MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Finance
Seventy-second Session
April 23, 2003
The Senate Committee on Finance was called to order by Chairman William J. Raggio, at 8:15 a.m. on Wednesday, April 23, 2003, in Room 2134 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Vice Chairman
Senator Dean A. Rhoads
Senator Barbara K. Cegavske
Senator Sandra J. Tiffany
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator Bernice Mathews
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gary L. Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Russell J. Guindon, Deputy Fiscal Analyst
Brian M. Burke, Senior Program Analyst
Jeffrey A. Ferguson, Program Analyst
Joyce Garrett, Program Analyst
Michael Archer, Committee Secretary
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Joseph M. Neal Jr., Clark County Senatorial District No. 4
Senator Dennis Nolan, Clark County Senatorial District No. 9
OTHERS PRESENT:
John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration
Dana Mathiesen, Deputy Director, Department of Motor Vehicles
Robert F. Wideman, Deputy Chief, Northern Command, NevadaHighway Patrol, Department of Public Safety
John L.Wagner, Lobbyist, Nevada Republican Assembly
Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens
Terry R. Crawforth, Administrator, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Bill Bradley, Board of Wildlife Commissioners, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Gilbert A. Yanuck
Michael J. Hornbarger,President, Nevada Outfitters and Guides Association
Doug Ponn
Joel Blakeslee
James D. Jurad
Dave Stanley
Kaitlin A. Backlund, Lobbyist, Nevada Conservation League
Chris MacKenzie, Board of Wildlife Commissioners, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Dennis K. Neilander, Chairman, State Gaming Control Board
Scott K. Sisco, Interim Director, Department of Cultural Affairs
Brian K. Krolicki, State Treasurer, Office of the State Treasurer
Senator Raggio:
Senate Bill (S.B.) 493 was heard in this committee on April 21, 2003, and staff has made some adjustments. Please give us an update.
SENATE BILL 493: Makes supplemental appropriation to Office of the Military for unanticipated shortfall in money for utility costs in Fiscal Year 2002‑2003. (BDR S-1335)
Gary L. Ghiggeri, Senate Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
I have distributed a modified finance committee agenda (Exhibit C), and will read the staff recommendations for S.B. 493 on page 2. Staff recommends the supplemental appropriation be amended from $131,604 to $137,000.
Senator Raggio:
How will the Office of the Military pay the amount due for fiscal year (FY) 2002?
Mr. Ghiggeri:
It will be presented to the State Board of Examiners for payment out of the Stale Claims Account.
Senator Raggio:
Mr. Comeaux, do you agree with this?
John P. Comeaux, Director, Department of Administration:
Yes.
Senator Raggio:
I will take a motion to amend and do pass S.B 493.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 493 INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF THE APPROPRIATION TO $137,000.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
Senator Cegavske:
Do we currently have the money in the Stale Claims Account?
Mr. Ghiggeri:
The amount for FY 2002 will be taken out of the Stale Claims Account; the amount for FY 2003 will be taken out of whatever funds the state treasurer has in the General Fund for this fiscal year. Since this expense was discovered since January, it is not included in the Governor’s budget. I do not believe the committee has any option other than to approve this.
Senator Raggio:
The portion of the expense for FY 2002 will have to be funded from the Stale Claims Account, and then should be funded from current year funding as a supplemental appropriation.
Senator Cegavske:
What I am concerned about is that we are passing bills when we do not know whether we have the revenue to pay for them.
Senator Raggio:
We are already below the statutory requirement of 5 percent for FY 2003, but we have to pay the utility bill.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR TIFFANY VOTED NO.)
*****
Senator Raggio:
We will now look at Assembly Bill (A.B.) 253.
ASSEMBLY BILL 253: Makes supplemental appropriation to State Distributive School Account in State General Fund for unanticipated shortfall in Fiscal Year 2002-2003. (BDR S-1224)
Mr. Ghiggeri:
I will read staff recommendations for A.B 253 on pages 2 and 3 (Exhibit C).
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 253.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
We will now hear Senate Bill (S.B.) 180.
SENATE BILL 180: Requires provision of independent research staff for Legislators of each political party represented in Legislature. (BDR 17‑145)
Senator Joseph M. Neal Jr, Clark County Senatorial District No. 4:
This bill is intended to help Legislators get proper information in order to serve their constituents effectively. Since going to the 120-day Legislative session, the number of bills has made it difficult for those of us who feel we must read and understand all of them. This bill will create a research group to aid the minority political party. Our staff is not meeting this need because of the need to address themselves to committees chaired by the majority party. I had asked for a fiscal note on the bill in February 2003, but do not yet have that as a part of my records.
Senator Raggio:
We do have the fiscal note for this bill and it estimates the costs would be $248,000 for FY 2004, and $402,000 for FY 2005. That is based on four senior research analysts being hired.
Senator Neal:
I have not seen that note, and it could be accurate if you are adding additional staff. I think, however, it all could be accomplished using the current staff.
Senator Raggio:
Do other states have research staffs divided by political party? If so, who employs them?
Senator Neal:
California does this, and the Legislative counsel employs them.
Senator Raggio:
But they must defer to the political party.
Senator Neal:
The Legislative counsel assigns individuals to the various parties. We do not need a separate director for this; we just need to separate the present staff so some are available to do necessary research for the minority party.
Senator Raggio:
We will close the hearing on S.B. 180, and will open the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 214.
SENATE BILL 214: Revises provisions concerning enforcement of requirement of registration of motor vehicle by new resident of this state. (BDR 43‑1058)
Senator Dennis Nolan, Clark County Senatorial District No. 9:
Please refer to the mock-up of the proposed amendment to S.B. 214 (Exhibit D). This version is closer to the original intent of the bill. We have a significant problem collecting revenues on vehicle registrations. This may be attributed to the fact that, unlike Nevada, other states do not use vehicle registrations as a means of revenue. Consequently, our registration rates are higher than other states; so many people do not register their vehicles. The lost revenue is between $8 million and $12 million a year. The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) originally opposed S.B. 214 because it put them in an enforcement position. We have amended the bill so when a person uses the special telephone number to anonymously report a non-registered vehicle, the information will be passed to the Department of Public Safety (DPS) for investigation and enforcement. There are some jurisdictional issues, so the DPS may have to go through local law enforcement to do this.
Dana Mathiesen, Deputy Director, Department of Motor Vehicles:
I will now read a memo (Exhibit E), which is our reply to questions this committee previously asked, and lists the current laws for vehicle registration of new residents. We estimate there are over 100,000 unregistered vehicles in the state. In addition, we have included a report showing what other states are doing to remedy this problem.
Senator Raggio:
It appears a substantial number of people are not in compliance with these laws.
Senator Nolan:
Senate Bill 214 originally required a person to register their vehicle before receiving a new driver’s license. The proposed amendment to that bill required notification of a person at the time they obtained their driver’s license that they would have 30 days to register their vehicle or their names would be turned over to DPS for investigation. A.B. 30 has similar language.
ASSEMBLY BILL 30: Revises provisions regarding registration of motor vehicles. (BDR 43-67)
Ms. Mathiesen:
Currently Nevada does not require the name on the vehicle registration to be the same as on the driver’s license. Most of the states on the New Resident Survey, pages 2 and 3 (Exhibit E), indicated that it was an enforcement issue and their DMV offices are not involved in enforcement. The new language states if a person fails to register a vehicle within 30 days of DMV obtaining information about the driver’s Nevada residency, DMV shall notify the local law enforcement agency.
