Executive Budget FY 2002 - 2003 Detail

              xecutive
Budget
DETAIL
Fiscal Years
2002 and 2003
Jane Dee Hull
Governor
Provisions for Individuals with Disabilities
If individuals with disabilities require reasonable accommodation in order to use this document, please
contact the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting at (602) 542-5381
January 2001
To the Citizens of Arizona and the
Members of the Forty-Fourth Legislature:
The Executive Budget is my opportunity to highlight priorities and address numerous public
policy issues. The Executive Budget for the Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 Biennium encompasses
operating recommendations for over one hundred State agencies. It includes thousands of spe-cific
issues relating to 191 appropriated funding sources.
My budget is best summarized by five principles that I established to guide its overall develop-ment.
1. Conservative revenue estimates. The budget must be based on conservative revenue esti-mates
reflecting both hard data and a growing sentiment that suggests a slowing of economic
growth at the national and local levels. If the revenue estimate is overstated and the State actually
collects less in revenues than anticipated the consequences of that error for our citizens and for
State government are far more grave than any impact from understating revenues. It is critical,
when contemplating this policy decision, to remember that each percentage point represents al-most
$70 million per year – $210 million over the forecast period – and that even a small error
will have large ramifications.
I remember when State government endured several years of mid-year budget cuts as a result of
tough economic times. We have not had to go through that exercise for the past nine years and
the use of conservative revenue estimates will protect us from having to do so in the future.
2. A fluid budget development process. At the time the budget is adopted, if favorable eco-nomic
trends have pushed revenues above the Executive Budget forecast, the surplus revenues
should be deposited into the Budget Stabilization Fund.
The legislation that addressed the Alternative Fuel Tax Credit relied on the Budget Stabilization
Fund to finance up to $200 million in costs. While I acceded to the Legislature’s funding deci-sion,
utilizing Budget Stabilization Fund monies at this stage of the economic cycle still concerns
me, as it should concern us all. It is vital that the State establish a proper reserve account to help
soften an economic downturn.
JANE DEE HULL
GOVERNOR
STATE OF ARIZONA
1700 WEST WASHINGTON, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007
(602) 542-4331   FAX (602) 542-7601   WWW.GOVERNOR.STATE.AZ.US
3. Increased pay for State employees. My budget contains over $290 million in employee
compensation funding. As CEO of Arizona’s largest employer, I am frustrated by the daily loss
of valued State employees to the private sector and to other levels of government, due to our in-ability
to offer competitive pay. The taxpayer has a right to expect competent, effective service
from State government, and I am committed to satisfying those expectations. We must bridge the
compensation gap and stop the drain of ability and experience from all branches of State gov-ernment.
The compensation gap carries severe consequences. At the Department of Corrections, one posi-tion
out of five is unfilled. At the Department of Environmental Quality, 108 of 750 positions
were vacated in a 10-month period last year, resulting in the loss of hundreds of years of institu-tional
knowledge. The plan I have developed includes both across-the-board increases and merit
increases. It provides funding to address entire classes of employees and to enhance retirement
benefits. Last, but certainly not least, the plan includes $62 million in anticipation of higher
health insurance costs.
4. Attention to major health issues. My budget contains recommendations that address two
significant and related health issues:
• funding for the seriously mentally ill, leading us toward a resolution of the Arnold v. Sarn
lawsuit, and
• implementation of Proposition 204, passed by Arizona voters on November 7, 2000.
Arnold v. Sarn. My budget provides an estimated $155 million in new funds for the seriously
mentally ill. Behavioral health funding has been one of my top priorities since assuming office in
September 1997. Funding increases for behavioral health exceed every major program in State
government with the exception of STUDENTS FIRST, which did not exist until Fiscal Year 1999.
While the re-certification of, and funding for, a new State hospital have been major achieve-ments,
the State must take further strides towards resolving Arnold v. Sarn. My funding plan in-corporates
changes in the level of Title XIX funding as well as leveraging additional resources as
a result of Proposition 204.
Proposition 204. Expansion of the AHCCCS program as a result of Proposition 204 must be ad-dressed
during this Legislative session. My budget makes the following assumptions:
• The State will obtain a federal waiver to expand the AHCCCS program. This waiver is
critical in the implementation of Proposition 204 because it will provide for additional fed-eral
funding.
• Any savings generated in the first two years as a result of financing the Medically
Needy/Medically Indigent population must be placed in a Budget Neutrality Compliance
Fund that can be used in later years as the program grows.
• The Disproportionate Share program is reduced to providing only for the private hospital
portion of the program, in anticipation of changes necessary to meet federal budget neu-trality
requirements.
January 2001
Page 2
• With two exceptions, all Tobacco Settlement funds are used for the purpose of implement-ing
this program. First, $40 million is earmarked to repay withdrawals from the Budget
Stabilization Fund for the Arizona State Hospital. Second, an annual allocation of $8 mil-lion
is set aside for Health Care Group.
5. Tax reduction. My budget extends the streak of tax cuts to eleven consecutive years. I have
committed $80 million to reduce the burden on property tax payers, businesses and individuals. I
am proud that during my administration we have been able to make significant strides in ad-dressing
two areas of taxation that continue to impose excessive burdens on Arizonans:
• the Vehicle License Tax, which we have reduced by over 24%, and
• the Corporate Income Tax, which we have lowered from a high 9.3% to less than 7%.
Beyond these quantifiable decreases, STUDENTS FIRST already has significantly reduced local
revenue bonding requirements. Over time, this will result in reduced property taxes for virtually
all Arizona homeowners and businesses.
Specifically for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003, my K-12 education budget contains over $40 mil-lion,
in compliance with Truth in Taxation requirements. If net assessed value grows at antici-pated
levels, this program will have resulted in over $60 million in reduced property taxes since
its inception in Fiscal Year 2000. In addition to lowering property taxes, my budget earmarks
$40 million toward reducing the Premium Insurance Tax and providing other targeted relief.
Finally, it is imperative that I restate my belief that the Legislature and Executive should not
commit to funding issues beyond the biennial budget period. There is extreme pressure, both fi-nancially
and politically, to extend obligations beyond the period that is under consideration.
However, it is in the best fiscal interests of the State that we leave future funding decisions to
future policymakers.
I look forward to the challenges that lie ahead. Due to the events that have occurred within the
past several months regarding the alternative fuel debacle, it is imperative that we work together
in a manner that restores our citizens’ confidence in our ability to manage their resources. My
budget provides a course that is fiscally responsible and meets the most pressing needs of our
citizens and the State of Arizona.
Sincerely,
JANE DEE HULL
Governor
JDH:neh
January 2001
Page 3
Table of Contents i
Executive Budget
Table of Contents
Budget in a Flash............................................ 1
Agency Operating Budget Detail
Assumptions and Methodology................................................ 3
General Government
Department of Administration.................................................. 9
Office of Administrative Hearings.......................................... 14
Office of the Attorney General................................................. 16
Auditor General’s Office........................................................... 18
Department of Commerce........................................................ 19
Governor’s Office of Equal Opportunity .............................. 21
State Board of Equalization...................................................... 22
Governor’s Office of Excellence in Government .................. 23
Exposition and State Fair Board .............................................. 24
Government Information Technology Agency .................... 25
Governor’s Office....................................................................... 27
House of Representatives ......................................................... 28
Joint Legislative Budget Committee....................................... 29
Judicial System .......................................................................... 30
Legislative Council .................................................................... 32
Department of Library, Archives and Public Records ........ 33
Lottery.......................................................................................... 35
State Personnel Board................................................................ 37
Retirement System .................................................................... 38
Department of Revenue............................................................ 40
Secretary of State........................................................................ 43
Senate ........................................................................................... 45
Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting..... 46
Board of Tax Appeals................................................................ 47
Office of Tourism ....................................................................... 48
Office of the State Treasurer..................................................... 51
Commission on Uniform State Laws...................................... 52
Health and Welfare
Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing................... 53
Department of Economic Security .......................................... 55
Department of Environmental Quality.................................. 64
AHCCCS...................................................................................... 68
Department of Health Services................................................ 76
Commission of Indian Affairs ................................................. 83
Arizona Pioneer's Home........................................................... 84
Ranger's Pension ........................................................................ 85
Department of Veterans’ Services........................................... 86
Inspection and Regulation
Accountancy Board ................................................................... 89
Acupuncture Board of Examiners........................................... 91
Department of Agriculture....................................................... 92
Board of Appraisal..................................................................... 94
State Banking Department ....................................................... 95
Board of Barbers......................................................................... 96
State Board of Behavioral Health Examiners ........................ 97
Boxing Commission................................................................... 99
Department of Building and Fire Safety.............................. 100
State Board of Chiropractic Examiners ................................ 101
Corporation Commission ....................................................... 103
Board of Cosmetology............................................................. 106
Board of Dental Examiners .................................................... 108
State Board of Dispensing Opticians .................................... 109
State Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers.............. 110
Department of Gaming........................................................... 111
Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners ........................ 113
Industrial Commission............................................................ 114
Insurance Department............................................................. 115
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control ...................... 117
Board of Medical Examiners.................................................. 118
State Mine Inspector ................................................................ 120
Board of Naturopathic Physicians Medical Examiners..... 121
State Board of Nursing............................................................ 123
Nursing Care Ins. Admin. Examiners .................................. 125
Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners ........................ 127
State Board of Optometry....................................................... 129
OSHA Review Board............................................................... 130
Board of Osteopathic Examiners........................................... 131
State Pharmacy Board ............................................................. 132
State Board of Physical Therapy Examiners ....................... 133
State Board of Podiatry Examiners ....................................... 134
State Board of Private PostSecondary Education............... 135
State Board of Psychologist Examiners................................ 136
Racing Commission................................................................. 138
Radiation Regulatory Agency................................................ 139
Department of Real Estate...................................................... 140
Registrar of Contractors.......................................................... 142
Residential Utility Consumer Office..................................... 144
Board of Respiratory Care Examiners.................................. 145
Structural Pest Control Commission .................................... 146
Board of Technical Registration............................................. 148
State Veterinary Medical Examining Board........................ 150
Department of Weights & Measures .................................... 151
Education
Arizona State University – Main Campus........................... 153
Arizona State University – East Campus............................. 155
Arizona State University – West Campus ........................... 157
Table of Contents ii
Commission on the Arts ......................................................... 158
State Board for Charter Schools............................................. 160
State Board of Directors for Community Colleges............. 161
State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind ............................. 163
Department of Education ....................................................... 165
Arizona Historical Society...................................................... 171
Board of Medical Student Loans ........................................... 172
Northern Arizona University ................................................ 173
Commission for Postsecondary Education ......................... 175
Prescott Historical Society ...................................................... 177
Board of Regents ...................................................................... 178
School Facilities Board ............................................................ 180
University of Arizona – Main Campus................................ 182
University of Arizona – Health Sciences Center ................ 184
Protection and Safety
Auto Theft Authority .............................................................. 187
Department of Corrections..................................................... 189
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission................................. 193
Drug and Gang Prevention Resource Center ..................... 195
Department of Emergency and Military Affairs ................ 196
Board of Executive Clemency................................................ 197
Department of Juvenile Corrections..................................... 198
Law Enforcement Merit System Council............................. 200
Department of Public Safety .................................................. 201
Transportation
Department of Transportation............................................... 207
Natural Resources
Game and Fish Department................................................... 209
Geological Survey .................................................................... 211
State Land Department ........................................................... 213
Department of Mines & Mineral Resources........................ 216
Navigable Stream Adjudication Commission .................... 217
State Parks Board ..................................................................... 219
Department of Water Resources ........................................... 221
Budget Reform
Budget Reform.......................................................................... 223
Program Budgeting Migration Schedule............................. 226
Fund Balances
Fund Balances and Descriptions............................................. 227
Appendix
Table 1: Comparative Balance Sheet – General Fund....... 299
Table 2: Revenue Detail – General Fund............................. 300
Table 3: Revenue Detail – Other Appropriated Funds..... 305
Table 4: Summary of FY 2000 Actual
Expenditures by Object........................................................... 311
Table 5: Summary of FY 2001 Appropriations
by Object.................................................................................... 325
Table 6: Summary of FY 2002 Agency Request
by Object.................................................................................... 339
Table 7: Summary of FY 2002 Executive Recommendation
by Object.................................................................................... 353
Table 8: Summary of FY 2003 Agency Request
by Object.................................................................................... 367
Table 9: Summary of FY 2003 Executive Recommendation
by Object................................................................................... 381
Arizona State Government Organizational Chart ............. 395
Resource Directory .................................................................. 396
Budget Terms
Glossary ..................................................................................... 397
Acronyms .................................................................................. 401
Acknowledgements
BUDGET IN A FLASH
EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY
FISCAL YEARS 2002 & 2003 - GENERAL FUND
'02 Growth Change '03 Growth Change '02 Growth '03 Growth
K-12 Basic State Aid 65.9 1.0% 142.3 2.2% Department of Public Safety 37.0 39.0
K-12 Inflation 66.0 1.0% 132.0 2.1% AHCCCS 34.8 36.1
SFB Construction / Building Renewal 62.0 1.0% 77.8 1.2% Veterans' Services 32.8 32.8
SFB Deficiency (150.0) -2.3% (30.0) -0.5% ASU Main Campus 29.0 29.0
Developmentally Disabled Caseload 39.1 0.6% 62.4 1.0% Health Services 18.0 99.5
Behavioral Health Funding 30.9 0.5% 45.2 0.7% Northern Arizona University (41.9) (41.9)
Employee Compensation 76.4 1.2% 213.6 3.3% Department of Corrections (71.0) (37.0)
AHCCCS Adjustments 9.5 0.1% 122.7 1.9% Juvenile Corrections (81.5) (79.5)
All Other Changes 10.0 0.2% 43.1 0.7% Economic Security (296.0) (279.9)
All Other Agencies 20.1 26.1
Total off FY 2001 Appropriation 209.8 3.3% 809.1 12.7%
Total off FY 2001 Recommendation 127.1 2.0% 726.4 11.2% Total GF FTE Decreases (318.7) (175.8)
($ in millions) Change FY 02 Change FY 03 ($ in millions) FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03
from FY01 Recomm. from FY01 Recomm. Actual Estimate Recomm. Recomm.
