MINUTES OF THE JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING OF SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS Sixty-eighth Session May 26, 1995 The joint subcommittee meeting on Public Safety/Natural Resources/Transportation of the Senate Committee on Finance and the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means was called to order by Chairman Lawrence E. Jacobsen, at 8:00 a.m., on Friday, May 26, 1995, in Room 352 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Chairman Senator William R. O'Donnell Senator Bernice Mathews ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Larry L. Spitler, Chairman Mr. Thomas W. Fettic, Chairman Mr. Morse Arberry, Jr. Mr. Jack D. Close Ms. Chris Giunchigliani Mr. John W. Marvel STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Gary Ghiggeri, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst Jeanne L. Botts, Program Analyst Marion Entrekin, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Robin Bates, Chief, Classification and Planning, Department of Prisons Robert Bayer, Director, Department of Prisons John E. Neill, Chief, Fiscal and Support Services Division, Department of Prisons Senator Jacobsen asked Gary Ghiggeri, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst, to provide information to the subcommittee regarding prison inmate population growth. Mr. Ghiggeri distributed Exhibit C to the subcommittee that reflects population figures throughout the prison for the 1995 - 1997 biennium. He indicated the distribution reflects housing inmates in the Northern Nevada Correctional Center (NNCC) above emergency capacity in September, 1996 by 144 inmates, which will invoke the "Stickney Agreement" for additional custodial staff. Mr. Ghiggeri said an additional 40 inmates will be housed in Unit 7 of the NNCC in September, 1996, and the housing of the inmates in that facility from September, 1996 through June, 1997 will be necessitated based upon the current inmate population projections. Exhibit C is predicated upon the assumption that 644 inmates will be housed at the Lovelock Correctional Center (LCC) in June, 1997, and Mr. Ghiggeri said that facility has a design capacity of 560. He also pointed out Exhibit C assumes: every bed in the Department of Prisons will be occupied over the next biennium; there will be a 35 percent parole board (State Board of Parole Commissioners) approval rate; Assembly Bill (A.B.) 317 will be approved to provide the director of the Department of Prisons the authority to place certain inmates under house arrest; and the successful operation of the "Assessment and Life Skills Program" by the Division of Parole and Probation. ASSEMBLY BILL 317: Makes various changes related to juvenile courts, sentencing, crimes and punishments. Mr. Ghiggeri remarked the budget closing action sheets for the Department of Prisons (Exhibit D) reflect budget closings based upon population projections for all institutions and conservation camps within the prison system, and speculates that the Jean Conservation Camp will continue to house female inmates over the 1995 - 1997 biennium. He said the Governor's Executive Budget recommends a 36-bed expansion of the Boot Camp Program as operated at the Indian Springs Conservation Camp targeted for January 1, 1997, and the closing sheets reflect this information. Mr. Ghiggeri advised the subcommittee they will have to decide whether the beds will be used for the Boot Camp Program or as additional beds for the conservation camp. He said the 36-bed expansion is required based upon current population projections for inmate placement. Mr. Ghiggeri reported that Senate Bill (S.B.) 278 was approved by the Assembly on May 25, 1995, that provides for the design of housing Units 3, 4, and 5 of the Lovelock Correctional Center and the funding for the advanced planning and design of a 1,000-bed men's prison in southern Nevada. SENATE BILL 278: Makes appropriation for design of Phase II of Lovelock Correctional Center, provides for issuance of bonds and temporary advance for Phase I of Men's Prison No. 7, and requires department of prisons to contract for construction and operation of new facility for women. S.B. 278 will also provide for the privatization of a women's prison in southern Nevada. He pointed out if a women's prison is privatized in southern Nevada sometime within the 1995 - 1997 biennium, depending upon the size of that facility, it will free up the existing women's prison to house male inmates over the 1995 - 1997 biennium. The housing of the inmates at the current NNCC facility will alleviate some of the strain involved with housing inmates that will be placed in the Department of Prisons over the 1995 - 1997 biennium. Mr. Ghiggeri indicated he has not personally discussed the situation with any private contractors, but he has heard it is possible to have a facility designed, built, and operational within a 12 - 14 month period. If that is the case, Mr. Ghiggeri said there is a possibility a facility could be operational by September, 1996 to alleviate the strain now placed on NNCC on housing inmates. Senator O'Donnell asked if there is information available regarding the number of possible inmates there are in the system, "sort of the bulge in the pipe." Mr. Ghiggeri said there has been a substantial increase in the number of Pre-Sentence Investigations (PSIs) the Division of Parole and Probation has been experiencing over the past year. He explained a PSI report is prepared by the Division of Parole and Probation prior to the sentencing of an offender for probation or imprisonment. The Department of Prisons has been experiencing significant net growth in the population over the past 6 - 8 months, Mr. Ghiggeri said, but indicated he is unable to provide the number of inmates or potential inmates there are in the pipeline. He reiterated there has been an increase in the activity involved with PSIs, but the number of individuals that end up in prison or on probation is dependent upon the courts. Senator O'Donnell asked in which month within the current biennium the Department of Prisons will run out of prison space, considering the 35 percent parole rate the State Board of Parole Commissioners has indicated is attainable. Mr. Ghiggeri estimates the Department of Prisons will be above the emergency threshold by September, 1996. He stated the department will have to continue to house all inmates, based upon current projections, from September, 1996 through June, 1997. He opined Phase II of the Lovelock Correctional Center should be operational by July 1, 1997, and depending upon the status of Units 3, 4, and 5, additional inmates may be housed there. Referring to the anticipated 35 percent parole rate, Mr. Marvel asked, "For every percentage decrease, what does that equate to in the number of prisoners, and what additional costs are we looking at?" Mr. Ghiggeri replied he would have to defer to the Department of Prisons, but believes a 5 