Senator seeks to curb state coffer grabs

If voters express resounding opposition to the state tapping local governments for money without their permission, one lawmaker says he will try to temper such revenue grabbing in the 2011 session and restrict it in the future.

An advisory question sponsored by the Nevada Association of Counties and on the Clark County ballot will ask voters whether state leaders should get local governments' say-so before diverting revenue, imposing fees and making them responsible for state-run services.

In 2009, the state Legislature targeted Nevada's two largest counties, Washoe and Clark, to help fill an $800 million budget hole. Clark County lost almost $200 million over two years, and Washoe County lost about $50 million.

Lawmakers also tried to siphon $62 million from the local Clean Water Coalition after a pipeline project had been shelved, but the coalition sued the state and the dispute has yet to be resolved.

County and city leaders throughout Nevada worry that the state will go after more local governments in 2011 to offset an expected $3 billion shortfall.

State Sen. John Lee, D-North Las Vegas, said he will work to counter such actions if at least 60 percent of voters answer "yes" to the advisory question. Lee said he doubts he can stop lawmakers desperate for money from dipping into local coffers next session, but he hopes that a voter mandate will give them pause and lay the groundwork for future safeguards against revenue raids.

"The legislators cannot do their job by raiding local governments continually," said Lee, the assistant minority whip and chairman of the Government Affairs Committee.

Sixteen of the state's 17 counties, including Clark, will have the question on the ballot. So a clear majority vote would be a mandate from residents to limit the state's revenue-grabbing authority, Lee said.

Lee said he would propose amending the state constitution to require a two-thirds vote from the Assembly and Senate before the state can dip into local coffers.

He said he wouldn't expect to muster the needed support in the Legislature for an amendment that crimps lawmakers' fiscal authority, especially when they're staring at a gaping shortfall.

If his proposal fails to gain steam in Carson City, he said he will launch a petition drive to put it on the 2012 statewide ballot. By law, voters would have to pass the amendment in the 2012 and 2014 elections before it could go into effect.

Lee, who won't reach term limits until 2016, said he would shepherd the ballot initiative through to the end as long as he's re-elected in 2012. In the meantime, he would use the advisory question's results as leverage to press legislators into talking earnestly with local leaders before plucking their dollars.

Lawmakers who want to be re-elected would have to consider the will of their constituents, rather than treating local governments as subservient "creatures of the state," Lee said. "Then we could say we gave them a seat at the table. They weren't the meal."

The governor can veto bills that would raise fees, raid local coffers or push state programs onto local governments.

Gov. Jim Gibbons went along with legislative takings in the past, saying they were necessary. And neither of the gubernatorial candidates from the major parties would say whether they might veto such proposals.

Both Republican Brian Sandoval and Democrat Rory Reid have vowed not to raise taxes, leaving them with no choice but to find revenue elsewhere or cut costs.

Sandoval wouldn't directly answer what he thought about the Legislature grabbing local revenues or whether its ability to do so should be curbed.

But Sandoval, who's leading in statewide polls, said in an e-mail that he favors giving counties home rule and, in turn, transferring more of the state's services to the counties.

"The simple fact is many services the state now provides would be better administered at the local level," Sandoval said. "With the greater level of autonomy local governments have asked for with home rule, they will also have a greater level of responsibility for funding and accountability for providing these services."

He said a period of transition would be required to avoid saddling local governments with unfunded mandates.

Clark County Commissioner Rory Reid, his Democratic opponent, also indicated that the state might have to pass responsibility for some services to the counties.

If that should happen, the state must work closely with local leaders in reassigning these tasks, instead of unilaterally imposing the new duties on the counties, Reid said. Reid, however, said he was opposed to the state raiding local funds.

He said his budget plan outlines how the state can balance its books without diverting local revenue. He recalled how frustrating it was to have the state compound the county's strained budget as local tax revenue was dropping.

"Diversions are not solutions," Reid said. "We worked real hard to balance our budget ... and we were rewarded by the state taking $200 million."

Clark County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani said she opposed putting the advisory question on the ballot because she thought it was a hollow, feel-good exercise. An advisory question has little bearing on what lawmakers do, Giunchigliani said.

However, Lee argued that a message from constituents can at least give lawmakers pause.

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