[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6528420,"mediaKeyId","3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec","parentId",3396568,"title","DPS officials seek one‑shot funds to finish NCJIS modernization as lawmakers flag new requests","audioSeconds",848,"startMs",2749000,"endMs",3597000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec&start=2749&end=3597","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec/thumbnail_2749000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6528420/Nevada/DPS-officials-seek-oneshot-funds-to-finish-NCJIS-modernization-as-lawmakers-flag-new-requests","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6528420-07f750b6443c2fcd1d9819fbcdc7bcca/orig.mp4?Expires=1770631538&Signature=jzfGNdiSmZs4f6dwQcPPymnaAqSJ5aCXylAj5CTaDEpDS5wL9zQ~NsDA82rI-eJM~EvjEPe~H~OlqiYRkJpp40V-EKIXCQvFl9tTvEBxo1QVZ25sjk6gsRqgRIkMLs031RucdbFcJTuQ~qDGCdc~h2H4cuPq6ahu24D04oklpt3m5e9Wm48PKS0e~95bOTva-A8KzKNWiVeHbM3FtPL~4q9ee~sFwi1JzYliku3~m-DYntt0an8pM5UBsbU9ACEwA9mCpzy4VxtPaVbuWc3D5zzqGliYdoRzwKDxJr1E0R~sVrrdnz7rY65fji1gvo4SVpzuthIhYFec6maouc5FBA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada Legislature","date","2025-05-20T01:42:34Z","article","The Assembly Ways and Means Committee heard from Department of Public Safety officials on a $19,011,896 one‑shot appropriation package that includes funding for the Nevada Criminal Justice Information System (NCJIS) modernization and several other technology, vehicle and equipment requests.

The appropriation request covers consulting and change‑management fees, continued modernization work on NCJIS, records management upgrades for parole and probation and other division needs. Christy Defer, senior fiscal officer for the Department of Public Safety, said the package spans multiple divisions and included both state general fund and State Highway Fund items.

Lawmakers focused their questions on costs the department said were not in the governor’s recommended budget. Jason Kolenut, administrative services officer for the Records Communications and Compliance Division, told the committee several additional costs were identified after the budget was built because of delays: “We have had some delays and pushbacks in our go live, which are causing us to have those contracts extended,” he said. Kolenut said extension of legacy contracts and additional work to finish phase 1 of the modernization were driving the new requests.

Erica Suzayamas, a Department of Public Safety project representative, told the committee that some items were identified in October and November and later submitted as budget amendments; those amendments did not move forward during the executive budget process. She said the extensions are tied to outside criminal justice partners and ensuring no loss of critical data during transition.

Committee members pressed on structure and policy issues. Assemblymember Watts said the subcommittee had concerns about the cumulative effect of the positions, contract extensions and one‑shot requests related to NCJIS. “It is frustrating for me ... to try and understand everything when we've got budgets, budget amendments, and one‑shots,” Watts said. DPS staff acknowledged sections of the bill — notably a $2,000,000 line for continued phase‑1 costs — were not anticipated in the executive budget and will require committee discussion at the work session.

Other divisions that testified identified recurring vs. one‑time needs. Andy McCool, administrative services officer for the Division of Parole and Probation, said certain software subscription costs are ongoing but historically were requested as one‑time funding because products previously were purchased outright rather than by subscription.

The committee did not vote on the bill at the hearing. Members said they would consider the package further at a work session, including whether to approve added funds for NCJIS phase‑1 extensions and staffing proposals that were moved in or out of agency budgets. A number of lawmakers requested additional detail and reconciliation of which costs had been reviewed in subcommittee closings and what must be resolved before a final decision.

Ending: Committee staff and DPS agreed to provide more line‑by‑line detail ahead of the work session. The committee chair said section 5 (the $2 million continuation) and section 13 (position and organizational changes) would be topics for follow‑up before the legislature takes final action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","5/19/2025 - Assembly Committee on Ways and Means. Pt. 2","oneSentenceSummary","The Assembly Ways and Means Committee heard from Department of Public Safety officials on a $19,011,896 one‑shot appropriation package that includes funding for the Nevada Criminal Justice Information System (NCJIS) modernization and several other technology, vehicle and equipment requests.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature NV, Nevada","taxId",78440,"location","Nevada","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6528405,"Ways and Means receives walk‑throughs of major budget BDRs: authorization act, CIP, K‑12 funding, appropriations and pay bill",1036,5177000,6213000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec&start=5177&end=6213","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec/thumbnail_5177000.jpg","/articles/6528405/Nevada/Ways-and-Means-receives-walkthroughs-of-major-budget-BDRs-authorization-act-CIP-K12-funding-appropriations-and-pay-bill","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6528405-86039ed7cb937035a725621b242ab832/orig.mp4?Expires=1770631538&Signature=jaF59nXimxos~x9RyvMCVEacPpi9oOxSFwHObEOs-eqr0xR3Xw40cxFiFjPA3SMbcyAFMtrKiwT4a2CBmjb9sbU6piH6UUkH3gdsF~DhqV~Ig1M-ut46mb2~Xy~8iXeGrgfURKHzxdR4GnWTYfDnFVSaHLWkrXQI-JSqP-zB9St95l~4ttotbfkSYA96TaxGcKd4brMxtwWh-LHjjRzKFrqBd1YzjXlQ-uXxZGmMpKt3zueRD2Rte3KzU08WBMvJup2PJlMj9ZfPBuQbq7JYrahbt94L9gbgucP3KmR8ggf8o4RYkqvh~KwgFaPobWkezMS8mxKTzHSHMJDwERs8dA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Assembly Ways and Means Committee received detailed walk‑throughs from Legislative Counsel Bureau and Fiscal Analysis staff on several major budget bills and BDRs that implement money‑committee decisions for the 2025–27 biennium.

Authorizations Act: John Kucera of LCB Fiscal summarized the 2025 Authorizations Act. He said the act implements money committee decisions for non‑general‑fund sources and authorizes $17.2 billion in FY26 and $16.6 billion in FY27 across many accounts, with exceptions for the Gaming Control Board and Department of Transportation. The act contains carryover and reversion language, special authorizations for higher‑education receipts and other technical provisions.

Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Julie Waller (Fiscal Analysis) reviewed the 2025 CIP BDR. Notable items included $381.8 million for a Southern Nevada Forensic Facility, $71.2 million for purchase and improvements of multiple state office buildings in Las Vegas, $58.9 million for evaporative cooling replacement at High Desert State Prison, and federal fund authorization for the remaining portion of the North Las Vegas State Veterans Home. The CIP also includes general obligation bond authorizations and sets the ad valorem rate at 17¢ per $100 of assessed valuation (unchanged), which requires a two‑thirds vote.

K‑12 funding bill: LCB presented BDR 1232, the K‑12 education funding bill, which implements the committee’s money decisions on the Pupil‑Centered Funding Plan (PCFP), special education, career and technical education grants, professional development accounts and targeted programs. Staff explained the “all‑in” per‑pupil figures (federal + state) and noted the approved statewide per‑pupil figures for FY26 and FY27. They said some adjustments to the governor’s recommended numbers reflected attendance area adjustments, an error correction in the FY20 baseline proportional reduction calculation, and policy choices not to roll certain baseline amounts into the adjusted base but to keep them as separate weighted categories.

Appropriations Act: Nancy Morris and Alex Hart presented the Appropriations Act walk‑through for state general fund and highway funded budgets. The act includes general fund appropriations of $4.209 billion in FY26 and $4.344 billion in FY27 for state operations (total $8.553 billion over the biennium), an increase of about $1.51 billion compared with the 2023 legislature. The act contains carryover, reversion and transfer provisions, targeted appropriations (including for the Nevada Health Authority structure), and new language suspending rainy‑day transfers for the biennium.

