politics:

Gibbons skirts legislators in action to oversee stimulus

Friday, Aug. 14, 2009 | 11:56 a.m.

Gov. Jim Gibbons

Power Struggle

Governor balks at shift of stimulus authority (8-12-2009)
Gibbons ready to tear at legislative patch (8-9-2009)
Legislature reins in Gibbons; Democrats cite incompetence (8-5-2009)
Committee vote delays $10M in stimulus money (8-3-2009)
Democrats reject Gibbons' 'stimulus czar' proposal (8-3-2009)
State board OKs $509,000 request for stimulus ‘czar’ staff (7-28-2009)

More stories about politics

Gov. Jim Gibbons issued an executive order on Friday to create a director in his office to oversee $2.2 billion in stimulus money, circumventing earlier legislative action and raising legal questions about his order.

Gibbons said he would not abdicate the job that Nevadans elected him to do, and said that the reporting process the Legislature set up -- to have a position in the controller's office report the money -- was unwieldy.

He said the Interim Finance Committee set up a "convoluted reporting process. We need someone to expand and implement our use of American Recovery and Relief Act funds."

The $120,000-a-year position and $56,000-a-year administrative assistant, as well as $80,000 in benefits and other expenses, would be paid for through American Recovery and Relief Act money. The administrative costs, allowed under the stimulus, still require federal approval, which could take six weeks, according to Gibbons' staff.

Changes to the budget, as well as accepting federal grant money, has been the purview of the Legislature. When the part-time Legislature is not in session, that job falls to the Interim Finance Committee, which is made up of legislators.

The IFC approval has been required to accept federal grants in excess of $50,000 or any federal grant that employs additional staff.

But Gibbons said the stimulus grants him the authority over the $2.2 billion the state is set to receive.

"The federal law supersedes state law," Gibbons said during a press conference Monday. (It was a surprising statement from Gibbons, who in his time in Congress and nearly two years in the governor's mansion had advocated for state's rights.)

The Interim Finance Committee earlier this month rejected Gibbons' plan to create a stimulus director in his office. Instead, they lowered the salary and created what was more an accounting position under Controller Kim Wallin, a Democrat. That position would help state agencies fulfill reporting requirements.

Gibbons' staff instructed department heads not to work with Wallin on the stimulus.

Gibbons questioned the legality of the IFC's action as well as the constitutionality of the office. But he said right now, he's not going to file a lawsuit.

Gibbons invited the Legislature to file a lawsuit against his action.

"If they want to challenge this, they want to go to court, they want to waste taxpayer money and time challenging this, so be it. Let them sue me," he said. "This is the way the state of Nevada is going to move forward with the ARRA funds."

Neither Gibbons nor his staff would say whether they have received a legal opinion telling him the executive order is legal.

"We have the Constitution standing behind us," Gibbons said. "That's the legal authority."

Robin Reedy, Gibbons' chief of staff, said they had provided the attorney general's office a "courtesy call" because of the possibility. "There are many, many lawyers in the world, and we work with many people," she said. She pointed to the deputy chiefs of staff, one of whom is a former legislator and one is a former executive director of the Nevada Commission on Ethics. "We're confident in this executive order."

But his executive order is unlikely to end the tug-of-war between Gibbons and the Democrat-controlled Legislature.

Andrew Clinger, Gibbons' budget director, said he would submit the change to the budget to Controlle Wallin. He said a proposal to approve the administrative costs will be submitted to the federal government in a week, and the governor's office has been told those plans are being processed in 60 days.

Gibbons at first denied that they would change budget accounts, known as work programs.

"We didn't say we would change a work program," he said when asked if he didn't need the authority. "I don't think you even heard that word."

Earlier in the press conference, Reedy said they would be changing work programs through the normal budgetary process.

Reedy also said state would move forward without legislators' approval to spend $10.5 million in stimulus money weatherizing homes. The Interim Finance Committee had rejected the state Housing Division's plan, delaying the expenditure of that money.

Wallin was travelling and unavailable for comment immediately. Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-Las Vegas, did not return a call for comment.

Discussion: 12 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy.

By bremskraft

Aug. 14, 2009

12:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hhhhhhhaaaaaaaahahaha... Fiscal conservative my ass... Small government my ass... "Furloughs" my ass... This man cares only about power and sex, sometimes even confusing the two.
By Katie

Aug. 14, 2009

12:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

The $120,000-a-year position and $56,000-a-year administrative assistant, as well as $80,000 in benefits and other expenses, would be paid for through American Recovery and Relief Act money
*******

They couldn't hire someone from within for this admin asst???? And at $56,000 a year no less???? Heck, usually admin asst jobs with the State do NOT pay that much!! They are lucky to even break the $40K mark!! Of course, the job is basically temporary.....let see if they take THEIR furlough days.
By LasVegasRocks

Aug. 14, 2009

12:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Good for Gibbons . . . now when it gets screwed up (and it will be screwed up within weeks with the Love Gov. Jim Gibbons overseeing it) and the law suits begin to mount, he'll have no one to blame but himself.

