Nevada can manage small budgets

Finally, some good news about Nevada.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities recently published a report ranking the states in terms of their usage of the most effective fiscal tools to manage their money and make course corrections as needed. Nevada scored 7.0 on its use of 10 good tools for budget planning and fiscal responsibility, ranking sixth in the nation, an unusually good score for the Silver State.

The report focused on three areas of quality fiscal planning. The first area is a “map of the future,” featuring multi-year forecasting, fiscal notes with multi-year projections, and baselines for current services. The second area is called “credible projections,” focusing on independent revenue forecasting, a legislative fiscal office, and pension oversight. Finally, “staying on course” encourages well-designed rainy day funds, oversight of tax expenditures, pension funding and debt-level reviews and regular status reports on the budget.

The excellent score is not really such a surprise given the conservative fiscal policies supported by leaders of both parties over the years ranging back to Assemblymember Jan Evans, Sen. Bill Raggio and Speaker Barbara Buckley. All supported the implementation of a rainy day fund, independent revenue forecasting and a strong legislative fiscal division.

But the top 10 ranking in financial management begs the question of why there are so many current efforts to find additional revenue for basic governmental services. If we manage our resources so well, why are we continually in crisis? And why are we so intent on stealing money from each other?

In Reno, we have the school board seriously considering the idea of a citizen’s initiative to reallocate—i.e., steal—existing revenues from Washoe County’s general fund and from the flood control budget to fix crumbling schools. This effort is a result of the predictable demise of AB 46, a cynical measure passed by the 2013 Legislature asking local elected officials to impose taxes the Legislature preferred not to vote on.

Of course the idea of one governmental entity taking money from another without regard to the consequences or propriety of the action was pioneered by the Legislature when it raided local government funds to the tune of millions of dollars during the recession. The Nevada Supreme Court finally put a brake on the practice in 2011, forcing Gov. Sandoval to approve extending the “sunset” taxes instead.

Recently we’ve also heard the recycled idea of a state lottery in response to student outrage over yet another tuition increase at UNR. Higher education officials suggested the students demand a state lottery for education, forgetting to mention how many times the casino industry has killed lottery bills, seeing it as competition for limited gaming dollars.

Last week, business leaders had another idea for boosting the per-pupil spending on K-12 education in Southern Nevada. “Fix” the funding formula so pupils in Northern Nevada get less while their Southern Nevada counterparts get more.

The Education Initiative, (TEI), promoting a new broad-based business tax on corporations with revenue of more than a million dollars a year will be on the ballot in November, despite fierce opposition from businesses who are used to paying next to nothing in state taxes in Nevada although they pay corporate taxes ranging from 5 percent to 8.84 percent in every surrounding state. These big business leaders are never shy about requesting more subsidies or tax credits for themselves, but are quick to predict the state’s economy will self-destruct should the people demand they contribute more to the basic infrastructure any state needs to function well.

Yes, Nevada can be proud of its top 10 showing in fiscal management. But in terms of providing the support needed for education, an adequate social safety net, environmental protections, and other basic services, we unfortunately get what we pay for.