percent change in the approval rate amounts to 500 inmates. Robin Bates, Chief, Classification and Planning, Department of Prisons, testified for every 5 percent change in the probation grant rate, the increase per year would be 400 to 500 inmates, and the additional costs will involve capital improvement expenses to provide for housing, and inmate driven costs at the rate of approximately $14,000 per year per inmate. Mr. Marvel asked what the parole rate was in April, 1995. Mr. Bates responded the probation grant rate for April, 1995 was 31 percent. Mr. Arberry asked if most of the inmates in the prison population are "hard-core" criminals. Mr. Bates responded the general offense distribution statistics for the Department of Prisons for men and women combined is: 24 percent property offenders; 19 percent drug offenders; 34 percent violent offenders; 6 percent Driving Under the Influence (DUI) offenders; 13 percent sex offenders; and 3.5 percent other offenders. Mr. Bates stated the statistics are based upon general characterizations of an inmate's offense. Since inmates often have multiple offenses, the department looks at the most serious offense to determine what category the inmate should be placed in. Mr. Arberry stated the reason for his question is due to the killing of a Sparks, Nevada police officer on May 22, 1995 by a parolee. Mr. Arberry remarked: I was trying to make a determination...if we are going to have hard-core criminals such as the person that was released recently, then the percentage will go down because there is no way we can let them on the street. If they have very basic crimes (they have not hurt anyone) I feel we should let them out. Mr. Spitler said there are many bills before the Legislature at the present time that readdress who should or should not be in prison. He opined many of the bills he has reviewed contain valuable information regarding how the Legislature can determine who should be in prison for full terms, or can be better served by some type of diversionary program. Mr. Spitler is convinced the Department of Prisons will reach an emergency threshold very quickly and even be "maxed out" beyond an emergency threshold. He asked what options are available to either contract with other states who may have bed space, or to acquire suggested solutions from other states who have experienced the same problems associated with inmate population. Robert Bayer, Director, Department of Prisons, responded one of the few options available is to contract out-of-state, although there are a number of states that are trying to do the same thing as a result of "Get Tough on Crime" and "Truth in Sentencing" legislation. The other option is to be able to construct facilities to house inmates at a faster pace. He admitted he does not know how this can be done other than to contract (the project) out through Requests for Proposals (RFPs) or sole source. Mr. Bayer said as a last resort, the least desirable option available is to erect a tent in the middle of a (prison) athletic field. Mr. Bayer also suggested the judicious use of other options such as house arrest and sound parole decisions. Mr. Spitler asked if the department has considered the use of modular units to be used on a temporary basis to house inmates. Mr. Bayer said modular units or tents are similar in nature and have both been considered. Mr. Spitler stressed he is interested in making certain there are options available to the department. He commented he hopes the department will not look upon house arrest until after a thorough determination has been made ruling out prison confinement. Mr. Spitler strongly suggested the subcommittee consider the establishment of a contingency fund, through the Interim Finance Committee (IFC), for the purpose of providing emergency housing. He remarked, "I really think we are at a very dangerous stage in terms of how many people were given to the Department of Prisons to handle, and I do not think they have the facilities to do it." Ms. Giunchigliani stated in light of the hard-core nature of many of the prisoners, she does not think a tent or modular unit to house inmates will provide adequate safety measures to the community as well as to the employees. Mr. Bayer concurred the department is receiving a high volume of prisoners that have had prior convictions or have been involved with serious crimes, and these offenders have no regard whatsoever for the public. Ms. Giunchigliani asked if the department has looked into where the drug and DUI offenders are housed. She asked if these inmates can be potentially identified to occupy an alternative housing structure. Mr. Bayer said the department will utilize the House Arrest Program for nonviolent offenders who have had only one, or no, prior felony, have been screened by the department, and referred to the Division of Parole and Probation for further screening. Although still considered an inmate, these individuals are confined to their house except for periods of time when they are either working or have had prior permission to leave the house, Mr. Bayer said. Ms. Giunchigliani inquired if the department locates the placement facility, or if the offender is returned to an apartment complex or their original home. Mr. Bayer replied the decision is arrived at jointly with the Division of Parole and Probation. He indicated the department will not consider house arrest as an option for those offenders going out-of-state. Of the number of offenders recommended by the Department of Prisons for the House Arrest Program, usually 50 or 60 percent are screened out by the Division of Parole and Probation, Mr. Bayer said, and the best inmates are chosen. Ms. Giunchigliani surmised the drug and DUI offenders may not necessarily be in the prison system at this time. Mr. Bayer replied, "Exactly, they could be on house arrest or in a camp." Ms. Giunchigliani concluded since this group of nonviolent offenders has already been moved out of the prison to a residential confinement situation, the department will be left with the hard-core offenders who probably should not be placed in an alternative housing environment,which will create more of a "bed crunch." Mr. Bayer responded: I think you are asking if the custody mix will change. That is something we (the Department of Prisons) are trying to evaluate right now. I think in the foreseeable future, under the Governor's recommended budget, I do not see a change in the custody mix. Under some of the other bills, you may see a mix change. For the next 2 years, for this biennium, based on the Governor's recommended budget, we have provided you with what we believe the percentage breakout will be. Ms. Giunchigliani commented there are two bills that are being considered now that are based on a 35 percent parole rate. She opined there will be a further reduction in parole rates due to the unfortunate incident of the (Sparks) police officer being killed and the Governor asking for the resignation of Thomas P. Wright, Commissioner, State Board of Parole Commissioners. Mr. Bayer interjected that will not necessarily be the case. Ms. Giunchigliani remarked human behavior cannot be predicted, but based upon the past practices of the parole board she predicts there will be an immediate decline in the number of paroles. Mr. Bayer pointed out the highest parole denial rate has occurred with "short sentence" inmates with nonviolent histories. He believed these offenders represent some of the better risks, and the parole board is considering a review of some of the past denials. Ms. Giunchigliani stated, Those are the 331 [offenders] you wrote them about to be considered because their form does not take into consideration the short sentencing, and that is part of the dilemma. Hopefully, Ms.