County counsel argues against aid for the needy

Clark County and legislative lawyers are wrangling over how strict a spending cap is for social services as the economic slump ratchets up the demand for aid.

The Legislative Counsel Bureau says the county can use money from other parts of its budget to make up for the $7 million the state took from programs subject to the spending cap.

County Counsel Mary-Anne Miller rebutted that argument today. The cap is rigid, and the Nevada statutes clearly forbid diverting money to the affected programs, she said.

As the two sides duel, thousands of residents on the brink of homelessness are vying for depleted aid that will diminish further when social services are cut. The programs offer rental assistance and other means for keeping the destitute off the streets and out of jails and emergency rooms, county officials say.

Miller’s opinion is not scheduled to be discussed at a commission meeting. Four commissioners who were interviewed were evenly split about it.

County Commissioner Lawrence Weekly said he was puzzled about why Miller and other officials won’t accept the legislative counsel’s opinion if it will help the impoverished.

“What we’re trying to do is in good faith,” Weekly said. “We’re trying to save lives.”

If the Legislature’s attorneys sign a statement saying it’s OK for the county to spend more on social programs, the county should be covered legally, Weekly said.

But County Commissioner Steve Sisolak said he worries the county could get sued for violating the spending limit. Therefore, he feels compelled to go with Miller’s argument, even though funding social services is crucial in a recession, he said.

“I don’t believe the Legislature thought their taking would cause this much of an impact,” Sisolak said. “Now they’re looking at a way to mitigate the impact.”

At the crux of the legal dispute is a 1971 statute that Miller said was a compromise between those who wanted to aid the poor and those who sought to curb spending on social programs.

The law requires earmarking a portion of property tax money for certain social programs — say, for the homeless — but also forbids spending a dime more than that allotment.

Miller said that when the state grabbed a 4-cent portion of the county’s property tax rate earlier this year it took money from social services that cannot be replaced.

In her written opinion, she described being “troubled” that the state ignored a part of the statute that states “no interfund transfer ... or contingency transfer may be made by the board of county commissioners.”

But Lorne Malkiewich, the legislative counsel’s director, argues that the state’s takeaway didn’t lower the spending ceiling.
The county can still spend the original amount that was set aside for these programs, he said.

One way to illustrate the differing opinions is to picture a 10-gallon vat filled with water.

Miller would argue that 10 gallons is all you get, no matter how much the state scoops out.

Malkiewich would argue that if the state siphons, say, 3 gallons, the county can restore the vat to 10 gallons by drawing water from other sources.

County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani backs the legislative counsel’s stance.

She said it was unfortunate the two camps were haggling rather than discussing how to find wiggle room within the cap.

“If we can augment the budget, why would we not do it if it actually helps our citizens?” Giunchigliani said.

On Thursday, a man who spent all morning applying for rental aid stepped out of a crowded social services office and onto the dirt-smudged front patio, where other frustrated people gathered.
He talked of slowly going blind, of suffering from varicose veins so severe he can’t work, of waiting 11 months for disability benefits that have yet to come.

He said he showed up at this office on Pinto Lane at 1:30 a.m. so he’d be first in line for rental assistance. At noon his hopes were dimming.

“It’s almost impossible,” said Lance, 52, who didn’t want his last name used. “The money just isn’t there.”
Nancy McLane, social services director, said the agency has begun trimming services, such as rental assistance, to offset the state’s $9.3 million takeaway.

Otherwise, the agency will run out of money to aid impoverished adults by year’s end, she said.

She noted that the spending cap affects $6.9 million in programs for the homeless and destitute. About $2.4 million in lost funding for elderly services can be replaced without question, she said, adding that the agency has been unable to do so.
Commissioner Susan Brager said the county definitely needs more money for social services. Still, she supports Miller’s opinion as a safeguard against lawsuits.

“Unless someone can show we’re going to be held harmless,” Brager said.

Weekly said he could foresee someone suing the county for shirking its duty to aid its most vulnerable residents.

“That’s something to be nervous about,” Weekly said.

Contact reporter Scott Wyland at swyland@reviewjournal.com or 702-455-4519.