And, I wonder, how much money of the $120,000 or $56,000 salaries will find its way back to the Gibbons re-election campaign coffers?
By CarsonNewshound

Aug. 14, 2009

2:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

It seems that Nevada has been forced to park itself in front of a very old sewer plant...
By UNLVStud

Aug. 14, 2009

2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

The Luv Guv strikes again. What ever happened to that recall? We could've saved ourselves a lot of hurt if he wasn't in office. 2010 can't come soon enough.
By JBond

Aug. 14, 2009

2:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Gibbons Mantra:

IT'S MY MONEY AND I WANT IT NOW.
By OpenRange

Aug. 14, 2009

2:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hollywood needs to create a new show for late prime-time.

Call it "Desperate Governors".
By geoholman

Aug. 14, 2009

2:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Let's rearrange the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.
By sexy2utoooo

Aug. 14, 2009

6:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Maybe now he can explain to the Feds why he has allowed one of his underdogs to hire a private contractor to launder money through one of his smaller programs when the funds are unverifiable and how the money has been shuffled through the program with his knowledge, for years, hell he even pays this guy barry siskind 3 times his salary a month, then crippled the programs ability to pay benefits. The evidence was submitted and as usual, Governor chrome dome, had the whistleblower's contract with the state canceled and denied the person access to a public hearing, where the great old Masto was present. These people are theives! Steal as much as you can gibbons, we have a jail cell waiting for you!
By SgtRock

Aug. 14, 2009

7 p.m.

Suggest removal

Interim Finance Committee (IFC) has no constitutional powers and therefore their votes do not carry the weight of law.

There are in a catch-22. If they challenge the Governor then most likely the courts will rule that the IFC has no constitutional basis.

Only by votes of the full legislature can the legislative branch can take actions that are enforceable.

The Nevada Constitution does not emplower an oligarchy of the legislative branch to hold power over the governor and much less than the state as a hold.

Not only is that unconstitutional but it is anti-democratic.

Many Nevadans are not being represented because many duly elected representatives do not get to vote in IFC sessions.

That would be unequal representation.
By James_Kresnik

Aug. 16, 2009

8:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

SgtRock,

Really now, if the IFC is wholly unconstitutional, then why does it exist at all? I suspect this will be a matter of contention - and not your pontification - until the courts sort it out - or the constitution provisions a full-time legislature, like practically every other state with a real economy.

"Only by votes of the full legislature can the legislative branch can take actions that are enforceable."

So the Governor has carte blance access to all taxpayer funds until the full legislative meeting? I'm having a lot of trouble taking your word on it as it has the ring of a dictatorship.

"Not only is that unconstitutional but it is anti-democratic."
Less democratic than a single person running amok with no adult (giggle) supervision? I think I'll pick courts to sort this out and not SgtRock.

"Many Nevadans are not being represented because many duly elected representatives do not get to vote in IFC sessions."

This I can't argue with. The IFC a dumb system put in place for presumably good reasons and needs to be trashed if we're going to have a fully functioning government in the future.

The most I can say is let both sides take it to court, hope we get a solid ruling one way or another and get the Constitution changed to a system that is actually sane.
By Vegasjeff

Aug. 20, 2009

6:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

For a man that complained to the media that the state legislature hadn't considered potential exemptions when they created the furlough bill and then told all of his executive directors that he'd fire them if they asked for those same exemptions, this is no surprise. For a man that complained that the legislature only provided a 4.8 percent pay cut even though he cut the payroll portion of the state budget by 6% and told his directors to figure it out by themselves, this is no surprise. The governor may have federal authority to do as he pleases with stimulus funds but the state of Nevada has its own constitution and Governor Gibbons is wiping his feet on it. Be that as it may, he can take the money and give it out like Halloween candy to his executive directors but they are bound by law not to spend a penny more than their legislatively approved budget less they face criminal charges so go right ahead and we'll just see how many of your directors end up behind bars when you ignore our voices. The legislature is our voice and by walking all over them you are walking all over us and I know that during the next election your yes-man media support can't vote for you nearly enough to win again. Mr. Gibbons, I recommend you work with our elected representatives otherwise you're not going to get elected to dog catcher.