[Lupe] Gunderson [Chairman, State Board of Parole Commissioners] will be back next week telling us that commission has at least decided to adopt that in the interim, so at least they are reviewing the short sentence [offenders] as potential candidates. Senator Jacobsen reminded the subcommittee there will be difficult decisions to be made, and the incident of May 22, 1995 when the Sparks police officer was killed will cloud the issue. Mr. Marvel remarked the Department of Prisons budget was based, in part, on some of the provisions contained in A.B. 317, and the beds have already been accounted for. He stated he shares some of the same concerns as those brought out by Ms. Giunchigliani, and the episode of May 22, 1995 will raise havoc towards achieving a 35 percent parole rate. He believes Mr. Spitler's suggestion to place a large amount in a contingency fund under the guidance of the IFC will offer a workable solution towards providing emergency housing, but he is not in favor of an RFP as far as privatization is concerned. He suggested the subcommittee consider using a sole- source provider for needed prison construction projects, and this recommendation should be given to the major committees. Mr. Fettic noted the entire prison budget is based upon a 35 percent parole rate, the Lifeskills Program that is untested, and residential confinement. After doing some calculating, he concluded if the Lifeskills Program and residential confinement had a 50 percent success rate, and the parole rate is 30 percent, approximately 502 new beds will be needed in 1996 and 564 in 1997. He pointed out the LCC will be over- populated in 1995. Mr. Fettic asked: Where are these people going to go, and where will we get the funds to house them? Assuming there is a state that will take them because all the states appear to be full, what will that cost the state each year to house them? I have heard figures of $10 million to $12 million a year out-of-state. One thing I am afraid of is until we get some kind of experience on how the Lifeskills Program and residential confinement will work...I do not want to be in the position of having to tell the parole board they have to parole people. They said they can do 35 percent and not have a problem. Maybe they can, maybe they cannot. I think the parole rate will be around 30 percent, and if what you tell us is true, that is 400 to 500 new inmates per year. If we pass this budget as it currently is, you may run out of room this year, and we do not have enough time to build prisons. If we go the normal route to build prisons, by the time you do all the RFPs it can be 2 to 3 years. The way I see it, we just do not have that kind of time. We have to look for some other kind of a safety valve here, at least that is what my freshman experience tells me. Senator O'Donnell said comments have emanated from both the Assembly and the Senate that to have a release rate of 35 percent is questionable, and a 35 percent release rate with a "safety factor" is even more questionable. He said the committees have looked at a policy, and questioned a policy, since the beginning of the session that indicates, "we must fit the prison population to the statistic instead of fitting the statistic to the prison population." He believes Ms. Giunchigliani's assumption is correct there will be a reduction in the number of releases, and not an increase to 35 percent. He pointed out the parole board reported a 31 percent release rate in May, 1995, which was supposed to be an accurate figure based upon "safely" releasing offenders into the community. Senator O'Donnell remarked: That has not happened, and I do not think that is going to happen. The release rates will be lower. We have some bad people in the prisons, and they are getting harder every day. We have a number of people in the pipeline that are going to be placed in prison. We need to look at this in terms of an emergency measure. We need prisons, and we need them now. If we are going to run out [of bed space] this year, I think we are going to be in a critical situation if not by this year, certainly by September, 1996, when we are going to be at a critical mass. We are going to be letting prisoners go just like we did 2 years ago, and I do not think the population or the citizens of the State of Nevada want that to happen. We have to come up with something. I do not know what it is, but I know we need beds. It is a hard choice for us to make and we would like to solve the problem, but I do not think it will happen until we build some more beds and fit the statistics to the prison population. Senator Jacobsen said it is evident to him that the subcommittee should not consider "hanging their hat" on the release rate since he believes it is unrealistic. After listening to testimony today, Mr. Arberry opined the Department of Prisons has been placed in a dilemma because they are not responsible for placing offenders in prison, and cannot make the decision to release them. Additionally, there are many crime bills pending to "save the system." He believes prisons should be built at the lowest possible cost based on a release rate of 19 - 20 percent, and the budget should be based upon a low release rate as well. He is concerned to do otherwise will end up in a special session of the Legislature to deal with overpopulation in the prisons. Senator O'Donnell echoed Mr. Arberry's comments. Even if unlimited funds were available to the state to build prisons, Senator O'Donnell believes there will still be a problem because there is no new prison construction underway. Mr. Arberry remarked the concept of using tents to house offenders was previously regarded as a joke. He now thinks this may be a solution on a temporary basis. Ms. Giunchigliani said as the state restructures the prison system and prison policies, the court system may not be in tune with some of the policy changes that are being made, and will continue to follow their usual sentencing procedures. She stated, "If we build them, they will fill them." She believes this will bring up the question of how many prisons the state must build, and some type of balance will have to be