Agency:
Dept. of Education $127.3 $2,578.2 $271.5 $2,722.5 Beginning Balance $255.4 $203.4 $104.3 $131.5
Dept. of Health Services 49.8 303.6 69.9 323.8 Base Revenue Estimate 5,960.3 6,368.2 6,636.6 7,100.5
Dept. of Economic Security 24.7 474.1 62.7 512.1 Tax Adjustments 0.0 0.0 (15.0) (25.0)
University System 17.9 790.9 16.6 789.5 TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS 6,215.7 6,571.6 6,725.9 7,207.1
AHCCCS 9.5 538.9 122.7 652.1
Dept. of Revenue 8.3 67.2 3.1 61.9 USES OF FUNDS
Redistricting Commission 6.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 Operating Budgets 6,011.9 6,343.1 6,485.6 6,947.1
Dept. of Public Safety 3.3 79.5 6.6 82.8 Budget Supplementals 0.0 82.7 0.0 0.0
Retirement 3.1 7.3 (4.2) 0.0 Total Operating Appropriations 6,011.9 6,425.9 6,485.6 6,947.1
GITA 3.1 3.1 0.7 0.7 Capital Outlay Appropriations 22.2 35.7 30.4 31.0
Attorney General 2.9 29.6 4.7 31.5 Employee Compensation Incl. 2.6 76.4 213.6
Community Colleges 2.8 138.1 7.7 142.9 VLT Tax Cut 0.0 21.4 32.1 32.1
State Land Department 2.7 19.1 2.1 18.5 Admin. Adjust. & Emergencies 51.7 37.7 33.0 33.0
State Treasurer (1.7) 5.6 (1.6) 5.7 Revertments (73.5) (55.9) (63.1) (63.1)
Secretary of State (2.8) 3.2 0.2 6.2
Office of Tourism (8.9) 0.0 (8.9) 0.0 Total Expenditures 6,012.3 6,467.3 6,594.4 7,193.7
Dept. of Corrections (15.1) 572.8 4.2 592.1
School Facilities Board (87.6) 383.7 48.3 519.5 Balance Forward 203.4 104.3 131.5 13.4
All Others (2.8) 484.6 (2.1) 485.4
Total $142.4 $6,485.6 $604.0 $6,947.1 TOTAL USES OF FUNDS $6,215.7 $6,571.6 $6,725.9 $7,207.1
fy
The Executive Budget includes Capital Outlay amounting to an increase
of $1.4 million over the biennium comprised of the following:
  $93.4 million to ADOA for 4%, 5%, and 2% merit increases
  $58.5 million to the Universities and other systems outside the ADOA System FY 2002 Projects:
  $12.5 million for CMRs and Retirement   $26.4 million for building renewal funded at 50%
  $49.2 million for Health & Dental and Other Adjustments   ($65.0) million for delayed construction of prison complex
  ($20.0) million for a funding shift for highway construction
  $0.6 million for statewide officer remote housing
  AHCCCS - Caseload & Medical Inflation Growth $39.3
  K-12 Education - Basic State Aid & AIMS Testing 19.2 FY 2003 Projects:
  DHS - Behavioral Health Title XIX 17.0   $24.9 million for building renewal funded at 50%
  DES - Long Term Care 4.1   ($8.1) million for delayed construction of prison complex
  School Facilities Board - Building Renewal Inflation 2.7   ($20.0) million for a funding shift for highway construction
  All Other Agencies 0.4   $0.5 million for statewide officer remote housing
Total General Fund Supplementals $82.7   $4.1 million for a DHS state health laboratory
FY 2002 & FY 2003 General Fund Compared to FY 2001
Operating Budgets Sources and Uses FY 00 - FY 03
Employee Compensation
DOLLARS FTE POSITIONS
Arizona Budget Surpluses
FY 1979 to FY 2003
Capital Outlay
FY 2001 Supplementals
For FY 2003, the Executive Budget includes a total Employee Compensation package amounting to $213.6
million over FY 2001 comprised of the following:
$0
$250
$500
$750
$1,000
FY 79 FY 80 FY 81 FY 82 FY 83 FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 FY 87 FY 88 FY 89 FY 90 FY 91 FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03
Millions Budget Stabilization Fund Med. Srvcs. Stabilization Fund Temp. Assist. Stabilization Fund General Fund Surplus
Budget in a Flash 1
FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2002 FY 2003
   Basic State Aid 109.2 238.3   Developmentally Disabled Caseload Growth 39.1 62.4
   Homeowners Rebate / Additional State Aid 22.7 36.0   Adoption Services 2.9 5.0
   Other Formula Aid (0.4) 0.6   Children Services (7.6) 2.9
   Achievement Testing 2.2 2.9   CPS & Adoption Case Managers 2.6 2.2
   AIMS Intervention & Dropout Prevention 0.5 0.5   Non-Medical Home and Community-Based Services 1.7 1.7
   State Board of Education 0.1 0.1   CPS Training Academy 0.8 1.2
   SAIS Development Costs Reduction (2.0) (2.0)   Child Support Contingency Funds 0.0 0.5
   Accountability Measures (A+) (5.0) (5.0)   Healthy Families (5.0) (5.0)
TOTAL $127.3 $271.5   Family Builders (5.2) (5.2)
  Navajo Nation Maintenance of Effort (6.5) (6.5)
FY 2002 FY 2003   Other Adjustments 1.9 3.5
   Operating Aid 3.6 7.0 TOTAL $24.7 $62.7
   Capital Outlay and Equalization Aid 0.9 2.4
   Dual Enrollment (1.8) (1.8) FY 2002 FY 2003
   Other Adjustments 0.1 0.1   MN/MI Caseload & Inflation 39.6 48.2
TOTAL $2.8 $7.7   TANF/SOBRA Caseload & Inflation 33.4 51.1
  Title XIX Deliveries 19.7 27.1
FY 2002 FY 2003   Emergency Services -- Undocumented Aliens 13.6 21.6
   FY 2002 Statewide Pay Plan 11.6 11.6   Fee For Service Costs 4.9 8.1
   Enrollment Growth (1.6) 0.0   I.H.S. Contracted Referrals Savings (54.4) (13.0)
   WICHE/AFAT Aid Adjustments 0.0 0.7   Reinsurance Cost Growth 14.2 16.2
   Other Adjustments 7.9 4.3   Proposition 204 Implementation (82.9) (81.8)
TOTAL $17.9 $16.6   Freedom to Work 0.5 1.0
  Other Acute Care 2.2 6.4
FY 2002 FY 2003   Eligibility Interviewers 1.2 2.2
   Deficiency Correction (150.0) (30.0)   AHCCCS Customer Eligibility 0.5 1.1
   New School Construction 50.0 60.0   Long-Term Care Caseload Growth 9.8 22.9
   Building Renewal 12.0 17.8   LTC HCBS & Nursing Facilities 4.9 7.3
   Other Adjustments 0.4 0.5   Other Adjustments 2.3 4.3
TOTAL ($87.6) $48.3 TOTAL $9.5 $122.7
FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2002 FY 2003
   CO Pay Plan 2.9 5.4   Children's Behavioral Health Title XIX 8.2 10.7
   Inmate Population Growth (2.8) (0.6)   Seriously Mentally Ill Title XIX 22.7 34.5
   Delay Opening 350 Beds at Lewis Prison (6.6) 0.0   General Mental Health & Substance Abuse Title XIX 4.0 5.1
   Delay Purchase of 400 Private DUI Beds (5.9) (2.9)   Arizona State Hospital -- New Facilities 0.1 4.2
   Delay Purchase of 1,000 Private Beds (1.6) 0.0   Assurance & Licensure Services Staff 1.0 1.0
   Increased Health-Care Costs 1.4 1.4   Children's Rehabilitative Services Title XIX 0.6 1.3
   Treatment of Hepatitis C 0.0 5.0   Proposition 204 -- Budget Neutrality 12.0 12.0
   Protective Services Unit 0.5 0.5   Other Adjustments 1.2 1.1
   Close Arizona Center for Women (1.0) (1.0) TOTAL $49.8 $69.9
   Other Adjustments (2.0) (3.6)
TOTAL ($15.1) $4.2 FY 2002 FY 2003
  Revenue Generation Staffing 0.3 0.4
FY 2002 FY 2003   Streambed Ownership (0.1) (0.1)
   Decreased Population Forecast (3.3) (3.3)   Fire Management Program 0.1 0.1
   SWR Complex Travel Stipend 0.7 0.7   Master Planning, Engineering & Land Evaluation 1.1 0.5
   Replacement Equipment 0.8 0.8   Federal Condemnation Actions & Land Exchanges 0.2 0.1
   Other Adjustments 0.3 0.6   Water Rights Adjudication 0.8 0.8
TOTAL ($1.5) ($1.2)   Statehood Boundaries Surveys 0.2 0.2
  Other Adjustments 0.1 0.2
FY 2002 FY 2003 TOTAL $2.7 $2.1
   Attorney Parity Program 1.9 3.8
   Technology Crimes 0.3 0.3 FY 2002 FY 2003
   Tobacco Enforcement 0.2 0.2   Underground Storage Tank (1.6) (1.6)
   Other Adjustments 0.5 0.4   Pilot Incentive Pay Plan 0.6 0.6
TOTAL $2.9 $4.7   Leadership Development Program 0.2 0.3
  State Primacy for National Pollutants 0.5 0.4
FY 2002 FY 2003   Arizona-Mexico Border Environmental Program 0.1 0.1
   Officer Pay Plan & Annualization 0.2 0.3   Information Technology Security/Standards 0.2 0.4
   Highway Patrol Support 0.2 0.4   Other Adjustments 0.5 0.6
   GITEM 0.5 0.7 TOTAL $0.6 $0.8
   DNA Database-New Populations 0.5 0.8
   Crime Lab 1.0 1.3 FY 2002 FY 2003
   Radio and Telephone Equipment 0.9 0.9   Data Center Charges 1.1 1.1
   Helicopter Lease-Purchase 0.5 0.6   E-Government & Government Ed. Bill 0.8 0.6
   Mobile Data Computer Replacement 0.0 1.2   TPT System Problems 5.0 0.0
   Radio Infrastructure 0.0 0.8   LAN Financing & Telephony On-Going Costs 0.2 (0.1)
   Offsets to DNA and Highway Patrol Funds 0.9 0.9   BR/ITS Project 0.4 0.4
   Other Adjustments (1.4) (1.3)   Other Adjustments 0.9 1.1
TOTAL $3.3 $6.6 TOTAL $8.3 $3.1
Department of Revenue
MAJOR CHANGES IN FY 2002 AND FY 2003 GENERAL FUND BUDGETS (Increases to FY 2001)
Department of Education Department of Economic Security
Community Colleges
University System
AHCCCS
Department of Public Safety
Department of Health Services
State Land Department
Department of Environmental Quality
School Facilities Board
Department of Corrections
Department of Juvenile Corrections
Attorney General
2 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
Assumptions and Methodology 3
Assumptions & Methodology
Building a budget
Preparing the State’s spending plan is a year-‘round process that determines the size and
scope of government
HE AGENCY OPERATING BUDGET
Detail section of the Executive
Budget provides details on the rec-ommendation
for each State agency.
Amendments to Arizona’s Budget
Reform Act (Laws 1997, Chapter 210)
significantly changed the State’s plan-ning
and budgeting systems.
First, all State agencies moved to
biennial budgeting starting with the
FY 2000/FY 2001 biennium. Capital
improvement budgeting is also
moved to a biennial budgeting sys-tem.
Next, all State agencies are re-quired
to submit their budgets in a
format that reflects the program
structure in the MASTER LIST OF STATE
GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS by FY 2006.
OSPB and Joint Legislative Budget
Committee (JLBC) Staff have devel-oped
a schedule to migrate State
agencies to this new format in three
phases between FY 2000 and FY 2006.
Phase I agencies, which include most
of the State’s single-program agencies,
were migrated with the FY 2000/FY
2001 budget submittal. Phase II agen-cies,
which include the spectrum of
agencies between the single-program
agencies already phased in and the
State’s largest agencies, are being mi-grated
in this FY 2002/FY 2003 bien-nium.
The migration schedule can be
found in the “Budget Reform” section
of this document.
Finally, agency strategic plans will
be published with the agencies’ pro-gram/
subprogram information in the
MASTER LIST OF STATE GOVERNMENT
PROGRAMS.
Budget process
The budget process begins on or
before June 1, when the Governor’s
Office of Strategic Planning and
Budgeting (OSPB) issues instructions
to guide agencies in preparing their
budget requests. Agency requests
must be submitted to OSPB by Sep-tember
1 unless an extension is
granted for up to an additional 30
days.
Between September 1 and the
opening of the Legislative session, the
Executive reviews budget submis-sions
and prepares the Executive
Budget Recommendation, which
contains operating and capital outlay
expenditure plans and estimated
revenues.
Also during this period, JLBC Staff
reviews the agency requests. JLBC
prepares a Legislative budget for op-erating
and capital outlay expendi-tures;
it also details revenue estimates.
Finally, JLBC performs an analysis of
the Executive recommendation, which
culminates in their Analysis and Rec-ommendations
for the FYs 2002 and
2003 budget.
Annually, no later than five days
after the regular Legislative session
convenes, the Governor must submit
a budget to the Legislature. The
budget must contain a complete plan
of proposed expenditures and all
monies and revenues estimated to be
available. Also required is an expla-nation
of the basis of such estimates
and recommendations, including any
proposed legislation that the Gover-nor
deems necessary to provide reve-nues
to meet the proposed expendi-tures.
Legislative review of the two
budget options begins shortly after
the regular session convenes. Public
hearings occur before both the Senate
and House appropriation committees.
The committees may adopt the Ex-ecutive
budget or the JLBC staff
budget, or they may elect to adopt a
budget containing elements of both
budgets or with entirely new ele-ments.
Before July 1 the budget is
adopted by the Legislature through
the passage of a General Appropria-tions
Act, a Capital Outlay Bill and
various Omnibus Reconciliation Bills
(ORBs). The reconciliation bills are
used for statutory adjustments that
must be implemented to carry out the
adopted budget. Once adopted, the
bills are then presented to the Gover-nor
for approval.
