteran's Affairs category under Department of Motor Vehicles. Mr. Weller explained during the last session they were a stand-alone agency. When the reorganization was proposed, it was suggested the military join the Department of Public Safety. The military and Veteran's Affairs are affiliated through their service relationship. He said when the military was left alone as a stand-alone agency, the Veteran's Affairs were forgotten, ending up by accident in the budget. Mr. Gosnell said in that Veteran's Affairs does not have a public safety law enforcement activity, they placed it where it could best provide support for the organization. Mr. Marvel stated the committee would be giving this further consideration. Senator O'Donnell stated he was not satisfied with the agency's budget and felt it would be mismanagement on the committee's part not to give the DMV a tactical team of good quality data processing staff as well as some direction for the purchase of new computer equipment. Mr. Marvel asked Mr. Weller how functional his department would be during the upcoming Capital Improvement remodel. Mr. Weller replied Henderson was presently on line in the CIP as a new full-service facility. He stated the work would be split with the East Saraha. He could not explain how it was going to be accomplished in Carson City; they may use trailers. Mrs. Tiffany said she would be paying particular attention to this budget while on the subcommittee. She expressed her disappointment, stating DMV was a nondirected agency and reorganization was not the answer; automation would not solve the problem. Mrs. Brower mentioned she did not feel there was any advantage to separate the agency. Mr. Weller said he spends 60-70% of his time dealing with motor vehicle matters. Mr. Marvel stated the committee will scrutinize the reorganization very carefully. Chairman Arberry questioned Mr. Weller regarding office security. Mr. Weller said there were security personnel on contract, highway patrol and bureau of enforcement investigators who carry guns. He said although there were occasional verbal and physical confrontations with customers, it was more of a preventive measure. Ms. Guinchigliani reported the subcommitee would address the present policy of having all titles kept in Carson City and registration. She stated she did not feel the shifting of departments would lead to better customer service. A mechanism wherein management is working in tandem with the people delivering the service and those receiving the service is much needed. Ms. Guinchigliani requested a status report for the subcommittee outlining future outreach plans and satellite buildings. Mr. Allard asked Mr. Weller whether the mail-in registration renewals and acceptance of driver's licenses from other states will shorten the lines. Mr. Weller replied they will have a significant positive impact. In respect to the hearings, Mr. Gosnell reported the budget would be moved to the DMV side in addition to two positions: one new hearing officer for southern Nevada plus a support person. Mr. Marvel asked for clarification of budget account 4714. Mr. Gosnell stated this was his budget and was similar to that of the director's office. He said budget account 4714 will become two budgets: budget account 4714 will remain on the DMV side as administrative services and budget account 4720 is created from the positions that presently exist from within the overall package. Their goal is to share the accounts payable system through a fileserver. Mr. Marvel asked whether the department had taken postage into account. Mr. Weller replied they were working on this with Mr. Pinkerton of the Budget Division. Mrs. Guinchigliani asked Mr. Weller to justify the addition of the mail clerk position. Mr. Weller stated if he does not have three mail clerks for eight hours a day, the inmates run the mailroom. There must be someone at all times to supervise the inmates. He stated, in terms of the department, they distribute close to $3 million pieces of mail to the department's offices in Carson City - making runs to Parole and Probation as well as to the Parole Board. He reported the impact of the BDR will be seen in the 1997 session. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, RECORDS SEARCH - PAGE 1697 Mr. Weller maintained the records program is a status quo budget. The money that is received is applied to the Highway Fund after the cost for the program is deducted. He said the program will be impacted to some degree by the crime bill in the sense of what information can be released. Mr. Marvel asked whether the staff had other duties. Mr. Gosnell said they did not. In response to Mr. Marvel's question regarding the amount of receivable accounts, Mr. Gosnell responded he did not understand the question - the receivables they have are all connected to the Highway Fund and are current. He stated Brady and the fingerprint program are two account receivables that are not brought in through their normal activities. The Brady and fingerprint revenues are program related. Motor Carrier and driver's license revenues are brought in through the department's regular revenue system and deposited into the Highway Fund. He reported they have a cash flow problem on the bad check situation in the Motor Carrier revenue. At any one time they are running approximately $25 million out of $300 million. Ninety percent of the bad checks are caught after the first month; it is the 10% they have to chase. Senator Raggio asked for the present policy on departmental lists. Mr. Gosnell said the department felt secure regarding who can tap this information. He said they normally do business with insurance companies; average citizens requesting the information must have a legal right or accident report filed for acquisition. He cited an instance wherein UNR bought the list in order to do a medical study. Senator Raggio asked Mr. Weller how he accounted for one million requests. Mr. Gosnell said those are his work statistics; every phone call and letter is counted whether it is a revenue producer or not. He reported frequent visits by those wishing to check their records. In respect to the profit made from these requests, Mr. Gosnell reported they will revert $4.2 million, over and above what they need to spend on the program to the Highway Fund at the end of 1997. Senator Raggio asked for an explanation of the Licenses and Fees. Mr. Gosnell said they were the revenues they charge to the insurance companies; there are no other types of fees coming into the program. Mr. Hettrick asked what the minimum size list was in order to request someone's name, what would the cost be and what would be a valid reason for the request. Mr. Weller said he did not have an answer. Legitimate reasons include documentation that the person is working on an accident or divorce case; private investigators have their own accounts. He said the system is as good as the people that run it and the people that make the inquiries. Mr. Hettrick stated on one side of the coin is the privacy issue and on the other the revenue issue. Mr. Fettic asked Mr. Weller to elaborate on their privacy policies, how employees were trained and the penalties for those who abuse the open account system. Mr. Weller mentioned the information is classified as a public record and decision making is difficult for employees. