Republican Legislators Plan To Split DNR

Tomahawk - Republican legislators announced yesterday that they were going to use the budget bill to completely reorganize the DNR. The previous Thompson administration had required reorganization a few years ago, but some Republican lawmakers decided that was a failure.

Using the budget bill to get around the public’s interest has become a common tactic in Wisconsin. It was this kind of stealth legislation attached to the budget that resulted in the removal of the popular Public Intervener and politicized the DNR by making it a cabinet position in 1995. It was also used to create the Mining Local Agreement Law and changed laws to provide for the Duluth to Weston transmission line. In spite of enormous opposition, none of these laws have been overturned.

There was a series of public hearings on a similar proposal in 1999 and the record shows there was overwhelming opposition to splitting up the DNR. By using the budget bill the Republicans can go around the public interest. There was no mandate for this; it was not part of last fall’s political campaigns. Apparently a few lawmakers decided they know what is best for Wisconsin’s natural resources.

Legislators claim in the information they released yesterday that the reorganization would not cost any tax dollars. A similar split in Michigan cost over 4 million dollars.

ECCOLA spokesman Jim Wise said, “ If this doesn’t require any money, then why are they trying to hide it in the budget”? “It looks like they are afraid to use the legitimate democratic process that has traditionally been used to make Wisconsin laws.”

If the DNR needs reorganizing again, DNR staff should be involved and we should take time to look at this statewide with accurate facts, figures, and public input. Jamming it through in the last days of a complicated deficit budget is just plain wrong.

The announcement from the legislators indicated they might hold one public hearing. Wise said, “ Why bother with a public hearing, they have already decided to ignore the citizens, it is the same dirty trick used to politicize the DNR and eliminate the Public Intervener.”

While the proposal is explained as an attempt to make DNR more efficient, it will have the opposite affect. Instead of one policy board, there will be two. Instead of one agency working on permits, there will be two. Instead of integrated natural resource management, it will be fragmented with duplicated services and weakened authority.

To force through an agency split without allocating any money for the changes, is proof that they don’t really want to create a better agency to manage our natural resources. What they want to do is just the opposite.