Upon presentation, the Governor
has five days to sign the bills into law,
veto them in their entirety, line-item
veto individual items of appropria-tions
or allow the bills to become law
without the Governor’s signature. The
Legislature may, with a two-thirds
vote, override a veto or line-item veto.
The operating budget is prepared
and enacted using the cash basis of
accounting. Budgetary cash basis of
accounting recognizes expenditures
when estimated to be paid and reve-nues
when estimated to be received
by the Treasurer.
Budgetary control is maintained
through Legislative appropriation and
the Executive Branch allotment proc-ess.
Appropriations are allocated into
quarterly allotments by legal appro-priation
level. The State also main-tains
an encumbrance accounting
system to enhance budgetary control.
With the exception of capital outlay
items, encumbrances outstanding at
the end of the fiscal year can be liqui-dated
during a four-week administra-tive
period known as the 13th month.
Capital outlay appropriations and
their encumbrances continue until the
project is completed or abandoned.
T
4 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
The budget call
The Governor issued a call for FY
2002 and FY 2003 agency budget re-quests
on June 1, 2000. The call ad-dressed
the dynamics associated with
an ever-changing budget process. The
call explained that the resources
available for the next biennial budget
are not only dependent on the health
of the economy and the overall Gen-eral
Fund picture but the November
2000 election as well, which had sev-eral
important ballot initiatives con-taining
fiscal impacts.
The call encouraged agencies to
use their strategic plans to prioritize
resources just as the Governor has
endeavored to do in her Strategic Di-rection
for State Government. The
Hull Administration priorities are
fairly well detailed and focus on five
major themes:
• Education,
• Children’s Health and Well-being,
• Economic Prosperity,
• Quality of Life, and
• Good Government.
The FY 2002 and FY 2003 budget
submittals represent the second time
that all agencies of State government
were required to submit biennial
budget requests.
Additionally, 43 agencies were
designated to implement program
budgeting in this biennium, in addi-tion
to the 59 agencies already phased
in. The remaining agencies will be
transitioned to program-based budg-eting
by FY 2006.
Efforts continue to enhance exist-ing
automated budget and planning
systems to streamline budget devel-opment
and performance measure
tracking. A survey of agencies was
conducted regarding the use of the
budget and planning applications
(called BUDDIES and AZIPS, respec-tively).
On a five-point sale, respon-dents
rated their overall satisfaction
with the budget system at 3.6 and the
planning system at 3.9.
Budget boundaries
In order to calculate FY 2002 base
budgets, the following adjustments
are made:
• annualization of programs par-tially
funded during FY 2001;
• annualization associated with the
April 1, 2001, merit pay award of
2%;
• annualization associated with the
Classification Salary Adjustment
(CSA), if appropriated to a specific
agency, that became effective
January 1, 2001;
• lease/rent rate adjustments;
• risk management adjustments;
and
• elimination of one-time expendi-tures.
The base adjustments for FY 2002
are added to the FY 2001 appropria-tion
to calculate the FY 2002 base
budget.
The Appropriations Act (Laws
2000, Chapter 3, Section 109) con-tained
appropriations for a merit pay
plan of 2%, up to a maximum of 4%,
effective April 1, 2001.
Limits defined. To assist the
larger State agencies in the develop-ment
of their FY 2002 and FY 2003
budget requests, the Governor estab-lished
preliminary “budget request
limitations.” Those limits pertained
exclusively to operating budget re-quests
and did not include any re-strictions
on capital budget requests.
If an agency found it necessary to
identify funding requirements beyond
those established, they were requested
to list them as part of their “Critical
Issues” submittal.
The following is a listing of Gen-eral
Fund budget request limitations
by agency for FY 2002 and FY 2003.
Limits on FY 2002 related to the re-quested
increase over their FY 2001
operating appropriation. FY 2003 lim-its
were calculated as a specific in-crease
over the limit established for
FY 2002.
Agencies were asked to submit
their requests at or less than the levels
listed below:
• The Department of Administra-tion
(ADOA) was limited to a
$676,800 increase over the FY 2001
appropriation and an increase in
FY2003 of $277,500 over the FY
2002 limit.
• AHCCCS was limited to an in-crease
of $150 million in FY 2002
and an increase of $120 million in
FY 2003.
• The Department of Economic Se-curity
was limited to a FY 2002 in-crease
of $44 million over the FY
2001 appropriation and a $36 mil-lion
increase in FY 2003 over the
FY 2002 limit.
• The Department of Health Serv-ices
was limited to an increase of
$3.6 million in FY 2002 over the FY
2001 appropriation and a FY 2003
increase of $1.5 million over the
FY 2002 limit.
• The Department of Corrections
was limited to an increase of $14.7
million in FY 2002 over the FY
2001 appropriation and a FY 2003
increase of $6 million over the FY
2002 limit.
• The Department of Juvenile Cor-rections
was limited to a FY 2002
increase of $1.7 million over the
FY 2001 appropriation and a FY
2003 increase of $713,600 over the
FY 2002 limit.
• Finally, the Department of Educa-tion
and the Community Colleges
were directed to submit their re-quests
at the level necessary to
provide the full funding required
by their respective formulas.
The Executive continued to limit
the definition of various categories of
Decision Packages that have been
allowed in the past, and instructions
clearly defined how agencies should
handle the following policy catego-ries:
Mandated decision packages are
changes requested by an agency to
meet constitutional, statutory or
court-ordered requirements from ei-ther
federal or State entities. Such
requirements must have been im-posed
or become effective since the
agency’s previous budget request or
the FY 2001 appropriation.
Assumptions and Methodology 5
Demographic decision packages are
defined as increases necessary to
maintain the same level of service in
light of a changing population that is
eligible for service.
Critical issues are considered by the
agency director as essential to the
agency’s mission and could not be
funded with internal program reduc-tions.
Though not specifically addressed
in the FY 2002 and FY 2003 budget
instructions, agencies generally may
not include the following factors in
developing their budget requests:
• ERE rates above predetermined
factors provided in the instruc-tions;
• general inflation;
• special inflation (provider, utili-ties,
medical, other);
• increases for risk management
charges; and
• increases for travel per diem and
lodging expenses.
Budget requests related to infor-mation
technology in excess of $25,000
were required to be accompanied by a
Project Investment Justification (PIJ)
packet. The PIJ went through a sepa-rate
review conducted by the Gov-ernment
Informational Technology
Agency (GITA).
In order to conform to a require-ment
mandated by A.R.S. § 35-115,
each agency was required to report
administrative costs with their FY
2002 and FY 2003 biennial budget
submissions. The Judiciary, some leg-islative
agencies, and some elected
officials did not comply with this re-quirement.
As a result, the Adminis-trative
Costs section in agency write-ups
will reflect zero costs or the sec-tion
is eliminated entirely.
Budget format
The FY 2002 and FY 2003 Execu-tive
Budget contains agency mission
statements and descriptions, which
correspond to those submitted on
September 1, 2000 or in accordance
with an approved extension. These
planning elements may be different
than those published in the 2000-2001
MASTER LIST OF STATE GOVERNMENT
PROGRAMS since (a) they are more cur-rent
and (b) the MASTER LIST is pub-lished
only in even-numbered years.
Program budgeting. Laws 1997,
Chapter 210 requires the State to
budget all agencies on a program ba-sis
by FY 2006. OSPB and the JLBC
Staff have agreed to migrate all agen-cies
in three phases over a six-year
transition period. The 59 agencies in
Phase I developed their requests by
program in the FY 2000 and FY 2001
Executive Budget. An additional 43
agencies in Phase II have been mi-grated
into program budgeting with
their FY 2002 and FY 2003 budget
submissions. The recommendations
for Phase I and II agencies are dis-played
by program.
Agency key performance meas-ures.
In accordance with Arizona
Budget Reform legislation (Laws 1995,
Chapter 252), the FY 2002 and FY 2003
Executive Budget includes the key
performance measures for each
agency. Key measures are those
measures in agency strategic plans
selected by agency staff as important
to highlight. Agencies were instructed
to update the measures using the
aforementioned AZIPS (Arizona’s
Integrated Planning System). Most
measures have been published as
submitted by the agencies, without
modification or verification by the
OSPB staff.
In addition to the agency key
measures, the OSPB publishes the
MASTER LIST OF STATE GOVERNMENT
PROGRAMS every even-numbered year.
This reference document contains a
more comprehensive listing of per-formance
measures for every agency,
program and subprogram.
Annual budgets. The FY 2002 and
FY 2003 Executive Budget contains
detailed recommendations for all
agencies of State government that
have appropriated funds.
Technical budget adjustments
The FY 2002 and FY 2003 Execu-tive
Budget Recommendation con-tains
standard adjustments that in-clude:
• Employee-Related Expenditure
rate changes;
• health and dental insurance rate
changes;
• risk management charge changes;
• annualization of the FY 2001 merit
pay package;
• annualization of the FY 2001 Clas-sification
Maintenance Review in-creases;
• State-owned, private and COP
rental rate charges;
• elimination of one-time equipment
purchases; and
• adjustments to motor pool rates.1
Throughout the budget develop-ment
process OSPB has worked
closely with JLBC Staff to limit techni-cal
differences between the recom-mendations.
The amounts of the spe-cific
components are available for
inspection at the OSPB.
The general guidelines used in the
FY 2002 Base Budget adjustments are
discussed below.
Personal services. The methodol-ogy
used in adjusting the Personal
Services base for FY 2002 consisted of
increasing the FY 2001 Personal Serv-ices
base for the following:
• annualization of the January 1,
2001, merit pay award of 2%; and
• analysis of the justification pro-vided
to address any differences
that may exist between the appro-priated
Personal Services base and
the requested Personal Services
base.
During the 2001 Legislative ses-sion,
adjustments will be made in the
General Appropriations Act for annu-alization
of the Classification Mainte-nance
Review (CMR) monies, which
are effective January 1, 2001. Individ-ual
agency CMR adjustments are to be
developed by ADOA’s Personnel Di-vision
by February 15, 2001.
1 Rate changes are not addressed in individual
agency operating budgets as they will be ad-dressed
in the General Appropriations Act and
allocated by JLBC Staff to individual agencies
upon passage.
6 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
Finally, a vacancy factor of up to
3% has been applied based on the
number of FTE within an agency.
Employee-Related Expenditures.
Two separate rates are used in calcu-lating
ERE funding requirements:
• An HDL rate calculates the health,
dental and life insurance costs per
individual FTE based on specific
rates of participation in the three
insurance programs (health, den-tal,
and life) to which the State
contributes.
• A marginal rate is calculated by
adding the rates of FICA, workers’
compensation, unemployment in-surance,
a pro rata charge for per-sonnel
costs, a pro rata charge as-sessed
for the Government Infor-mation
Technology Agency
(GITA), long term disability insur-ance,
retirement sick leave pro
rata, and retirement.
The sums of the rates are multi-plied
by the total Personal Services
amount, excluding Boards and Com-missions
when appropriate.
The following rates are used for
the development of each of the vari-ous
ERE components:
FICA. The rate is comprised of a
6.2% Social Security tax on the first
$76,200 of an employee’s Personal
Services and a 1.45% Medicare tax on
the full amount of an employee’s Per-sonal
Services.
Workers’ compensation. The rates
developed by ADOA’s Risk Manage-ment
Division are used. Those rates
vary by agency and are available for
inspection at the OSPB.
Unemployment insurance. The rate
of 0.2% of Personal Services is used
for FY 2002 and for FY 2003.
Personnel Division Pro Rata. The
rate of 0.9% of Personal Services is
assessed on the payroll of the majority
of State service agencies, pursuant to
A.R.S. § 41-764, to fund the operations
of the Personnel Division of ADOA.
GITA Pro Rata. The rate of 0.15% of
Personal Services is assessed on all
agencies except the Universities and
Community Colleges to fund the op-erations
of the Government Informa-tion
Technology Agency.
Disability insurance. The rate of
0.33% of Personal Services is used for
those employees not covered by the
State Retirement System. The State
Retirement System provides disability
insurance to active employees.
Retirement. The following rates
were used for both Fiscal Years 2002
and 2003:
Retirement Group Rate
ASU Police.......................................2.00
Attorney General Investigators .........7.55
Capitol Police ...................................9.44
Correctional Service Officers ............2.00
DEMA Fire Fighters..........................7.21
Dept. of Juvenile Corrections............2.86
Dept. of Public Safety .......................0.00
Elected Officials ...............................0.00
Game and Fish.................................6.32
Liquor Commission Investigators ...... 9.57
NAU Police.......................................3.63
State Retirement ..............................2.49
UA Police .........................................7.79
Life insurance. The rate of $36.96
per authorized FTE is used.
Health and dental insurance. The FY
2002 and FY 2003 budgets for health
and dental insurance are based on
agency-specific employee participa-tion
rates calculated by ADOA in No-vember
2000. The individual agency
rates are then multiplied by the num-ber
of agency FTE eligible for benefits
to determine the health and dental
charge. No growth factors have been
applied; that will be resolved in the
2001 Legislative session.
Retirement Accumulated Sick Leave
Fund. Chapter 291, Laws 1997, created
the Retirement Accumulated Sick
Leave Fund. The FY 2002 and FY 2003
budget provides for a 0.4% pro rata
assessment against Personal Services.
The money in this fund will be used
to compensate retiring employees for
unused sick leave in a three-tiered
system.
All Other Operating Expenditures.
All other operating expenditures
(AOOE) consist of the budget classes
of professional and outside services,
in-state and out-of-state travel, food
and equipment, and such expendi-tures
as advertising, postage, tele-communications,
printing, repair and
maintenance, utilities, supplies, medi-cal
equipment and supplies, rent and
risk management charges.
The general assumptions and
methodology employed in determin-ing
the funding for this area of the
Executive Budget include:
P&O. The amount recommended
for Professional and Outside (P&O)
Services was based on the needs of the
agency and was generally determined
on a zero-based approach.
TRAVEL. The Executive reviewed
each agency’s budget to limit staff to
essential travel.