reached. She is fearful as the more hard-core criminal comes into the system, it will add to the costs because more medium and maximum prisons will be needed as well as additional correctional officers to deal with that type of criminal. Due to safety considerations for surrounding communities, Ms. Giunchigliani emphatically remarked she will not support temporary measures such as the tent concept to house hard-core criminals. She believes at some point the Legislature must start talking about proper funding for the prison system, and will have to deal with taxes at some point in time. Mr. Close pointed out he has been in support of the tent concept since the current legislative session began, and he has not ever regarded the suggestion as a joke. He believes based upon the percentages, there are some inmates that will fit into this type of confinement. He further believes Mr. Bayer should be given the latitude to determine which individuals will be candidates for this type of temporary housing. He pointed out the subcommittee has talked about placing an offender in a cell for a period of time, but have not discussed the recidivism and rehabilitation of the inmates. "Just because we throw them in a cell for so long does not guarantee they are not going to go out and commit a crime," Mr. Close stated. He believes if revenue is going to be used to place individuals in prison, the state must also commit the revenue and the time to provide rehabilitation to keep offenders from returning to prison. Assuming out-of-state placement is possible, Mr. Fettic asked if a reasonable daily rate to house prisoners will amount to approximately $75 per day. Mr. Bayer responded that would be his estimation of an out-of-state daily cost, per prisoner. He said he will research the question and provide the information to the subcommittee. Mr. Fettic estimated based on a parole rate of 30 percent, a $75 daily rate would project to about $22 million over the course of the biennium. Depending upon the success rate of the Lifeskills Program and residential confinement, Mr. Fettic said out-of-state confinement could cost the state as much as $28 million over the biennium. Senator Mathews agreed funds should be allocated to provide rehabilitation at the prisons. She said she will be paying particular attention to the Lifeskills Program and the efforts that are being made to provide rehabilitation within the prison system, because she believes this will enable some released offenders to remain out of prison. Mr. Fettic concurred with Senator Mathews, but pointed out the state is not building prisons hoping people will come in because "they are standing in line to get in." Mr. Ghiggeri said no closing action sheets have been provided to the subcommittee at this time for the director's office or for medical care facilities because some of the decisions the subcommittee will make regarding other prison budgets will impact upon them. He said once budget decisions are made for the institutions and conservation camps, adjustments can then be made to the budgets for the director's office and medical care facilities. He stated the closing actions the subcommittee has been provided today (Exhibit C) address all of the major institutions and the camps. He referred the subcommittee to page 2 of Exhibit D and pointed out the impact to the General Fund based only on these actions will amount to approximately $2.9 million in Fiscal Year 1996 and approximately $672,000 in Fiscal Year 1997. Mr. Ghiggeri advised the subcommittee the amounts are above the Governor's recommended budget, and anticipates housing a number of inmates in prison facilities above the emergency threshold level, particularly in Fiscal Year 1997. It is also predicated upon a 35 percent parole board approval rate, and takes into consideration the impact of A.B. 317 and the authority it will give the director of the Department of Prisons. Prison Warehouse Fund - Page 1549 Mr. Ghiggeri said this budget provides authority to the Department of Prisons to purchase and disburse supplies to the prison facilities, and is a flow-through account. MR. MARVEL MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO CLOSE THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS. MR. FETTIC SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED. (MS. GIUNCHIGLIANI WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) * * * * * SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO CLOSE THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SENATOR JACOBSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. Senator O'Donnell asked if there will be adjustments needed in this budget account if the prison population and number of facilities increase. Mr. Ghiggeri responded the budget can be adjusted by the Department of Prisons by coming before the IFC. He stated this budget account is comprised of authorized and not General Fund revenue. Senator O'Donnell asked if adjustments will be needed for some of the other prison budgets for the same reason. Mr. Ghiggeri replied if the subcommittee decides to privatize the women's facility in southern Nevada, some of the inmate driven costs that are currently allocated for the Nevada Women's Correctional Center (NWCC), and some of the operating costs that are potentially in the recommended closing for NNCC, could be reallocated to the NWCC if that facility were converted to a male facility, and this would lessen the impact of privatization. THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR MATHEWS WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) * * * * * Senator Jacobsen reminded the subcommittee that even if some budgets are closed today, it will not prevent them from being reopened at a later date should the need arise to do so. Mr. Fettic asked staff to bring a report to the subcommittee describing the quickest and most economical method available to build new prisons. Mr. Ghiggeri said it has been indicated to him that a private women's facility could be operational within 12 to 14 months from the time a contract is signed, and this will provide an additional 250 beds. Offender's Store Fund - Page 1553 Mr. Spitler recommended this budget be held pending the outcome of Assembly Bill (A.B.) 389. ASSEMBLY BILL 389: Revises provisions governing payment of certain expenses of offender incarcerated in state prison. Inmate Welfare Account - Page 1561 Mr. Ghiggeri said this account is utilized by the Department of Prisons to provide for inmate recreational activities and other benefits such as satellite television and law library expenses. He said this account receives funding from profits derived from the Offender's Store Fund budget account. Other than the recommendations reflected in Exhibit D, Mr. Ghiggeri suggested if A.B. 389 is approved, the Department of Prisons should refrain from expanding or enhancing the satellite television system until they are certain sufficient profits are available from the operation