http://www.governor.wa.gov/priorities/budget/consolidate_services.pdf

The commission is missing from the lineup on page 3

Back in 2009 Jacobsen mentioned that the commission costs a total of 500,000 dollars. I dont know if that is per year or every two years.

Between hunting and fishing license, that amounts to 50 cents per license.
We can easily cover the cost of the commission.
Any other excuse to dump the commission is just a power grab.

Find out if agency staff is charged off to an account for the commission. Somebody is charged for that time even though it is internal.

The Commission does have a couple designated staff in WDFW and they have an assigned AG.

Merge: ????????? If this merge is anything like the merge of W.Game Dept. and Fisheries Department.........Steelhead will again be the "big lossers"......bottom line.....if it doesn't directly benefit the commercial industry, tribe and non-tribal, then monies seen to spend in those areas.....those areas, for the most part, involve salmon.

My take on this move, is more $$$$$$$ percentage wise, will be spent of salmon enhancement, than on steelhead enhancement. This will be a continued loss to Sportsmen that enjoy the joys of fishing and catching steelhead.

The tribes, co-managers, need buy into the declining runs of steelhead in this State, and cut back the netting times to something, way less, than 5 days a week.

http://www.ofm.wa.gov/budget11/recsum/477.pdf

This is a nine page break down of the mini changes plus the money that is proposed. Some make sense and others do not. Others still make me want to fire the folks who thought they were a good idea worthy of a budget expense in the first place. Make your own opinions.

I think the big picture here is that, since they believe merging two three or four agencies together will save money, I believe you have to disect the mission and nature of the work to find out what makes them compatible and others not compatible.

Noone would pair WDFW with the Dept of Transportation, but we all know what culverts do under the roads. 20/20 hindsight would have put a lot more WDFW in the zoning regulations for homes and business over the last century, but that is sort of the point, there are many parallel functions and operations and there are those that are on a head on collision course. Dept of energy and WDFW come to mind.

Our CCA Lobbyist Scott Sigmund will be our guest speaker at tonights meeting, if you wish to see how things really are, feel free to attend, meeting is open to all. Meeting notice posted on another thread.

http://www.tvw.org/media/mediaplayer.cfm...3441&bhcp=1

At 48:15 Climate Policy ends and Natural res agency reforms begins.

48:15 to 124:00 lots of comments and people, back and forth

124: to 132 is Todd Hass comments regarding WDFW budget reductions and oil spill readiness

I attended today's Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. They are about as excited about the idea of a merger as you guys are... that is to say, not at all. Many of you raised very valid concerns that are shared by Parks.

There are no illusions that merging would save any real money, or that it would increase funding to Parks in any way. They're just as concerned about WDFW trying to take their funds as you are about the reverse

They will be implementing a day use fee for State Parks beginning in July. $5/car, or $10 (proposed for now, could change) for an annual pass for WA residents, and you can get one when you renew your license tabs (this will replace the current donation program). More for out of staters, maybe $25.

They are still working out lots of details, those numbers are not finalized, but I would be very surprised to see any changes to the concept.

Someone mentioned Flaming Geyser earlier in the thread? That park needs millions of dollars to completely overhaul its sewage, water, and other infrastructre needs. The park was always scheduled to close, it's just that now there is no funding to do the repairs, putting a reopen date indefinitely down the road.


Please write to the governor and your elected officials to let them know how you feel about this proposed merger. They are moving very quickly on everything and your voice needs to be heard!

I am feeling just as poopy as sister Marsha right now, but we can't go there. Nobody else cares as much as we do. We do best taking the high road.

+1

Thanks RBG!

Last post but serious question:

Doesn't this sequence of decisions by Ms Gregoire just devolve the really hard decisions for the executive branch (ie how to deal with the unions directly) down to the merged departments who now get to cut positions rather than renegotiate union contracts, which are a key element of any long term solution. So now we keep the basic troublesome structure but cut some heads so we can re hire later?

A guest editorial in the Seattle Times Paper yesterday hit the nail squarely on the head -- http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2013732832_guest22mullin.html of course we would NOT want to upset SEIU in any way shape form or fashion

M -- did you read the link/article? And even Senior Sonntag and Blind Squirrels can come up with a "Nut" or two, i.e., the Performance Audit Recommendations that ALL AGENCY HEADS signed off on and AGREED WITH (page number 42)!!!! And to get very creative regarding COMPETITION (which is absolutely absent in State Goobermint), at the very minimum, WDFW IT should have to complete with the States Own Centralized & More Cost Effective General Administration IT. And Phil was either extremely Stoooooooooooopid during the ESPN interview or crooked as a dawgs hindleg saying WDFW had only 42 IT types when it was closer to 100 which 20% of those were either NEW HIRES or Funny Business of re-classifying Fish Biologists as PC Weenies brought on AFTER the so called Hatchery/LE cuts. Bottom line on this issue is that WDFW Overhead employees should have to compete for their YOBS, and therefore reduce WDFW's largest costs (Personnel). And tell me just ONE REASON WDFW has any Public Relations" type of personnel that would not make me throw up or die laughing. I can post the IBloom List of those PR Types.

Actually M, that was far tooooooooooo easy, i.e., contracting out for WDFW IT services to including Desktop hardware and software support, Server Farm hardware & software support including operations and maintenance, and the spendy one, telecommunications that bind it all together. The players in that arena are probably far to numerous to list here, but a few examples would be the Telephone Companies like Verizon, AT&T, Print, etc., etc. then the Real IT Out Sourcers like MMDS, ADP, EDS, IBM, again etc., etc. Then the costs of printing all the paper they do. Then the as the article in the Seattle paper points out "Personnel/Payroll Services", is that enough as a starting point.