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, DRIVERS LICENSE - PAGE 1701 Mr. Bruce Glover, Chief of the Drivers License Division, introduced Virginia Lewis, fiscal analyst and Mark Krmpotic of Administrative Services. He gave a brief overview of last year's activities emphasizing service as the division's first priority. Services implemented to reduce lines in Las Vegas included an employer-based program (pilot project findings to be reported to the subcommittee), extended hours, renewal by mail and the cross training of all vehicle registration and driver's license employees (to solve the problem of people being in the wrong line). Mr. Marvel asked whether the mail-in program would help the division reduce staff. Mr. Glover replied that it will not, however, he felt it could be accomplished with existing staff. There were no questions on base budget. Regarding the decision unit, M-200, Mr. Glover explained the unit addresses their critical need for additional staff in southern Nevada and passage of pending legislation licenses should have an impact on the reduction of lines. Mr. Marvel asked why there was no fee under the Governor Recommendation line item. Mr. Krmpotic said it was rolled into the base budget. Assemblywoman Chowning asked for a clarification of the fee increases for motorcycle and commercial driver's licenses. Mr. Glover said they were not built into the budget since they did not know whether they would pass and could not count on the revenues if they were. Mrs. Chowning asked Mr. Glover to explain the process. Mr. Krmpotic said the money normally goes directly into the Highway Fund and appropriations are made out of the Highway Fund to the budget itself. Mrs. Chowning asked whether the committee would be informed whether this was approved before sine die. She requested this be further explored in the subcommittee meeting. In response to Mrs. Chowning's comments, Mr. Gosnell stated the monies collected from registration and driver's licenses goes into the Highway Fund as a revenue. Legislators make appropriations to the agency based on their budget requests. He said, except for the 22% relationship, there is no relationship. A green dollar going in from driver's license and a green dollar from registration is just a revenue; under the cap they are allowed to appropriate up to 22%. The relationship (with the increased fees as shown) has no direct bearing on the driver's license budget. Mrs. Chowning said legislators were told the reason for this was because staff was needed, the tests were lengthy, etc. Because of this, Mrs. Chowning felt there was a direct relationship. Mr. Gosnell maintained there was a relationship in respect to the 22%. He said if they never increased revenues, they would never be able to increase any expenditures within the DMV budget. If DMV sees a 4-1/2% increase in revenues over the next two years as a result of demographics and adjustments, ostensibly they should be able to expand their expenditures in the budget by 4-1/2%. He stressed there is no one-to-one match on the money. Mrs. Chowning stated the committee needs to see that somewhere, see where it is coming from and see where it is going. Mr. Spitler asked why the committee was not looking at this agency from the customer's perspective. He requested objectives outlining the percentage of time it takes to deal with the customer for the subcommittee meeting. Mr. Spitler stated citizens are not complaining about DMV counter services; the problem is getting to the window. At the subcommittee, he wants to see statistics that reflect the waiting line time, percentage of customers served, and amount of money needed to accomplish the goals. Mr. Spitler said it would then be the legislator's obligation to decide whether or not the cap was appropriate or inappropriate. Mr. Allard asked Mr. Gosnell to provide the subcommittee with reasons regarding how the increase in license fees will benefit motorcyle drivers and how it relates to the 22% cap. Senator Raggio discussed the motor voter law and the resistance it was meeting in other states. He pointed to the DMV budget, page 1703 under M-582, and questioned the impact of the motor- voter program on licensing and registration waiting lines and their past experiences with the cost. He said according to the DMV budget, the figure was reflected to be $32,000 annually as a maintenance cost of the program. He noted in the registration budget, page 1712, the expenditure for voter registration was budgeted at $13,000 and zeroed out in the future. He added it appeared in this budget for the first time as an expenditure item under driver's license rather than registration. He asked Mr. Gosnell for an explanation. Mr. Gosnell said motor-voter was transferred out of registration's budget and put into driver's license in last session's budget. Senator Raggio asked whether the true cost of the program was $31,694. Mr. Gosnell said the money was for printing fees for reproducing the forms. He said they are mandated by the federal government to give everyone a motor- voter application. Senator Raggio asked Mr.Gosnell to explain why California is refusing to comply with the law and whether it added to longer lines. Mr. Gosnell stated Nevada has always had a Motor Voter Act and found that it has had minimal impact. The only impact are the fees for printing the numerous forms. Ms. Giunchigliani asked why DMV is absorbing the costs and whether they had explored the idea of supplying mail-in voter registration forms. Mr. Gosnell noted this was the only General Fund resource they had. He stated they have a renew- - by-mail program. Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Glover if DMV had analyzed their customers in respect to the causation of long lines. Mr. Glover said this budget by itself would not completely resolve the problem. Senator Jacobsen asked whether an educational promotional program be in order for first-time customers. Mr. Glover stated the elimination of driver testing should be explored since more time is needed to educate novice, impaired and problem drivers. He added there was no time for educational programs; they were just trying to survive. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, COMMERCIAL DRIVERS LICENSE - PAGE 1707 Mr. Glover reported the Commercial Drivers License Act was instituted by the U.S. Congress in 1986 and requires states to relicense and test all commercial drivers. Their budget requires no additional members to their staff of sixteen. Mr. Glover stated the fee is $85 for a commercial drivers license driving test; $55 without the drive test. Mr. Marvel requested information on the photo license fee. Mr. Glover said it amounts to $1 in additon to each license that they issue. He added they are presently into their four-year renewal cycle. Mr. Marvel asked Mr. Glover to justify the travel category monies. Mr. Glover said in order to comply with federal recertification, four staffers must annually travel to Appleton, Wisconsin where they are trained in commercial drivers licensing; the fee is $1,500 for one week. Mr. Marvel asked whether the agency would still be in compliance should one person be sent, returning with enough information to train the others. Mr. Glover said this may be a possibility as long as the agency kept their programs up. Mr. Glover said there are specific commercial drivers license centers in Las Vegas (one), Reno (one) and Elko (one). Most of their offices are able to issue commercial licenses due to the staff being cross-trained. When questioned further by Mr. Marvel in respect to two people being sent for recertification instead of four and having the two pass their training on to staff in Nevada, Mr. Glover did not respond. Regarding the bill to increase the commercial drivers license fee should the driving skills test be conducted, Ms. Giunchigliani said she did not see a breakout in the measurement indicators and asked how many had the skills test administered. Mr. Glover said he did not have the statistics but would bring it to the subcommittee. She asked whether the fees generated would be deposited into the Highway Fund. Mr. Glover concurred. Ms. Giunchiglini stated the committee will not know what happens or the reason for the increase in those funds. Mr. Glover said that is also correct; it will increase the agency's revenue to keep them within 22%. Mr. Spitler asked whether the division was 100% self supporting. Mr. Glover answered that it was. Mr. Spitler questioned the rationale of moving the rent and utilities to the Administrative Services Division. Mr. Glover responded it was for management purposes and to facilitate their accounting procedures. Mr. Spitler asked if they had work papers to prove they were not subsidizing someone else's rent and utilities. Mr. Gosnell said they could supply the work papers to the subcommittee. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, REGISTRATION - PAGE 1711 Mr. Raymond Sparks, Acting Deputy Director, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, said he was replacing Donna Wadey, Acting Chief of the Registration Division, who was ill. Ms. Joanne Keller, Management Analyst for the Registration Division was also present to testify. Mr. Sparks read from prepared text (Exhibit D). He read up to the second paragraph on page four and skipped to the budget. Mr. Sparks said the division has been extremely busy over the last biennium implementing new programs, making modifications to existing programs and continually fending with the ongoing problem of providing customer service levels. Mr. Marvel reported he receives many complaints from auto dealers and asked whether the division had cleaned up the backlog on titles. Mr. Sparks said it had been a major problem and they had shipped staff resources from other program areas into the title production section. At the worst point they were just over four months behind in processing titles. The current backlog is twelve weeks, however, this is still not acceptable. He stated their goal is no more than a month; two weeks would be ideal. He said typically their first priority is staffing windows. Mr. Sparks said they first started falling behind during the hiring freeze in 1991. Mr. Spitler asked what impact the 34 new positions would have on the mail-in backlog and waiting lines. He also questioned the license plate manufacturing costs. Mr. Sparks said the expenses were determined by the cost of the raw materials and the projected production numbers. He noted the projected increase for materials was substantial. Mr. Sparks said the bulk of the new positions requested were for the title program; he felt the backlog could be totally eliminated should the positions be approved. He recounted the remaining positions will be used for the mail-in registration renewal programs as well as new staff for the West Flamingo office in Las Vegas. Mr. Spitler requested waiting line projection calculations for the subcommittee. Mr. Sparks mentioned the drivers license division had attempted such calculations; the registration division will try. Mr. Sparks reported the turnaround time to be five days for the mail-in renewal applications. Mrs. Chowning inquired whether the committee had considered an express line for people with just one registration renewal. Mr. Sparks replied they used to have express lines for renewal transactions only; it was self-defeating in that it kept people from mailing in their renewals. He said they were re-evaluating and were considering providing a special window for people with multiple transactions. In respect to new computer equipment networking registration and licensing data, Mrs. Chowning asked for an explanation. Mr. Sparks said the plan was to contract for a business process reengineering study or BPR. They realized computerization is a significant success factor they need to accomplish, however, before redesign they wanted to analyze the current business processes. He said a one-shot has been requested to fund that study and get the division started on the redesign. Mr. Sparks remarked the registration and drivers license data interface would be a very expensive program and funding would most probably be requested in the 1997 legislative session. Referring to M-100, Mrs. Chowning asked why the inflationary increase in food was requested. Mr. Sparks said the funds were used to supply inmates at the Nevada State Prison license plate factory with coffee, cream and sugar. Mr. Allard asked whether the division anticipated registering more vehicles in 1995 than in 1994 and why the measurement indicator figures in the budget remained the same. Mr. Sparks said it was an error; the figure for 1995 should read 1,228,512. Ms. Giunchigliani reported it took six minutes to register her vehicle recently in Carson City and she complimented the office for its efficiency. She questioned the reason for the forfeiture of the blue license plates. Mr. Sparks said the final decision would be made during the 1995 session. The fading and peeling paint on the blue licenses which began issuance in 1969. The plates are to the point of illegibility which is the rationale for the collection. He noted the blue plates have become a status symbol and people are reluctant to surrender them. Ms. Giunchigliani raised the question of penalties for missing mail-in deadlines. Mr. Sparks said this was discussed during the last session and the surcharge was not well received by some members of the legislature. He said the discount would require an adjustment to the budget and would reduce the revenues. Mr. Sparks explained their future plan to renew registrations by telephone which would require the acceptance of credit cards. He said the credit card company would charge a discount to the state which could amount to $1 million. The charge has become the major stumbling block for implementing the system in Nevada. Ms. Guinchigliani questioned the issue of potential statutory change. Mr. Sparks said he was unaware of this. Referring to page 17 of the BPR, Ms. Guinchigliani asked whether there was a program to inform people of the proper paperwork required for their renewal visit - it was reported in the BPR that 30% of registation customers did not have proper documentation and had to return to DMV in order to complete the transaction. Mr. Sparks said they did not have a formal program to address the problem. Senator O'Donnell, referring to the computer networking feasibility study, asked whether DMV could accomplish the same results if they had their own technical or management staff. Mr. Sparks agreed the agency could complete the study if staff were available. He said before DMV asked the legislature for significant funding, they wanted to make sure the expenditure was justified. Senator O'Donnell stated he was not sure the BPR was the correct approach and thought the agency should give thought to hiring staff for this task. Mr. Close requested further written information on the registration division audit. Mr. Sparks said he would prepare a report for the subcommittee. Senator Coffin suggested the DMV offer a refurbishing service for the blue plates, the costs paid for by the license owner. He said this would remove the legibility problem. His second suggestion was to use the blue plate on the front of the car, the grey on the back. Mr. Sparks thanked the Senator for his proposal. Mrs. Tiffany, referring to enforcement investigators, asked whether they should be transferred to the Investigations Division. Mr. Sparks said it was related to the reorganization; the Bureau of Enforcement Investigators, currently part of the registration division, have peace officer authority. Approximately 95% of their enforcement actions are taken administratively; the DMV assesses an administrative fine for a violation or take some action against the license. The rationale for moving the positions into the Investigation Division was to refer those type of investigative matters that would be pursued criminally to the division and the remaining investigators in the BOE would focus strictly on administrative sanctions. Mrs. Tiffany asked whether Mr. Sparks believed this should be done. Mr. Sparks said if they were moved into the divison of investigation and focused the criminal enforcement programs in that division, some effectiveness may be gained. Mrs. Tiffany said she was hesitant to implement this since Mr. Sparks reported no major problems. Mr. Sparks remarked there would be advantages either way. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, VERIFICATION OF INSURANCE -1721 Mr. Sparks reported this account was funded through fees which were charged to reinstate suspended vehicle registrations. State statute requires that funds in reserve in excess of $1 million at the end of each fiscal year be transferred from this account into the State Highway Fund. He stated the major change could be found in M-200, the Demographics Decision Unit. Because they are anticipating that the new Insurance Verification Unit program will be substantially more effective in identifying uninsured vehicles, Mr. Sparks predicted an increase in the number of vehicle registrations that were suspended. Mr. Marvel inquired whether their measurement indicators were realistic. Mr. Sparks replied the more significant of the two numbers was the number of suspensions for no insurance. He said they determined the number by estimating that 5% of the vehicles that are required to be insured would be uninsured and the program would be 100% successful in identifying and suspending those registrations. He said the numbers are speculative until they have a year's worth of experience with the program. Mr. Marvel noted the revenue had been increasing yearly. Ms. Tiffany inquired whether there was a reserve in the account. Mr. Sparks reported in fiscal 1995-96, it was estimated to be $2.9 million; everything but $1 million will transfer to the Highway Fund. Consequently, $1 million will roll forward into fiscal 1997 in this account. Mr. Marvel asked whether the $1 million reserve could be reduced. Mr. Sparks stated it could be; the only concern would be having enough money at the beginning of the fiscal year to continue operations until revenues came in. Ms. Tiffany