of the Offender's Store Fund account to fund the costs associated with A.B. 389. MR. MARVEL MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO CLOSE THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, AND A LETTER OF INTENT BE ISSUED TO REMOVE THE EXPANSION OF A TELEVISION SATELLITE SYSTEM. During a tour of the Nevada State Prison, Mr. Arberry noted their recreational equipment is very old and outdated. He believes this budget should be enhanced by an additional $20,000 to provide for some new equipment. Ms. Giunchigliani said the same thing should be done for the women's prison. Senator O'Donnell asked why it is necessary to provide prisoners with recreational equipment. Mr. Ghiggeri said there is funding provided in the budget for the acquisition for recreational equipment recommended in decision module E-710, and the Governor did recommend some enhancements for recreational equipment in the budget. Additionally, when the Assembly approved Assembly Bill (A.B.) 239, they removed the General Fund support for refurbishment of the gymnasium floors at the Southern Desert Correctional Center (SDCC) and NNCC as well as the rehabilitation of the multipurpose building ceiling at NNCC, and recommended that those enhancements be funded from this budget since it is a recreational activity. ASSEMBLY BILL 239: Makes appropriation to department of prisons for maintenance and minor construction projects. Mr. Marvel withdrew his motion to close this budget account pending the resolution of A.B. 389. Ms. Giunchigliani requested Mr. Bayer provide information regarding the status of recreational equipment. She stated she was extremely offended when she toured the women's prison in Jean, Nevada when she found out the men had received new gymnasium and exercise equipment, and their leftovers were "dumped" in the middle of a dirt pile to be used by the women. She commented, "Ladies need to be kept active as well." Senator Jacobsen interjected funds have been available for recreational equipment, but in many cases not requested. The equipment was utilized at some of the honor camps instead. Senator Jacobsen acknowledged this budget account will be held pending the outcome of A.B. 389. Destitute Prisoner's Fund - Page 1565 Mr. Ghiggeri said this account was approved by the 1989 Legislature to receive residuals from the operation of the Plasma Center. He suggested this budget be closed in accordance with the Governor's recommendation. SENATOR O'DONNELL MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO CLOSE THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GOVERNOR. SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * MR. MARVEL MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO CLOSE THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GOVERNOR. MR. SPITLER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * Restitution Center South - Page 1577 Mr. Ghiggeri explained this facility has a rated capacity and emergency threshold of 60 inmates, and Exhibit D assumes that facility will operate at that capacity over the 1995 - 1997 biennium. Mr. Fettic noted the terminology "assumes average inmate population" has appeared in each one of the prison's budget closing action sheets. He asked if each of the budgets are predicated upon a 35 percent parole rate. Mr. Ghiggeri responded in the affirmative. He further stated the restitution centers and most of the honor camps will operate at the levels suggested, and will not exceed the rated capacity over the 1995 - 1997 biennium. Based on the population projections, Mr. Ghiggeri said the major institutions such as NNCC, NSP, and LCC assume the facilities will exceed the emergency threshold over the 1995 - 1997 biennium. Adjustments will probably be made at the NNCC, NSP, and LCC based upon the action that will be taken regarding privatization of a women's facility or the provision of contract funds to operate a facility or send inmates out-of-state. Mr. Ghiggeri stated he does not see the populations in the camps or restitution centers fluctuating based upon a change downward or upward of the parole approval rate. He opined at this time the majority of the camps and restitution centers will operate at the level projected. Mr. Spitler said he was under the impression the Restitution Center South was a women's facility. He asked the mix of the 60 male and female inmates. Mr. Bayer replied as of May 24, 1995, there are 24 males and 36 females in this facility for a total of 60. He pointed out the department has been increasing the female mix in the anticipation of a switch at the Jean camp that has run into some problems, and this explains why there are more females in this facility. Mr. Spitler stated he introduced Assembly Bill (A.B.) 511 and agreed to hold this bill for the next legislative session, because the title "Restitution" needs to be changed or thorough discussion must be made regarding the meaning of restitution, since only 5 percent of the inmates receive restitution. ASSEMBLY BILL 511: Specifies proportion of wages of offender assigned to center for restitution to be paid to victim for restitution. Mr. Spitler remarked the assistant director of the Department of Prisons, Mr. George M. Weeks, has agreed to work with him during the biennium to look at restitution. He asked Mr. Bayer for his commitment the meetings will take place. Mr. Bayer said if Mr. Weeks made a commitment, it will be carried through. Regarding the rated capacity of the restitution centers or camps, Mr. Ghiggeri said the majority of the costs are fixed whether there are 55 or 60 inmates in a particular facility, and the staffing will remain constant as well. He said there are certain costs that will fluctuate based upon the number of inmates that are housed in a facility which is noted as "inmate-driven costs" under Item 2 of Exhibit D for this budget page, and include inmate labor, personal hygiene, supplies, and food. If there is a shift in the number of inmates, and a decision is made that will affect some of the budgets, the only adjustments that will be required will be for inmate-driven costs, Mr. Ghiggeri said. MR. MARVEL MOVED TO RECOMMEND CLOSING THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GOVERNOR. MR. SPITLER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO RECOMMEND CLOSING THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GOVERNOR. SENATOR O'DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * Restitution Center North - Page 1581 Mr. Ghiggeri stated this is an 88-bed facility occupied 100 percent by male inmates at this time. He highlighted the suggested adjustments to this account as shown in Exhibit D. Senator Jacobsen asked where the Restitution Center North is located, and an opinion from staff or the prison administration regarding the success of this operation. Mr. Ghiggeri said the facility is on Second Street in Reno, Nevada, adjacent to the Reno Hilton Hotel. Prior to the present operation, this facility housed