Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Raymond F. Bladine
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Kristina C. Gomez
After reviewing current legal costs, it is now clear that the FY 17 appropriation of $1,115,300
will be insufficient to cover Leach v. AIRC legal costs, operational costs, and any additional costs
that might be generated by the Harris v. AIRC case.
Expenditures for the Leach case have not progressed as rapidly as was estimated in preparing the
FY 16 budget. Therefore, FY 17 costs will be significantly higher. To date, we have spent
$1,374,184 on Leach, of this amount, $500,000 has been spent so far this fiscal year. Based on
the rate of current expenditures an additional cost of $473,000 is estimated to be spent during the
remaining part of the fiscal year. We are still in the discovery phase of the case.
We will seek permission from Legislative leadership and the Governors Office to carry over
unspent funds to the next fiscal year. This would avoid requiring a supplemental appropriation
when the Legislature is not in session. Alternatively, a request to the court to delay trial
activities because of a lack of an appropriation might be required. Carrying over the unspent
funds seems like the easiest solution.
The following table summarizes appropriations for Commission activity, actual expenditures to
date, and potential estimated remaining balances.
Appropriation Year
FY 2014
$1,462,701
(supplemental appro. only)
FY 2015
$1,115,300
FY 2016
$1,115,300
Total Estimated Carryover
Actuals
$ 745,153
$ 953,387
$ 684,370
If the Commission is allowed to carry over estimated appropriation balances of about $879,461
the total appropriation available at the start of FY 17 would be $1.9 million. The $1.9 million is
likely to provide sufficient resources for legal and operating costs in FY 17. For the current fiscal
year the Commissions appropriation is $2,276,455.
(602) 542-5221
WWW.AZREDISTRICTING.ORG
Costs involved in Harris are currently not programed in our expenditure estimates for FY 17, due
to a lack of information from the U.S. Supreme Court. Thus, additional funding could be needed
depending on the court decision.
As we all know, we want to avoid the problem of insufficient funds for the Commission to carry
out its constitutional responsibilities. A supplemental appropriation request in the middle of a
trial, and/or when the Legislature is out of session is clearly not desirable.
Attached is Exhibit 3 a spreadsheet, which shows in detail all expenditures from year to date.
Kristina and I will begin requesting meetings with Legislative leadership and the Governors
Office to alert them to this financing problem, and seek their help in solving it.
We will of course keep you informed as our activity progresses. If you have any questions or
comments please let us know.
Attachments: Exhibit 3
Cc:
Lorenzo Romero
Michael Williams
Wendy Baldo
Greg Jernigan
Mike Liburdi
Robert Ellman
Clark Partridge
Mike McGee
Susie Myers