State Budget Director Outlines New Process For Developing 2011-13 Spending Plan

CARSON CITY – State budget Director Andrew Clinger today sent a memo to all agencies saying the process of building the new two-year Nevada budget will be substantially different from past practice.

Given the fiscal crisis faced by the state over the past three years, Nevada can no longer craft a budget by taking the previous year’s expenditures, adjust for one-time expenditures and add inflation and caseload growth, he said.

“We must create a budget process that looks first at the outcomes citizens expect,” Clinger said. “Some of the questions this new budget building approach needs to answer are: What is the proper role of state government? What services must we provide? What is the most efficient way to provide those services? And, what is the best way to pay for them?”

Clinger said the administration has formed the Priorities of Government Working Group to help answer these questions by reviewing and prioritizing all state services. The first step will be to create an inventory of all state services and the outcomes they produce.

As part of this process, agencies will be required to provide mission statements and a list of activities the agency engages in. Also required will be the populations served, the cost of the activity, how the activity is currently funded and outcome and output measures related to the activity.

“The answers to these questions along with other criteria identified by the working group will help us begin to prioritize where to use our limited state resources and engage in activities that produce the most valuable outcomes for our citizens,” Clinger said in the memo.

Agencies are required to submit their preliminary budgets for the 2011-2013 biennium to the Department of Administration by Sept. 1.

  • Leta Collord

    I am pleased to see State budget Director Andrew Clinger is recommending this change in the way Nevada formulates its working budget. I was alarmed to learn that the traditional approach had been to just bump all expenditures a specified percent each legislative session. This thoughtful system that engages citizens in contemplating the programs, their effectiveness and outcomes, and whether they serve our needs, and yes, can we afford each of them.

  • Aaron Friedman

    Hats off to Andrew Clinger. I’m glad to see a new process that does away with the incremental growth every 2 years. Hopefully a Republican majority in the state houses will put a stop to this runaway spending.

  • Allec Meyonshaff

    I like the idea. The area I see having a problem will be funding for projects that are NOT bipartisan.

    There is going to be a lot of starting and stopping for programs that go against one political platform or the other, as the legislative body leverages the dominance they may hold at that time.

    There isn’t a program out there that one side of the other doesn’t want to kill because they don’t se its relevance.

  • Morgan Freeman

    And that’s how it went for Andy – that was his routine. I do believe those first two years were the worst for him, and I also believe that if things had gone on that way, this place would have got the best of him.
    -ShawShank Redemption

  • Kate

    Who are the four department heads that make up the Priorities of Government Working Group along with Andrew Clinger, Stacy Woodbury and Lynn Hetrick? I have been unable to find that information anywhere. Thanks.

  • Anonymous

    What I would like to know is why agencies that are not funded through the General Fund are included in the Furloughs and pay cut considerations. My department is federally funded and we receive our budget dollars to run our program out of a grant. We offer no salary savings to the General Fund whatsoever. What is happening is that our disposable income is being decreased markedly. That cuts off dollars that we spend in our local communities. So where is the benefit to our state?