Senator Raggio:
Does that run counter to the existing requirement that they register it within 30 days? Is that an exception?
Ms. Mathiesen:
At the time a person reports a resident who has not registered their vehicle, we would not know precisely how long a resident had been in the state. As such, the 30-day period would start from the date of the report.
Senator Cegavske:
In your memo (Exhibit E), you indicate there are 100,000 unregistered vehicles. What does that equate to in dollars lost? Also, what is done when the owner of an unregistered vehicle is stopped by law enforcement?
Robert F. Wideman, Deputy Chief, Northern Command Nevada Highway Patrol Division, Department of Public Safety:
When the vehicle is discovered to be unregistered, it is treated as a secondary violation. The Nevada Highway Patrol issues about 1000 citations a month for registration-related issues, which would include those who failed to obtain Nevada license plates.
Senator Cegavske:
Do they give a warning or is it a citation?
Mr. Wideman:
If they were within the 30-day requirement, then they would be given a warning; if they have passed the 30-day limit, it would be a citation.
Senator Nolan:
Except for discovering this registration violation when a person is stopped for something else, there is no other fine for not registering.
Senator Coffin:
The current practice of tripling fees for a person who has not registered is certainly a penalty.
Ms. Mathiesen:
For new residents, the DMV does not impose any fines or late charges. However, if a current resident is late in registering a vehicle there are penalties.
Senator Coffin:
Do DMV employees ask how long a person has lived in Nevada? Do you have the authority to ask that question?
Ms. Mathiesen:
We do not ask that question, but could have always asked it.
Senator Coffin:
Have you always had the authority to set up a phone number to allow residents to report someone who has not registered their vehicle?
Ms. Mathiesen:
We have always taken those kinds of calls, but had to turn the information over to law enforcement.
Senator Coffin:
Has there been anything to prevent you from taking those calls, or keeping a registry of the calls?
Ms. Mathiesen:
There was nothing to prevent us from doing that.
Senator Coffin:
So this bill is necessary to prod the agency into action, and it takes some money to do it.
Senator Nolan:
The DPS computers are best able to handle this, so it just makes sense to have the DPS take the calls. Once there is a promotional effort, which is part of the fiscal note, we will develop public service announcements to help Nevadans learn about the telephone number.
Senator Coffin:
There was once a central authority that could have done this when DMV was still part of DPS. Do they have authority to go onto county roads to enforce this?
Mr. Wideman:
This is a significant problem, particularly in southern Nevada. Our southern command already has a mechanism, through the automated phone-answering attendant, which gives the public specific directions on how to report such violations. Some staff has been dedicated to follow up on these calls, and we have realized significant results. In answer to your jurisdictional question, the highway patrol does have authority to go on to the city and county roads to act as peace officers as long as it is in connection with the basic function that started on the freeways.
Senator Raggio:
The law has changed over the years. Originally, a person could retain their out‑of-state vehicle registration until it expired. The law was subsequently changed to require out-of-state residents to register within 30 days of becoming a resident. There does not appear to be a concerted effort to affect compliance with this law. There is no use changing the law for the 30-day requirement if no one is trying to enforce it. We are reluctant to tie this to driver’s licenses because you may scare them away from getting those, too. Where does the $109,000 appropriation come from?
Senator Nolan:
The $250,000 fiscal note, on the original S.B. 214, would not apply to the amended version.
Senator Raggio:
Do we then need a new fiscal note on this?
Senator Nolan:
We probably will. The two major costs would be developing an advertising campaign and increasing the number of positions for DPS. If we realize even one-tenth of the lost revenue as a result of this, it will be good.
Senator Raggio:
We cannot base a budget on the problematic concept that we will get new revenue from this.
Senator Cegavske:
The smog reduction campaign, which used a telephone number to allow the public to report violators, seems to have been successful. How did that work? Also, did you consider having the public utilities send out a public service message with the bills? Would the program you propose be similar to this smog abatement program?
Ms. Mathiesen
The emission noncompliance campaign has been successful. We do 3 months of advertising, and receive about 20,000 calls per year.
Senator Raggio:
Is the DMV receptive to this proposal?
Ms. Mathiesen:
The DMV wants to get something done on this.
Senator Raggio:
Then work with Senator Nolan on this to see whether you can pare down the amount on the fiscal note to make it acceptable. Come back with a firm proposal. We will close the hearing on S.B. 214, and open the hearing on S.B. 391.
SENATE BILL 391: Provides for stipends and payment of costs of postage for Legislators under certain circumstances. (BDR 17-949)
Senator Nolan:
This bill is intended to provide equity for those who seek office. Legislators do not receive the compensation that they deserve. We serve the public knowing we are going to take a loss in our personal income. It is unfair to us, and others who wish to run for public office, and is a disincentive to many prospective candidates. We understand the Legislature will want to avoid increasing our salaries, in light of the current budget situation. The proposed amendment to S.B. 391 (Exhibit F) allows Legislators to provide evidence that they were not being compensated by any other means, in order to be reimbursed for lost income up to $2000 per month. This would only apply to the last 2 months of the Legislative session, when we are no longer being compensated.
Senator Raggio:
Before this amendment, the bill called for a cap of $20,000. Has that been changed?
Senator Nolan:
Yes. The cap was misconstrued in the interpretation; it was intended to equate to a person making $20,000 a year.
Senator Raggio:
Would it increase above $2000 per month? Would you have to show a reduction in income? What exactly does section 3 of S.B. 391 mean?
Senator Nolan:
The bill tried to address an inequity in the postal allowance. To send just a postcard to each house in my district would cost a minimum of $6000. A portion of the bill was to increase the allowance.
Senator Raggio:
In S.B. 391, section 2 would not become effective until January 1, 2007. Section 3 was to become effective in October 2003. Are you suggesting we amend out section 3?
Senator Nolan:
Yes. We want that taken out because the budgetary circumstances this session would make it difficult to accept.
Senator Coffin:
How would you prove the reduction in income? Not all Legislators lose money. I do not lose money from month to month. I could not prove a loss of income.
Senator Nolan:
The Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB) would establish policy to determine who had lost income. Because it is public record, it would be scrutinized carefully.
John L. Wagner, Lobbyist, Nevada Republican Assembly:
The Legislators deserve to be compensated properly for their services. You should also have a higher postage allowance to meet your constituents’ needs. The bill should be amended to include health insurance.
Senator Raggio:
The Nevada Constitution provides for Legislators to be paid not in excess of 60 days. A 60-day session was rare, even until the middle of the last century. The sessions grew longer until we saw a 165-day session, even though the Legislators were still paid for only 60 days. Under the Constitution, we could not raise salaries during a Legislator’s current term of office; it had to be done prospectively.
There is no question that Legislators, particularly those who live over 50 miles away, do not receive adequate compensation. I admire people who are willing to get into the process and serve. This has become a disincentive to those who would like to serve in the Legislature. For the most part everyone here works harder than they are given credit for, and I do not think the constituents realize the time, effort, trauma, and stress involved in this process. It is fun until you have to vote, and then you are damned if you do and damned if you do not.