Pay bill: The pay bill team reviewed BDR 1229 which establishes maximum salaries for classified service employees by department and contains standard adjustments, callback or credential pay provisions for certain occupations, and biweekly salary payment language for elected officials. It allows the Division of Human Resource Management to correct clerical omissions with IFC approval and contains an exemption allowing committee action before fiscal notes are returned.

Committee reaction: Committee members thanked staff for the dense briefings and raised technical questions about bond debt service, reversion dates, and specific CIP projects. Staff noted the ad valorem rate and the two‑thirds vote requirement for the bond authorization sections. Members asked for follow‑up material and clarified next procedural steps for bill introductions and work sessions.

Ending: Fiscal staff said they would provide supplemental detail and reconciling schedules for committee members ahead of the work sessions and the formal bill introductions.","Legislative fiscal staff walked the Ways and Means Committee through a set of large BDRs: the Authorizations Act, the 2025 Capital Improvement Program, the K‑12 funding bill, the Appropriations Act and the pay bill. Staff highlighted totals, notable projects and provisions that require committee consideration.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6528410,"PEBP rates bill advances after hearing as retirees press for higher Medicare HRA",560,6666000,7226000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec&start=6666&end=7226","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec/thumbnail_6666000.jpg","/articles/6528410/Nevada/PEBP-rates-bill-advances-after-hearing-as-retirees-press-for-higher-Medicare-HRA","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6528410-97ccf4535bf28229c31e03f360e14220/orig.mp4?Expires=1770631538&Signature=VrOpx3TLnLDOBbG183WObJY8Lg2oEEXBofruegG5hexkxG~3DknGSLcLvqM2RslK2cX8ti4UfuemPa1v9jr23d2QxnEHzjEX1Z46Xv2rwyPcNVBIxSsVTsEH8japChk3KcC~PgIDixTAPBhmhvy9Mq5bsm1oQffbK2LhRyeOlGDjPK6V3jvW219ij7hS4d~U-cysX8HjozFLh1InGuWqdHIZkeF8Uo5aNOB~rk4u0zVtwzqc-rJqvcvFB6ka56THeEgJdXarK6ozNK9m1MKk-fUS~4iqnHvRw3FYlbDNfeuq3psEBSGq6V~HJ8KD9SMknnPT3OAAe2uhmca621mRkw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Assembly Ways and Means Committee heard the departmental and public testimony on AB 583, the biennial PEBP rates bill setting the state's monthly contributions for active employees and retirees for the 2025–27 biennium.

Alex Hart of the Fiscal Analysis Division summarized the bill. For active employees, the state's monthly contribution was presented as $909.91 in fiscal year 2026 and $943 in fiscal year 2027. For retirees not yet Medicare‑eligible, the state contribution is $650 in FY26 and $700 in FY27. For retirees in the Medicare exchange, the bill continues the existing formula that provides $13 per month per year of service (capped by service) rather than an across‑the‑board HRA increase.

Witnesses from public employee organizations told the committee they appreciated the maintenance of current benefits but urged additional assistance for Medicare‑age retirees who were moved to the Medicare exchange in 2011 and whose HRA has not increased since 2019. Kent Irvin of the Nevada Faculty Alliance said the association supports AB 583’s budget but asked the legislature to consider augmenting Medicare HRA amounts. “We must also note that state employee health benefits and employee premiums have not been fully restored to pre‑pandemic levels,” Irvin said.

Terry Laird of Retired Public Employees of Nevada (RPEN) and Tess Opperman with AFSCME Retirees urged a higher HRA. Opperman said Medicare‑age retirees have faced rising premiums for Medicare parts B and D and supplemental plans while the HRA grant has stayed the same since 2019. “Just because PEPB doesn't cover the cost of Medicare retirees does not mean their costs have not increased,” she said.

