As it continues to wrangle over taxes, the legislature also is looking for ways to rein in the budget.
No agency is under closer scrutiny than Nevada's Department of Information Technology, the division that provides computer and telecommunications support and services to the state's myriad offices.
DoIT was in the spotlight at a joint subcommittee meeting recently and is slated for an encore soon to provide answers to the legislators' lingering questions.
Those questions ranged from DoIT's plans to spend $2.5 million on a new mainframe, from its shuffling of personnel that subcommittee chair Sen.
Sandra Tiffany (R-Clark County) called a "shell game," to the source of its charges to other agencies when many of those agencies are now using outside IT services.
"As we're going through all the budgets we've been scratching our heads at all the DoIT charges," said Sen.Tiffany during DoIT's budget hearing before the Senate Committee on Finance and the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means Joint Subcommittee on General Government.
In fact, that week the subcommittee heard testimony from at least two offices of the state's Department Business & Industry that had problems with DoIT.
Patricia Jarman-Manning, commissioner, Nevada Consumers Affairs Division said during that office's budget hearing that its telephone system was antiquated, its chief financial officer acted as its computer technician and that it hired an outside contractor to do its web site development because it was cheaper than going through DoIT.
Nancyann Leeder, Nevada Attorney for Injured Workers, in another hearing, said her office hired a consultant recommended by DoIT to do a study of its database system.
"The guy was a flake," Leeder said later.
He left the project without producing anything and while Injured Workers was able to recover his $27,000 fee, a lot of time was wasted in the process, said Leeder.The office ended up hiring DoIT to do the study for them.
"It meant we went through the discussion multiple times and it tied up a lot of time for six staff members," said Leeder.
"And we don't have a lot of time.
I personally don't know about the technology and it cost me a lot of money to find out from a sister agency."
By the time DoIT went before the subcommittee, the legislators had a long list of questions, starting with ones about DoIT's request to be able to pool its costs and spread them out over the state's agencies, whether or not an agency uses DoIT services.
"We want to change the CIO assessment because we were paid in the past by only those agencies that contract for DoIT services, when his position is broad and everyone benefits whether they use DoIT or not," said Shelly Person, chief of administration with DoIT in Carson City.
Much of those costs are stemming from another DoIT assessment security.
In its new budget, DoIT is requesting four additional staff for security purposes.
At the same time, it's asking for $200,000 to hire a consultant to do a study of the state's computer security systems.
"Can't we do the assessment in house?" asked Sen.
Tiffany.
Assemblywoman Vonne Chowning (D-Clark County) said it seemed "backward," to be hiring people when DoIT is still in the process of assessing its needs.
"Which agencies are asking for all this guidance? Or did you take it on yourself?" she asked.
" We already know some things we need done and that's why we've asked for four people," said Terry Savage, DoIT's director.
"We still have some not identified and that's why we need an assessment."
In the end, the subcommittee asked DoIT to compile a list of agencies that are requesting security help.
The third assessment, called a common enterprise assessment, which includes web site development and telecommunications, also came under fire.
DoIT is asking for five additional staff.
"We've talked to all the agencies and most web site work is done outside DoIT," said Sen.Tiffany.
"Do we have a role for that in DoIT?"
That's something DoIT was supposed to be investigating when it said it in the last biennium it was undertaking a test of whether to decentralize some of its services.
"We heard then almost exactly what you're saying today," said Assemblywoman Chowning.
"So what did this mean? You said it would be done.Where is the report? This is really appalling."
"What I said was wrong," replied Savage.
"I was naive and clueless.What's needed is not a test but a detailed analysis."
"And now we have to spend $100,000 to get a report," replied Chowning.
Savage said further analysis needs to be done to ensure the state doesn't lose any federal funds by allowing any IT services to fall out from under DoIT's control.
Federal payback ended up being another issue.
DoIT had hired a consultant to help it get up to speed on arcane Federal Cost Accounting Standards that enable the state to recover some costs from the federal government.
But the agency is asking to maintain the consultant as an "insurance policy." "The intent was that the department could gain knowledge and the skill set to assume the responsibility without the assistance of a consultant," said Assemblywoman Chowning.
"Why was this not told to us before? You said it would be finished."
Savage conceded that the agency could move forward without a consultant, but he insisted that it was a small tradeoff to ensure that that the state secured all the federal funds it could.
In the end, the subcommittee gave DoIT a long list of questions to answer before its next budget hearing that has yet to be scheduled.
Despite the grilling, DoIT's director held fast to his requests.
"We're doing 19 percent more work for a