We used to raise our salaries regularly. A few sessions ago, the Legislature voted on a 300 percent pension increase. I did not vote for it, but think it was reasonable. Despite our pension being ridiculously low, the public outcry over that has made us reluctant to increase our compensation. We should amend the constitution, and ask the public to be reasonable about this.
Mr. Wagner:
You did an excellent job stating why you deserve a raise.
Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens:
I speak in opposition to S.B. 391. The stipend to make up for lost income would have negative reverberations in the state because of the inequality it would create for Legislators who are employed to perform equally responsible duties. I completely agree that the time, effort, and stress the Legislators undergo is far greater than is generally understood, and it should be adequately compensated. Please refer to our alternative proposal (Exhibit G). The loss in compensation has gone on so long and is such a large sum that it is difficult for constituents to accept that. We propose requiring the Legislature to fix compensation each session, comparing salaries to comparable private sector duties, and not exceeding that level. We also propose establishing a constitutional limit of 20 days for special sessions, a constitutional provision equalizing county employee salaries and changing the limit for postage and stationery expenses.
Senator Raggio:
When you refer to state and county officials do you mean elected officials?
How do you compare a county commissioner with the board chairman in the private sector? How do you compare a sheriff, state controller or a governor to someone in the private sector? I think it would be more appropriate to compare these with similar positions in the public sector across the country.
Ms. Lusk:
Yes, the reference refers to elected officials. I agree it is difficult to compare. You would have to develop a matrix to show appropriate comparisons.
Senator Raggio:
We will now hear S.B. 368.
SENATE BILL 368: Provides for reimbursement of Legislators for certain travel expenses incurred during legislative interim. (BDR 17-676)
Senator Dean A. Rhoads:
This bill will only reimburse Legislators for costs to attend public meetings with elected officials. If you will look at my handout (Exhibit H) you will see my district is the largest state Legislative district outside of Alaska. As the handout indicates, this bill would affect 13 Legislators. As an example of how costly out-of-pocket travel expenses can be, I went to the dedication ceremony of a new high school in Lincoln County and it cost me $529. The bill would limit reimbursement to $5000. You could not get reimbursed once you have filed a declaration of candidacy for reelection, and this would be for travel only within a Legislator’s district.
Mr. Wagner:
I fully support this bill.
Senator Raggio:
We will close the hearing on S.B. 368 and open the hearing on S.B. 420.
SENATE BILL 420: Makes various changes relating to Division of Wildlife of State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. (BDR 45-1254)
Terry R. Crawforth, Administrator, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources:
This bill increases license and permit fees, and includes a consumer price index (CPI) trigger proposal for future fee adjustments. The Nevada Division of Wildlife (NDOW) has three and one-half fewer positions in this budget than we did in the last biennium. My handout (Exhibit I) describes our agency’s responsibilities for conserving wildlife and maintaining programs for the public. Graphs on pages 3 through 11 illustrate licensing trends and new fee proposals, federal and state revenue, and expenditures.
Senator Raggio:
Will the 1 percent of total funding you formerly received from tourism now go to another account and be deleted from your proposed budget?
Mr. Crawforth:
Yes.
Senator Raggio:
Does the graph on page 7 indicate your unobligated reserves?
Mr. Crawforth:
That is correct. It is time for some adjustments. Page 8 shows the forecast if we include the proposed enhanced funding.
Senator Raggio:
Do the forecasted revenues on page 8 include the CPI? Is so, what factor was used?
Mr. Crawforth:
Yes, we used a CPI factor of 2.7 percent. It is based on U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) statistical increases.
Senator Raggio:
Are the figures in the far-right column on page 11 your total proposed fees?
Mr. Crawforth:
Our request for the new license fees is shown on the far right. We took the CPI proposal and ran it against the 1996 adjusted fee, as if we had the CPI in the beginning of 1996, and it came to $29.
Senator Raggio:
If you raise the fees to the proposed costs, will it affect a large number of people who apply for licenses?
Mr. Crawforth:
We will get some buyer resistance, but it will depend on the license.
Senator Raggio:
How do the proposed fees compare with other western states?
Mr. Crawforth:
We are on the low side of the western average right now. This increase would put us on the high side. However, the other states are looking at fee increases now as well, and not all of our licenses are comparable.
Senator Raggio:
What does the bill do with respect to special fees, such as those for seniors?
Mr. Crawforth:
We are trying for across-the-board fee increases. It will double the amount seniors now pay. Our license year begins March 1st, so fee increases will take affect in March 2004.
Senator Raggio:
In S.B. 420 section 3, it says if the fee has been adjusted in the last 2 years, they may adjust the fee, but if it has not been increased in the last 2 years, they may not adjust the fee. Am I interpreting that correctly?
Mr. Crawfoth:
You are correct. There are many technical amendments in the bill. I refer you to S.B. 420 section 7, describing a new program for upland game, which will require a $10 fee.
Senator Raggio:
So in addition to hunting license you would require a $10 payment for an upland game bird?
Mr. Crawforth:
In section 9, subsection 2, line 36, we do not want to use the upland game bird funds for wetlands, and so we amended this to change the word “wetlands” to “upland game bird habitat.” Section 11 would create a habitat conservation fee of $3 to go into the wildlife obligated reserve account.
Senator Raggio:
If you want to hunt an upland bird, will you pay $29 for a license, $10 for an upland game fee, and a $3 habitat conservation fee for a total of $42? Are you imposing a CPI on top of this?
Mr. Crawforth:
That is correct. Section 22 of the bill shows the increases in basic fees. The proposed amendments have to do with guides and outfitters. They are willing to pay substantially more for their licenses and application fees if a board can be created that will give them more service and regulatory control from NDOW. All the guide fees in these amendments are increased substantially. In subsection 5, lines 11 through 24, is a list of permits for the proposed increases to cover our costs of inspection and issuance.
Senator Raggio:
How were those amounts determined?
Mr. Crawforth:
They are based on what it costs us to inspect and issue those licenses.
Senator Raggio:
Under this proposal, if a senior wanted to hunt an upland bird, the fee would be increased from $7 to $17 for a combined hunting and fishing license. Would they also pay the proposed $10 and $3 fee?
Mr. Crawforth:
That is correct. Our proposed increases for big game tags are in section 24. These are comparable with most states.
Senator Raggio:
How much is a non-resident deer tag? Will this increase be a deterrent to non‑resident hunters coming to Nevada?
Mr. Crawforth:
The tag is now $200, and it will go up to $240. This is in addition to $138 for a hunting license. It would not be a deterrent, as we have many times more applications for those tags than tags available.
The last item I would like to mention is section 40. This increases the boat registration fees. Since this is a property tax, half of what we collect goes to the county school fund in the county in which the boat is registered.
Senator Tiffany:
What is the source of revenue for the two fisheries you are rebuilding?
Mr. Crawforth:
Trout stamp money would be used to repay the bonds.
Senator Tiffany:
Are the amendments proposed in Senator Rhoads’s letter (Exhibit J) still going to be considered?
Mr. Crawforth:
That trout stamp money is from the last biennium. The proposals in that letter are committee recommendations and have not yet been added as amendments.
Senator Tiffany:
I do not like the CPI concept. I would support taking that out because it removes the Legislature from the process. Where is your 3 percent cut that the Governor recommended of all agencies?
