By DR. LARRY MOSES
No one asked me but…Last week I speculated on the Governor’s attempt to balance the State budget. Most of the speculation turned out to be true. Don’t you just love it when you are right?
The Governor indicated he could not balance the State budget with the 5.3 billion dollars he had to spend. Since he pledged not to raise taxes, he borrowed nearly $200 million and took another nearly $300 million from local governments to bring the revenue up to $5.8 billion. How one comes to a balanced budget by borrowing is a mystery to me, but that is the Governor’s plan.
Let me state early on, I have no objections to spending only what the State has. I really have no objections to the cuts the Governor has called for. The people of Nevada have made it clear they wish to have no tax increase and, therefore, they must understand cuts are coming.
What I do find interesting is the robbing of Peter to pay Paul in this budget. The Governor will take $121 million in property tax revenue from Clark and Washoe counties. These are funds local governments use to maintain local services. This money is used to help fund things like Cappalappa Family Resource Center, the Overton Senior Center, and local mental health services.
Not only does Sandoval plan to take funds from local governments, he intends to drop added burdens upon them. Less money, more responsibility, and better services became re-occurring themes throughout the speech. One began to believe there are unicorns grazing on the front lawn of the Governor’s mansion.
He is pushing for a change in the law that would allow school districts to use bond money voted for by the residents of local districts to build and renovate schools as general fund dollars. While I speculated he would do this, I further speculated he would use the money throughout the State. The Governor’s plans keeps the money bonded for by the residents of Clark County in Clark County. However the effect is the same because State funds that would have come to Clark County will now be used elsewhere. The Clark County School District could free up anywhere from 200 million to 900 million dollars, depending on which report you believe from the district officials. This would make up for the loss of $81 million in per pupil support from the State as well as the loss $213 million in education funding the Governor plans to use in the general fund from the room tax. The residents of Nevada voted to increase the room tax for the specific purpose of funding education. The Governor would now funnel these funds to other programs.
This is another example of why you should never make an agreement with the government. The Governor took $10 million out of education funds to continue the Millennium Scholarship. A few years ago, another Governor took the State’s tobacco settlement money, that was supposed to be used for medical purposes, and set up the scholarship. His rationale for this was that educated people are healthier people. He indicated it would be self-supporting. But with the drop in revenue from tobacco sales, the fund is no longer adequate. Rather than adjust the program downward, the new Governor has decided to use education dollars on this scholarship.
Are there ways to cut cost in government spending? Without a doubt. However, not all are pleasant nor convenient.
Looking at the school district, one can see a transportation department budgeted at over $74 million and a police department that cost over $30 million. There are extra-curricular programs that cost the district millions. Let me get real unpopular in a hurry with some suggestions.
How about if a child lives within five miles of school and wants a bus ride let the parent pay a bus fee. That is what the school district my son’s children attend does. In that district no matter how far the ride, the parent pays for the child to get on the bus. If you have to cut somewhere, why not the bus rides?
Let’s get rid of the School Police and use the local police department when a criminal act is committed on school property. There is a need for security, but there is seldom a need for a certified police officer. I have to believe security can be provided a lot cheaper by seasonally employed security personnel.
We might want to look at the fact that the district has a staff of eleven attorneys. However, when there is a major problem, they use private attorneys to settle the issue.
If an extra-curricular program does not pay for itself, the parents of the participants should make up the difference. I do not believe any extra-curricular program in the district shows a profit. Even those that charge admission, if all factors are considered, fall short of paying for themselves.
Right now, parents of cheerleaders pay for their daughter’s program why should the athletes they cheer for not do the same? I paid three hundred dollars to a school district in California so my granddaughter could participate in band. It was important enough for me to do so.
Parents of athletes pay to see their children perform. Drama parents pay to see their children act. Why are band concerts free?
Parents all across the country pay for their children to participate in sports until they reach high school. If we are not willing to raise taxes to pay for programs, the money must come from somewhere else or the programs should be discontinued.
Sometimes we forget that public education was instituted to teach youngsters to read, write, and do math. The further we get from the basic purpose of education, the more it costs.
I certainly have no problem with the expansion of the role of public education, but one must realize each time you expand a program, you expand the costs. If cuts in education must be made, let’s start on the periphery and work our way in.
One of the craziest things the Governor said was, while cutting funding to State agencies, those agencies should step up the services offered. I have no problem with the reduction of cost of all governmental services. However, I think it is ridiculous to think there should be no expectation of reduced services as well.