MOTOR POOL RATES. During the 2001
Legislative session, recommendations
for motor pool costs will be consid-ered
as part of the General Appro-priations
Act. After passage, JLBC
Staff will make appropriate alloca-tions
to individual agency appropria-tions.
INFLATION. No recognition is given
for general inflation.
RISK MANAGEMENT. Agency budgets
include the FY 2002 and FY 2003 risk
management billing rates provided by
ADOA. Those rates will generate
revenues of $55 million to the Risk
Management Fund, $28.5 million of
which is from the General Fund and
$26.6 million is from Other Appropri-ated
and Non-Appropriated Fund
sources. This amount represents a $7.5
million increase for the General Fund
and a $10.3 million increase for other
funding sources over the amount pro-vided
in FY 2001. The allocation
amounts are available for inspection
at the OSPB. During the development
of the FY 2002 and 2003 budgets,
ADOA used a two-year actuarial as-sessment
to determine risk manage-ment
rates.
RENT. Rent amounts for State agen-cies
occupying ADOA space are pro-vided
at the rate of $13.50 per square
foot for office space and $4.50 per
square foot for storage space. The
square footage calculation is based on
documentation prepared by ADOA’s
Facilities Management Division de-tailing
actual and planned occupancy
as of July 1, 2000. JCCR will be re-viewing
the current rate and upon
Assumptions and Methodology 7
approval any modifications will be
incorporated into the General Appro-priations
Act and allocated by JLBC
Staff.
The amounts required to cover
Certificate of Participation (COP)
payments are provided in agency op-erating
budgets and based on memo-randa
distributed by the ADOA Gen-eral
Accounting Office. For FY 2002,
the Executive has also budgeted oper-ating
and maintenance (O&M) fund-ing
at $4.78 per square foot for certain
agencies located in COP facilities out-side
the Capitol Mall. Beginning in FY
2003 those facilities will be paid off
and the Executive recommends that
O&M funds be appropriated from the
Capital Outlay Stabilization Fund.
O&M funds will be paid to ADOA in
its property management capacity. All
rent amounts for agencies occupying
private space are based on estimated
rent charges as specified in the lease
agreements.
DATA CENTER CHARGES. ADOA Data
Center budgeted charges are based on
projected agency usage multiplied by
the appropriate rate for each category
of usage.
EQUIPMENT. The amount recom-mended
for equipment, whether
capitalized or non-capitalized, was
based on the agency’s needs and was
generally determined on a zero-based
approach. Reductions were taken to
reflect annualization of one-time
equipment purchases approved in the
FY 2001 appropriation.
Recommendations for Judiciary
and Legislature
The Executive has historically not
made recommendations for the Judi-ciary
and Legislative agencies. This
practice is continued in the FY 2002
and FY 2003 budget with one excep-tion.
As a result of the passage of
Proposition 106, which established the
Redistricting Commission, the Execu-tive
recommended a reduction in ap-propriation
for the House, Senate, and
Legislative Council since each
agency’s appropriation included
funding to redraw district boundaries.
Recommended appropriation
format and Legislative changes
The recommended appropriation
format is located at the end of each
agency’s recommendation. Some rec-ommendations
require Legislative
changes necessary to implement the
Executive Budget. These required
changes are addressed in a separate
listing as part of the EXECUTIVE BUDGET
SUMMARY companion document•
ADA Arizona Department of Administration
Mission:
To provide effective and efficient support services to enable government
agencies, state employees, and the public to achieve their goals.
Description
ADOA is comprised of the Director's Office and seven divisions including
Financial Services, General Services, Human Resources, Information
Services, Management Services, Strategic Administrative Services, and
Capitol Police. Each division consists of programs (usually defined by
major functional area). Each program within the divisions provides
services. ADOA has defined 76 major services that are provided to the
external customers and 33 services that are provided internally to ADOA.
In addition to defining these 109 services, ADOA has further assessed
them based on the necessity of the service to the customer. Thus, ADOA
has defined 23 (enabling) services that are critical to the customer's ability
to function.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
Administration 2,851.0 3,335.1 3,483.8 3,506.1
Financial Services 13,918.8 14,090.3 13,787.9 14,311.0
Facilities Management 16,506.9 17,190.5 17,949.2 18,935.1
Human Resources 10,839.7 11,419.3 16,034.4 16,298.3
Information Technology
Services
22,069.6 29,707.4 33,115.7 38,875.8
Support Services 11,344.7 17,049.4 14,326.7 16,133.5
Capitol Police 2,229.1 2,305.6 2,274.9 2,416.2
Risk Management 67,272.1 76,230.5 80,356.2 82,984.0
Agency Total 147,031.9 171,328.1 181,328.8 193,460.0
Category
FTE 965.5 967.0 1,001.8 1,004.8
Personal Services 29,717.0 32,858.4 34,605.9 34,716.8
ERE Amount 6,305.3 7,410.8 7,779.6 7,815.6
Prof. And Outside Services 25,217.5 27,181.5 29,316.9 29,975.1
Travel - In State 419.0 393.7 394.4 397.7
Travel - Out of State 91.3 134.6 130.5 130.7
Aid to Others 44.1 60.0 60.0 60.0
Other Operating Expenses 74,759.7 86,156.4 93,000.9 100,820.9
Equipment 10,478.0 17,132.7 16,040.6 19,543.2
Agency Total 147,031.9 171,328.1 181,328.8 193,460.0
Fund
General Fund 25,934.1 28,035.5 27,326.5 27,599.1
COP Building Operating and
Maintenance Fund
1,268.7 1,343.7 1,352.4 0.0
Personnel Division Fund 8,083.8 8,539.4 13,222.8 13,487.3
Capital Outlay Stabilization 8,355.6 8,521.7 8,827.4 11,582.4
Corrections Fund 495.4 553.7 562.7 563.6
Air Quality Fund 335.2 475.4 475.4 475.4
Special Employee Health 2,755.9 2,879.9 2,876.9 2,872.8
Technology &
Telecommunications Fund
22,069.6 29,707.4 33,115.7 38,875.8
Admin - Motor Pool
Revolving
8,367.0 12,859.9 11,719.3 13,536.3
Admin - Special Services 222.7 243.2 249.1 249.1
Admin - Surplus Property
State
1,723.4 2,636.0 972.0 961.8
Admin - Surplus
Property/Federal
148.4 264.0 272.4 272.4
Risk Management Fund 67,272.1 75,268.3 80,356.2 82,984.0
Agency Total 147,031.9 171,328.1 181,328.8 193,460.0
The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in
the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure.
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 612.5 612.5
General Fund 199.4 199.4
COP Building Operating and Maintenance Fund 5.6 5.6
Personnel Division Fund 77.0 77.0
Capital Outlay Stabilization 24.5 24.5
Corrections Fund 5.9 5.9
Special Employee Health 12.6 12.6
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 140.7 140.7
Admin - Motor Pool Revolving 8.8 8.8
Admin - Surplus Property State 9.7 9.7
Risk Management Fund 128.3 128.3
ERE Standard Adjustment 26.4 32.0
General Fund 127.8 134.4
COP Building Operating and Maintenance Fund 1.8 1.8
Personnel Division Fund 2.0 1.7
Capital Outlay Stabilization (24.7) (24.9)
Corrections Fund 0.6 0.6
Special Employee Health 2.9 2.6
Technology & Telecommunications Fund (72.7) (72.8)
Admin - Motor Pool Revolving (6.2) (6.2)
Admin - Special Services 0.3 0.2
Admin - Surplus Property State (2.4) (2.4)
Admin - Surplus Property/Federal 8.4 8.4
Risk Management Fund (11.4) (11.4)
Rent Standard Adjustment 124.5 134.8
General Fund 112.6 117.6
Personnel Division Fund (13.5) (13.1)
Capital Outlay Stabilization (21.0) (20.6)
Corrections Fund 0.1 0.5
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 14.8 18.9
Admin - Motor Pool Revolving 29.1 29.1
Admin - Special Services 2.4 2.4
Risk Standard Adjustment 390.1 476.0
General Fund 101.3 123.6
COP Building Operating and Maintenance Fund 1.3 1.6
Personnel Division Fund 26.4 32.2
Capital Outlay Stabilization 3.7 4.5
Corrections Fund 2.4 2.9
Special Employee Health 10.0 12.2
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 48.4 59.1
Admin - Motor Pool Revolving 152.3 186.0
Admin - Special Services 0.7 0.8
SLI ENSCO COP 4,586.7 4,586.7 4,585.5 4,584.9
SLI AFIS Program and
Support
2,506.3 2,549.5 2,001.4 2,097.5
SLI Relocation 7.1 60.0 110.0 1,017.0
SLI Utilities 5,895.2 6,000.0 6,100.0 6,100.0
SLI Human Resource
Information System
1,565.1 1,279.7 5,702.9 5,961.5
SLI Insurance Premiums 4,520.8 6,205.4 6,910.4 6,910.4
SLI Risk Management
Losses
32,970.2 34,347.0 38,538.2 38,987.2
SLI Workers Compensation
Losses
17,996.6 22,071.0 21,251.4 23,398.2
SLI Attorney General 6,281.1 6,663.3 6,742.9 6,742.9
SLI Premium Tax 330.1 444.2 444.2 444.2
SLI University Student
Health Work Program - WC
62.2 159.5 159.5 159.5
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 9
FY 2002 FY 2003
Admin - Surplus Property State 7.0 8.5
Risk Management Fund 36.6 44.6
Equipment Elimination Standard Adjustment (10,795.8) (10,795.8)
General Fund (295.1) (295.1)
Technology & Telecommunications Fund (2,950.0) (2,950.0)
Admin - Motor Pool Revolving (7,435.7) (7,435.7)
Admin - Surplus Property State (115.0) (115.0)
Executive Issues
Replacement Equipment-ATS 1,960.0 2,725.0
The Arizona Telecommunications System (ATS) is responsible for the
State's voice, video and data communications infrastructure. For FY 2002
the Executive recommends $2.0 million for replacement equipment
associated with ATS operations.
The Executive recommends $2.7 million in FY 2003 for replacement
equipment associated with ATS operations.
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 1,960.0 2,725.0
Surplus Property Appropriation Limits (1,650.0) (1,650.0)
In FY 2002 the Executive recommends that the “Due to Other Funds”
portion of the Surplus Property Management Program budget be given
non-appropriated status. The purpose of the program is to dispose of
surplus property and return 10% of the proceeds to agencies. In the first
year of its appropriated status (FY 2000) the program did not have
adequate expenditure authority and was forced to represent payments to
agencies as a reduction of revenues. The Executive recommends
discontinuing the appropriated status of the proceeds to be paid to
agencies through the “Due to Other Funds” object, while maintaining the
appropriated status of the program's operating costs.
Admin - Surplus Property State (1,650.0) (1,650.0)
Motor Pool-Fleet Replacement & Fuel Request 6,111.1 7,894.4
Per the Department’s five-year refresh policy, for FY 2002 the Executive
recommends $6.1 million to replace 273 vehicles and granting additional
appropriation authority due to increased fuel costs.
The Executive recommends $7.9 million to fund fuel costs and the
replacement of 305 vehicles in FY 2003.
Admin - Motor Pool Revolving 6,111.1 7,894.4
GRRC Economist 57.7 57.7
The number of rule packages reviewed by the Governor's Regulatory
Review Board (GRRC) has increased by 163% since FY 1996, with an
increase of only 2.0 FTE positions for that period. For FY 2002 the
Executive recommends $57,700 and 1.0 FTE position to assist with
workload increases.
General Fund 57.7 57.7
Human Resource Management System 423.2 681.8
The HRMS special line associated with mainframe processing costs has
not been increased since FY 1999. Since that time, operating costs have
increased significantly due to such new programs as Retiree Accumulated
Sick Leave (RASL), the Y2k field expansion and a garnishments module.
Even with the impact of rate reductions associated with Data Center
consolidation, the HRMS special line is significantly underfunded. The
Executive recommends increased funding of $423,200 in FY 2002.
For FY 2003 the Executive recommends an increase of $258,600.
Personnel Division Fund 423.2 681.8
Health and Dental Open Enrollment (251.8) (251.8)
For FY 2002 the Executive recommends a reduction of ($251,800) for one-time
costs associated with open enrollment. The recommendation
includes continued funding for the Contract Specialist and ongoing
consulting costs associated with the initial underfunding of the program
and legislative consulting requests.
Special Employee Health (251.8) (251.8)
FY 2002 FY 2003
Employee Benefits Customer Service Staffing 223.3 217.3
State government retirees can choose health plans contracted by the
Arizona State Retirement System or continue using the plans used by
active State employees. Between FY 1998 and FY 1999, the number of
retirees using the active State employee health plans grew by 21.9% to
9,309. Since that time, the number of retirees using the plans has grown
at a rate of 100 per month. To address the workload of the customer
service staff, the Department established four limited positions and one
temporary position which were never funded. The Executive recommends
converting the existing positions to permanent FTE and providing an
additional 2.0 FTE for a total of 7.0 positions in FY 2002. The
recommended funding for the positions is $223,300 for FY2002.
In FY 2003 the Executive recommends a reduction of ($6,000) for one-time
expenditures.
Special Employee Health 223.3 217.3
Worker's Compensation Staffing (76.0) (82.0)
Increased workload has resulted in the Department depending heavily on
outside vendors, which is significantly more expensive than handling the
services internally. The Executive recommends an additional 5.0 FTE
positions to handle the increased workload and reduce the program's
budget by ($76,000).
For FY 2003, the Executive recommends eliminating ($6,000) in one-time
equipment funding and continuing the operating funding.
Risk Management Fund (76.0) (82.0)
Risk Management Losses 4,202.0 4,651.0
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends an increase of $4.2 million for
higher costs associated with property and liability claims.
For FY 2003 the Executive recommends an additional $449,000 for risk
management losses.
Risk Management Fund 4,202.0 4,651.0
Insurance Premium Increase 705.0 705.0
Private insurance policies are purchased when the State finds them to be
a more economical alternative to self-insuring. The Executive
recommends an additional $705,000 to fund increased private insurance
premiums.
