Rivrguy posted an interesting observation from a former Senator:

"...the agency used the Commission as a shield for not only political accountability but by controlling the information to the Commission prevented rational change."

My comments:

1. Not sure that the agency "used" the Commission as a shield from political accountability. I would prefer to view this as the Commission being the buffer between politicos and the agency. In short, probably what we wanted when we voted on Initiative 45 to create the Commission.

2. As to preventing "rationale" change I am always concerned when words like "rationale" and "reasonable" are used as they so often are commentator specific. In other words, an opinion.....
However, I do agree that various individuals within the agency do, in fact, control processes and information toward their own or agency agendas (if not the biologist then his boss or his boss's boss). It is this manipulation that we have the opportunity to challenge during the public process and before the Commission. Absent that public process/Commission review will the agency stop slanting their data? I doubt it!