And when you state an "opinion" regarding examples where it has not "Work Out", please be more specific, and do include all life cycle costs, i.e., retirement, health, capitalized equipment, etc.

The only real issue in this State regarding contracting out has been the behind the scene Goobermint Employee Union(s) that are allowed to exclude and thereby control any "flavor" of contracting out that may or may not jeaprodize one Union Position. I believe that even the left leaning media in the State has pointed Christine's aversion to addressing the issue of contracting out as an alternative in labor negoiations. Bottom line here in Washingtoons, we the taxpayers are getting the short/shitty end of the stick.

As far as that thread regarding WASTE, fraud and abuse by shellfish managers, that option is being persued to re-do the audit of the CRC funds from 2000 thru 2006 as a financial audit whereby Senior will not have the option of providing Political Cover for Generalissimo Christine & Company. And it was not just the Shellfish managers that were playing fast & loose with CRC funds, it was also other WDFW managers and "Program" types.

Sg is spot on with his assessment of how promoted cost savings simply do not end up materializing. What he did not address is the cost in terms of consolidation related inefficiences (short, mid and long term) which inevitably occur but never seem to have been reflected in the "savings" analysis.

Furthermore, in this instance the Guv is effectively gutting the will of the people when it created the current Commission. As I recall part of the deal back when this all transpired was that the then Guv wanted some input/control as a quid pro quo for general funds appropriations. My weak recollection is that is how the Guv came to appoint the Commissioners yet the Commissioners hire/fire the Director who does NOT report directly to the Gov nor to the Legislature (officially). The Legislature's bite is that fiscal and, also, the Senate confirms Commissioners and only a confirmed Commissioner may be the Chair. So, now that the general funds are being cut back she wants to take back control????

So, under the proposed merger not only is it unreasonable (based on old guy experiences) that proposed savings will materialize there will be huge ripples in the universe and we and the resources will be back into the old manner of "managing" resources through legislative dictate. Been there and it isn't pretty.

Since I am on a roll let me opine about contracting out services. As a retired AF Contracting Officer I have had some experiences that are germane to this discussion.

Contracting out services may save money if the services to be provided are easily described in a Statement of Work and are sufficiently available in the area to result in good competition. However, the Government cannot become so reliant upon the contractor that it subsequently decides it cannot go through another new contractor learning curve and rationalizes NOT competing the requirement when the initial contract expires. Sole source negotiated contract anyone? One of the scary aspects of this is that an agency may end up reducing its own staff due to having available the resources of the contractor and later simply cannot wean itself. Guess who's driving the boat at that point???

John Q versus AuntyM = Draw

Want to make sure what production your saying dump. Some hatchery returns are poor but find out why, as ocean harvest drives many of these. Take Chinook, dump it all and the Alaska, BC, ocean fisheries will continue on with a pool that has much greater % of natural spawned fish. Simply put these fisheries will then have much greater impact on the wild runs. The impacts to tribal catch I do not know but I do know what a federal appellate judge once told me. If the state reduces tribal catch for any reason that is not natural then it will be penalized. The last thing to go is tribal fisheries. Non tribal sport & commercial are expendable.

Understood what he was saying..............still did not take it well.

edit here. The judge was a fishing fool.

Yep Larry, Sole Source is really screwing the Pooch so they say & I have experienced first hand. It fact I was moved aside at BPA for raising so much hell about it. Later and after yet another "Re-Org" I was vindicated.

I still say the "Creative Competition" would greatly improved WDFW and also lower costs. And that "specious agruement" and multiple/mixed specialities (PC Weenies/Biologist) is just an exercise in "Hiding" FTE.

Just look at the "Ownership Costs" of the equipment & software alone, and not just the capital side of that equation because that's just the tip of the problem. It's the life Cycle costs associated with maintaining Hardware & Software, and annual license fee renewals and mis-categorized FTE running everywhere servicing the decentralization. That is the core fallacy that PC's are cheaper. Then telecommunications capital & maintenance costs of hardware (lines/Point-to-Point/Fiber/etc, etc) that is necessary to tie everything together is astronomical. I betcha they are holding onto their de-centralized server opinions just to support/justify keeping mis-categorized FTE, and fight tooth and toe-nail with concepts like Citrix.

And I agree with you regarding the trap of Sole Sourcing, contracts MUST be re-competed every five years. First year mandatory and re-newable annually after that, No Exceptions. And here is where WDFW is so stone aged, first they do not compete it, and secondarily, do not even think creatively. As an example, competition is NOT an all or nothing, in fact the best is blended. And that Blending can be "Fluid" depending upon circumstances, i.e., a downturn in the economy. Mostly major players in this market (MMDS/EDS/Source ADP (a biggie in Olympia)) cannot do the entire job well or economically, especially on a contract life basis. The real key to blending is first really examining just what Core Business Support Functions are and are NOT. Remember good old A-76??? The State could actually adopt A-76 and benefit tremendously. Structure RFP's that reward multiple service providers that have PROVEN TRACK RECORDS in their specialities. At BPA, what we found to be the best was FTE formed a Core, and multiple contractors provided specialized services & products.

That tired me out and reminded me what I retired from. And Youngster's, there still is NOTHING New Under The Sun, especially in Puter-Land.