Risk Management Fund 705.0 705.0
Surplus Property Management Program 86.7 75.0
For FY 2002 the Executive recommends $86,700 for the purchase of
computer equipment and software associated with the installation of a
surplus property inventory management system. A PIJ has been
submitted to GITA and received conditional approval. In addition, the
funding includes monies for the replacement or refurbishment of electric
carts and handling equipment.
Funding is reduced to $75,000 in FY 2003 for finalization of the inventory
system and the replacement of further non-capital equipment.
Admin - Surplus Property State 86.7 75.0
Physical Security 244.0 244.0
In FY 2001 the State will complete a five-year conversion to the Monitor
Dynamics, Inc. (MDI) Building Security System. To improve organizational
effectiveness the Executive recommends moving, in FY 2002, 2.0 FTE
positions associated with maintenance and support of the MDI system
from the Capitol Police program to the Building and Planning Services
subprogram. In addition, the Executive recommends $244,000 and 1.0
FTE position to assist in maintaining the system and completing the
standardization of the Capitol Mall buildings fire alarm systems. Also
included in the recommendation is funding for equipment refreshment.
General Fund 244.0 244.0
Increased Utility Costs 100.0 100.0
The Executive recommends $100,000 in FY 2002 for increased utility
costs.
10 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
FY 2002 FY 2003
Capital Outlay Stabilization 100.0 100.0
ADA Office Funding 168.3 168.3
The American's with Disabilities Act (ADA) office was established in 1993
by Executive Order 93-12 and has been funded primarily by the Social
Services Block Grant (SSBG) through the Department of Economic
Security (DES). Due to diminishing SSBG funds, DES discontinued
funding for the program in October 2000. The Department has provided
the necessary support for the remainder of FY 2001. Beginning in FY
2002 the Executive recommends funding $168,300 and 4.0 FTE positions
from the Personnel Fund.
Personnel Division Fund 168.3 168.3
ATS Appropriation Authority 750.0 4,500.0
The Executive recommends $750,000 in appropriation authority for
anticipated agency projects in FY 2002. In addition, the Executive
recommends that, before the execution of any project, a complete
business plan -- including clearly defined revenues -- be presented to the
Government Information Technology Agency (GITA) and the Information
Technology Authorization Committee (ITAC) for review.
The Executive recommends $4.5 million in appropriation authority for
anticipated agency projects in FY 2003. In addition, the Executive
recommends that, before the execution of any project, a complete
business plan -- including clearly defined revenues -- be presented to the
Government Information Technology Agency (GITA) and the Information
Technology Authorization Committee (ITAC) for review.
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 750.0 4,500.0
Disaster Recovery Processing Site 92.0 17.0
In FYs 2000 and 2001 the Department was provided with $408,000 in
each year to hire consultants for input into documenting business
processes, developing a written plan of action to restore business
functions to normal operation, and testing the plan. Beginning in FY 2002
the Department will have completed this phase of the project. The
Executive recommends an additional $92,000 for total funding of
$500,000 in FY 2002 to establish a disaster recovery processing site with
a private vendor.
For FY 2003 the Executive recommends the elimination of ($75,000) for
one-time expenditures associated with establishing the site, and
continued funding of $425,000 for on-going service provision.
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 92.0 17.0
PLTO 1,472.5 2,875.3
Laws 2000, Chapter 280, Second Regular Session established the
authority of the DOA director to enter into a contract with a private vendor
to build two office buildings on the Capitol Mall. A contract has been
established and the buildings are scheduled for completion on July 1,
2002. These facilities will allow the State to consolidate operations and
reduce lease expenditures for costly private lease space. Lease cost
savings are estimated at $13.6 million over the 25-year term and do not
consider that the State will eventually own the facilities. Given the
complexity of the Privatized Lease To Own (PLTO) project, the Executive
recommendation is broken into a number of components that are outlined
below.
Agency Lease Costs: The FY 2003 Executive recommendations for
funding of agencies lease budgets are based on the $13.50 COSF rate,
the Certificate of Participation (COP) charge, or private lease rates,
whichever is appropriate. However, agency lease budgets need to be
modified to reflect the actual costs associated with PLTO. Given that
PLTO is still in the development phase and that the impact on
appropriated funds is estimated to be minimal, the Executive
recommends delaying the modification of agency budgets until the 2002
Legislative Session.
Project Management: The implementation of the PLTO project requires
coordinating the relocation of over 2000 FTE, and approximately 565,000
square feet. The Executive recommends 3.0 FTE positions and $173,200
FY 2002 FY 2003
in FY 2002, to provide project management. The recommendation
includes two project manager positions and one administrative support
position. For FY 2003 the Executive recommends a reduction of ($7,800)
for costs associated with one-time expenditures.
Relocation Costs: The relocation costs for the agencies moving into the
new facilities have been built into the lease payments. However,
agencies relocating to vacated state space require funding for relocation
costs. The Executive recommends $50,000 in FY 2002 for costs
associated with the relocation of these agencies. The funds will be used
to secure a moving company and begin the relocation planning with the
vendor. In FY 2003 the Executive recommends an additional $907,000 for
relocation of agencies. In addition, the Executive recommends
transferring excess fund balance $1.7 million from the COP Fund to the
COSF Fund.
Voice and Data Services: The agencies scheduled to relocate onto the
Capitol Mall utilize multiple voice and data services. When the agencies
relocate, voice and data services will be provided through the Arizona
Telecommunications System (ATS) within DOA. Providing services and
consolidating the agencies onto the ATS phone system will require the
purchase of 1,313 phones, relocation of 669 phones, and installation of
various other telecommunication and data equipment. The costs for the
equipment and on-going maintenance services will be supported through
a monthly charge to the agencies. The Executive recommends $1.1
million in FY 2002 for costs associated with the purchase and installation
of equipment and the provision of services. Of the $1.1 million, $717,700
is for costs associated with financing the switching of peripherals and data
hubs and routers associated with the new DEQ and DOA buildings. In FY
2003 the Executive recommends a reduction of ($67,600) for costs
associated with one-time expenditures. The recommendation includes
funding for on-going finance costs and $350,000 for costs associated with
the agencies relocating to the vacated DOA space.
Capitol Mall Security: In order to provide adequate security for the
additional employees moving to the Mall and the two additional buildings
on the Mall, the Executive recommends 2.0 FTE positions and $114,000.
The funding includes monies for two police officers and necessary
equipment. For FY 2003 the Executive recommends an additional 3.0
FTE positions and $143,400 for a dispatcher, sergeant and police officer.
The recommendation includes the elimination of funding for one-time
expenditures.
Unoccupied Lease Space: The Information Services Division and the
General Services Division of DOA reside in COP space. Between the time
that those divisions vacate the space, the tenant improvements are
completed and the new agencies move into the space, the COP
obligation must be met. To meet the COP obligation in FY 2003 the
Executive recommends $424,600.
Tenant Improvement Costs: The Executive recommendation pertaining to
tenant improvements and building renewal associated with PLTO is
reflected in the Capital Budget Recommendation.
General Fund 114.0 256.6
Capital Outlay Stabilization 223.2 1,551.0
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 1,135.3 1,067.7
COP Properties 0.0 73.5
The final payment on seven State buildings purchased through the
issuance of Certificates of Participation (COP) will be made in FY 2002.
Agency tenants have previously been appropriated dollars to support the
State’s COP payments and for the operations and maintenance of the
buildings. Once appropriated, those funds were transferred to the COP
Fund and the COP Operations and Maintenance Fund, respectively.
Beginning in FY 2003, tenant agencies will be charged the COSF rental
rate of $13.50 per square foot. For FY 2003 the Executive recommends
that funding for 15.0 FTE positions associated with operating and
maintaining the facilities be appropriated from the COSF Fund, and that
following the administrative adjustment period any remaining monies in
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 11
FY 2002 FY 2003
the COP Operations and Maintenance Fund be transferred to COSF. In
addition, the Executive recommends increasing funding for operations
and maintenance by $73,500 in FY 2003 for total funding of $1.4 million.
COP Building Operating and Maintenance Fund 0.0 (1,352.7)
Capital Outlay Stabilization 0.0 1,426.2
GAO SMA Funding Correction 115.4 115.4
In FY 1997 a Statewide Accountant salary market adjustment (SMA) was
authorized; however, funding was provided for only 50% of the vacant
positions. Due to the underfunding, the agency has been forced to
maintain vacant positions in order to meet its Personal Services needs for
the filled positions. In FY 2002 the Executive recommends $115,400 to
address funding shortfalls.
General Fund 115.4 115.4
Replacement of RMIS 680.3 654.3
The Risk Management Information System (RMIS) was developed in the
early 1980s and is inadequate in providing effective management of the
agency’s loss data. In addition, support and maintenance of the program
is no longer available. The Executive recommends 0.8 FTE positions and
$680,300 for costs associated with the replacement of the RMIS system.
A PIJ has been submitted to GITA and received conditional approval.
For FY 2003 the Executive recommends elimination of one-time funding
of ($26,000) for equipment. Finalization of the RMIS replacement project
is expected in FY 2003.
Risk Management Fund 680.3 654.3
HRMS Payroll System Replacement 4,000.0 4,000.0
In the FY 2000/2001 biennium, the Department was appropriated funds to
survey agencies' needs and to examine the Human Resource
Management System (HRMS) and the Arizona Financial Information
System (AFIS). The review of the systems by the Department and GITA
revealed that the existing HRMS system is in a serious state of disrepair.
In November the ITAC committee requested the Department examine
outsourcing options through the issuance of a Request for Information
(RFI), which the Department is preparing. Given the severe state of the
HRMS system, the Executive recommends adjusting the Personnel Fund
pro rata to 1.04% in FY 2002 and 1.01% in FY 2003 and establishing a
set-aside of $4 million in each fiscal year for the replacement of the
HRMS system. The estimated General Fund impact is ($1.3 million) in FY
2002 and an additional impact of ($149,200) in FY 2003, assuming growth
in the personal services base of 5%. In addition the Executive
recommends a reduction of the Retiree Accumulated Sick Leave rate to
0.29% in FY 2002 and 0.33% in FY 2003. Adjustment of this rate will have
an estimated General Fund impact of $1.4 million in FY 2002 and
$506,800 in FY 2003. The Executive also recommends a transfer in FY
2003 of $600,000 from the Construction Insurance Fund and $400,000
from the Surplus Property State Fund to the General Fund. That results in
no General Fund impact for the HRMS replacement project over the
biennium. It is recommended that funding for the project be made non-lapsing.
Personnel Division Fund 4,000.0 4,000.0
State Boards Position Reclassification 2.5 2.5
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends $2,500 for the reclassification of
a Fiscal Services Tech position (Grade 14) to a Fiscal Services Specialist
position (Grade 16).
Admin - Special Services 2.5 2.5
Risk Management Computer Refresh 0.0 56.0
In FY 2003 the Executive recommends $56,000 for the purchase of 28
computers. Proposed funding will establish the program on a three-year
computer refreshment cycle.
Risk Management Fund 0.0 56.0
Replacement Equipment-Data Center 1,627.0 3,000.0
The Executive recommends $1.6 million for FY 2002 replacement
FY 2002 FY 2003
equipment associated with operating the Data Center. The
recommendation includes funds to upgrade system memory, replace tape
drives and pay for other items.
For FY 2003 the Executive recommends $3.0 million for replacement
equipment associated with operating the Data Center. The
recommendation includes funding for CPU upgrades and Enterprise
Operations Center upgrades.
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 1,627.0 3,000.0
Replacement Equipment-ISD Operations 150.0 150.0
In FY 2002 the Executive recommends $150,000 for replacement
equipment associated with the Information Services Division (ISD)
Operations sub-program.
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 150.0 150.0
Alternative Fuels Cost Reimbursement
Program
(962.2) (962.2)
Administration of the Alternative Fuels Cost Reimbursement Program
should be complete by FY 2002. The Executive recommends the
elimination of the one-time funding.
General Fund (962.2) (962.2)
Replacement Equipment 24.2 24.2
For FY 2002 the Executive recommends funding for the purchase of
custodial and grounds replacement equipment. The recommendation
includes funding for 40 vacuum cleaners and an electric cart.
For FY 2003, funding is continued for the replacement of an additional 40
vacuum cleaners and a mower.
General Fund 24.2 24.2
Data Center Consolidation (35.3) 60.8
In FY 2001 the Executive began the first phase of consolidating the
State’s mainframe operations to reduce mainframe costs. The
Department of Revenue has begun using the Department of
Administration’s data center, and ADOT will follow suit during calendar
2001. The State will save approximately $1.0 million from the first phase
of Data Center consolidation over five years while avoiding an estimated
$1.2 million in upgrades to the DOR mainframe system. Phase two of the
consolidation will standardize software products and further reduce
mainframe costs. In FY 2002, the Executive recommends the elimination
of funding for ($1.1 million) in one-time equipment purchases, and
continued funding of $512,900 for 10.0 FTE positions. The Executive also
recommends in FY 2002 a reduction of ($548,100) for AFIS II operation
costs to capture savings associated with Data Center consolidation.
In FY 2003 the Executive recommends continued funding for the costs
associated with the 10.0 FTE positions. In addition, the Executive
recommends increased funding of $96,100 for the AFIS II operation costs
due to increased Data Center usage.
General Fund (548.1) (452.0)
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 512.8 512.8
Worker's Compensation Losses (576.9) 1,569.9
In FY 2002 the Executive recommends a reduction of ($576,900)
associated with estimated worker’s compensation claims.
In FY 2003 the Executive recommends an increase of $993,000 for
estimated worker’s compensation claims.
Risk Management Fund (576.9) 1,569.9
FY 2001 Supplemental Recommendations
FY 2001
Health and Dental Open Enrollment 558.1
12 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
The State is in the fourth year of a five-year contract for health coverage
for State employees and retirees. Due to the passage of Laws 2000,
Chapter 37, 2nd Regular Session ("HMO Reform"), providers were able to
increase premiums beyond the premium caps established in the contract.