only female inmates, Mr. Ghiggeri said. Ms. Giunchigliani asked if the Restitution Center South and the Restitution Center North have identical budgets. Mr. Ghiggeri responded the Restitution Center North has a maintenance person because it is a state facility while the facility in the south is being leased. Otherwise, the inmate-driven costs for such items as food, labor, and personal hygiene supplies are identical, and the only difference in costs is due to the number of inmates housed in the facilities. He said the facility in the south is budgeted for approximately $74,000 per year for rent that is not included in the facility in the north since the state owns that facility. MR. MARVEL MOVED TO RECOMMEND CLOSING THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REFLECTED IN EXHIBIT D. MR. FETTIC SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO RECOMMEND CLOSING THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REFLECTED IN EXHIBIT D. SENATOR O'DONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. * * * * * Southern Nevada Correctional Center - Page 1595 An explanation was provided to the committee regarding the suggested adjustments to the budget account for the Southern Nevada Correctional Center (SNCC) reflected in Exhibit D. He stated the budget is predicated upon an average inmate population of 600 inmates in Fiscal Year 1996 and 608 in Fiscal Year 1997, and pointed out the design capacity for this facility is approximately 350 inmates, the rated capacity is 567, and the emergency threshold is 613. He explained if a decision is made to privatize or provide the director of the department the authority to secure beds out-of- state to hold inmates, the only adjustment that will be required to the budget will involve inmate-driven costs. MR. FETTIC MOVED TO RECOMMEND CLOSING THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REFLECTED IN EXHIBIT D. MR. MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Ghiggeri requested if the subcommittee closes the budgets today that contain no staffing impact if a population change is generated at a later time, he would like to have some direction or authority to adjust the inmate-driven costs if a decision is made to privatize some facilities or provide the director authority to contract for beds out-of- state. Mr. Ghiggeri said this will give him the authority to reduce the budget by the inmate-driven costs at a future date when the decision is made. Senator Jacobsen asked Mr. Fettic if he would accept Mr. Ghiggeri's recommendation as a part of his motion. Mr. Fettic agreed to do so. MR. FETTIC MOVED TO RECOMMEND CLOSING THE BUDGET IN ACCORDANCE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REFLECTED IN EXHIBIT D, AND TO GRANT AUTHORITY TO STAFF TO ADJUST THE BUDGET FOR INMATE-DRIVEN COSTS DUE TO PRIVATIZATION OF SOME FACILITIES OR OUT-OF-STATE PLACEMENT. SENATOR MARVEL SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Spitler remarked, "I am not sure we are not closing the budgets prematurely because I think each one of them will have to be revisited." He asked if medical care is included in the inmate-driven costs. Mr. Ghiggeri replied medical is not included in the budget. He repeated the closing action sheets do not include a recommendation for closing medical care and the director's office pending the subcommittee's actions on the other prison budgets. He clarified there are separate budgets for medical care. There are inmate-driven costs in the medical budget of approximately $3,600 per inmate, Mr. Ghiggeri said. Ms. Giunchigliani asked if there will be discussion regarding the mental-health component of the prison industry. Mr. Ghiggeri said that is an item he will propose to discuss with the subcommittee when closure of the medical budget is processed. He has been attempting to obtain information from the Department of Prisons concerning the patient load being covered by the psychiatrists and psychologists. The Governor has recommended new positions (psychiatrists and psychologists) to address the mental health needs of the inmates. Absent of information concerning the caseload currently being carried by the psychiatrists and psychologists at this time, Mr. Ghiggeri said he has no basis to either refute or approve what is being recommended by the Governor. Mr. Ghiggeri said he is interested in determining the number of inmate patients each psychiatrist and psychologist is actively carrying for some type of comparison with the adult mental health system. Mr. Fettic said he does not want to hold up the closure of any of the budgets, but he thinks the subcommittee is closing budgets without the benefit of knowing what the budget actually is. He stated, "I have a real uncomfortable feeling about this." Mr. Ghiggeri clarified the budgets he is highlighting with the subcommittee today involve the cost of housing inmates at the facilities that will fluctuate based upon the inmate- driven costs. If there are 500 or 600 inmates over and above the projected population of the Department of Prisons based upon a 35 percent (parole) approval rate, and the subcommittee is comfortable with a 30 percent approval rate necessitating an increase in the projected inmate population of either 400 or 500 inmates per year, Mr. Ghiggeri said the Department of Prisons does not have physical space to house the additional inmates. Mr. Ghiggeri pointed out he cannot foresee a population increase from that projected over the course of the biennium at the SNCC unless authority is given to the director of the department to purchase beds someplace else, or privatization of a women's facility is accomplished. If this occurs, Mr. Ghiggeri said the inmate-driven costs will be decreased. Mr. Fettic asked, "You feel comfortable we can move ahead with these [budget closings]? Mr. Ghiggeri said if the subcommittee gives him the authority to adjust the inmate-driven costs based upon a decision that is made at a future date, he will feel comfortable. Mr. Fettic interjected that authority is in his motion. Mr. Ghiggeri believes something will have to be done to provide additional funding if the subcommittee feels a 35 percent approval rate is not sufficient. If the subcommittee feels a 30 percent (or lower) approval rate is sufficient, then he feels additional funds will have to be provided to the Department of Prisons to house the inmates. He does not believe the Department of Prisons has sufficient physical space to house the inmates, which will necessitate providing the department with the authority to contract with another state or another facility to house the inmates. Mr. Close said he appreciates Mr. Fettic's comments, but believes the budgets should be closed as presented to include approving the expenses and income based upon the information provided by staff in the budget closing action sheets (Exhibit D). He understands there may be future adjustments to the budget accounts once a decision is made regarding the overpopulation