$150 million less in revenue=34% cut for Nevada??
The real numbers behind the state's budget shortfall
Earlier this summer, reports and news articles from across Nevada told us that the state had already "cut to the bone" and that nothing more could be cut. More cuts would be devastating and would roll back our services to Stone Age levels.
Back then, the state was looking at 14 percent cuts. But now that State Controller Kim Wallin's "Report to the Citizens" has come out, there's some real cause for head-scratching.
In Fiscal Year 2007, Nevada took in $7.39 billion in revenue, according to Wallin's report. In Fiscal Year 2008 (the fiscal year that ended in June 2008) revenue was $7.26 billion—a "devastating" 1.77 percent drop.
The general fund—which is like a bank account from which the state withdraws revenue—is estimated to collect only 2 percent less for this biennium (FY 2007-2009) than it appropriated (spent) in the last biennium (FY 2005-2007)—and that is after adjusting for inflation.
Allegedly, state government is facing "34 percent" cuts—although no one in the government has yet dared, for the last month, to explain how they get to that figure, despite multiple requests from NPRI. Clearly, however, general fund revenues are nowhere near any such plunge.
In fact, it looks as though the general fund for the next biennium will collect just $150 million less than in the current biennium—about a 2.7 percent decrease.
Times must be really tough for Nevada's bureaucrats, who—courtesy of financially drunken lawmakers—were expecting millions more in their budgets but now have to deal with (gasp) a little over 2 percent less than they spent last time around!