After reviewing the current provider's proposed premiums beginning in FY
2002, the State chose to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP). In order to
keep the health and dental contracts on the same cycle and to minimize
enrollment costs, the dental contract will also be re-bid. The State’s health
contract is valued at over $250 million and requires significant
negotiations and administration. For FY 2001 the Executive recommends
1.0 FTE (with funding of $40,800) to act as a Contract Specialist and
negotiate and administer the State’s health and dental contracts. The
proposed funding is for the final six months of FY2001. In addition, for FY
2001 the Executive recommends $517,300 for increased operating costs
associated with open enrollment. Funding includes costs of temporary
labor, consulting, programming and miscellaneous supplies. The
Executive recommends that these funds be made non-lapsing.
Special Employee Health 558.1
Alternative Fuels Cost Reimbursement Program 0.0
In the 44th Legislature, Seventh Special Session, Chapter 1, the
Department was appropriated $962,163 from the General Fund to
administer the Alternative Fuel Cost Reimbursement program through the
Consumer Loss Recovery Fund. The appropriation was made non-lapsing.
General Fund 0.0
Data Center Consolidation 1,360.3
In FY 2001 the Executive recommends an increase of 10.0 FTE positions
and $1.4 million associated with the costs of Data Center consolidation.
The recommendation includes $1.1 million for equipment purchases and
$282,600 for six months of personnel costs. For additional discussion on
the Data Center consolidation initiative please refer to the Executive
recommendation for FY 2002/2003.
Technology & Telecommunications Fund 1,360.3
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Percent of services with
comparative data
N/A 22 44 66
Percent of program priority
milestones achieved
N/A 80 90 100
Percent of services achieving
established monthly
performance targets
64 80 90 100
Percent of ADOA’s services
experiencing an increase in
customer satisfaction, based on
the annual customer satisfaction
survey
33 67 75 80
Percent of ADOA’s services
improving with a minimum of 6.0,
based on annual survey
17 80 90 100
Number of core processes
mapped and/or improved
0 50 75 100
Percent of positive responses
from "Communications" efforts
59.9 75.0 78.0 80.0
Percent of positive responses
from "Training" efforts
58.3 65.0 70.0 75.0
Percent of positive responses
from "Working Conditions"
efforts
62.5 75.0 78.0 80.0
Percent of positive responses
from "Recognition" efforts
53.6 65.0 70.0 75.0
Percent of positive responses
from "Morale" efforts
67.1 75.0 78.0 80.0
Percent of positive responses 73.7 80.0 82.0 84.0
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
from "Supervisor Skills" efforts
Percent of positive responses
from "Support of Upper
Management" efforts
58.7 65.0 70.0 75.0
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
3,474.8 3,474.8
180,995.5 187,709.5
1.92% 1.85%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation by program
with special line items.
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 13
HGA Office of Administrative Hearings
Mission:
To contribute to the quality of life of the State of Arizona by fairly and
impartially hearing the contested matters of our fellow citizens arising out
of State regulation.
Description
This agency commenced operation January 1, 1996. Previously,
administrative hearings have been conducted "in-house" in each
respective State agency or occupational board. The creation of the Office
of Administrative Hearings as a separate agency charged with providing
administrative law judges has interjected increased professional
detachment and physical distance to ensure confidence in the
independence and fairness of the administrative hearings.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
Hearings 2,125.2 2,116.8 2,168.1 2,168.0
Agency Total 2,125.2 2,116.8 2,168.1 2,168.0
Category
FTE 34.0 34.0 34.0 34.0
Personal Services 1,393.6 1,594.4 1,616.3 1,616.3
ERE Amount 288.1 318.9 316.6 316.7
Prof. And Outside Services 64.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Travel - In State 22.8 40.3 40.3 40.3
Travel - Out of State 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Aid to Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Other Operating Expenses 271.9 163.2 194.9 194.7
Equipment 83.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Agency Total 2,125.2 2,116.8 2,168.1 2,168.0
Fund
General Fund 1,275.0 1,251.0 1,231.7 1,231.7
Registrar of Contractors
Fund
836.4 852.0 0.0 0.0
AHCCCS Donation Fund 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8
Office of Administrative
Hearings
0.0 0.0 922.6 922.5
Agency Total 2,125.2 2,116.8 2,168.1 2,168.0
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 24.5 24.5
General Fund 15.3 15.3
Registrar of Contractors Fund 9.2 9.2
ERE Standard Adjustment (4.9) (4.8)
General Fund (7.7) (7.6)
Registrar of Contractors Fund 2.8 2.8
Risk Standard Adjustment 3.6 3.4
General Fund 2.0 1.9
Registrar of Contractors Fund 1.6 1.6
Office of Administrative Hearings 0.0 (0.1)
Executive Issues
Cost Allocation Plan 0.0 0.0
For FY 2002 the Executive is recommending the cost allocation plan.
Laws 1999, First Special Session, Chapter 1 requires the Office of
Administrative Hearings to develop an indirect cost assessment based on
an agency's proportional use of administrative law judges' time. Each
agency that is assessed a charge is listed in the table shown below. The
individual assessments were developed using actual FY 2000 use of
administrative law judges' time. The Executive is also recommending that
FY 2002 FY 2003
these amounts be placed in the newly created Office of Administrative
Hearings Fund as an appropriated fund.
Office of Administrative Hearings 0.0 0.0
Participating Agencies Amount
Arizona Lottery $1,431
Board of Accountancy $13,876
Board of Cosmetology $8,083
Board of Appraisal $3,444
Board of Behavioral Health Examiners $861
Board of Chiropractic Examiners $1,033
Board of Dental Examiners $5,358
Board of Medical Examiners $26,497
Board of Nursing Care Institution Administrators Examiners $19
Board of Psychologist Examiners $768
Board of Technical Registration $2,179
Department of Gaming $1,423
Naturopathic Board of Medical Examiners $1,003
Peace Officers Standards and Training $12,721
State Board of Nursing $18,325
Structural Pest Control Commission $7,667
Registrar of Contractors $817,871
General Fund Offset (28.9) (28.9)
For FY 2002 the Executive is recommending the implementation of a
legislatively mandated cost allocation plan. Laws 1999, First Special
Session, Chapter 1 requires the Office of Administrative Hearings to
develop an indirect cost assessment based on an agency's proportional
use of administrative law judges' time. Per this plan, agencies previously
billed at $28 per hour will now be swept of an amount contingent on actual
use of OAH. Due to the fact that a larger portion of the costs will now be
assumed by 90/10 agencies, a corresponding reduction in the General
Fund is being recommended.
General Fund (28.9) (28.9)
Transfer to OAH Fund 57.0 57.0
In FY 2002, the Executive recommends the transfer of $817,900 of the
$865,600 expenditure authority from the Registrar of Contractors fund to
the Office of Administrative Hearings fund as defined in law. With the
creation of the Office of Administrative Hearings fund and with the
implementation of the Cost Allocation Plan, the use of the Registrar of
Contractors' fund will no longer be needed and will be reduced by
($865,600). As per the Cost Allocation Plan and to reflect the total
amount swept from funds other than the Registrar of Contractors,
$104,700 has also been added to the Office of Administrative Hearings
Fund. The total of all funds being placed in the newly created Office of
Administrative Hearings Fund is $922,600.
Registrar of Contractors Fund (865.6) (865.6)
Office of Administrative Hearings 922.6 922.6
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Average number of days from
hearing scheduling to first
scheduled hearing (days)
50.2 45.0 45.0 45.0
Percent of cases reheard 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77
Percent of cases appealed to
Superior Court
1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35
Percent of evaluations rating the 98 99 99 99
14 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
ALJ excellent or good in
attentiveness
Percent of evaluations rating the
ALJ excellent or good in
explaining the hearing process
97 98 99 99
Percent of evaluations rating the
ALJ excellent or good in the use
of clear and neutral language
96 97 98 99
Percent of evaluations rating the
ALJ excellent or good in
impartiality
94 95 96 97
Percent of evaluations rating the
ALJ excellent or good in dealing
with the issues of the case
94 95 96 97
Percent of evaluations rating the
Office excellent or good in
sufficient space
92 93 94 95
Percent of evaluations rating the
Office excellent or good in
providing freedom from
distractions
95 96 97 98
Percent of evaluations rating the
staff excellent or good in
responding promptly and
completely to questions
95 96 97 98
New cases docketed to cases
concluded
1:.98 1:.98 1:.98 1:.98
Average number of days from
hearing request to hearing
scheduling (days)
2.8 1 1 1
Average length of a single
continuance [measured by first
continuances only] (in days)
47.6 47.0 47.0 47.0
Average number of days from
the first scheduled hearing to the
conclusion of the hearing (days)
10.2 10.0 10.0 10.0
Average number of days from
the conclusion of the hearing to
transmission of the decision to
the agency (days)
9.2 9.0 9.0 9.0
Cases docketed 7,096 7,096 7,096 7,096
Hearings held 3,466 3,466 3,466 3,466
Hearings conducted by contract
administrative law judges
0 0 0 0
Percent of agency acceptance of
findings of fact and conclusions
of law (excluding recommended
order) without modification
96 96 96 96
Percent of agency acceptance of
findings of fact and conclusions
of law (including recommended
order) without modification
90 90 90 90
Percent of OAH decisions
contrary to original agency
position
22.43 22.43 22.43 22.43
Percent of agency acceptance of
contrary OAH decision
81.57 81.57 81.57 81.57
Percent of agency rejection of
OAH decisions
2 2 2 2
Average length of delay (in days)
from first hearing date to
conclusion of the case due to
continuances
56.3 55.0 55.0 55.0
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Percent of evaluations rating the
staff excellent or good in
courteous treatment
97 98 99 99
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
171.0 172.5
2,165.3 2,165.3
7.90% 7.97%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation to the agency.
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 15
AGA Office of Attorney General
Mission:
To provide comprehensive legal protection to the citizens of Arizona and
quality legal services to the agencies of the State of Arizona.
Description
The Office of the Attorney General was created by Article V, Section I of
the Arizona Constitution. The Attorney General is an elected position and
holds office for a four-year term. Powers of the Attorney General are
conferred by the Arizona Constitution or by statute. The fundamental
obligation of the Attorney General is to act as legal advisor to all state
agencies except those few exempted by law. Additionally, primary
responsibilities include prosecuting and defending proceedings in which
the state has an interest and to render written opinions upon questions of
law.
To accomplish these responsibilities, the Attorney General has re-organized
the Department of Law into eight divisions. These divisions are
the Agency Counsel Division, the Child and Family Protection Division,
the Civil Division, the Civil Rights Division, the Criminal Division, the
Public Advocacy Division, the Administrative Operations Division, and
Administration. Each division is further organized into sections, which
specialize in a particular area of practice.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
Central Administrative
Functions
7,168.4 7,652.6 7,871.7 7,814.0
Agency Counsel Division 7,545.4 8,725.8 11,564.0 14,417.2
Child & Family Protection
Division
82.4 115.0 115.0 115.0
Civil Division 10,324.9 12,062.3 12,235.4 12,240.8
Civil Rights Division 1,854.3 2,064.0 2,086.6 2,086.8
Public Advocacy Division 6,561.6 7,891.0 8,200.9 8,161.7
Criminal Division 10,952.1 13,714.0 11,994.4 11,931.1
Agency Total 44,489.1 52,224.7 54,068.0 56,766.6
Category
FTE 691.2 693.2 702.5 702.5
Personal Services 27,731.4 31,296.5 34,358.0 36,664.6
ERE Amount 5,320.6 6,305.9 6,604.7 7,030.2
Prof. And Outside Services 702.6 1,826.1 2,016.3 2,163.1
Travel - In State 290.4 361.1 424.4 424.4
Travel - Out of State 152.6 155.0 161.0 161.0
Aid to Others 3,317.9 5,812.2 3,662.2 3,662.2
Other Operating Expenses 5,579.3 6,262.5 6,460.0 6,455.7
Equipment 1,394.3 205.4 381.4 205.4
Agency Total 44,489.1 52,224.7 54,068.0 56,766.6
Fund
General Fund 25,284.3 26,733.3 29,603.2 31,458.9
Attorney General Consumer
Fraud
1,137.0 1,677.0 1,701.7 1,702.5
Attorney General Antitrust
Revolving
413.5 743.8 758.2 758.4
Attorney General Collection
Enforcement
1,843.5 1,942.6 2,023.8 2,077.9
Attorney General Agency
Services Fund
13,249.1 16,052.3 17,043.2 17,830.7
Victim's Rights
Implementation
2,561.7 5,075.7 2,937.9 2,938.2
Agency Total 44,489.1 52,224.7 54,068.0 56,766.6
The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in
the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure.
SLI Grand Jury 156.1 156.8 158.8 158.7
SLI Victims' Rights 3,066.1 5,580.1 3,442.3 3,442.6
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 518.5 518.5
General Fund 295.3 295.3
Attorney General Consumer Fraud 15.8 15.8
Attorney General Antitrust Revolving 5.3 5.3
Attorney General Collection Enforcement 20.1 20.1
Attorney General Agency Services Fund 177.1 177.1
Victim's Rights Implementation 4.9 4.9
ERE Standard Adjustment (104.0) 37.0
General Fund (172.3) (41.8)
Attorney General Consumer Fraud 8.9 9.7
Attorney General Antitrust Revolving 9.1 9.3
Attorney General Collection Enforcement 8.0 9.0
Attorney General Agency Services Fund 35.0 43.2
Victim's Rights Implementation 7.3 7.6
Rent Standard Adjustment 25.9 31.0
General Fund 25.9 31.0
Risk Standard Adjustment 85.3 75.9
General Fund 85.3 75.9
Executive Issues
Technology Crimes 349.8 281.0
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends 6.0 FTE positions and $349,800
for the technology crime prosecution unit. The unit was created in FY
2001 with an appropriation of $100,000. The Executive recommends 2.0
FTE positions to be funded with existing funds and 4.0 FTE positions to
be funded with the additional $281,000. An attorney, two investigators and
a legal assistant will be added to the unit. The current unit is not able to
handle the State's dramatically increasing computer crime caseload
volume. The amount includes $68,800 for one-time equipment purchases
including two vehicles for the investigators.
The FY 2003 recommendation includes a reduction of ($68,800) to
eliminate funds used for one-time equipment purchases.
General Fund 349.8 281.0
Education and Health 14.1 12.2
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends a 0.3 FTE Medical Investigative
Nurse position and $14,100 to the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit. The
backlog of open cases has more than doubled in the last five years.
Federal Funds will pay for seventy-five percent of the associated costs.
For FY 2003, the Executive recommends a ($1,900) reduction to
eliminate funding for one-time equipment.
General Fund 14.1 12.2
Tobacco Enforcement 204.9 163.3
The FY 2002 Executive recommendation includes 3.0 FTE positions and
$204,900 to establish a tobacco enforcement unit. The positions include
an attorney, special agent, and legal secretary. A tobacco enforcement
unit would help ensure Arizona receives its fair share of the Master
Settlement funds and enforce the various provisions of the Master
Settlement.
For FY 2003, the Executive recommends a reduction of ($41,600) due to
one-time equipment purchases, including a vehicle for the special agent.
General Fund 204.9 163.3
Records Storage 57.0 57.0
The FY 2002 Executive recommendation includes $57,000 for record
storage. The Department of Library, Archives and Public Records now
requires agencies to pay for services relating to record storage that were
previously provided at no charge.
General Fund 57.0 57.0
16 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
FY 2002 FY 2003
Victim's Rights Fund (2,150.0) (2,150.0)
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends a ($2.2) million reduction in the
appropriation from the Victims' Rights Fund. This will eliminate all but
$300,000 of the one-time appropriation in FY 2001. The $300,000 will be
used to continue victims' rights training and victim-satisfaction evaluation.
Victim's Rights Implementation (2,150.0) (2,150.0)
Attorney Parity Program 2,736.3 5,474.2
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends $2.7 million for an assistant
attorney general (AAG) salary increase. Current salaries are the lowest
among public law offices in Arizona and are insufficient to attract and
retain competent attorneys. In calendar year 2000, turnover was
approximately 18%. Over 60% of those leaving left for better pay. The
recommended pay package increases the salaries over two years to the
average of the Maricopa County Attorney's Office and the U.S. Attorney's
Office. The recommended General Fund amount includes $892,700 to be
allocated between 12 agencies.
In FY 2003, the Executive recommends an additional $2.7 million to be
similarly allocated.
General Fund 1,904.4 3,809.9
Attorney General Collection Enforcement 53.1 106.2
Attorney General Agency Services Fund 778.8 1,558.1
Model Court 0.0 0.0
The Executive recommends transferring $1.6 million from the Collection
Enforcement Revolving Fund to the Attorney General’s Federal Funds
account in FY 2002. The monies will be used to eliminate the backlogged
cases in the Model Court program. The agency projects that it will
thereafter be able to handle all dependency cases without the additional
financial assistance. The transfer to the Federal Funds account enables
the Attorney General to receive a 50% federal match. The Executive
recommends that the transferred monies remaining in the Federal Funds
account revert to the General Fund on June 30, 2003.
Attorney General Collection Enforcement 0.0 0.0
Building Security 105.5 41.8
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends $105,500 to provide security at
the Capital Center and improve security at the Law Building. The amount
includes $63,700 for one-time equipment purchases such as an x-ray
machine and cameras. The remaining funds, $41,800, will be used to
contract with Capital Police for a Police Aide for the Capital Center.
For FY 2003, the Executive recommends a reduction of ($63,700) used to
purchase security equipment in FY 2002.
General Fund 105.5 41.8
FY 2001 Supplemental Recommendations
FY 2001
Alternative Fuels Cost Reimbursement Program 0.0
In the 44th Legislature, Seventh Special Session, Chapter 1, the
Department of Law was appropriated $397,400 to provide legal and
investigative services to the Department of Administration to administer
the alternative fuel cost reimbursement program and to the Department of
Revenue to administer the alternative fuel tax credit program.
General Fund 0.0
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Number of terminations achieved 482 740 580 500
Number of guardianships
achieved
815 1,250 980 840
Number of reunifications
achieved
1,036 1,580 1,240 1,070
Number of 17/1,000 20/1,200 17/1,000 17/1,000
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
trainings/presentations and
number of attendees
Increase number of people
reached through presentations
and trainings by 5% per year
3,396 3,565 3,743 3,930
High technology criminal matters 14 40 50 60
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
3,985.2 3,985.2
52,466.1 52,045.7
7.60% 7.66%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation to the agency
with special line items.
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 17
AUA Auditor General's Office
Mission:
To independently provide the legislature, government decision-makers,
and the public with impartial, relevant information, specific
recommendations, and technical assistance to improve state and local
government operations.
Description
The Auditor General is appointed by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee
and approved by a concurrent resolution of the Legislature. A.R.S. 41-
1279 requires the Auditor General to express an opinion on the financial
statements of audited entities, and determine compliance with applicable
federal and Arizona laws. A.R.S. 41-1279 and A.R.S. 41-2953 further
require the Auditor General to conduct comprehensive performance
evaluations of state agencies and the programs they administer.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
Auditor General 9,544.3 10,416.4 10,416.4 10,416.4
Agency Total 9,544.3 10,416.4 10,416.4 10,416.4
Category
FTE 179.0 179.0 179.0 179.0
Personal Services 6,781.4 7,426.2 7,426.2 7,426.2
ERE Amount 1,126.7 1,320.3 1,320.3 1,320.3
Prof. And Outside Services 365.8 328.1 328.1 328.1
Travel - In State 280.6 413.2 413.2 413.2
Travel - Out of State 16.8 20.0 20.0 20.0
Aid to Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Other Operating Expenses 826.8 753.5 753.5 753.5
Equipment 146.2 155.1 155.1 155.1
Agency Total 9,544.3 10,416.4 10,416.4 10,416.4
Fund
General Fund 9,544.3 10,416.4 10,416.4 10,416.4
Agency Total 9,544.3 10,416.4 10,416.4 10,416.4
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Percentage of administrative
recommendations implemented
or adopted within one year for
financial audits
62 65 65 65
External quality control review
resulted in clean opinion
(triennial review)
NA NA Yes NA
Average number of hours to
complete each Performance
Audit Division audit
2,600 2,500 2,500 2,500
Percentage of staff time put in to
projects directly productive to the
Office mission
69 75 75 75
Percentage of legislative
recommendations implemented
or adopted within three years
53 60 60 60
Percentage of administrative
recommendations implemented
or adopted within two years for
performance audits
96 90 90 90
Percentage of imposed
deadlines met
91 100 100 100
Percentage of reports accepted
by cognizant agency
100 100 100 100
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
1,218.0 1,436.9
15,516.2 19,341.5
7.85% 7.43%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation to the agency.
18 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
EPA Department of Commerce
Mission:
To build the foundation for a strong economy and superior quality of life
through the development of competitive industries and sustainable
communities.
Description
As the State's principal economic development agency, the Department
supports expansion of existing businesses, including new, small, and
minority-owned businesses; recruits new companies; promotes
international trade and investment; supports community and economic
planning and development efforts in rural areas; provides guidance and
support for housing and energy needs; and works to eliminate
weaknesses in the business climate. The Department is committed to
strengthening and promoting Arizona as a business location.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
Commerce Department 20,063.5 10,099.8 8,565.0 8,557.3
Commerce & Economic
Development Commission
2,607.0 3,260.3 3,060.8 3,060.6
Housing Trust Fund 206.0 731.3 374.5 370.8
Oil Overcharge
Administration
125.2 1,885.0 174.2 174.2
Bond Activity Administration 62.1 116.8 116.8 116.8
Agency Total 23,063.8 16,093.2 12,291.3 12,279.7
Category
FTE 106.5 97.5 93.5 93.5
Personal Services 3,546.6 3,998.2 4,187.8 4,187.8
ERE Amount 655.8 802.6 813.0 814.4
Prof. And Outside Services 1,847.8 2,229.1 2,396.7 2,396.7
Travel - In State 94.3 103.9 111.9 111.9
Travel - Out of State 95.4 103.7 104.7 104.7
Aid to Others 90.8 6,854.8 103.0 103.0
Other Operating Expenses 16,499.1 1,857.9 4,422.2 4,418.2
Equipment 234.0 143.0 152.0 143.0
Agency Total 23,063.8 16,093.2 12,291.3 12,279.7
Fund
General Fund 20,063.5 10,099.8 8,565.0 8,557.3
Lottery Fund 168.8 240.6 247.9 247.9
Commerce Div Bond Fund 62.1 116.8 116.8 116.8
Housing Trust Fund 206.0 231.3 374.5 370.8
Commerce & Economic
Development
2,438.2 3,019.7 2,812.9 2,812.7
Housing Development Fund 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0
Oil Overcharge Fund 125.2 1,885.0 174.2 174.2
Agency Total 23,063.8 16,093.2 12,291.3 12,279.7
The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in
the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure.
SLI Job Training 6,000.0 3,500.0 0.0 0.0
SLI Motion Picture 626.7 640.4 640.0 640.2
SLI Rural Tourism
Development
97.1 106.2 106.2 106.2
SLI Special Housing Needs 74.0 77.4 77.8 77.8
SLI Williams AFB Economic
Development
350.0 350.0 350.0 350.0
SLI Clean Air Fund 0.0 1,000.0 0.0 0.0
SLI Senior Living Program 175.5 202.6 203.7 203.7
SLI Greater Arizona
Development Authority
9,000.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
SLI High Technology
Clusters
0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 76.4 76.4
General Fund 51.6 51.6
Commerce Div Bond Fund 1.1 1.1
Housing Trust Fund 10.6 10.6
Commerce & Economic Development 5.1 5.1
Oil Overcharge Fund 8.0 8.0
ERE Standard Adjustment (18.9) (17.6)
General Fund (38.7) (37.6)
Commerce Div Bond Fund (4.6) (4.6)
Housing Trust Fund (0.4) (0.2)
Commerce & Economic Development (4.9) (4.9)
Oil Overcharge Fund 29.7 29.7
Rent Standard Adjustment 160.3 160.3
General Fund 133.6 133.6
Commerce Div Bond Fund 2.8 2.8
Housing Trust Fund 7.7 7.7
Commerce & Economic Development 8.5 8.5
Oil Overcharge Fund 7.7 7.7
Risk Standard Adjustment 8.2 7.3
General Fund 5.7 5.1
Commerce Div Bond Fund 0.7 0.7
Housing Trust Fund 2.9 2.8
Commerce & Economic Development 3.3 3.1
Oil Overcharge Fund (4.4) (4.4)
Executive Issues
Arizona Partnership for the New Economy 2,500.0 2,500.0
The Executive recommends $2.5 million in both FY 2002 and $2.5 million
in FY 2003 to launch the implementation of key initiatives recommended
by the Arizona Partnership for the New Economy (APNE). Governor Hull
designated APNE to define the New Economy and its importance to
Arizona; assess Arizona's current readiness and establish benchmarks
for measuring progress; and develop strategies for correcting any
perceived deficiencies in responding to the opportunities presented by the
New Economy.
The 36-member panel focused on two key principles.
1. Broadening the participation of Arizona businesses and citizens by
connecting and preparing people for the New Economy across all sectors:
industry, government, education and community.
SLI Apprenticeship Services 0.0 151.3 143.6 153.1
SLI Arizona Partnership for
the New Economy (APNE)
0.0 0.0 2,500.0 2,500.0
SLI International Trade
Offices
770.3 1,194.8 976.0 976.0
SLI Women & Minority-
Owned Business
108.6 110.3 111.1 111.1
SLI Small Business
Advocate
105.9 108.7 108.8 108.8
SLI Office for Senior Living 174.2 198.3 197.2 197.2
SLI National Law Center 250.0 250.0 250.0 250.0
SLI Advertising and
Promotion
620.3 659.2 659.2 659.2
SLI REDI Matching Grants 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0
SLI Economic Development
Matching F
90.1 104.0 104.0 104.0
SLI Main Street 129.9 130.0 130.0 130.0
SLI Commerce & Economic
Development
168.8 240.6 247.9 247.9
SLI Housing Development 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0
SLI Housing Office 206.0 231.3 374.5 370.8
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 19
FY 2002 FY 2003
2. Deepening Arizona business and citizen involvement in the New
Economy by investing in knowledge and learning to increase the
competitiveness of our state.
After taking input from people around the state and deliberating for over
one-year the group offered five core strategies:
1. Getting Connected
2. E-Learning
3. E-Government
4. Knowledge Leaders and Entrepreneurship, and
5. Building creative and desirable communities.
This budget recommendation provides some of the resources needed to
address issues like rural telecommunications development, regional
economic development grants, matching grants to universities in support
of technology transfer and support of Azventurecapital.com a virtual new
business incubator.
General Fund 2,500.0 2,500.0
Insurance Settlement (1,000.0) (1,000.0)
The Executive recommendation includes a decrease of ($1.0) million to
reflect the end of a scheduled transfer from the General Fund to the
Clean Air Fund. Laws 1996, 7th Special Session, Chapter 6, appropriated
up to $1.0 million from the General Fund to the Clean Air Fund in each
fiscal year during which deposits from the settlements with the Farm and
Home Insurance are made to the General Fund. There are no deposits
scheduled for FY 2002 and FY 2003.
General Fund (1,000.0) (1,000.0)
Housing Staff Transfer 47.6 47.6
The Executive recommendation transfers $47,600 and 1.0 Housing
Commission Coordinator FTE position from the Office of the Governor to
the Department of Commerce Housing and Community Development
Program to better align the appropriated resources with the statutory
responsibilities of the Department.
Housing Trust Fund 47.6 47.6
FTE Count Adjustment 0.0 0.0
For FY 2002 the Executive recommendation adjusts the Apprenticeship
Services FTE count by a net increase of 3.0 positions with no additional
monies.
General Fund 0.0 0.0
Job Training Program (3,500.0) (3,500.0)
Per Laws 2000, Chapter 383, beginning with FY 2002 the Arizona Job
Training Program will no longer be funded by General Fund
appropriations. Chapter 383, made significant changes to the Job
Training Program, established in 1993 by the Arizona Legislature.
