Dé·jà vu Again
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
While the concept of “here we go again” might take on a negative connotation – that really isn’t the intent or direction I’d like to go with this. Instead the real hope is that by noting the possibility of history poised to repeat itself we might evaluate our thinking and come up with something by way of a solution which makes the best sense.
Former Nevada Governor Bob Miller came up with an idea a few years ago that Nevada government had too many agencies. His idea to correct this took on the form of government reorganization. The results of that process included the Nevada Department of Agriculture becoming the Division of Agriculture, within the Department of Business and Industry.
Agricultural folks didn’t embrace the idea of not having a “Department” of Agriculture and with encouragement the Nevada Legislature eventually re-established the agency back into “Department” status.
Although the term being used in discussions currently is “consolidation” the idea is still one of taking the number of government agencies in Nevada and making them fewer in number. Again, the Nevada Department of Agriculture is being considered as a sub-agency for some other entity.
The primary motivation this time around is that saving dollars – to avoid needing to increase revenue by either taxes or fee increases – means we need a streamlined approach with duplication of “administration” costs reduced. Bean-counting and having somebody in charge are functions with expenses that can be reduced by having fewer people doing them…whether they are done more effectively might be something discounted in favor of efficiency.
Nevada Farm Bureau voting delegates, setting their organization’s point of view on the matter, recently stated…
Accomplishing this policy objective isn’t going to be automatic, easy or inexpensive. The options necessary to achieve the desired outcome of keeping the Department of Agriculture – as a Department – will likely require a complete removal of all general funds from the operations of the agency. It would seem that the most logical way to remove the case for the Department being something that is too expensive is to get to the point where “it’s not costing the general fund anything”.
The Nevada Department of Agriculture doesn’t get very much by way of Nevada Government General Fund dollars, but going to zero is still going to have a price and a consequence of things being different. It will also require an approach of dollars from user fees being used for covering administrative-type expenses. To paraphrase an old concept that I was taught in college – “you can do away with the people who perform certain activities, but you can’t avoid some of the functions that need to be carried out…”
We are being told that agricultural industry representatives will have the opportunity for input and be part of the discussions in how the journey forward is going to proceed. That will be different from when Governor Miller revealed his re-organization vision and made it happen through legislative actions.
While the concept of “here we go again” might take on a negative connotation – that really isn’t the intent or direction I’d like to go with this. Instead the real hope is that by noting the possibility of history poised to repeat itself we might evaluate our thinking and come up with something by way of a solution which makes the best sense.
Former Nevada Governor Bob Miller came up with an idea a few years ago that Nevada government had too many agencies. His idea to correct this took on the form of government reorganization. The results of that process included the Nevada Department of Agriculture becoming the Division of Agriculture, within the Department of Business and Industry.
Agricultural folks didn’t embrace the idea of not having a “Department” of Agriculture and with encouragement the Nevada Legislature eventually re-established the agency back into “Department” status.
Although the term being used in discussions currently is “consolidation” the idea is still one of taking the number of government agencies in Nevada and making them fewer in number. Again, the Nevada Department of Agriculture is being considered as a sub-agency for some other entity.
The primary motivation this time around is that saving dollars – to avoid needing to increase revenue by either taxes or fee increases – means we need a streamlined approach with duplication of “administration” costs reduced. Bean-counting and having somebody in charge are functions with expenses that can be reduced by having fewer people doing them…whether they are done more effectively might be something discounted in favor of efficiency.
Nevada Farm Bureau voting delegates, setting their organization’s point of view on the matter, recently stated…
"Nevada Farm Bureau supports the Nevada Department of Agriculture as a department level entity. Department status recognizes the importance of agricultural production and it provides quality service to state farmers and ranchers. Nevada Farm Bureau supports that the Nevada Board of Agriculture be maintained as a policy-setting entity.
The Board of Agriculture should also maintain strong connection with Nevada agricultural organizations, providing Nevada agricultural producers with the opportunity to give input and influence into services or programs which are needed to benefit farmers and ranchers."
Accomplishing this policy objective isn’t going to be automatic, easy or inexpensive. The options necessary to achieve the desired outcome of keeping the Department of Agriculture – as a Department – will likely require a complete removal of all general funds from the operations of the agency. It would seem that the most logical way to remove the case for the Department being something that is too expensive is to get to the point where “it’s not costing the general fund anything”.
The Nevada Department of Agriculture doesn’t get very much by way of Nevada Government General Fund dollars, but going to zero is still going to have a price and a consequence of things being different. It will also require an approach of dollars from user fees being used for covering administrative-type expenses. To paraphrase an old concept that I was taught in college – “you can do away with the people who perform certain activities, but you can’t avoid some of the functions that need to be carried out…”
We are being told that agricultural industry representatives will have the opportunity for input and be part of the discussions in how the journey forward is going to proceed. That will be different from when Governor Miller revealed his re-organization vision and made it happen through legislative actions.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 11/26/2010 7:48 AM 
Categories: Government
Tags: Nevada Nevada Department of Agriculture Government Spending
Categories: Government
Tags: Nevada Nevada Department of Agriculture Government Spending
Comments