As soon as First Things First survived the Legislature’s bid to dismantle the agency and take its money, the program had a surprising message for its would-be executioners: We’re willing to help.

The Early Childhood Development and Health Board Fund, as the organization is formally known, said it is open to discussions with lawmakers about how it can help alleviate the $850 million budget deficit the state faces.

That assistance could include a loan to the state, said board Chairman Steve Lynn, as well as other, less drastic possibilities. But First Things First still believes a loan would require voter approval, though some contend the voters could be sidestepped if the money were used for children’s services.

Lynn’s olive branch came shortly after the failure of Proposition 302, which would have dismantled the early childhood development program and swept the money into the state’s general fund. The Legislature referred the measure to the ballot in March and voters soundly rejected it Nov. 2.

In his election night statement, Lynn said the program’s board was committed to reopening negotiations with the Legislature and governor to “maximize resources” during the ongoing budget crisis, though he said First Things First has not been contacted by anyone in the Legislature.

Those negotiations could include a loan that would help the state fill the $325 million hole that Prop. 302 left in the budget, Lynn told the ~Arizona Capitol Times~. He said he still stands by the board’s longtime stance that the board would need voter approval to loan the state money, but he’s not completely certain and is willing to explore the issue.

Lynn said First Things First understands the problems facing the state and has an interest in helping it navigate the crisis. But if help is coming, it will clearly be on the program’s terms.

“We cannot enter into an agreement that is anything less than ironclad in terms of (the state) paying back whatever it is we are able to loan,” Lynn said. “I don’t know exactly what that may require, but we will have to insist that we have a very firm understanding of those issues before we agree to use the money in any way other than the way the voters have told us they want it used.”

Gov. Jan Brewer included a First Things First loan in her budget proposal in January, and spokesman Paul Senseman said the governor still believes that the program could loan the state money without voter approval.

Others, however, are skeptical.

“I don’t even know if the loan’s legal or not,” said Rep. Andy Tobin, who was recently elected House majority leader. “Everything’s on the table, so let’s have a look at it. But I’m not so sure that we’re allowed to do that.”

Voters created First Things First in 2006 to provide developmental services to children 5 years old or younger. Under the Voter Protection Act, any changes the Legislature makes must further the voters’ intent.

Attorney Mike Liburdi, of the firm Perkins Coie Brown & Bain, said there may be loophole. If lawmakers use a loan to fund education, health care or social services used by children 5 and under, they could make a strong case that they are furthering the intent of the voters. Many lawmakers supported Prop. 302 on the grounds that its failure would lead to deeper cuts in those areas.

And the Legislature might be able to sidestep the Voter Protection Act’s requirement that it pass any changes to voter-approved programs with a three-fourths majority if it could show that the loan wasn’t being used to defund the program, Liburdi said.

“There are ways around it, like if the Legislature wants to get creative and say, ‘OK, loan us the money for this and we’ll use the money for these dedicated projects that meet … the program guidelines,’” Liburdi said.

Any move by the Legislature to borrow money from First Things First could be met by a court challenge. The Arizona Supreme Court blocked the Legislature’s attempt to sweep the program’s money in 2009, and even if First Things First and the Legislature agreed to a loan, others may try to stop them.

Tim Hogan, an attorney with the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, said his organization would scrutinize any loan agreement to ensure that was constitutional.

“We won’t be the only ones,” he said.

The legality of a loan is a major sticking point, but there are others as well.

The state has borrowed more than $2 billion over the past four years, and some, such as Rep. John Kavanagh, are opposed to putting the state further in debt. Kavanagh said he would rather see First Things First use its money to pay for child-oriented services that the state may be forced to cut back on, such as Child Protective Services.

Kavanagh, who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, said he would support holding a special election in 2011 for that purpose, but only if it involved a substantial amount of money.

“We’re not really in a position to take on more general fund debt. So if they’re offering a loan, they’re not really going to be helping us,” said Kavanagh, a Fountain Hills Republican.

Lynn said First Things First is not legally allowed to supplant state funding. However, he said the program could find other ways to ease the state’s burden, such as using First Things First services to qualify for the state’s portion of programs with federal matching funds.

Even if First Things First is willing to loan money to the state, some Republican lawmakers who pushed the issue nearly a year ago remain skeptical about a possible loan, now that the threat it faced before the election is gone.

Sen. Steve Pierce, the Senate majority whip, said he doubts that First Things First would be willing to loan the state money, as lawmakers and the governor asked it to do nearly a year ago.

“We asked them and they just laughed at us,” said Pierce, a Republican from Prescott.

Lynn said First Things First agreed to put a proposition on the ballot that would have sought voter approval for a loan. The Legislature, he said, rejected that idea and put the outright dismantling of the program on the ballot instead.

The Legislature budgeted $325 million from the proposed sweep of First Things First. But Lynn said he believes there is less than $300 million in the program’s coffers, and any loan would have to leave First Things First with enough money to continue its operations.

Voters also rejected Proposition 301, which would have swept the Land Conservation Fund designed to contain urban sprawl. The Legislature had expected to reap about $469 million from the two ballot measures.