issue. Although the subcommittee is in the middle of a motion, Mr. Spitler interjected the subcommittee should be going through each of the prison budgets to identify the major areas for discussion. He pointed out there are two major crime packages that have been introduced to the Legislature, one that was heard in the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means, and one that has not been heard dealing with truth in sentencing issues. For these reasons, he determined he cannot support closing the major prison budgets today. Mr. Spitler remarked: I think it is imperative we not rush through these things because of some fictitious date. I think this is becoming one of the hottest and most critical points in the session...the prison issue and education, particularly K-12. I think to not give it [the prison budgets] full attention and at least get these bills through so that we can see where the impact is on the prison budgets really becomes a disservice, and will only mean we will have to come back and do it again. It takes two-thirds vote to reopen a budget. I would like to make sure we are all working together to close the budget as opposed to being at odds as to whether a budget should be reopened. For that reason I will not be supporting closing any of the prison budgets, but I will support discussing them today and picking out critical issues. I have no problems with closing the budgets for the honor camps. Mr. Fettic echoed Mr. Spitler's comments, and stated he will withdraw his motion to recommend closing the budget for the SNCC reflected on page 1595 of Exhibit D. Mr. Marvel rescinded his second motion accordingly, and suggested the budgets for the honor camps be closed with one single motion. Senator Jacobsen concurred with the comments by Mr. Spitler and the action taken to withdraw the motion by Mr. Fettic and Mr. Marvel. He said the subcommittee will proceed with an open discussion regarding the prison budgets, but no closing action will be taken. Mr. Ghiggeri continued to highlight some of the suggested adjustments for each of the major prison budgets shown in Exhibit D to familiarize the subcommittee members with the issues that have been reviewed. Mr. Spitler said he would like the staff to comment regarding outstanding projects. He pointed out when the budget for the SDCC is discussed, there will be discussion regarding locks. Also, he asked regarding the status of one-shot appropriations and, specifically, if a one-shot appropriation has been proposed for the SNCC. Mr. Ghiggeri responded the Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) for the SNCC that are pending completion involve electrical work for a transformer to be raised above ground level, a fire sprinkling system within the housing units, and some sewage lagoon work. He said a project involving the removal and movement of an underground fuel-storage was completed at the SNCC. Mr. Ghiggeri stated there were some one-shot appropriations and CIPs approved during the current legislative session. He pointed out A.B. 239 included funding for enhancement of security in the control room of the SNCC. Mr. Spitler asked, "So there are not any outstanding issues authorized in past legislative sessions that are not currently being addressed?" Mr. Ghiggeri replied he believes all of the outstanding issues involving CIPs and one-shot appropriations are being processed. Ms. Giunchigliani asked Mr. Bayer to provide information to the subcommittee regarding the amount of overtime used by the department, and the status of overtime "especially as we go into emergency capacity." She also requested information be provided concerning the ratio of correctional officers to prisoners, "especially as we go into emergency capacity" and what it is based on, currently, within the budget. She inquired, "Is weaponry throughout the budgets, depending on the honor camp, if there is additional weapons or replacement of weapons? We hear a lot about radios in the cells." Mr. Ghiggeri replied the majority of the funding for weapons and replacement radios is included in Senate Bill (S.B.) 198. SENATE BILL 198: Makes appropriation to department of prisons for replacement of various equipment. Ms. Giunchigliani noted throughout all of the budgets reference is made concerning inmate clothing. She asked if the budget pertains to the cost for clothing on a yearly basis, or for "increased capacity." She inquired, "Have we resolved the issue of women's undergarments being provided in a timely manner?" Mr. Ghiggeri stated the inmate-driven costs for clothing is based upon an average of what was actually expended in a prior fiscal year by institution with the exception of additional clothing costs required at the two intake centers, NNCC and SDCC. Women's clothing is provided for separately. Each female inmate is given clothing at an average cost of $76 per year per inmate. Ms. Giunchigliani commented some of the female inmates have complained they have not been furnished brassieres in months. Southern Desert Correctional Center - Page 1601 Mr. Ghiggeri remarked the closure for this budget assumes an average inmate population of 1,424 in Fiscal Year 1996, and 1,447 in Fiscal Year 1997. The rated capacity for the SDCC is 1,342, and the emergency threshold is 1,458. He pointed out this facility will be operating between the rated and emergency threshold for the majority of the 1995 - 1997 biennium. He continued his discussion of this budget by referencing the adjustments reflected in Exhibit D. As Mr. Spitler pointed out, the SDCC does have some outstanding CIPs, Mr. Ghiggeri said, that includes locks for Unit 8 to be undertaken as a project within the 1995 - 1997 biennium. Mr. Ghiggeri said the Department of Prisons wants to replace the locks and electrical control panels at the same time at a cost of approximately $1 million. To replace the doors and locks, the department will either have to reduce the population of the facility or relocate the inmates while the project is underway, and there are no available beds to relocate the inmates. Mr. Ghiggeri indicated the department will have to defer implementation of the lock project until the opening of the LCC that may provide flexibility for movement of the prisoners. Mr. Spitler reiterated, "I am not following this. I thought we passed an emergency measure to get these locks fixed?" Mr. Ghiggeri said the lock CIP project will be undertaken within the 1995 - 1997 biennium. The control panels were approved as a CIP project for the 1993 - 1995 biennium, but there has been no emergency appropriation provided for this project. Senator O'Donnell said even if the funding is available, there is no facility in which to move the inmates so the project can be completed. Mr. Spitler stressed, "The issue is they are getting out. I am going to go back and talk with the people down there and do my own research, because we passed something to do this project after we toured the SDCC." Senator O'Donnell and Senator Jacobsen also remember an emergency measure was passed to appropriate the funds for lock repair in the SDCC. Mr. Bayer said he does not recall a bill going through that provided an emergency appropriation for the locks. Even if the bill was passed and the funds are available for the project, the inmates will have to be moved somewhere as the "guts" for the security system in Unit 8 are installed, Mr. Bayer said. He concurred when the LCC opens, the inmates of Unit 8 may be able to be temporarily moved there. During a tour at the SDCC last year, Mr. Close recalled discussion had ensued regarding maintenance work that can be done on some of the locking mechanisms to prevent inmates from getting out of their cells. He explained prisoners were jamming locks to enable them to leave their cells at will. Mr. Close asked for the current status regarding this situation. Mr. Bayer replied once the prison officials were made aware of the problem, steps were taken to secure the doors, and there has not been repeated instances of prisoners leaving their cells. Mr. Bayer remarked the department has accomplished a series of things to correct the "lock" problem at SDCC such as arriving at a plan to install a temporary bolting system to be locked by an officer from the outside of the cell. This plan has been delayed until after installation of the fire sprinkling system that was just completed, Mr. Bayer said. In conjunction with the company that provided the locks, the department has experimented with swapping some of the locking parts to arrive at a design that cannot be circumvented. Mr. Bayer reported the remodeled locks have been tested at the NSP, and it is believed the modifications will work although the changed locks have not yet been tested at the SDCC. Ely State Prison - Page 1607 Mr. Ghiggeri stated the budget closure for this account is predicated upon an average population in Fiscal Year 1996 of 986 inmates, and 1,000 in Fiscal Year 1997. The rated capacity for this facility is 986, and the emergency threshold level is 1,008. The adjustments recommended for this account, reflected in Exhibit D, are based upon the number of inmates housed in the facility. Mr. Ghiggeri reported there is a chaplain being recommended as an addition to the budget, and a corresponding reduction for the contract services now provided at the Ely State Prison (ESP). Senator O'Donnell stated hearings were held by the subcommittee to determine the necessity for a chaplain at the ESP. He pointed out there are currently 68 prisoners on death row in this facility, and the subcommittee learned there has been a decrease in the number of security violations, fights, and stabbings within this group of inmates believed to be directly attributable to the visits the chaplain has made. Senator O'Donnell stated, "As of July 1 [1995], the volunteer [chaplain] out there now is going away, increasing the necessity to fill the position." Senator O'Donnell pointed out as the population of the prison increases, the need for religious services will increase as well. Mr. Fettic remarked decision module E-425 provides for the replacement of security parts, and the Department of Prisons has advised the security and locking mechanisms are failing at an extraordinary rate. He asked the current status concerning this issue. Mr. Bayer said since he does not recall receiving a report of failing locks at the ESP, he will have to research and provide the requested information to the subcommittee at a later date. Mr. Fettic said he has also been advised there may be employee- related morale problems at the ESP. Mr. Bayer said he, too, has heard there are morale problems in this facility, but the reason for them has not yet been determined. He remarked he is anxious to visit the ESP to personally look into the situation. Mr. Bayer pointed out the ESP is a maximum security facility, and there is bound to be more stress and "burnout" associated with employees assigned to this institution than to other prison facilities. Ms. Giunchigliani asked if her assumption is correct there is no chaplain in Ely that is interested in filling the prison contract. Senator O'Donnell said there is a Catholic priest in Ely, but he has been notified by the bishop or the Catholic diocese that his services will be terminated effective July 1, 1995, due to lack of funding. He stressed there will be potential lawsuits filed by inmates if chaplain services are terminated in the ESP. Referring to the area of education, Ms. Giunchigliani inquired if the White Pine County School District contracts with the Department of Prisons to provide educational services in the ESP. She indicated she has been advised by several individuals funds provided for the program are being wasted or diverted for other things. She also heard that teachers suspended from teaching assignments within the White Pine County School District were given teaching positions in the prison. She asked Mr. Bayer if he can provide information to the subcommittee pertaining to the school budget for the prison. John E. Neill, Chief, Fiscal and Support Services Division, Department of Prisons, stated the department does not control the school budget. He suggested the requested information be secured from the State Department of Education or from the Department of Administration's Budget Division. Senator Mathews asked if the other prison facilities are provided chaplain services. Mr. Ghiggeri replied chaplain services are provided in northern and southern Nevada on a contract basis. She asked how much is budgeted for chaplain services, and Mr. Ghiggeri responded the budgeted amount is between $36,000 to $39,000 per annum, including fringe benefits. Senator Mathews asked if chaplain services are also provided for staff. Mr. Bayer replied the chaplain is utilized in a variety of ways including providing services to the staff. Lovelock Correctional Center - Page 1613 Mr. Ghiggeri provided an overview for this account from information contained in Exhibit D. He said funding is included to facilitate the opening of the LCC on July 1, 1995, instead of October, 1995, as initially recommended by the Governor. Additionally, the funding for "Phase II" staff is not included in the recommended budget for the 1995 - 1997 biennium since the Phase II facility is not scheduled to be on-line until, at the earliest, July 1, 1997. The LCC will have an inmate population of 562 in Fiscal Year 1996 and 639 in Fiscal Year 1997. The rated capacity is 560, and the emergency threshold is 644. Senator Jacobsen adjourned the meeting at 10:37 a.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Marion Entrekin, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Chairman DATE: Assemblyman Thomas W. Fettic, Chairman DATE: Assemblyman Larry L. Spitler, Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Finance Assembly Committee on Ways and Means Joint Subcommittee on Pub. Safety/Nat'l Res./Trans. May 26, 1995