Mr. Crawforth:
We had a 3 percent cut in the General Fund appropriation for our non-game program.
Senator Tiffany:
You are only funded 3 percent by the General Fund. Does this mean you do not get General Fund money any longer?
Mr. Ghiggeri:
The 3 percent budget cut was $20,972, and was a reduction in General Fund support for reduced licenses. Also, the fiscal note for the agency itemizes some fee increases proposed for this bill. Included in that is a transfer to the Distributive School Account (DSA) from boat registrations in the amount of $353,000 next year, and $385,000 the following year.
Mr. Crawforth:
We get $679,000 from the General Fund.
Senator Tiffany:
Has anyone proposed to your agency that you become 100 percent fee-based, so we can eliminate the General Fund money you receive? Will your proposed increases cover the $679,000 General Fund appropriation?
Mr. Crawforth:
We have not been approached to become 100 percent fee-based. When it comes to the non-hunted species, the general public is asked to pay for those. Hunters pay for the hunted species. The Governor’s budget increases the General Fund portion by $200,000 to support the non-game species management. These fee increases will generate about $2 million.
Senator Tiffany:
Did you build into your budget anything to improve your computer system to collect these fees?
Mr. Crawforth:
We are in the process of developing a new licensing computer system. Most of that expense is coming from the current biennium.
Senator Tiffany:
Will you notify the public about these changes? Will you post it on the Internet?
Mr. Crawforth:
It will be posted on the Internet. We have done a good job finding out what the public wants. I have a packet of letters (Exhibit K) to illustrate the support we have for the fee increases.
Senator Rhoads:
There is tremendous support by the guides for this fee increase. I applaud that, but have reservations about using the CPI. In my district the deer have suffered from drought, wild horses, and predators.
Senator Raggio:
What is the status of the deer population?
Mr. Crawforth:
Mule deer are not doing well in the western United States, but it is not due to over-hunting. In the mid 1980’s we had 275,000 deer in Nevada, but now we have 125,000.
Senator Raggio:
How many deer were taken last year?
Mr. Crawforth:
There were 14,000 to 15,000 deer taken last year. The number decreases every year.
Senator Raggio:
How will this affect your deer tag revenue?
Mr. Crawforth:
Deer tag revenue is down.
Senator Mathews:
The CPI leaves the Legislature out of the loop, so I will not be in favor of that. You need to identify all these additional fees when you put this information on the Web. We continually seem to ask the people who can least afford it to shoulder theses increases. What happens if these fees are not increased across the board?
Mr. Crawforth:
If these fees are not increased, we will not have sufficient revenue to accrue all of our federal aid. Our programs will diminish substantially.
Senator Raggio:
Over the years we have always asked the participants to pay for this. We have never used General Funds for these activities. If we are going to continue with this philosophy we will need to increase fees or not have these activities.
Senator Mathews:
I was not suggesting that we do not support the program.
Senator Rawson:
Wild horses are an introduced species and the mule deer is not. Are the mountain lion and coyote now protected?
Mr. Crawforth:
The mountain lion is now a game animal, and the coyote is no longer protected. I think we do not generally have more predators than we should, but in places of declining habitat conditions, predators have the advantage. We are targeting predator management in specific areas.
Senator Rawson:
Is there new language in the bill allowing active members of the military who are stationed in Nevada to get the lower fee?
Mr. Crawforth:
We are making some changes. I have provided a list of proposed amendments to S.B 420 (Exhibit L), which I will now read. One of these items is to exempt disabled veterans, Indians, and servicemen from fee increases. NDOW has dedicated employees, our programs are popular with our customers, and we manage this with an erratic cash flow due to the way our licenses are sold. We often have to borrow from the General Fund. I understand your concerns about the CPI, but I think it will prevent large periodic increases in lieu of smaller annual increases.
Bill Bradley, Board of Wildlife Commissioners, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources:
The Board of Wildlife Commissioners has been directed by you to watch this agency and make sure it is fiscally sound. NDOW responds positively to the needs of the public. The fee increases are essential to keep the agency running. I understand you do not like to lose control if the CIP is implemented, but it means we will not have to come back here every 2 years.
Senator Rhoads:
I think the predators need some attention. Have you increased the quota on them?
Mr. Crawforth:
We are taking steps to reduce the predators and have increased the quota on predators. We harvest about 265 mountain lions in Nevada.
Senator Coffin:
Do indigent families get cited if they are taking fish without a license?
Mr. Crawforth:
Our officers have always used discretion. They contact about 30,000 people per year and issue about 10,000 citations.
Gilbert A. Yanuck:
I request you act favorably on S.B 420. Allow me to read my prepared statement (Exhibit M), which addresses the need to adequately fund NDOW so it can meet the challenges of the future.
Michael J. Hornbarger, President, Nevada Outfitters and Guides Association:
The fee increases will provide us with the kind of regulation we need to level the playing field. We are happy to pay; the CPI is a good thing. It seems like we spend too much time coming here to obtain a small increase every 2 years.
Doug Ponn:
I am here to support this bill.
Joel Blakeslee:
I support this bill.
James D. Jurad:
I am here to support this legislation. I feel the increases are needed, and support the CPI.
Dave Stanley:
S.B. 420 is essential to the wildlife of this state. I urge you to support this bill.
Kaitlin A. Backlund, Lobbyist, Nevada Conservation League:
We urge your support of S.B.420, with or without the CPI.
Senator Raggio:
Is General Fund money being suggested to replace the tourism funding that NDOW will lose?
Mr. Comeaux:
Yes.
Chris MacKenzie, Board of Wildlife Commissioners, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources:
This bill provides funding for habitat development, which is crucial to the future of wildlife. I support S.B 420. There are no organized sportsmen’s groups or conservation groups opposed to this bill. All the county advisory groups are in support of this bill in one form or another.
Senator Raggio:
I have another letter here from American Ready-Mix (Exhibit N) in support of S.B. 420. We will close the hearing on S.B. 420, and will go to budget closings.
Jeffrey A. Ferguson, Program Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
I will read the discussion of closing issues budget account (B/A) 101-4061 from the budget closing action detail report, closing report #7 (Exhibit O. Original is on file in Research Library.), pages 2 through 4. The closing issues include board-issued gaming work permits, new positions for testing electronic gaming devices, continuation of the credential pay plan, and audit division travel funding.
Gaming Control Board – Budget page GAMING-1 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-4061
Senator Raggio:
Will the work permit fee increase?
Mr. Ferguson:
The fee would remain at $75. There is proposal in S.B. 432 that would allow the Gaming Control Board to charge actual costs to register gaming employees.
SENATE BILL 432: Makes various changes pertaining to regulation of gaming. (BDR-41-490).
Senator Raggio:
Will this allow us to remove the General Fund portion?
Dennis K. Neilander, Chairman, State Gaming Control Board:
The budget is built on a $75 per person registration fee. That $75 covers the cost the board incurs for background checks, and administering the program. There could be an additional cost to the employees to have their fingerprints rolled. That cost depends on the rate in the jurisdiction it is taken.
Senator Raggio:
Does S.B 432 accommodate all that? Did one of the counties want to retain the work permit program?
Mr.Neilander:
The bill will accommodate all that. Douglas County is interested in maintaining the program.
