ILNews

ILS budget likely to increase

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Thanks to a $40 million increase in funding for Legal Services Corporations signed by President Barack Obama Wednesday, an official at Indiana Legal Services Inc. estimates that the only Indiana-based organization that receives funding from LSC will receive up to an additional $300,000 to $350,000 in funds for the organization's 2009 fiscal year, which runs Jan. 1 to Dec. 31.

The $40 million, which brings the national total from $350 million to $390 million, represents an approximately 11 percent increase over 2008 LSC funds. However, $365.8 million of the $390 million is what the LSC will distribute to the 137 LSC-funded legal aid programs in the U.S., or a 9 percent increase for individual programs' funding.

Of the ILS's 2008 budget, approximately 65 percent, or $5.1 million, was from LSC, according to Norman Metzger, executive director of ILS. The organization also receives donations from United Way chapters around the state, foundations, and private donors.

He said in addition to helping the LSC-funded programs, the $40 million in extra funding will also go toward funding technology advancements, loan repayment assistance, LSC's national headquarters, and LSC's oversight of the programs that receive grants.

The amount ILS will receive for 2009 based on this increase is "just a guess," Metzger said, but is based on a formula that uses the percentage of Indiana residents who live below the poverty line as of the latest census, taken in 2000. The percent Indiana receives is not due to change until 2010 census numbers are available.

Metzger said the ILS will know for sure April 1 when they receive their direct deposit from LSC, and he also expects an e-mail or other notice from the LSC in the next few days explaining how the increase will affect ILS.

A more in-depth article about the increase will be in a future issue of Indiana Lawyer.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT