Published: October 27, 2009 10:58 am      

Clark County Council approves budget and new tax

Cuts extensive: 30 percent for most departments

The Clark County Council offered an answer in how to meet a budget crisis it’s facing: slash departmental spending and impose a local option income tax that will generate a moderate amount of revenues in 2010.

The council agreed to let each department head decide how to cut individual budgets for the upcoming year, but the offices will have to cut to the tune of 30 percent of approved amounts in most cases.

The budget for 2010 — which was unanimously approved — totals $13.8 million. The expected revenues presented by Dan Eggermann, hired by the county as a consultant, for 2010 are $12.9 million, as previously reported by The Evening News.

“[Services] are going to drop in every single office in this building,” said Councilwoman Barbara Hollis. “We’re talking about people’s jobs here, and it’s not pleasant.”

Hollis and fellow council members Jackie Dickman and Jack Coffman held a special committee meeting recently to decide on the cuts and suggested the baseline of 30 percent.

The exceptions for the reductions were the sheriff’s department only being cut 15.3 percent because the 2009 numbers did not include all salaries; the election budget actually nearly tripled because there was no election held in 2009, but there are county elections in 2010; the drainage budget was cut by 85.7 percent; commissioners budget was cut by 6.6 percent because the 2009 budget did not include employee benefits and medical package; the aviation budget was left the same because it is a grant match; the jail was cut 41.9 percent because the council is relying on Sheriff Danny Rodden to continue to generate revenues by housing state inmates and would receive some monies with the local option income tax that was approved.

Hollis said the county plans to use various funding methods to mitigate cuts and provide funding support. Included are economic development income taxes, rainy-day funds, applying for a public works loan to cover a portion of building authority funding and preparing for a tax sale in 2010.

“We would give you a bottom-line number on your budget as officeholders ... and you tell us how you want to spend that dollar amount,” Hollis said. “If it means that you’re going to have to lay-off, then you’re going to tell us what you have to do.

“We don’t want to micromanage within that dollar amount.”

To close, Hollis asked the officeholders in attendance for comments or questions, “other than how to operate, because I don’t have that answer,” she said.

The presentation left county office-heads — although they likely sensed what was coming — upset that the cuts had been so drastic.

Circuit Court Judge Dan Moore was left incensed and asked Council President David Abbott what he was thinking when the council decided to underfund the levy — which basically means the county didn’t ask for as much tax dollars as it could have captured.

“In 2008, a voluntary reduction of the levy, tell us what your thinking was when you did that,” Moore asked emphatically. “I think we all deserve to hear that. Everybody that comes to this building for service — and I’m talking about the people that pay taxes — they need to know that their services may be cut.

“There aren’t going to be as many people working here. Tell us what your thinking was when you made that decision?” he asked.

An argument between Abbott and Moore ensued, but Abbott has previously said in The Evening News that the underfunding of the levy was originally designed to save the taxpayers of the county money and admitted it may have been a mistake.

Moore was not the only one shocked and upset by the breadth of the cuts.

“I mean, 58 percent of my budget [in 2010, as compared to 2009] for the jail means half of the employees,” Rodden said.

He was somewhat supplicated when it was explained the revenue of the local income option tax passed earlier in the meeting will help to fund the jail’s operations.

The LOIT tax was introduced at Thursday’s meeting and subsequently approved Monday night. The tax, which takes effect Dec. 1, will encompass a property-tax relief provision as well as help to fund public safety costs.

The total rate for both sections of the tax will equal .50 percent and will be divided equally. For a person making $40,000 in gross income, it was estimated the additional tax will cost that person about $200 per year.

The money will be divided in the county as well as other local municipalities, with the county receiving a reported $1.5 million for the public-safety portion of the tax. A part of the revenues will not be realized in the first year of the tax, but it was a limited option left open to the council to try and recoup and build some revenue.

The meeting continued after The Evening News’ deadline. Look for follow-up coverage in a future edition.