Statewide Campaign for Legal Services Funding Responds to Governor’s Budget

While recognizing the dire financial straits the state is trying to
navigate, legal services advocates are reeling from the news that the
first budget submitted by Governor David Paterson fails to include any
funding for the general delivery of civil legal services to the poor. The Statewide Campaign for Legal Services Funding, of which Legal Services NYC is a member, responds.

 

STATEWIDE CAMPAIGN FOR LEGAL SERVICES FUNDING

For Immediate Release

For More Information: 

Anne Erickson, 518-462-6831 x 103

Andrew Scherer, 646-442-3606

Steven Banks, 212-577-3277

Deborah Wright, 212-343-0708

Christopher Lamb, 212-417-3766

 

Advocates Stunned that First Paterson Budget has No Funding for Civil Legal Services

While recognizing the dire financial straits the state is trying to
navigate, legal services advocates are reeling from the news that the
first budget submitted by Governor David Paterson fails to include any
funding for the general delivery of civil legal services to the poor. 

"We all know that in times of extreme economic distress, poor and low
income New Yorkers are hit hard and fast by the downturn.  Their need
for legal assistance will skyrocket as they face legally complicated
issues around securing unemployment benefits, guarding against
increased evictions and dealing with the loss of health benefits,” said
Anne Erickson, president and CEO of the Empire Justice Center, speaking
on behalf of the Legal Services Funding Alliance, a coalition of the 20
legal services programs outside of New York City.  “We know Gov.
Paterson is a strong advocate for access to justice and the delivery of
legal assistance to those most in need.  We urge him to restore at
least some of this critical funding,” she added.
    

The groups were stunned to see an Executive Budget that eliminates all
state funding for the general support of civil legal services.  Given
the Governor’s strong support for programs and services for the poor
and disabled, the legal services groups are extremely troubled by this
lack of funding for what is the last line of defense against
homelessness and complete destitution for those most in need.

In 2007-08 state funding for civil legal services totaled $15.85
million.  In 2008-09 it was cut by 55% to just over $8 million. Adding
to the pain is the continuing attempt to cut current year funding
through the deficit budget which calls for a 44% cut to any unspent
funding in the 2008-09 budget.

“We know these are tough times – in fact we see those who are hardest
hit by these tough times in our offices everyday across the state – but
we also know that legal services are extremely cost effective” said
Andrew Scherer, Executive Director and President of Legal Services NYC.

For example:

• 
  Client Benefits: In 2006 civil legal services generated $131 million in
  benefits for their clients, a return of 93 cents on the dollar.  The
  majority of the benefits flow almost immediately into state and local
  economies resulting in sales tax revenues and business income to state
  and local businesses.  
• 
  Maximizing Food Stamps: For every family of three who receives Food
  Stamps, as much as $5,556 in federal dollars is generated in
  nutritional support and subsequent expenditure in the local economy.
• 
  Avoiding the High Cost of Homelessness:  It is estimated that for each
  family in New York City that avoids eviction as a result of civil legal
  services representation, $31,215 in savings is generated.  Savings
  around the state will vary, but are still substantial. One study
  estimates a $4 savings for every $1 invested.  
• 
  Creating Efficiencies in the Courts:  Civil legal services program
  resolve an estimated two out of three client problems by providing
  advice or non litigation services. Increasing the availability of legal
  services will help cut down on the number of cases that wind up before
  a judge unnecessarily.

The elimination of all state funding for the general delivery of legal
services comes at a time when another core source of funding, the
Interest on Lawyer Account (IOLA) Fund is rapidly shrinking.  Driven by
interest rates and economic activity, the Fund’s income is in a
nosedive.  IOLA, along with state funding and federal funding are the
three core funding streams that support the delivery of legal services.

The groups noted that State funding, which reached a high of almost $16
million in 2007, has been available at various levels since 1993, has
become essential to the core operating funds that keep programs across
the state running.

IOLA Interest
Income as of November 30, 2008

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"The proposed State cuts for civil legal services will hurt New Yorkers
who need legal help in the midst of this severe economic downturn.  We
are already forced to turn away six out of every seven New Yorkers who
seek our help, and now with the new State cuts we'll have to turn away
more families and individuals who need legal aid to get unemployment
and disability benefits, flee from domestic violence, and prevent
evictions, foreclosures, and homelessness which is at record levels in
New York City," said Steven Banks, the Attorney-in-Chief the Legal Aid
Society in New York City. 

“As a policy decision, this is happening against a stark backdrop: as a
state, we are already failing to meet some 80% of the civil legal needs
of poor and low income families,” said Deborah Wright, President of UAW
Local 2325 – Association of Legal Aid Attorneys.

“In addition to the complete lack of funding, this constant
roller-coaster in state funding also points to the lack of any office
within the Executive branch that is responsible for civil legal
services,” said Christopher Lamb, Executive Director, MFY Legal
Services. “We urge the Governor and the Legislature to consider
creating an Office of Civil Justice or at least designating one of the
Governor’s policy Secretaries to take on this responsibility,” he said.

The groups called on the Governor to restore funding for civil legal services during the 21-day amendment period.

###