Senator Raggio:
If the cities and counties opt out of this, we will have the revenue to support it?
Mr. Neilander:
This would eliminate the ability that now exists, for counties to opt out.
Senator Raggio:
If we approve this in the budget closings, will it be contingent on S.B. 432 passing?
Mr. Neilander:
That is correct.
Senator Tiffany:
Is this going to be a Web-based program?
Mr. Neilander:
It will eventually be a Web-based program, but right now we have to develop ways to keep that information safe. Although the list is public information, we are worried someone will gain access to other information on our file server. We will first have a manual system and then phase it in to an electronic one.
Senator Tiffany:
How will the human resources departments get this verified?
Mr. Neilander:
The bill is not effective until January 2004, so we have about 6 months to implement that electronic system.
Senator Tiffany:
Will we know the process before those 6 months have elapsed?
Mr. Neilander:
Yes.
Senator Cegavske:
Does S.B. 432 contain language that allows the $75 fee to be increased? Also, is it a national fingerprint search, and will locals be linking in to it?
Mr. Neilander:
The local and national checks now cost a total of $45. That leaves us with $30 to administer the program. The $75 is a cap under current law. S.B. 432 removes the cap and requires us to charge our actual costs. If the local or national agencies raise their fees to us, we will be able to increase our fees without coming back to the Legislature for authority.
Mr. Ferguson:
I want to point out that start-up costs for this program will require a General Fund loan of $384,235. The entire amount will be paid back to the General Fund by the end of the biennium. I will resume reading at enhancement E-177 on page 3 (Exhibit O).
E-177 Increase Non-Gaming Business– Page GAMING-3
Senator Raggio:
Has the $154,979 General Fund appropriation been removed?
Mr. Ferguson:
That is correct. The board has already increased its fees to accommodate that.
Senator Raggio:
Will the two new staff positions pay for themselves?
Mr. Neilander:
Yes, they will. I increased the fees after obtaining approval from the Interim Finance Committee (IFC).
Mr. Ferguson:
Please refer to the bottom of page 3 regarding the Continuation of Credential Pay Plan. This program was designed to recruit and retain credentialed employees such as certified public accountants (CPA), attorneys, and those with engineering degrees by increasing their compensation by $5000 per year. Staff recommends appropriation of this funding through General Fund appropriation if the subcommittee decides to continue the program.
Senator Raggio:
There has been some discussion that this could be cut. How critical is this component of your budget?
Mr. Neilander:
It is absolutely essential that we maintain professional credentialed people on our staff in order to regulate the gaming industry. We are investigating people who have huge resources at their disposal, and we cannot compete without highly credentialed professionals.
Senator Raggio:
What is the maximum they are paid?
Mr. Neilander:
In FY 2002 the maximum salary for agent level was $55,000; with credential pay it would increase to $60,000.
Senator Raggio:
Is that the maximum salary, even with a CPA or electrical engineering degree? Will the credential pay plan raise their salaries by $5000?
Mr. Neilander:
Yes.
Senator Cegavske:
Does everyone who applies for a gaming license have to pay the fee?
Mr. Neilander:
For the non-restrictive license, they pay an application fee of $500, plus the actual costs of the investigation. The investigative fees go to a separate budget account, which then reverts into the General Fund. There is a certain portion of it that goes into the investigative account.
Senator Cegavske:
Could you increase that investigative fee?
Mr. Neilander:
We did increase that fee 2 years ago.
Senator Cegavske:
How much was the increase?
Mr. Neilander:
The main fee went from $60 to $75 per hour.
Senator Tiffany:
If we put this in the unclassified pay bill, it is all General Fund. Will the $525 for the lab fees go toward these salaries?
Mr. Ghiggeri:
What we are recommending is that you put the General Fund portion in the unclassified pay bill and put language in the pay bill, consistent with previous unclassified pay bills, directing the Gaming Control Board on how to utilize those funds. It would also make reference to the amount of money available in the budget.
Senator Tiffany:
So would we try to wrap that in through the language?
Mr. Ghiggeri:
We assume they would utilize funding from investigative fees to fund a portion of this as they have in the past.
Senator Tiffany:
Do they get the $5000 bonus each year, or one time over the biennium?
Mr. Neilander:
It is $5000 annually, paid in semi-annual installments.
Senator Tiffany:
Would it be a $10,000 increase per employee over the biennium? What percentage of an increase is that?
Mr. Neilander:
Yes. It would be a 9 percent increase.
Senator Tiffany:
We are not giving any other state employees a salary increase.
Mr. Neilander:
This has been in place since 1995, in part to resolve problems of turnover. It has helped, and continues to help, in recruitment and retaining employees.
Senator Tiffany:
Should this be reviewed since people are not leaving state employment because of the current economy?
Mr. Neilander:
My concern is that if we eliminate the program, I lose several of our most highly trained and professional auditors.
Senator Cegavske:
How many people are we talking about? How much does a CPA get per hour in the private sector?
Mr. Neilander:
The current number of qualified personnel is 81. We have additional engineers coming on board, and we have some auditors who are actively pursuing their certification. The per-hour fee I spoke of earlier is the investigative fee; this is part of the licensing fee. We do not charge Nevada licensees for audit services
Senator Cegavske:
Are we subsidizing that investigation by not charging a high enough fee?
Mr. Neilander:
Those are auditors who work on investigations for suitability for a license. The auditors I am speaking of are the ones who audit existing licensees. These are done on a regular basis, and we do not charge for these audits. We are auditing them to make sure they have paid their fair share of taxes.
Senator Raggio:
The investigative fees should be consistent with the cost of investigation. With respect to the full-scope audit, that is for the benefit of the State, and so the licensee is not charged. The audit results in a great deal of tax recovery. Recent law school graduates today receive a minimum of $65,000 per year with almost any law firm. It surprises me that you are able to retain people.
Mr. Ferguson:
I will resume reading at decision unit M-400 on page 4.
M-400 Travel & Training Adjustment– Page GAMING-3
E-500 Accessible Flexible, Cost-Efficient Governments– Page GAMING-5
E-600 Budget Reductions – Page GAMING-5
Senator Raggio:
Will there be a net overall reduction in positions?
Mr. Ferguson:
There will be a net overall reduction of a .5 full-time employee (FTE).
Senator Raggio:
Is that your understanding, Mr. Neilander?
Mr. Neilander:
Yes.
Senator Raggio:
If we follow these recommendations, what is the total General Fund reduction?
Mr. Ferguson:
There will be a General Fund reduction of $735,412 in FY 2004 and $1,019,697 in FY 2005.
Senator Raggio:
Is the difference in these amounts because gaming work permit provisions do not go into affect until January 2004? In decision unit E-176, is the addition of reserves on the payback contemplated in these projections?
E-176 Increase Non-Gaming Business– Page GAMING-3
Mr. Ferguson:
Yes. The difference is due to the work provision permit beginning date of January 2004. The reserves in E-176 are included in this projection.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101–4061 WITH RECOMMENDATIONS BY STAFF AND CONTINGENT ON PASSAGE OF S.B. 432.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
We will now hear B/A 101-4067.
Gaming Commission – Budget page GAMING-8 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-4067
Mr. Ferguson:
I will read pages 5 and 6 of the closing list, which covers the elimination of a position, new electronic laboratory equipment, and an error in the work program year FTE count.