Committee members did not take a vote during the hearing. Staff reiterated that AB 583 implements previously approved budget decisions for PEBP and that changes to the formula would require additional fiscal consideration.","Fiscal staff presented AB 583, the public employees benefits program (PEBP) rates bill, setting employer contributions for the 2025‑27 biennium. Retiree groups and public employee representatives supported maintenance of benefits but urged increases in the Medicare retiree health reimbursement arrangement (HRA), which has not risen since 2019.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6528415,"Committee hears $3 million request to fund public defender stipends tied to Davis v. State compliance",980,524000,1504000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec&start=524&end=1504","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3396568-a8ea5ab8d44a09c8d436e2db00c4c0ec/thumbnail_524000.jpg","/articles/6528415/Nevada/Committee-hears-3-million-request-to-fund-public-defender-stipends-tied-to-Davis-v-State-compliance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6528415-f79a79ff3b892908face1e0a1a49fd03/orig.mp4?Expires=1770631538&Signature=k-CnLOn1tKo-t6O0uMB7b1tpn5aWWKFvI6aUJiKhB5c4Cl8jgPGC70EehgN7xdABHjIuhvZ-m3V~7xrS4gjq2hYLRK-Zzr0ZR8KVGhmkLTTACeZhaskicxcFSVHRDLP2LDAeGi5X~tC65ZfBbfqZPkY1r4XpNxVdextqTI3fpsrl7VO56-lxmP72shPLuD1J~rPeRyMYsdqlKwBhLupKYnGdlr~ST~9csbL1e4sONL27NLSyfVVfpwyszH4DZKNoheEMNq9dyAphhGACInxK4O5XmNMJjJioIcxNyst1GZccVSAe1AYqykb3UyjTzHGuDRolsYBEsbosfUg2FVdmdw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Assembly Ways and Means Committee took testimony on Assembly Bill 580, which would appropriate $3 million to the Department of Indigent Defense Services to underwrite stipends for public defenders and other costs related to compliance with the Davis v. State consent judgment.

Peter Handy, executive director of the Department of Indigent Defense Services, said the funding would give the department immediate access “to comply with the judgment” and to cover stipends and unforeseen costs identified by the court monitor. He outlined two possible stipend delivery models: direct stipends to state public defender employees or a reimbursement/grant model for counties that pay stipends or retention bonuses to their public defender staff.

Handy said the department intends the stipends to address pay parity concerns between state public defenders and local prosecutors, and to improve recruitment and retention. “It brings parity … the state public defender is paid on the same scale as a chief deputy attorney general,” Handy said, adding that stipends were requested to help “attract and retain people to work in the state public defender's office.”

Committee members pressed on structure and precedent. A member noted the state pay bill sets maximum salaries for state public defenders and warned that the proposed stipends, if effectively added to base salary, could exceed the statutory caps. The committee’s fiscal leader said a general‑fund one‑time appropriation that effectively increases employee compensation raises legal and budgetary questions under the pay bill; he recommended using the existing work‑program and interim finance committee (IFC) reimbursement process for extraordinary costs.

Handy said similar payments have been made previously to cover weekend and holiday duty stipends, but that legislative authorization would be required to pay stipends in the classified unclassified positions at this scale. He said the department had previously proposed stipends but lacked statutory authority without legislative action.

No formal action was taken at the hearing. The committee chair and members indicated they would consider whether to process the request as a one‑time general‑fund appropriation or to continue the established reimbursement/work‑program process through IFC.","The Department of Indigent Defense Services sought a $3 million one‑time allotment to provide stipends and other costs tied to compliance with the Davis v. State consent judgment. Lawmakers probed how stipends would be structured and raised concerns about pay‑bill salary caps and appropriate appropriation mechanisms.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

DPS officials seek one‑shot funds to finish NCJIS modernization as lawmakers flag new requests

Ways and Means receives walk‑throughs of major budget BDRs: authorization act, CIP, K‑12 funding, appropriations and pay bill

PEBP rates bill advances after hearing as retirees press for higher Medicare HRA

Committee hears $3 million request to fund public defender stipends tied to Davis v. State compliance