Connie Brown deals with a lot of upset, confused and, sometimes, angry people.
As a clerk in the Clark County Facilitator’s Office, she provides people with information on how to navigate common legal issues in family court, such as child support, custody and parentage, among other issues. The service costs $20, and Brown gives people the correct forms and can check to make sure they’re complete.
Brown said that by the time she’s done, people are hopefully headed in the right direction and are less upset and confused.
But the facilitator’s office faces an uncertain future as Clark County Manager Shawn Henessee assembles a budget for 2019 that’s expected to include spending reductions. The facilitator’s office could be cut, and Barbara Melton, a Democrat, has made it an issue in her bid to unseat Clark County Clerk Scott Weber, a Republican, in the November election.
“I just know that getting rid of the facilitator’s office would not help family law. It would not help domestic court,” said Melton, who works as a legal secretary in the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.
Weber said that he doesn’t want to cut the office but is faced with difficult choices and needs to preserve the core of his office that’s responsible for fulfilling state mandates.
“What it comes back to is if they ask us to cut even deeper, I really can’t go any deeper than where I’m at,” he said.
Cuts and closures
Under Clark County’s budgeting system, county departments and offices submit requests for funding or possible reductions. After considering requests and reductions, the county manager submits a budget to the county council, which can make amendments before approving it.
Weber has submitted a cut that would eliminate the facilitator’s office.
In June, Melton sent out a press release stating that the facilitator’s office would close by the end of the year. It further stated that as a result of one position being cut and another being moved, the office would be “effectively shuttered” by June 25. The office hasn’t been shuttered, however. Melton didn’t have an answer for the discrepancy.
Weber responded that Melton had “jumped the gun and made an inaccurate statement.”
But emails obtained through a public records request show that Melton wasn’t the only member of county staff under the impression that the facilitator’s office would be closed at the end of the year.
On June 12, Katina Lackey, an associate human resources representative, emailed Maureen Colvin, executive secretary-treasurer of Office and Professional Employees International Union Local 11, stating that due to budget cuts, the facilitator’s office, which is not a state-mandated service, “will be eliminated by the end of the year.”
Emails show the two discussing options for staff who would be affected. On June 26, Colvin wrote to Lackey seeking confirmation that the office would be closed. Lackey responded with, “That is correct.”
When asked about the emails, Weber maintained that no firm decision about the future of the facilitator’s office has been made. He said he wasn’t privy to the emails between the two and that the county works with unions to ensure smooth transitions for employees whose positions are eliminated or changed.
Lackey didn’t respond to a request for comment. Colvin said that she had been operating under the assumption that the facilitator’s office would be closed.
“I think that it seems odd that you would say, ‘due to budget cuts that this is going forward,’ but now it’s a ‘maybe,’ ” Colvin said.
No substitute
Melton said she wasn’t sure what she would cut instead of the facilitator’s office if she was clerk. But she said that she’s heard from multiple people in and outside of the court system about the importance of the office and that cutting it would significantly affect the court’s operations.
“It would put those citizens into a cycle of having to come back to court over and over,” she said. “It would back court up because these same people would have to come back with the same issues.”
The county manager’s budget hasn’t been released yet, and Clark County Budget Director Emily Zwetzig said possible cuts haven’t been finalized. But two court officials have also weighed in on the importance of the facilitator’s office.
On Aug. 9, Presiding Superior Court Judge Scott A. Collier and Superior Court Administrator Jeff Amram wrote to Zwetzig in support of the facilitator’s office. They wrote that it keeps the court’s calendar moving and prevents staff from being overwhelmed with questions they’re untrained to answer. They also wrote that it’s popular with the public, with 4,000 to 5,000 people visiting the facilitator’s office in 2017.
They also questioned the savings that would be generated by the cut proposed by Weber. According to their letter, the $20 fee people pay to access the service generated approximately $65,000 in 2017. The cut proposed by Weber would save about $81,000, for a savings of less than $20,000.
Weber questioned the numbers Collier and Amram used in their letter and said that the facilitator’s office has a budget of $389,000. He also suggested that the facilitator’s office be placed in the court’s budget.
As clerk, Weber has sought to generate savings and efficiency by moving paper files to digital formats. He pointed to the potential of a state initiative to automate the process for filling out court forms. He said that filling out court paperwork could be like using tax software that asks its user a series of questions and assembles the needed document.
Laurie Garber, an attorney with the Northwest Justice Project, a statewide nonprofit law firm, is managing the project. She said the Legislature appropriated funding for the two-year project earlier this year to aid people, who can’t afford a lawyer, in family court.
“I would not consider it a substitute (for the facilitator’s office),” Garber said. “I see them as complementary.”
She said that people with disabilities or language barriers will still need help. She also said that the family law system is complicated, and people will still need help navigating procedures, calendars and dockets.
The service can’t be completely automated, Weber said, and there needs to be some sort of human interaction. But he added that, ultimately, the decision over the facilitator’s office is out of his hands.
“We’re kind of at the mercy of where the (county) councilors are at,” he said.
