Reorganizing DNREC
Last year Bill Lee and Charlie Copeland proposed that DNREC be split into two pieces, drawing a line between Natural Resources and Environmental Control. It seemed an odd time to propose creating a new cabinet department, but one can give Lee and Copeland credit for putting forward a substantive proposal.
Now Copeland, having given a News Journal article about DNREC's reorganization a cursory read, has decided that the department's reorganization is vindication of last year's campaign proposal. Copeland writes:
One problem I've heard raised with O'Mara is the way permits are handled piecemeal without much concern for a facility's overall environmental impact. Hopefully, this proposed reorganization would provide a more centralized consideration of the cumulative impact of a facility's operations. Consolidation of regulatory divisions could also make life easier for permit applicants, by providing something resembling one stop shopping for a variety of permits.
Now Copeland, having given a News Journal article about DNREC's reorganization a cursory read, has decided that the department's reorganization is vindication of last year's campaign proposal. Copeland writes:
DNREC Secretary, Colin O’Mara, has agreed that DNREC needs to be divided.Actually, DNREC would not be divided under O'Mara's proposal. Its divisions would be realigned and consolidated, which is quite a bit different from breaking the department into two pieces. There may be common points in Lee and Copeland's idea and O'Mara's proposal, but they would look very different on an organizational chart.
One problem I've heard raised with O'Mara is the way permits are handled piecemeal without much concern for a facility's overall environmental impact. Hopefully, this proposed reorganization would provide a more centralized consideration of the cumulative impact of a facility's operations. Consolidation of regulatory divisions could also make life easier for permit applicants, by providing something resembling one stop shopping for a variety of permits.
posted by Tom Noyes at 6:43 AM
3 Comments:
Markell administration rearranges DNREC, and it's good.
Lee and Copeland propose rearranging DNREC, and it "lacks seriousness" and nothing more than "rearranging deck chairs."
Seriously, Tom. You're supposed to be better than that kind of thing.
And I LOVE the reorganization with no reduction in payroll (aka the Finance Dept. plan). It's also known as "rearranging deck chairs."
Come on. Just recognize it for what it is and move on.
As I pointed out in the post, the Lee/Copeland proposal and the O'Mara budget plan are quite different: Lee and Copeland called for creating a new department. O'Mara proposed consolidating divisions within a department. He certainly hasn't "agreed that DNREC needs to be divided," and did not propose a plan to do so.
I referred to the Lee/Copeland proposal as "substantive," even though I recall it being illustrated by drawing a line between DNR and EC on an easel. If they presented more in-depth detail on their proposal, I missed it.
Simply pointing out that Lee/Copeland and O'Mara both proposed "rearranging" DNREC does not make the two proposals equivalent.
"Simply pointing out that Lee/Copeland and O'Mara both proposed "rearranging" DNREC does not make the two proposals equivalent."
Of course not. One was proposed by dastardly Republicans and one by your valiant, honorable Markell administration.
"If they presented more in-depth detail on their proposal, I missed it."
The idea's been around for years, and the News Journal endorsed it when Bob Valihura first proposed it in legislation and they endorsed it again when it was part of the 2008 campaign.
The proposals are different, but what Markell & Denn criticized about the Lee-Copeland plan -- the lack of seriousness and the moving around of deck chairs -- is applicable to this move as well.
Post a Comment
<< Home