E-275 Working Environment & Wage - Page GAMING-9
E-720 New Equipment– Page GAMING-10
Senator Raggio:
What is the error in the work program year FTE account, indicated on page 6?
Mr. Ferguson:
There are two FTEs for the work program rather than zero as the Executive Budget indicates.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101 ‑ 4067 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
The next item is B/A 244-4063.
Gaming Control Board Investigation Fund – Budget page GAMING-12 (Volume 1) Budget Account 244-4063
Mr. Ferguson:
There are no major closing issues except those noted earlier in enhancement E‑177 regarding the transfer of funds for the seven positions.
Senator Raggio:
What do you charge to this account?
Mr. Ferguson:
As originally proposed in the Executive Budget, it will be $615,893 in FY 2004 and $630,037 in FY 2005.
Senator Raggio:
Do you want to make adjustments to assessments and cost-allocations as part of a motion?
Mr. Ferguson:
That is correct, in addition to the fee transfers.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 244-4063 WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Joyce Garrett, Program Analyst, Fiscal analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
B&I, Real Estate Education and Research – Budget page B&I-17 (Volume 2) Budget Account 216-3826
E-503 Accessible, Flexible, Cost-Efficient Government – Page B&I-21
Please see Closing List #7 (Exhibit O), pages 9 and 10. The closing issues are the Governor’s recommendation of $50,000 in each fiscal year for contract services for licensee education programs
E-502 Accessible, Flexible, Cost-Efficient Government – Page B&I-20
Also included in this budget is a request for $10,000 for printing a textbook, which the agency has subsequently agreed to eliminate until it can justify the funding. There are several items issues that involve travel, training, and the purchase of computer equipment.
Mr. Ghiggeri:
I want to ensure that the motion to accept staff recommendations includes the elimination of the $10,000, and provides authority for the Real Estate Division to come to IFC when they have developed a plan to spend the funds.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 216-3826 WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF INCLUDING THE ELIMINATION OF THE $10,000 AND THE AUTHORITY TO LATER APPEAR BEFORE THE IFC WITH A SPENDING PLAN.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED (SENATORS COFFIN AND MATHEWS WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE).
*****
B&I, Real Estate Recovery Account – Budget page B&I-24 (Volume 2)
Budget Account 216-3827
Ms. Garrett:
There are no major closing issues. Staff recommends this account be closed as recommended by the Governor with a technical adjustment to align the amounts being transferred from this budget account to B/A 216-3826, real estate education and research.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 216-3827 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR WITH THE TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR COFFIN AND SENATOR CEGAVSKE WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE).
*****
Senator Raggio:
The next item is B/A 271-3843.
B&I, Mobile Home Parks – Budget page B&I-81 (Volume 2)
Budget Account 271-3843
Ms. Garrett:
There are no closing issues. Staff recommends the account be closed as recommended by the Governor with one technical adjustment. This is to align the purchasing assessment that was overstated in the Executive Budget.
Senator Raggio:
There is over $200,000 in this account that comes from a fee. Do the owners pay that?
Ms. Garrett:
The owners pay a fee of $5 per lot.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 271-3843 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR WITH ONE TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (SENATORS COFFIN AND CEGAVSKE WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE).
*****
Ms. Garrett:
B&I, MFG Housing Education/Recovery – Budget page B&I-85 (Volume 2)
Budget Account 271-3847
There are no major closing issues. Staff recommends this account be closed as recommend by the Governor with one technical adjustment to correct the purchasing assessment.
Senator Raggio:
How is this funded? Do they need to get a court order to satisfy the claims?
Ms. Garrett:
A fee charged for original and renewed licenses funds the account. Payment from this budget account to satisfy claims must be made only be court order.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 271-3847 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR WITH ONE TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (SENATOR COFFIN ABSENT FOR THE VOTE).
*****
Senator Raggio:
Next we will hear B/A 101-3805.
Ms. Garrett:
B&I, Financial Institutions Investigations – Budget page B&I-109 (Volume 2)
Budget Account 101-3805
M-100 Inflation & Per Unit Adjustments – Page B&I-110
There are no major closing issues. Staff recommends this account be closed as recommend by the Governor with one technical adjustment to increase the statewide cost allocation in M-100.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-3805 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR WITH ONE TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (SENATOR COFFIN WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE).
*****
Ms. Garrett:
The next budget account is 101-3882.
B&I, Financial Institutions Audit – Budget page B&I-111 (Volume 2)
Budget Account 101-3882
M-100 Inflation & Per Unit Adjustments – Page B&I-112
There are no major closing issues. Staff recommends this account be closed as recommend by the Governor with one technical adjustment to increase the statewide cost allocation in M-100.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-3885 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR WITH ONE TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED (SENATOR COFFIN WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE).
*****
Senator Raggio:
Next item is B/A 296-4496.
Fort Mohave Development Fund – Budget page CRC-8 (Volume 3)
Budget Account 296-4496
Ms. Garrett:
Decision unit E-151 proposes the transfer of funds to Clark County for potential infrastructure development projects.
E-151 Economic Development – Budget page CRC-9
There are no major closing issues. The agency is requesting a $400,000 reduction in FY 2003-2004 in the transfer to Clark County for infrastructure development projects that have been identified by the town of Laughlin. This would bring the total authority to $800,000.
Senator Raggio:
Have they sold any land in the last 2 years?
Ms. Garrett:
They have not sold any land in the last 2 years.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 296-4496 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF $800,000 TO CLARK COUNTY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (SENATOR COFFIN ABSENT FOR THE VOTE).
*****
Ms. Garrett:
CRC Research and Development – Budget page CRC-10 (Volume 3)
Budget Account 296-4497
There are no major closing issues.
E-375 Environmental Policies & Programs – Budget page CRC-11
Senator Raggio:
Enhancement E–375 indicates they did not spend all the money that was appropriated previously. Why do they need this amount in the future?
Ms. Garrett:
That is correct. The reason they did not spend all of it was due to unanticipated delays in the program. The project is now moving forward. The agency is requesting a reduction of $30,200 in each year of the biennium to bring the total authority in to $500,000 in each fiscal year.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 296-4497 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO INCLUDE THE REDUCTION TO ALLOW THE AUTHORITY OF $500,000 IN EACH FISCAL YEAR.
SENATOR TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Bob Guernsey, Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
The next budget to be closed is B/A 101-2891. I will review closing issues and technical adjustments on page 24 of the closing list The budget calls for a 7 percent increase in funding for publications and periodicals, $39,600 for building rent for the blind and physically handicapped program in Las Vegas, funding for the bookmobile program, and technical adjustments. There are no major closing issues.
Nevada State Library – Budget page CULTURAL-41 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-2891
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2891 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Mr. Guernsey:
Budget account 101-1052 is described on page 25 (Exhibit O).
Archives and Records – Budget page CULTURAL-47 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-1052
There are no major closing issues in this account. I would point out that a .51 FTE position is being reduced to .45 in decision unit E-600 in order to eliminate the payment of retirement and group insurance benefits.
E-600 Budget Reductions – Budget page –CULTURAL-50
Senator Raggio:
Is the archives and records budget funded well enough for their purposes?
Scott K. Sisco, Interim Director, Department of Cultural Affairs:
We are doing the best we can with the resources available.