declared she had trouble reading the budget format and suggested the reserve be closely examined during the subcommittee meetings. Mr. Sparks was requested to supply historical information for the upcoming meeting. Mr. Allard mentioned he would like to see improvement in the insurance verification. He asked Mr. Sparks to supply the subcommittee with statistics on the number of insurance companies requesting information, the number they process, and the fees administered for suspensions. Senator Coffin asked Mr. Sparks to elaborate on the verification notices presently being mailed. Mr. Sparks reported the notices request proof of insurance. Senator Coffin asked Mr. Sparks to furnish a copy of the letter; he predicted each Senator will be having four to five thousand or more recipients in their district - they may want to know in advance just what the wording was. Ms. Giunchigliani asked why the number of insurance verifications dropped in fiscal 1997. Mr. Sparks said it was a typographical error and should be changed to 196,000. She questioned whether there was a penalty for insurance companies that do not notify the DMV of their verifications or cancellations. Mr. Sparks said there will be two penalties: the department has the authority to withhold drivers license information to insurance companies who don't report their policy information to DMV and the second is being developed by regulation of the insurance commissioner - there will be a monetary fine. The fine has not yet been determined. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, MOTOR VEHICLE POLLUTION CONTROL - PAGE 1725 Mr. Sparks read from prepared text, (Exhibit E), pages 11 through 13. Mr. Spitler asked whether all the positions dealt with pollution control. Mr. Sparks concurred. Mr. Spitler questioned where the sixteen people from this account were moved during the last biennium and did it address the backlog on registration. Mr. Sparks explained that salaries for a number of DMV technicians were paid for out of this budget account based on the rationale and there was a certain amount of time spent by all technicians in registering a vehicle that was related to the emissions control program. He agreed to bring more detailed information to the subcommittee meeting. Mr. Sparks noted over $1-1/2 million in transfers to other agencies were made from this budget account. The transfers were not requested by the divison. He pointed out the total grants and transfers to the counties almost equalled the entire cost of the division's administration of the program. He continued, while the expenditures in this budget were substantial, they were made for a number of purposes, only one of which was administering the emission control program by DMV. Mr. Sparks said it was fairly certain a number of changes would have to be made to the emission controls program because of the federal requirements; the mechanics training and public information program would be changed to make the program more effective. Mr. Marvel inquired whether this would increase the cost for Las Vegans. Mr. Sparks replied if they could rely on what the EPA has promised, the answer was negative. They will probably require an updated analyzer - approximately $17,000 versus the projections which range from $200,000 to $300,000 for the I/M 240 equipment. He added the emission stations that provide the testing set their own fees; the DMV establishes a maximum they can charge. He reported the emission stations could slightly increase their fee in order to recoup the costs of the new equipment. There was no projected increase for the fees DMV charged the emission stations. In respect to overcharging, Mr. Marvel asked for an explanation of the $3,000,000 in the balance forward account. Mr. Sparks stated Mr. Marvel's observation was probably correct. He noted the fees went up substantially; the projected reserve is a reflection of the increase. With the unknowns facing DMV with respect to making changes to the program, they anticipate the need for tapping some of the $3,000,000 reserve. Mrs. Evans related a complaint from one of her constituents regarding the new requirement to examine whether the emission control device had been tampered with. The constituent stated it would require more time and asked why the fee cap was not raised accordingly. Mr. Sparks said he was aware of the complaint. The department requires the emission inspection consist of a visual check to make sure the devices are present and functioning - they need not use instrumentation to make sure it is working. Mr. Sparks said he had scheduled a meeting with the Nevada Gasoline Retailers Association to resolve the matter. Mrs. Chowning said the measurement indicators did not show how many businesses had been inspected and fined and questioned where the revenue was and where in the budget would it be reflected. Mr. Sparks stated they assessed 113 administrative fines in fiscal year 1994 representing approximately $170,000; not all were related to the emission controls program (some were against car dealers, emission stations, and car rental agencies). He guaranteed to supply a breakdown for the subcommittee. Mrs. Chowning questioned where these were reflected. Mr. Sparks stated if it was a fine against a car dealer the money would go back into the Highway Fund; a fine against an emission station or emission inspector would revert back into this budget account (included in the fees ledger in the revenue). DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, MOTOR CARIER - PAGE 1731 Mr. Sparks read from prepared text, (Exhibit E), page 14. Mr. Marvel asked whether the division had noticed an improvement in their collections. Mr. Sparks said they had; a detailed report would be furnished to the Interim Finance Committee. He said there were eight recommendations in the motor carrier audit; five had been remedied. One was on hold due to the legislation which will move the point of taxation on special fuel at the retail level. He reported, should the legislation be approved, the recommendation to use fuel pump meters on the retailers would become moot. Senator Raggio requested an explanation on the visible smoke enforcement program. Mr. Sparks said it had been in place for six years and was funded by the pollution control account and is administered by the Nevada Highway Patrol. Vehicles that are visibly emitting smoke are stopped and issued a repair order or citation or both. Senator O'Donnell asked why this was relegated to four officers instead of it being the responsibility of every NHP officer. Mr. Sparks stated the four individuals were funded by the pollution control account; the majority of their activities need to be related to the enforcement activities. Senator O'Donnell asked whether this was federally funded. Mr. Sparks said the money was derived from the fees for the certificates charged to the emission stations; they subsequently transfer in the neighborhood of $200,000 yearly to the highway patrol to administer the program. He told the Senator to ask the Chief of the Highway Patrol regarding why every patrolman did not have this responsibility. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DIRECTOR'S OFFICE - PUBLIC SAFETY - PAGE 1745 Mr. Weller clarified Mrs. Tiffany's question regarding the switching of three positions from the Bureau of Enforcement to the Investigator Divison. He stated the purpose was to put like services together; bureau staff spend 10-15 percent of their time on law enforcement issues, the rest is on regulatory or administrative. They all hold peace officer status. He stated the rules are different when something is administered from a regulatory view as opposed to a law enforcement point of view. Mr. Weller reported there were three program issues impacting the public safety area: NDI crime bill funding, court assessment fees and potential HAZMAT fee impact. Mr. Gosnell stated budget account 4719, Director's Office, is half of what was left over from budget account 4706 and the administrative services split is a fair allocation based on workload. The only new position is the director's post for DMV. Mr. Marvel asked for a clarification of cost allocation. Mr. Gosnell said they took what was presently funded and used the funds exactly that way in the future. They made no increases or decreases in the General Fund or Highway Fund. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PUBLIC SAFETY - 1747 Comparing budgets 4719, 4720 and 4706, Mr. Arberry asked whether there was sufficient funding for this operation. Mr. Gosnell said initially they looked at seven more positions for both departments should they split; one being the new director, leaving six. The issue was revisited in respect to no increase in funding. He said it was their feeling with adequate staff at the lower levels and automation, the department would be able to accomplish the task. He stated, however, he could not give a definite "yes" or "no." Mr. Arberry asked whether the budgets would be funded strictly by highway funds. Mr. Gosnell answered affirmatively; they predicted the department splits on existing funding at their present level of funding. He added there was no increase in general funding, no allocation. This was a continuation of what they had done for many years. Mr. Arberry questioned whether there was any portion of the budget that was general funded. Referring to page 1748, Mr. Pinkerton said the $43,000 at the bottom reflected the money as a transfer from the director's office for the old administrative services. It was General Fund money and was used to match federal funds, representing a part of the reorganization during the last legislature where two accounting positions were moved from emergency services to administrative services. The only increase in funding was for the Director of Motor Vehicles position which he believed was funded through highway funds. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, AUTOMATION - PAGE 1751 Mr. Weller indicated this account supports the motor vehicles operations side of the department. He explained it was a status quo budget; two additional programmers (one for the south, one for the north) had been requested. Requests are being made for technical training workshop monies and more hardware training on the bull systems. E125 and E175 reflect the division's attempt to try to increase their capability within the department by cutting down on outside contractors. He said this was placed in the wrong portion of the committee's budget books; it belongs in the Motor Vehicles portion. Mrs. Tiffany asked whether the programming staff had enough time to work with the consultants. Mr. Weller stated he thought it important enough for them to make the time by working a little harder. In respect to business process re-engineering study, Mrs. Tiffany asked whether it will include rewriting the applicaton programs. Mr. Weller stated this was the second part, the BPR is estimated to be $595,000 and the additional $340,000 for the second part of the one-shot is their first initial effort at determining what kind of environment they should be entering in the future. Mr. Marvel inquired whether this was entirely highway money. Mr. Weller stated it was. Mr. Hettrick questioned whether the Information Services' total expenditures amounting to $1.2 million (ongoing) were cost effective. Mr. Weller could not answer and referred the question to the budget office. He said for $800,000 (a one-time fix) they could take the information and place it on the Public Safety computer, thereafter spending around $100,000 annually for maintenance. Referring to training, page 1752, Mr. Arberry asked for an explanation. Mr. Weller stated they had not used $2,000 worth of training in 1994. Their staff was occupied with mandatory insurance projects and due to turnover, had to be on the job. Mr. Arberry stated it did not meet the base budget definition; there should have been $50 in 1996 and $50 in 1997. Mr. Weller did not disagree; it was submitted wrong. Mr. Pinkerton, pointing to the narrative, said the training costs were incorrectly charged to the operating category. Mr. Fettic requested that information services' figures be submitted in writing. Mr. Weller stated he would comply with the request. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, CAPITOL POLICE - PAGE 1769 Mr. Mike Meizel, Administrator, Buildings and Grounds Division, stated the Capitol Police budget is under the Department of Administration. Under the planned reorganization of Public Safety, the Capitol Police will be part of the Public Safety department. He stated his division created the budget. He said the budget is funded from the rents that state agencies pay to the Buildings and Grounds Divison; it will be channeled back to Public Safety to fund the Capitol Police. The primary increases in the budget for this year, according to Mr. Meizel, were due to the new Las Vegas state office building. The Legislature approved six officers for the facility during the last biennium, giving them a sixteen hour, five day a week protection level. He reported after polling the various agencies occupying the building, the overall desire was for 24- hour security. He reported justification for full time security to be high employee and client load and juxtaposition to Cashman Field (many incidences of vandalism) across the street. He said the costs associated with four additional police officers for this facility were under M-200, bringing the total positions in southern Nevada to ten. Mr. Meisel stated they would be stationed at the new building and would be able to respond to calls from other agencies from this position. Mr. Marvel questioned the dignitary protection program. Mr. Meizel reported they are mainly occupied with facility protection; the main priority is for the constitutional officers. He said dignitary protection, although it is growing, is in smaller proportion to all their other tasks. Mr. Marvel, concerned with the duplication of services, questioned Mr. Meizel regarding whether the Capitol Police would resume dignitary protection services should the reorganization take place. Mr. Meisel said it would be up to the Department of Public Safety. In regard to module M-200, Senator Jacobsen, inquired whether they had adequate quarters in the new building to house the four officers. He added the Capitol Police worked out a cooperative agreement with Las Vegas Metro Police. Mr. Close asked Mr. Meizel for a breakdown of the present temporary security staff salaries. Mr. Meizel said he would be happy to comply. Referring to page 1771, new equipment, module E-720, Mr. Allard asked Mr. Meizel to clarify the $835. He said $4,207 is for the fax, computer and software - information services equipment. The $835 is strictly associated with fingerprint equipment. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, HIGHWAY PATROL - PAGE 1755 Colonel Paul Corbin introduced his co-budget presenter, Captain John Bawden, Chief Fiscal Officer. Colonel Corbin gave a brief description of the patrol's statutory responsibilities. Goals included improving the quality of services provided to highway users; reducing the severity and frequency of traffic collisions targeting causative violations; the dissemination of traffic safety education; reducing commercial vehicle collisions targeting safety defects, driver deficiencies and unsafe motor carrier fleet practices; and being accountable and managing all allocated resources effectively. Captain Bawden reported they have exceeded projections for their traffic violations by 16% in fiscal 93-94 and are running at approximately 2.7% this year which indicates a flattening out due to demographic growth eating up their available time. Mr. Marvel asked for a breakdown of their other non-state revenues. The Captain stated $91,735 was collected from security service agreements for services such as traffic control for private contractors or escort over dimensional loads across Nevada's highways. He said $39,000 was for a parole and probation dispatcher, previously working out of the University of Las Vegas police department and now located in the Las Vegas Communications Center. He added there was a donation of preliminary breath test devices valued at $3,800 last year. Mr. Marvel asked if the reclassification of their highway patrol sergeant to lieutenant was in their base budget. Captain Bawden answered it was indicated as an adjustment to the base expenses. Mr. Marvel said it shouldn't be, it was an enhancement. Mr. Joel Pinkerton acknowledged Mr. Marvel was correct; the sergeant who was currently doing the Governor's security function was in the base budget. He said it would be a reclassification if the Governor's security program were to be approved. He said the only time he showed a reclassification somewhere else was if there was a significant increase. He stated in this particular case, the position would be elevated one rank to supervise the Governor's security and he did not consider it significant. Mr. Marvel said the base budgets should be kept sacrosanct for maintenance of inflation and enhancements. Mr. Pinkerton had no problem seeing Mr. Marvel's viewpoint. Captain Bawden reported commercial vehicle violations were currently down due to staff vacancy problems. He said there was a body of forty officers who performed most of their commercial enforcement inspections and activities. He noted accidents have continued to increase, up 14% last year, and were running at about the same this year. Senator O'Donnell asked what the patrol does for wives of officers killed in the line of action. Captain Bawden said the federal government rewards the family with $100,000. He said his future plans include organizing a support group of concerned citizens who can deal with the surviving families' financial needs. Senator O'Donnell stated it was tragic that the state did not play a more active roll in helping the spouses. Mrs. Tiffany requested a future meeting with Colonel Corbin regarding dispatch systems. Emphasizing her experience in the dispatch equipment field, she questioned the $400,000 figure. The Colonel said he would have his Information Services Manager arrange a meeting with her. Senator Raggio requested an explanation of the unmarked vehicle program - whether it showed up as an enhancement in a budget somewhere; whether equipment was needed; and whether current office personnel would be used. The Captain stated a savings would be realized due to overhead bars and spotlights not being necessary. He said they would utilize officers on staff and use a limited amount of vehicles and mark them to create an omnipresence of more patrol officers. The Senator said it was a policy issue and had been discussed during previous sessions and not approved, generally because of public concern. The Captain reported a public poll in October, 1994, in which 60% of respondents were in favor of such a program. The Captain said in a thirty day period, the pilot program saw accidents reduced by 23%. The Captain said he would provide each member of the committee with a copy of the results. In reference to the dignitary protection program, Senator Coffin asked whether cost comparisons had been made between outside security service contractors and state troopers for protection of the Governor's mansion. The Colonel reported most governors were protected by their state troopers rather than a private security force, however, the matter could be studied. Mrs. Evans reported Mr. Weller's response to a request her staff had made regarding home storage of vehicles was unacceptable and would have to be cleaned up for the subcommittee. Mrs. Chowning referring to E710, replacement equipment, stated $1.4 million seemed quite high for mobile and portable radios and requested more information for the subcommittee. Mr. Marvel apologized for neglecting to recognize Ms. Merlene Olmstead who wished to testify during discussion of DMV registration that morning. He had committee members turn to page 1711. Ms. Olmstead, a member of the Ford Motor Credit staff in Sacramento, testified on the title problems her organization had been experiencing due to delays. She said Nevada's delays had forced her organization to produce forms in order to protect their liens. She said Nevada citizenry had been responding angrily over the fact they had not been advised their title had not been perfected. She reported the lack of title prevents the lienholder from selling the vehicle in a timely fashion, therefore, the vehicle must be kept in their possession and not sold. The decrease in value was passed on to the debtor as a deficiency balance. She warned there could be a class action movement taken towards Nevada DMV as they were responsible for these vehicles not been sold timely. In response to Mr. Marvel's question regarding turnaround time, Ms. Olmstead stated California's was approximately two months. There was an option of a 72-hour title for an additional fee. Ms. Olmstead said finance sources and dealers are feeling the $10 hit each time they make any inquiry regarding their lien status on titles. She reported as of Friday, she had $10,500,000 outstanding in untitled Nevada vehicles. Mr. Marvel said he shared her concerns. Mr. Spitler asked what the standard should be; what state has set a benchmark? Ms. Olmstead said California is progressing towards a paperless title which she felt would be the benchmark. Mr. Weller was asked by Mr. Marvel whether the agency had a plan to address this problem. Mr. Weller responded the problem could be alleviated with resources and computer automated equipment. A quick turnaround title for an extra fee had been proposed, however, the budget office did not think it appropriate to make the request during the session. Mr. Marvel said it should be examined and requested Mr. Weller to bring more data to the subcommittee. Mr. Sparks said they provide expedited title service; they can get title immediately over the counter with no extra charge, however, car dealers are limited to three per day. He added there was another expedited title process through their field offices where the turnaround time was approximately one week. They try to limit the preferential service for truly justifiable cases. He indicated their plan was to strip resources from other program areas and build up the titling staff in order to reduce the backlog. He noted turnaround time had been reduced to three months. Addressing Mr. Spitler's question, Mr. Sparks stated two weeks would be an ideal turnaround time. Mr. Dini asked what could be done to expedite services between now and July as a temporary measure. Mr. Sparks said they were presently doing all that could be done. He noted there had been a lag resulting from training time; employees that were temporarily reassigned to take care of titles three months should be up to speed by now. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY - HIGHWAY PATROL SPECIAL FUND - PAGE 1763 Captain Bawden stated this was a mirror of budget account 4713; the same performance indicators were used. Mr. Marvel asked whether they were considering combining the two. The Captain said it would be advantageous to join the two accounts under one management area. Mr. Daryl Capurro, Nevada Motor Transport Association, said the real problem was the 22% cap. He stated, over the last few years, the Legislature had mandated programs to the DMV and gave them just enough money to administer them or in some cases, simply no money at all. He noted during his 13-session experience, they had been bumping up against the 22% cap, in some cases exceeding it. He stressed it would take more than additional staff to solve the problem; electronic titling and transfer needed to be explored so that information can be delivered instantaneously. Referring to Mrs. Tiffany's comments regarding Registration Division positions, Mr. Capurro recommended the three inspectors from the Bureau of Enforcement not be moved to NDI. He said NDI is a General Fund agency and the Bureau of Enforcement positions are highway funded. If one department is split into two, one will be providing the enforcement effort for the other department's activities. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - PAGE 1773 Mr. James Rhode, Program Manager, National Governors Association-HAZMAT Pilot Project, yielded to Captain Bawden. The Captain reported their performance indicator projections to be low, this being the first year performance indicators for the account had been established. They have since been upgraded to match the actuals in 1994. He remarked they have been able to inspect more vehicles due to the implementation of an outreach program. Mr. Marvel asked whether the pilot project had been completed. The Captain reported it had not been completed and was slated for extension until June 1996; the present two positions would be needed for the biennium. Mr. Rhode said the original budget called for his position as well as an administrative position; that position has not been filled, the other position he is currently using is an existing person in the hazardous material permit section. Mr. Marvel inquired whether all 17 positions were performing HAZMAT related functions. Mr. Rhode said there were 12 sworn officers who were generally assigned to commercial enforcement activities; others were in traffic. Mrs. Brower asked Mr. Rhode to explain the types of violations that were incurred. Mr. Rhode said the primary violations had to do with shipping papers and the placarding of the vehicle (flammable when it should be inflammable). Mrs. Brower asked whether Mr. Rhode promised to supply more detailed information to the subcommittee regarding penalties. Senator Jacobsen asked how many permits were issued last year and how many active spills occurred in 1994. Mr. Rhode stated they had 996 annual permits in 1994; the majority of their carriers were out-of-state haulers. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, CRIMINAL HISTORY REPOSITORY - PAGE 1777 Mr. Dennis Debacco, Manager, Criminal History Repository stated he was prepared to answer any operational issues or questions concerning the program. He reported the continuing problem with percentage of court administrated assessments that partially funded the budget account. In regard to licences and fees, Mr. Marvel asked how much of the $1.6 million were court administrative fees. Mr. Mark Krmpotic, Management Analyst, replied $1.2 million was court assessment admin fees and $500,000 went into the Brady Bill. Mr. Marvel asked how long the Brady money would be available. Mr. Krmpotic explained it was continuing; as long as they were administering the point of sale firearms program, they would continue to glean revenue from that account. Mr. Marvel acknowledged the repository had been quite a benefit to Nevada gun sellers; turnaround time was reported to be fast. Mr. Marvel inquired whether they were able to provide any presentencing information. Mr. Krmpotic replied they did not provide it directly to the courts, the Department of Parole and Probation performed presentencing investigations. He stated they utilized the criminal history records repository as well as various national files made available through the repository to Parole and Probation to make presentencing investigative recommendations to judges throughout the state. He added the source information comes from the repository. Mr. Spitler asked whether the data they collected was analyzed to project bed space requirements for prisons or caseloads for Parole and Probation. Mr. Krmpotic stated the Department of Prisons and the Department of Parole and Probation as well as every law enforcement agency throughout the state criminal justice agency relied upon data that was within the repository. The agency performs searches for statistical type information for various state and local agencies that have a need for making various projections in their budgets or manpower allocations and staffing. He stated the Department of Prisons has made inquires of the repository on some special need type applications and data requests. He noted they recently successfully put together a state-wide uniform crime reporting program that has been operational for one full year. For the very first time they were able to get a consolidated snapshot of crime as it relates to Nevada. Mr. Spitler asked whether the agency did any statistical analysis of data. Mr. Krmpotic testified they did not. Mr. Spitler asked who could supply a current picture of crime in Nevada; what's growing and how the information could be applied to the state's specific needs. Mr. Krmpotic reported they have a Nevada Criminal Justice Information System advisory committee composed of various criminal justice officials throughout the state. There was a recommendation before the committee to put together a statistical analysis center that would be aligned with the criminal history records repository. Mr. Spitler asked for staff numbers and whether the proposal was ready for the Legislature's consideration. Mr. Krmpotic answered no, however, the advisory committee they work with has asked them to compile a document for their review at their next scheduled meeting in July. Mr. Spitler asked who the committee could work with in order to put together something in place sooner. Mr. Krmpotic said their current staff could supply the committee with a document in short order that would give some general projections as to what it would take. Mr. Spitler requested information for analysis during the subcommittee meetings. Mrs. Tiffany asked about the data structure. Mr. Krmpotic said it was currently a non-relational data base. He reported the agency is in the midst of a complete criminal history records repository redesign. They are redesigning their criminal history record system and design work is to be completed by June. He stated federal monies will be requested out of the crime bill to build that system once they have a design. Mrs. Tiffany asked whether the dispatch system could be interfaced to the repository. Mr. Krmpotic said they were; the dispatch system was primarily for the Nevada Highway Patrol and those organizations they provide dispatch service for. Ms. Giunchigliani said since the agency was automating, she would like statistics to substantiate the new positions submitted at subcommittee meeting. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, FINGERPRINT - Page 1781 Mr. Debacco pointed out the new fingerprint technician would assist them greatly in catching up the check backlog. Mr. Marvel questioned the backlog amount. Mr. Debacco explained the fingerprint program was for the administration of providing criminal history record background checks to hundreds of different occupational groups. He said the new technician would allow an increased utilization of services. Ms. Giunchigliani asked about the balloon payments for the WIN program. Mr. Debacco explained because of a significant shortfall of revenues during the last biennium (caused by hiring freeze), they were not able to meet their Western Identification Network obligations for one fiscal year in the last biennium. The total was $162,000. They restructured their debt over a three year period and the balloon payment was to provide a yearly payback. He remarked the statute that limits the agency's ability to charge fees to the criminal justice community for utilization of the system is still in place; the statute currently exempts criminal justice from paying fees for the services they provide (179A). Senator Jacobsen asked whether a temporary permit could be issued so people could at least go to work. Mr. Debacco said their turnaround time rarely exceeds two weeks. The real impediment was with the national background check through the FBI, taking from sixty to ninety working days to complete. He pointed out the agency was limited as to their ability to speed the system up. In respect to the issuances of temporary work permits, Mr. Debacco said the Criminal History Respository did not administer any type of permitting, however, they do perform background checks. Mr. Debacco said in a previous conversation with Senator Jacobsen he had suggested the State Board of Nursing offer contingent employment pending a successful background check. Mr. Close asked that details be supplied to the subcommittee regarding the backlog. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, INVESTIGATION - PAGE 1785 Mr. John Drew, Chief, Nevada Division of Investigation, presented the department's budget (Exhibit E). He said their primary responsibility was for narcotic enforcement, however, the department also rendered criminal investigative assistance to sheriffs, district attorneys and federal agencies within the state. Pointing to the performance indicators on page 1785, Mr. Drew noted in FY97 they drop off because of the potential loss of the federal grant program as it pertains to narcotics in the state. He noted the one-shot was for the purchase of replacement vehicles for the division. They had projected 90-97% of their fleet would be well in excess of 100,000 miles by the end of the present biennium. He stressed the vehicles must be dependable so investigators can respond when they are involved in crime scenes or enforcement activities. Mr. Marvel asked how many vehicles were in the division. Mr. Drew replied there were roughly sixty vehicles; several being special use vehicles. He added there was one vehicle for every person. Mr. Drew reported the only enhancement reflected in budget account 3743 was the addition of an evidence custodian, a non- sworn position. He said they were going to attempt to consolidate their evidence facilities with the Highway Patrol and Parole and Probation. The non-sworn person would be responsible for the maintenance of the evidence vault. He stated currently the evidence custodians were being managed by sworn personnel; investigators had been taken away from their duties and assigned to the vault. In the program transfers category, Mr. Drew said the three positions were from Registration Division for the Bureau of Enforcement (previously addressed by Mr. Sparks and Mr. Weller). In response to Senator Coffin's question whether enhancement 425, safety of citizens and visitors appeared anywhere else, Mr. Drew replied it did not. In reference to budget account 3743, Mr. Drew stated they asked for five additional investigators (3 narcotics, 2 non-narcotics) because of growth; the division had not been expanded in five years. At present they had many on- work cases primarily in the narcotics area that need addressing but did not have the resources. Ms. Giunchigliani felt much of the work was duplicative. She said much of the work was already being accomplished within local districts. Senator Jacobsen stated he was concerned about vehicle maintenance and asked whether they could be inspected on a regular basis. Mr. Drew said there was already a maintenance schedule in place; supervisors were required to perform quarterly inspections on the vehicles. The Senator said he had occasion to inspect one and was low four quarts of oil and a gallon of antifreeze. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, NARCOTICS CONTROL - PAGE 1791 Mr. Drew said this is the money they receive from the Byrne Grant to support narcotics enforcement throughout the state. It was primarily done by a multijurisdictional task force. He added the match for this grant had historically been taken out of the forfeiture account, 4703. There were no General Fund monies involved. He indicated the grant would most probably lapse in FY97. He anticipated narcotics enforcement in the multijurisdictional areas would be severely deterred. Mr. Dini asked for information regarding the task force's effectiveness. Mr. Drew called the committee's attention to (Exhibit F) beginning on page 11. He said the focus of each task force was community policing. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, FORFEITURES , LAW ENFORCEMENT - PAGE 1795 Mr. Drew stated this was the forfeiture account for both the Department of Public Safety and the Highway Patrol. It is used for grant matching, specialized equipment, the purchase of new issued weapons and vests for investigators, computer hardware and software. Senator Jacobsen asked whether debriefing was performed. Mr. Drew said it was not routinely done, however, they occasionally did walk throughs to examine what they could have done differently to enhance the outcome. Mrs. Evans requested detailed information on the forfeiture money for the subcommittee meeting. Mr. Drew said they would update their annual report and provide it to the committee. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, PEACE OFFICERS STANDARDS AND TRAINING - PAGE 1797 Mr. Richard Clark, Chief, Police Officers Standards and Training introduced Mark Krmpotic of Administrative Services and Gordon Waldaias, Supervisor, of the Continuing Education section. Mr. Clark pointed out the P.O.S.T. program maintains and establishes minimum professional standards for training and certification of all police officers in Nevada. It also audits all law enforcement academies in the state and their respective curriculums and evaluates all their training. P.O.S.T. coordinates, certifies, monitors and conducts continuing education courses to assist agencies with meeting a 24-hour yearly requirement under NAC41.063. Mr. Clark provided the committee with an overview of the program (Exhibit G). Mr. Marvel asked whether the program anticipated any resistance on A.B. 75 (addresses adequate funding for P.O.S.T. through an increase in court assessments). Mr. Clark said they did. Mr. Clark reported A.B. 83 (peace officer training in the detection of use and abuse of alcohol and controlled substances) would have a fiscal impact on P.O.S.T. of about $4,800 over the biennium. He added S.B. 50 (expand cultural awareness training) would have a fiscal impact of approximately $20,000 over the biennium. Ms. Giunchigliani asked whether there were training funds for domestic violence issues. Mr. Clark replied affirmatively. Mr. Clark pointed out the budget was flat without any expansion in programs. Mr. Marvel asked whether their administrative assessment fees were falling off. Mr. Clark replied they were facing a $80,000 to $140,000 shortfall this year. Mr. Marvel asked whether there was federal money in the program. Mr. Clark stated the federal money for the D.A.R.E. program runs out on June 30, 1995; the transfer for the traffic safety money would be completed in September, 1995; after the federal money drops off it will be picked up by the General Fund. Mr. Marvel asked if the $79,000 and $139,000 figures corresponded to the traffic safety money. Mr. Clark responded it did. Mr. Spitler asked Mr. Clark to supply more detailed information on E720, new equipment, for the subcommittee meeting. Senator Jacobsen said this was a project he was very close to as it was located in Stewart. He recommended the subcommittee tour the facility. Ms. Giunchigliani asked that the following be supplied to the subcommittee: information whether anyone else in the state certifies peace officers; the number of other law enforcement academies that exist within the state; and whether the program had looked at any other types of fee increases or use of committee community college programs to deal with the potential shortfalls. Responding to Ms. Giunchigliani's request to clarify the D.A.R.E. funds, Mr. Clark stated when the federal monies run out on June 30, it was anticipated the program would be picked up on a charter state board - a subchapter of D.A.R.E. America (it would be a non-profit organization, no state money would be going into it). DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, JUSTICE ASSISTANCE ACT - PAGE 1801 Ms. Mary Lynne Evans, Administrator, Justice Assistance Grant, explained 4708 was their pass through account; 62% of their money has to go to local government entities. She reported the future of the Byrne grant looks bleak. On July 1, 1995 they will be receiving $3,184,000 which will be dispensed very conservatively. Mr. Marvel noted they will have to make an adjustment in the budget to reflect the forementioned figure. Mr. Jim Hawk, Chief, Special Services Divison testified Ms. Evans administers the program in addition to acting as Deputy Chief of their division. He stated they propose to move the two positions to the Emergency Management budget account. Mrs. Chowning said she did not see any measurement indicators and which programs had received the $2.1 million. Ms. Evans said the performance indicators change every year when the grants are awarded. She said their grant application reflects how state, local, and volunteer programs are integrated. Since 1987, Ms. Evans reported her division had been involved with every D.A.R.E. program in all 17 counties in addition to Indian reservations. She said they were presently funding the D.A.R.E. coordinator statewide through the Washoe County Sheriff's Office. Mrs. Chowning asked for statistics regarding the $2.5 disbursement for 1994-95. Ms. Evans said she would supply the figures to the subcommittee. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN AND ADMINISTRATION - PAGE 1805 Mr. Hawk reported this was a pass-through account through which federal funds are distributed to various law enforcement organizations. He said the Office of Traffic Safety budget had no audit exceptions or one shot appropriations. He said the office also administered bicycle and motorcyle safety programs (in a different account). He noted the federal grant is a 50-50 matching program; the funds provided local governments are matched at their level. The major change for the proposed biennium, according to Mr. Hawk, will be to put less funding in the Impaired Driving program and Occupant Restraints in order to build a new program (page 1807) for community based traffic safety programs. The program unites emergency medical services, courts, law enforcement, and education at the community level allowing the community the opportunity to decide how it will best deal with their own traffic safety issues. Mr. Marvel asked about the status of federal money. Mr. Hawk said due to the entire reorganization of the federal Department of Transportation, the outlook looks bright; he anticipated no substantial change. As there were no more questions or budgets to present the meeting adjourned at 5:12 p.m. _______________________ ____ Janine Sprout, Committee Secretary Assembly Committee on Ways and Means February 13, 1995 Page