Specifically, the newly enacted Chapter revised the program's funding
establishing a 0.1% increase in employers' taxable wages which is
expected to provide for the Job Training Program approximately $7 million
in FY 2001 and about $15 million in FY 2002. These receipts are
deposited into the Job Training Fund, which the Department administers
as a non-appropriated fund. In FY 2001, this change reduced the General
Fund appropriation to the Job Training by ($3.5) million from the original
amount of $7 million. The program provides grants for short-term
customized training and retraining of employees of new and expanding
qualified businesses. In order to qualify for grants from the program, both
large and small companies must provide a percentage of training costs
for their employees.
General Fund (3,500.0) (3,500.0)
Housing Development Appropriation (500.0) (500.0)
The Executive recommendation includes a decrease of ($500,000) in FY
2002 to reflect a one-time appropriation.
Housing Development Fund (500.0) (500.0)
FY 2002 FY 2003
High Technology Clusters (100.0) (100.0)
The Executive recommendation includes a reduction of ($100,000) in FY
2002 to reflect the one-time appropriation provided in Laws 2000, Chapter
367, to be used on grants to further the development of high technology
clusters.
General Fund (100.0) (100.0)
Small Community Planning 413.0 404.8
The Executive recommendation includes $413,000 and 2.0 Planner FTE
positions to address the mandate required in Laws 2000, Chapter 301.
Included in this amount is $300,000 that will be dedicated for grant
assistance to communities. The grants will be designed to enable the
communities to acquire specific technical expertise in the areas of
planning, zoning and others community planning related matters.
General Fund 413.0 404.8
CEDC Operating Cost Adjustment (218.8) (218.8)
The Executive recommendation includes a decrease of ($218,800) in FY
2002 from the International Trade Offices Special Line. The Department
has been effective in managing its mission-critical functions and
readjusting expenditures to achieve substantial savings.
Commerce & Economic Development (218.8) (218.8)
Fund Appropriation Status Change (1,751.8) (1,751.8)
Laws 1999, Chapter 185, changes the appropriated status of the Oil
Overcharge Fund to a non-appropriated status. The recommendation
reflects this change with a reduction of ($1.8) million and (10.0) FTE,
which will continue in the non-appropriated status and no longer be
subject to legislative appropriation.
Oil Overcharge Fund (1,751.8) (1,751.8)
Affordable Housing 74.8 71.0
The Executive recommendation includes $74,800 in FY 2002 and an
associated one-time decrease of ($3,800) in FY 2003 to enable the
Housing Program to meet increased operating costs and to reduce the
imbalance of cost sharing with the Federal portion of the program.
Housing Trust Fund 74.8 71.0
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Average wage per job (in dollars) 17.90 17.30 17.78 18.26
Jobs created by companies
utilizing Commerce programs
16,148 15,000 15,500 16,000
Households served 71,244 71,244 71,800 71,800
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
941.5 941.5
10,260.1 10,260.1
9.18% 9.18%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation to the agency
with special line items.
20 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
AFA Governor's Office for Equal Opportunity
Mission:
To ensure equal opportunity for over 30,000 state employees by
administering and enforcing state and federal laws prohibiting
discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, and
disability. The GOEO will work to assist state agencies/divisions in
promoting equal opportunity in employment, appointments, and
procurement practices conducted on behalf of the state.
Description
The Governor's Office of Equal Opportunity (GOEO) provides information
and technical assistance to state agencies to ensure nondiscrimination
and equal opportunity access to employment, state contracts, and
appointments.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
Equal Opportunity 210.1 238.2 235.1 235.1
Agency Total 210.1 238.2 235.1 235.1
Category
FTE 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Personal Services 136.1 150.6 152.9 152.9
ERE Amount 27.8 31.6 26.3 26.3
Prof. And Outside Services 0.4 4.0 4.0 4.0
Travel - In State 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.8
Travel - Out of State 2.6 0.7 0.7 0.7
Aid to Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Other Operating Expenses 39.1 50.5 50.4 50.4
Equipment 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Agency Total 210.1 238.2 235.1 235.1
Fund
General Fund 210.1 238.2 235.1 235.1
Agency Total 210.1 238.2 235.1 235.1
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 2.6 2.6
General Fund 2.6 2.6
ERE Standard Adjustment (5.6) (5.6)
General Fund (5.6) (5.6)
Risk Standard Adjustment (0.1) (0.1)
General Fund (0.1) (0.1)
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Number of presentations and
informational sessions regarding
procurement opportunities
30 30 30 30
Number of state agencies
contacted by GOEO to ascertain
their employment needs
15 50 50 50
Number of community
organizations contacted by the
GOEO to help facilitate the
dissemination of information
regarding employment
opportunities
60 135 135 135
Number of Diversity Training
classes provided by the GOEO
7 7 7 7
Number of state agencies 102 105 105 105
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
assisted in their efforts to reach
parity and be in compliance with
Federal Equal Opportunity rules
and regulations
Number of state agencies
assisted in the preparation of
State and Local Government
Information Survey (EEO-4)
Annual Federal Report
105 105 105 105
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
232.0 232.0
240.8 240.8
96.35% 96.35%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation to the agency.
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 21
EQA State Board of Equalization
Mission:
To provide an independent appeal process for taxpayers, the county
Assessors, and the Department of Revenue in disputes relating to the
valuation and classification of property for ad valorem tax purposes.
Description
The State Board is comprised of seventeen members, seven appointed by
the Governor (including the Chairman) and five members from Maricopa
and Pima counties, respectively. The Board's jurisdiction is primarily over
locally assessed real and personal property in Maricopa and Pima
counties. Under A.R.S. § 42-15105 supplemental role, the Board’s
authority extends to centrally assessed property statewide. The Board,
formerly Division I of the State Board of Tax Appeals, was created on
August 1, 1995 through a consolidation of the appeals process.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
State Board of Equalization 572.5 622.8 640.0 640.0
Agency Total 572.5 622.8 640.0 640.0
Category
FTE 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
Personal Services 360.2 367.6 372.8 372.8
ERE Amount 65.4 67.3 78.5 78.6
Prof. And Outside Services 0.0 12.6 12.6 12.6
Travel - In State 5.0 19.4 19.4 19.4
Travel - Out of State 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Aid to Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Other Operating Expenses 134.8 155.9 156.7 156.6
Equipment 7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Agency Total 572.5 622.8 640.0 640.0
Fund
General Fund 572.5 622.8 640.0 640.0
Agency Total 572.5 622.8 640.0 640.0
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 5.8 5.8
General Fund 5.8 5.8
ERE Standard Adjustment 10.6 10.7
General Fund 10.6 10.7
Risk Standard Adjustment 0.8 0.7
General Fund 0.8 0.7
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Appeals Received 18,000 16,000 15,500 18,000
Cost per petition/hearing (in
dollars)
27 25 25 23
Online filing - To have all large
filers online. As of 8/2000 Pima
& Maricopa are online "live"
5,000 7,000 7,000 9,000
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
99.0 99.0
628.8 628.8
15.74% 15.74%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation to the agency.
22 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
OEGGovernor's Office for Excellence in Government
Mission:
To promote the Governor's goal of continuous customer service
improvement by providing business process assistance, capacity-building
tools, and recognition to executive branch staff.
Description
The Office for Excellence in Government (OEG) serves as the in-house
management consulting resource for the executive branch. It is
responsible for assisting agencies with resolving management and/or
operational issues. OEG focuses on improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of government business processes, with a particular
emphasis on customer service and satisfaction.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
Office for Excellence in
Government
1,459.5 2,064.3 1,609.2 1,609.3
Agency Total 1,459.5 2,064.3 1,609.2 1,609.3
Category
FTE 0.0 19.0 19.0 19.0
Personal Services 917.9 1,047.2 1,062.8 1,062.8
ERE Amount 149.8 181.7 186.0 186.1
Prof. And Outside Services 80.2 570.0 95.0 95.0
Travel - In State 1.6 4.0 4.0 4.0
Travel - Out of State 6.1 15.0 15.0 15.0
Aid to Others 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Other Operating Expenses 215.9 221.4 221.4 221.4
Equipment 86.5 25.0 25.0 25.0
Agency Total 1,459.5 2,064.3 1,609.2 1,609.3
Fund
General Fund 1,450.5 1,564.3 1,584.2 1,584.3
Office for Excellence in
Government
9.0 500.0 25.0 25.0
Agency Total 1,459.5 2,064.3 1,609.2 1,609.3
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 17.4 17.4
General Fund 17.4 17.4
ERE Standard Adjustment 2.5 2.6
General Fund 2.5 2.6
Executive Issues
Reduction in Education and Training Services (475.0) (475.0)
For FY 2002, the Executive recommends a reduction of ($475,000) in
professional and outside services for education and training. The
recommendation provides expenditure authority in an amount consistent
with the expected amount of revenue projected to be collected by the
Office. The Office has historically received an appropriation of $500,000,
however, the Office has not collected nor does it expect to collect
prospectively revenues to support their prior level of expenditure authority.
Office for Excellence in Government (475.0) (475.0)
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Amount of money saved through
ideas approved under the
Shared Savings and Suggest
Arizona programs
NA 4,000 8,000 15,000
Amount of money saved through NA 25,000 50,000 100,000
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
outsourcing or business process
improvement stemming from a
Competitive Government review
Percentage of OEG client
agency baseline statistics
showing improvements six
months after project completion
NA Baseline TBD TBD
Percentage of OEG client
agencies showing improvements
in baseline statistics six months
after project completion
NA Baseline TBD TBD
Percentage of OEG training
customers demonstrating
competence in training subject
matter upon completion of an
OEG training course
NA Baseline TBD TBD
Percentage of OEG customers
indicating improved customer
satisfaction attributable to
assistance provided by OEG
NA 60 65 75
Percentage of OEG employees
expressing job satisfaction
85 85 87 90
Percentage of external
customers indicating satisfaction
with OEG services
94 100 100 100
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
157.5 157.5
1,607.2 1,607.2
9.80% 9.80%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation by program.
Agency Operating Detail - General Government 23
CLA Arizona Exposition & State Fair
Mission:
To provide unlimited opportunity to celebrate Arizona's heritage, youth,
industry, traditions, and future by bringing the entire community together.
Description
The Arizona Exposition and State Fair (AESF) is a 96-acre entertainment
facility which showcases a variety of events including one of the pre-eminent
state fairs in the country. AESF rents its facilities to a variety of
tenants and promoters including the Arizona National Livestock Show, the
Maricopa County Fair, Valley Arena Management, and the Phoenix
Mustangs. AESF provides a location to showcase industry, agriculture,
education, and entertainment for the enjoyment of the citizens of Arizona.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY 2001
Appropriation
FY 2002
Exec Rec
FY 2003
Program/Cost Center Exec Rec
State Fair Operations 7,612.9 8,813.7 8,812.0 8,822.6
Interim Events 3,228.7 4,715.9 6,231.8 5,004.2
Agency Total 10,841.6 13,529.6 15,043.8 13,826.8
Category
FTE 186.0 182.0 186.0 186.0
Personal Services 3,859.8 3,775.8 3,983.4 3,983.4
ERE Amount 574.7 608.1 818.2 820.8
Prof. And Outside Services 3,448.7 3,240.7 3,491.9 3,491.9
Travel - In State 10.5 13.1 13.1 13.1
Travel - Out of State 14.2 20.0 20.0 20.0
Aid to Others 5.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
Other Operating Expenses 2,852.3 5,863.9 5,480.7 5,489.6
Equipment 76.4 0.0 1,228.5 0.0
Agency Total 10,841.6 13,529.6 15,043.8 13,826.8
Fund
Coliseum & Exposition
Center
10,841.6 13,529.6 15,043.8 13,826.8
Agency Total 10,841.6 13,529.6 15,043.8 13,826.8
Executive Recommendations
FY 2002 FY 2003
Standard Adjustments
Pay Package Annualization 29.5 29.5
Coliseum & Exposition Center 29.5 29.5
ERE Standard Adjustment 169.6 172.2
Coliseum & Exposition Center 169.6 172.2
Risk Standard Adjustment 86.6 95.5
Coliseum & Exposition Center 86.6 95.5
Executive Issues
Equipment Purchases 1,228.5 0.0
For FY 2002 the Executive recommends $1.2 million to replace worn-out
equipment, including a forklift, lawnmowers, water truck, utility vehicles,
tractors, a backhoe, folding chairs and a trash truck.
Coliseum & Exposition Center 1,228.5 0.0
Resource Shift 0.0 0.0
For FY 2002, the Executive recommendation includes a shift of resources
between budgeting line items that has no net impact on the agency
budget.
Coliseum & Exposition Center 0.0 0.0
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
Percent of guest survey ratings NA 75 85 88
FY 2003
Expected
FY 2002
Expected
FY 2001
Expected
FY 2000
Actual
Performance Measures
that are above average
People coming onto grounds
annually (in thousands)
1,406 1,600 1,800 2,000
Percent of facilities used per year 37.0 37.5 38.0 38.5
Events held on grounds 74 79 84 89
FY 2002 FY 2003
Administrative Costs
1,420.1 1,420.1
14,778.2 13,549.7
9.61% 10.48%
Administrative Costs
Agency Request
Administrative Cost Percentage
The Executive recommends a lump-sum appropriation to the agency.
24 FY 2002 and FY 2003 Executive Budget
GTAGovernment Information Technology Agency
Mission:
To partner with state agencies and private sector organizations to improve
information technology capabilities and add value, quality, and efficiency
in the delivery of public services for Arizona citizens, businesses, and
other governmental entities.
Description
This agency is responsible for statewide information technology (IT)
planning, coordinating, and consulting. The Government Information
Technology Agency (GITA) Director serves as the Chief Information
Officer (CIO) for State of Arizona Executive Branch agencies. GITA is
responsible to administer the State's Executive Branch IT resources,
including establishing statewide standards, serves as statewide
coordinator, critically evaluates and approves/disapproves agency IT
plans and projects. GITA is also responsible for mandating necessary
revisions to statewide standards and temporarily suspending the
expenditure of monies if an IT project is at risk of failing to achieve its
intended results or does not comply with State requirements. In addition,
GITA provides IT consulting services to agencies and staff support for the
Information Technology Authorization Committee (ITAC). ITAC is an
Executive, Legislative, Judicial, and private sector committee which has
oversight responsibility for information technology in all three branches of
State government.
Agency Summary
FY 2000
Actual
FY