Senator Tiffany:
Have you thought about taking other agency’s document imaging work?
Mr. Sisco:
We are already in that business. We combine the services of the smaller agencies and have that equipment available. We use inmate services to try to keep the cost down.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-1052 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
HE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Mr. Guernsey:
Budget account 101-1055 is described on pages 26 and 27.
Micrographics and Imaging – Budget page CULTURAL-52 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-1055
There are no major closing issues on this budget. The Governor recommends a total staffing reduction from 12 positions to 5 positions. Four positions have never been filled and are being eliminated; in addition three positions, currently vacant, are being eliminated under decision unit E-605. The agency is experiencing funding problems because they underbid a large job for the DMV.
E-605 Budget Reductions – Budget page –CULTURAL-54
Senator Raggio:
How much did they lose?
Mr. Sisco:
We lost about $200,000 on that job. We made some program management changes and now have the program back on track.
Senator Raggio:
You are out the $200,000. Why was it underbid?
Mr. Sisco:
It is an enterprise-funded program, and we did lose the $200,000. A Department Of Cultural Affairs employee was going through some kind of a personnel crisis situation and underestimated the job. However, this is not why we are eliminating these positions.
Senator Raggio:
Can you get by without those positions?
Mr. Sisco:
Yes, we can.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-1055 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
*****
Senator Raggio:
The next budget account is 101-2893.
Nevada State Library - Literacy – Budget page CULTURAL-57 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-2893
Mr. Guernsey:
This budget is described on page 28. Staff recommends the account be closed as recommended by the Governor.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2893 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Mr. Guernsey:
Budget account 101-2895 is described on page 29. Staff recommends the account be closed as recommended by the Governor.
Nevada State Library - CLAN – Budget page CULTURAL-61 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-2895
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2895 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Mr. Guernsey:
Budget account 101-2979 is described on pages 30 and 31. Staff is recommending that the license plate charges be increased to a level of $51,000 each year.
Nevada Arts Council – Budget page CULTURAL-64 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-2979
Senator Raggio:
Are those license plates renewed every year?
Mr. Sisco:
Yes.
Senator Rawson:
We established an endowment fund last session but did not fund it. Would that show up in this budget?
Mr. Sisco:
Yes, if at any time the Legislature were to fund it, the program would be part of their budget.
Senator Rawson:
Does the license plate revenue then go into the General Fund?
Mr. Sisco:
It is in a unique category and is expended out of that category. It does not offset the General Fund. The funding that remains in that category is carried forward.
Senator Rawson:
I wonder if we should appropriate some token amount so we have a line item for that endowment.
Mr. Guernsey:
I really cannot speak for the agency, but I do not think much would be accomplished by doing that without additional funding or an expenditure plan.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-2979 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
SENATOR COFFIN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Russell J. Guindon, Deputy Fiscal Analyst, Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
The next budget account is 101-1080. I will read the overview and closing issues on pages 1 through 3 of the Senate Committee on Finance Closing List #6 (Exhibit P. Original in on file in the Research Library.). In this budget the Governor has recommended an amendment, which, if approved, would appropriate $151,500 per year from the General Fund to provide funds for the cost of mailing checks from the state mailroom. Additional closing items include funding for salary, travel and per diem costs for the Board of Finance, and other small adjustments.
State Treasurer – Budget page ELECTED-86 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-1080
Senator Raggio:
Why cannot the cost-allocation reimbursement be implemented until the 2005‑2007 biennium?
Mr. Comeaux:
That is just how the statewide cost-allocation plan works. It is always 2 years behind and rolls forward.
Senator Raggio:
So what is the issue here? Should we approve the amendment to add $151,500 each year?
Mr. Guindon:
That is correct. Staff recommends this. I will note that we do not have all the information we would like in order to be completely comfortable with this, and adjustments might have to be made in the future.
Mr. Ghiggeri:
I believe the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means held up the budget because of this issue.
Mr. Krolicki:
This issue is coming from beyond us; it is coming from the Department of Administration.
Senator Raggio:
What is the purpose of holding it? We can always make the adjustment in the future.
Mr. Ghiggeri:
I do not know. I just heard they held up the budget based on this issue.
Senator Raggio:
With regard to the Board of Finance funding issue, do they pay these expenses personally?
Mr. Krolicki:
They have not traditionally asked for per diem. My only concern is that a member receiving per diem might set a precedent for those who eventually replace them.
Mr. Guindon:
The State Treasurer is requesting additional funds for printing and mailing that was not in the Executive Budget. Staff recommends the requested appropriation.
Senator Raggio:
Mr. Comeaux, do you agree with that?
Mr. Comeaux:
We did not recommend that originally, but we would not object.
Mr. Guindon:
The State Treasurer has also asked the committee to consider a General Fund appropriation of $895 in each year of the biennium for Verisign certificates. Staff recommends the appropriation. It was inadvertently omitted from decision unit E-300 by the Budget Office.
E-300 Fringe Benefit Changes – Budget page ELECTED-87
Senator Raggio:
Do you agree with that Mr. Comeaux?
Mr. Comeaux:
Yes.
Mr. Guindon:
On decision items E-720 and E-721, staff concurs with the Governor’s recommendation. On decision unit E-722 Staff recommends a reduction of $1012 from the cost of the document management and tracking system.
E-720 New Equipment – Budget page ELECTED-89
E-721 New Equipment – Budget page ELECTED-89
E-722 New Equipment – Budget page ELECTED-89
There are three other small technical adjustments, which I will now read from page 3.
Senator Tiffany:
If you look at E-722, there is another document scanning system. Have you talked to the library about using their scanning equipment?
Mr. Krolicki:
We will be delighted to participate.
Senator Tiffany:
I recommend that the State Treasurer use the existing scanner and document management system at the State Library.
Senator Raggio:
Is it feasible for you to use the state archives equipment?
Mr. Krolicki:
Our need is greatest in southern Nevada. Is the equipment available there?
Senator Tiffany:
Once the document is scanned into the management system, it is an electronic file.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-1080 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND, IF FEASIBLE, FOR THE STATE TREASURER TO USE THE STATE ARCHIVES DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT AND TRACKING SYSTEM; OTHERWISE AUTHORITY WILL BE MADE TO ADJUST THE BUDGET.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Mr. Guindon:
Budget account 101-3815 is located on pages 13 and 14. There are no major closing issues. The Governor recommends $15,105 per year for out-of-state travel. Staff notes that this is $7327 higher than was appropriated for FY 2001‑2002; however, in that period several trips were cancelled due to the effects of the September 11, 2001 tragedy.
Unclaimed Property – Budget page ELECTED-101 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 101-3815
Senator Raggio:
Who heads the unclaimed property unit?
Mr. Krolicki:
Steven MacDonald heads that division, but is not here today.
SENATOR COFFIN MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-3815 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Mr. Guindon:
The next item is B/A 745-1086. This is located on page 18.
Municipal Bond Bank Revenue – Budget page ELECTED-111 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 745-1086
There are no major issues in this account. Staff recommends one technical adjustment to remove the balance forward from FY 2002-2003 to FY 2003‑2004, and the corresponding reserve amount. Per Nevada Revised Statues (NRS) 350A.190, any uncommitted balance in the fund on July 1 of odd-numbered years reverts to the General Fund.
