Opinion - northwest_view

POSTED: Thursday, Sep. 24, 2009

State failing in effort to streamline government

One of the great disappointments of the 2009 legislative session was the failure of Gov. Chris Gregoire and state lawmakers to make substantive changes in state government operations.

Early in the session, Gregoire said the state's $9 billion budget shortfall meant state government was going to have to be transformed -- to be leaner and more cost effective. "State government needs to rethink the way we deliver programs and services throughout the state, and we are doing just that," Gregoire promised. "We have evaluated hundreds of ideas from citizens, state employees, and business and government leaders to develop both short- and long-term changes. ... There is much work ahead. ... This is not about short-term thinking - it is about changing the way we do business for the long term."

Gregoire said her goals were to:

- Reduce the size of government.

- Deliver 21st century customer service.

- Streamline state agencies and operations to maximize the effect of limited dollars.

The governor acknowledged that reform efforts were going to gore some "sacred cows" -- government programs that are pet projects of individual legislators or die-hard supporters.

The Legislature did not live up to the governor's rhetoric. By the time lawmakers left town, the government reform effort was pretty much reduced to the elimination of 18 of the state's 470 boards and commissions.

What a disappointment. Eliminating 18 advisory boards is hardly government reform.

Gregoire held out hope for more substantive changes. She said, "We have three agencies managing natural resources, each with its own scientist standing in the same Washington stream. We need to reform, and we will."

The state's 13 primary natural resource agencies employ 6,253 workers with two-year budgets totaling more than $1.5 billion and an additional $1.6 billion in construction costs.

So how's that promised reform in the natural resources arena going?

Recently, the governor's Natural Resources sub-Cabinet filed its report with the governor's budget office.

Anyone who was looking for a solid blueprint to agency consolidation or a clear road map on how to deliver services in a cost-effective manner will be sorely disappointed. Rather than develop a specific strategy to reconfigure the state's multiple natural resource and environmental agencies, the sub-Cabinet report is little more than a laundry list of "ideas" to potentially improve services and reduce costs.

Rather than make hard decisions and develop a concrete plan, the 16 members of the sub-Cabinet participants punted.

Take, for example, their "ideas" on structural changes in the natural resources arena. The subCabinet looked at what other states are doing and said Washington could shift to a two-agency model or a three-agency model or a four-agency model or a five-agency model. They didn't recommend one idea over another, didn't assign costs (beyond high, medium and low) to each idea or rank them in terms of preference. They did offer pros and cons for each plan but said it was impossible to say how much tax money could be saved.

Apparently the panelists saw their task as simply compiling ideas into a 166-page document and letting someone else do the deep analysis and make the tough decisions.

In fact, the participants made it clear that they weren't making any "recommendations," just putting ideas out there for public consumption and comment.

How useful is that? Isn't that just a tiny step on the long, long road to substantive government reform?

The report to the governor's budget office talks about creating a unified vision for natural resource agencies, of realigning regional boundaries and consolidating regional offices, fostering collaboration and sharing services. The steps are even outlined.

But anyone hoping for a substantive report with solid recommendations backed up with financial comparisons will be terribly disappointed by the work of the subcabinet and its list of ideas.

The governor and her department directors had an opportunity to show the public what true government reform looks like. Instead they punted the hard decisions down the line, much like the Legislature eliminating just 18 of the state's 470 advisory boards.

This editorial reflects the opinion of the editorial board of The Olympian newspaper in Olympia