Campaign To Change State’s Management of Natural Resources

“We have been reforming the Department of Natural Resources since the day I came into office,” Goldmark said. “Through this broad reform effort, we have an opportunity to work with other agencies to create greater efficiencies and environmental protection for the people of the state.”

Peter Goldmark is a funny guy. Maybe he thinks ordering people to call him Commissioner or Dr. Goldmark is reform… or maybe it was the soundproofing of his office… or lying to Governor Gregoire to keep his plane… or ignoring the money savings ideas put forth by his employees.

Well Dr. Commissioner Goldmark, I want to reform the DNR for the better and believe there’s an easy way to make this happen.

The Commissioner of Public Lands should no longer be an elected position. The current method allows an overwhelming amount of politics to play into the management of our state’s natural resources. It allows those who make large campaign contributions to have more influence than the public. It creates chaos and low staff morale whenever a new CPL is elected, especially those in management wondering whether or not they’ll be keeping their jobs. The current system allows a political windbag to sit in office 4 years until the next election, and even a new CPL is no guarantee things will be any different from their predecessor.

Why does Washington state have an elected CPL? I’ve looked but cannot find any other state with an elected CPL. This should be an appointed position. The biggest advantage of having an appointed agency director is they can be relieved from duty immediately when they fail to perform their duties as a public servant.

Please take a moment to email the Office of Financial Management and spread this idea. This would be an excellent step towards reforming the way our state’s natural resources are managed. Governor Gregoire and Peter Goldmark are claiming to be open to public input on the management of our state’s natural resources. While I believe this is just hot air to get the public to feel a little cozier about failing state leadership, a number of people submitting the same idea would draw attention.

Ideas submitted to the governor can be viewed at www.governor.wa.gov/priorities/reform/naturalresources.asp.

Comments or additional ideas can be submitted to resource.reform@ofm.wa.gov.

Contact: Kate Lykins Brown, Office of Financial Management, 360-902-0619

Savings of Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars –So Says Microsoft

A recent case study from Microsoft states:

The Washington State Department of Natural Resources generates about U.S.$200 million in timber sales annually with proceeds funding schools and hospitals—and it was facing an ever-growing, increasingly costly mountain of paperwork to navigate the complex regulatory structure involved in harvesting timber. To lower the time and cost of managing the sales process, and to ensure that the department’s six regional offices were working with current versions of documentation, the department created a document management and workflow application based on Microsoft® Office SharePoint® Server 2007. The solution has the potential to reduce the volume and cost of handling paperwork by 50 percent, and the solution is much more affordable than alternatives. It’s also providing an easily accessible repository for the department’s institutional memory, especially helpful as longtime staffers retire.

The Washington State Department of Natural Resources did not choose SharePoint to save money. When I came on board as an IT Specialist in October 2007, SharePoint was already being used as a testing ground for things to come, meeting notes, and some IT projects. The DNR switched their intranet over to SharePoint around the time Peter Goldmark came on board earlier this year. The case study by Microsoft is a weaving of fact and fiction, perhaps as a justification for the DNR’s blind use of their products.

This is not to say the DNR will not save money using SharePoint. However, the claim of being more affordable than alternatives has no basis because alternatives were not researched. The DNR is a vendor-driven agency. Those making million-dollar IT decisions have little to no knowledge of alternatives such as Drupal or Joomla. The DNR has not made any comparative analysis between Microsoft SharePoint and an open standards alternative. Ignoring the ongoing expenses of licensing and need for additional Microsoft products for functionality, the case study focuses on an environment where SharePoint is analyzed against the already institutionalized use of other Microsoft products.

“We achieved full return on investment on Office SharePoint Server the moment people started using the system,” states Product Sales and Leasing assistant division manager Jon Tweedale. However, as someone who provided technical support for this agency, I find it difficult to believe Jon actually knows when SharePoint was first up and running. I’d like to find out how he arrived at his opinion.

A very important fact being overlooked by the study is the agency’s reduction of staff. The case study uses an organization size of 1000. If this is the actual number being used, the 25% reduction in force would factor in on paperwork usage much more than the software being used.

The benefits section states:

By moving to a custom solution based on Office SharePoint Server, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources has the potential to cut the volume and cost of paperwork by 50 percent, save millions of dollars per years thanks to fast return on investment (ROI), and preserve institutional memory even as longtime employees retire.

The idea of preserving data is entirely dependent upon maintaining Microsoft licensing. In 10 years, should the DNR choose another route, they will need to move their data to other formats in order for it to be accessible. Open standards is the only way to ensure a future where access to the data does not come with additional expense to the public.