SENATOR TIFFANY MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 745-1086 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ONE TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENT.
SENATOR CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Mr. Guindon:
The next item is B/A 395-1087. This is located on page 19.
Municipal Bond Bank Debt Service – Budget page ELECTED-113 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 395-1087
There are no major issues in this account.
SENATOR MATHEWS MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 395-1087 AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GOVERNOR.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
We will next look at B/A 101-1081.
Treasurer Higher Education Tuition Administration – Budget page ELECTED-92 (Volume 1) Budget Account 101-1081
Brian M. Burke, Senior Program Analyst, Fiscal analysis Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau:
I will read pages 4 through 8, which cover our recommendations for closing this budget item.
Senator Raggio:
Is the Governor’s request to reclassify these positions and create this new position consistent with Senate Bill (S.B.) 446?
SENATE BILL 446: Authorizes State Treasurer to appoint and employ two Senior Deputies in unclassified service of State. (BDR 18-301)
Senator Tiffany:
Have you ever been, or do you intend to be, involved in a TV advertising campaign?
Mr. Krolicki:
Yes, I have been involved in a public service announcement.
Senator Tiffany:
During election time you will not be allowed to appear in those advertisements.
Mr. Krolicki:
I understand.
Mr. Burke:
The Assembly Ways and Means Committee closed this budget about an hour ago. The action they took was to remove $370,000 from the pre-paid tuition and the college savings plan, and use those funds to help pay off the unfunded liability in the prepaid tuition program.
Senator Tiffany:
On page 4, what does the 7.83 percent of change in the General Fund represent?
Mr. Krolicki:
Up until the 2003 biennium, General Fund loans had been the primary source of revenue for the Higher Education Tuition Administration Trust account. This trust will no longer be relying on this support, but rather transfers from the pre‑paid tuition account. The 7.85 percent is the difference between FY 2003 and FY 2002.
Senator Raggio:
The 7.8 percent resulted from an advance payment.
Mr. Ghiggeri:
That simply displays what was actually spent in FY 2002 as compared to what is currently approved for FY 2003. The amount shown in FY 2002 is the net of reversions. There may be reversions in FY 2003 that would not be netted against the $771,000.
Senator Tiffany:
I agree with the Assembly on not funding the $ 370,000 for marketing. Would that money revert to the General Fund?
Mr. Burke:
It would reduce the unfunded liability in the pre-paid tuition program rather than going to the General Fund.
Mr. Krolicki:
When we started pre-paid tuition, $370,000 was the allotted amount in the budget for marketing. Now that we have the college savings portion, all of the money you see on the college savings side is secured through entrepreneurial means and from financial firms. Now we are reducing the prepaid tuition account by half. We really need both. I would hope that we could keep marketing money to clarify the programs. I share the anxiety of an unfunded liability, but the plan is to be fully funded by 2009.
Senator Raggio:
I think the vitality of these programs depends on the public being informed.
Mr. Krolicki:
We have priced this very conservatively. The reason we have an unfunded liability is not due to a bad market, it is due to greater increases in the anticipated future tuition.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 101-1081 WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF INCLUDING THE RECLASSIFICATION OF POSITIONS, THE ANNUAL GENERAL FUND PAYBACK AMOUNTS, IN THE PREPAID TUITION ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNT, REVISION FOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT PRICES, MARKETING AND ADVERTISING, AND THE COLLEGE SAVINGS PLAN ACCOUNT, AND TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR TIFFANY VOTED NO.)
*****
Mr. Burke:
The next budget account is 260-1088. I will read the overview and closing issues on pages 9 through 12.
Millennium Scholarship Administration – Budget page ELECTED-96 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 260-1088
Senator Raggio:
Is this budget based on the effects of S.B. 448?
SENATE BILL 448: Revises authority of State Treasurer to invest money held in certain trust funds and to administer proceeds from certain settlement agreements and civil litigation between State of Nevada and tobacco companies and revises qualifications for millennium scholarships. (BDR 18-299)
Mr. Burke:
Yes, S.B. 448 affects it. The passage of the bill would allow the statutory cap for funding the administration of the program to be increased. On page 11 is a list of budgetary reductions cuts necessary to avoid raising the cap. On the same page are staff recommendations for alternatives to this.
Senator Raggio:
We should close this budget contingent on S.B. 448 passing.
Senator Cegavske:
Students are still receiving the refund and sign up for credits they decide later not to take. They still get the money. I do not understand why we cannot fix that problem.
Mr. Krolicki:
I share your concern, but there is good accountability. If students misuse that money, it still counts against their $10,000 credit. The State Treasurer is responsible for the administration of the program, but we ship the payments to the campuses. The State Treasurer does not know how the financial aid program eventually works on these campuses. Also, these funds are treated the same as federal student loan programs. We are locked into the standards of these programs.
Senator Cegavske:
I will keep bringing this up; it is accountability and it is necessary.
SENATOR RAWSON MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 260-1088 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONTINGENT ON THE PASSAGE OF S.B. 448 SO THAT, IF IT IS NOT APPROVED, THE TREASURER CAN APPROACH IFC LATER. THIS WOULD ALSO INCLUDE E-325 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS, AND THE TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS RETAINING THE 2 PERCENT ADMINISTRATIVE CAP.
SENATOR TIFFANY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Rawson:
As we deal with S.B. 448, we brought up the concern about the Latter Day Saints (LDS) kids who take 2 years out for a mission. Why are we exempting military service and the Peace Corps, but not them?
Mr. Krolicki:
I think by reducing the eligibility from 8 years to 6 years we accommodate the LDS kids who can still get a 4-year education.
Senator Raggio:
Why a 2-year exemption for military.
Mr. Krolicki:
The military veterans have options to use other than the millennium scholarship. Also, they are often in the service for over 2 years. If we exempted people for religious duties, the list would be long.
Mr. Rawson:
I am requesting information about the fiscal impact of such a change.
Mr. Burke:
I will now review the closing issues in budget account 605-1092 by reading pages 15 through 17. This budget contains an amendment to create a new unclassified senior deputy treasurer position in lieu of the existing classified administrative services officer. Additionally, excess revenues in the Nevada College Savings Program account are available to either repay prepaid tuition General Fund loans, or to reduce the prepaid tuition program un-funded liability.
Nevada College Savings Trust – Budget page ELECTED-104 (Volume 1)
Budget Account 605-1092
Senator Raggio:
The amendment reclassifying the administrative services officer position is not in the Governor’s budget. Does the Governor’s office have a major concern about this?
Mr. Comeaux:
No.
Senator Tiffany:
How did the Assembly close these issues?
Mr. Burke:
The Assembly closed the budget by approving the unclassified position and moving the unobligated money to fund the pre-paid tuition unfunded liability.
Mr. Krolicki:
It might be more appropriate to fund the unfunded liability rather than the loan repayment, so there is not a conflict.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO CLOSE BUDGET ACCOUNT 605-1092 WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THE UNOBLIGATED BALANCES GOING TO THE REDUCTION OF THE PRE-PAID TUITION PROGRAM UN‑FUNDED LIABILITY.
SENATOR RAWSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Senator Raggio:
If there are no further questions, or business, this meeting will be adjourned at 1:02 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Michael Archer,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator William J. Raggio, Chairman
DATE: