Early Retirement, Things Might Get Worse

[boehr]

I'm sure most of you all have heard about the 80 and out retirement that the state is offering. Doesn't effect me but the word is it will effect about 8000 state employees. Predictions are about 4000 will take advantage but I suspect it will be more. I don't know how many in the DNR but rumor has it that many will be taking it from Parks, Wildlife and Fisheries. It will not effect Law. Some of the top people (very knowledgable) will be gone prior to next deer season so it's hard to know what the impact may be to us hunters this year and in the future. All those retiring will not be replaced I suspect and for sure not in the experience department so there will be even less people to do the job that is needed to be done. I, as a hunter, have concern here and think you all should be concerned too.

[PrtyMolusk]

Howdy-
Boehr, I share your concern. Sadly, this seems to be the direction our society is taking. Concerned about costs? Offer early retirement! No one stops to think about the wealth pf experience that is being put out to pasture with these seasoned individuals...There is a helluva learning curve when it comes to working with the public; some of the best are being lost, and with them and their expertise also goes their ability to tutor and mentor those to whom the task will fall in the future...
Best of luck to you in the potentially trying times you face.

[Shoveler]

boehr,

Thanks for the information. For the people who do take the retirement, thanks for the years of service. For the Natural Resouces department heads, let remember that you are charge and responsiblities to the resouces, sportsmen/women, and citizens of Michigan. Parks, Wildlife and Fisheries should be looked at but not with the a budget cut mentality. It maybe necessary to write or email state reps and DNR officials urging filling of positions vacant by an early retirement program.

On another note, Boehr, got the information on pheasants and mallards.

One question, what is a moist soil management unit? Like for waterfowl?

Shoveler
:D

[boehr]

Shoveler...can't say for sure but if I had to guess, which guessing isn't always correct ;) , I would have to say wetland or low land areas, maybe areas that are not in direct sunlight. Like I said, only a guess.

[Pinefarm]

Ray, did you see the story below? I like Engler, but I don't like the story below...


Column: Where's the outrage over fund cuts?


Sunday, February 10, 2002






I have been waiting -- with decreasing patience, I might add -- for someone to get worked up about the last round of general funds cuts to conservation. So far, it hasn't happened.

Why not?


Let's review: On Nov. 6, Gov. John Engler ordered significant budget cuts across state government. The Department of Natural Resources took its share.

But the fish and wildlife divisions of the agency took more than its share. They lost both of the relatively tiny programs that the general fund supports.

Among the cuts ordered by the governor is $2.3 million that represents what the DNR loses by discounting hunting and fishing licenses for senior citizens. It has been policy for nearly 20 years that the state would make up the difference. Now it becomes clear why the DNR lobbied so hard for increased senior license fees: They were afraid something like this would happen.

Apparently, they were not being paranoid.

In the late 1990s, when sportsmen negotiated new fees, senior tags went from $1 to 40 percent of the standard fee. (Currently, seniors pay $5.60 for the typical $14 license.) The Legislature -- which sets fees, it should be noted -- agreed to honor its commitment to make up the shortfall.

But the guv decided to let the bulk of sportsmen subsidize the seniors and I heard nary a word of opposition from anyone in the Legislature, including the much ballyhooed Senate task force that recently addressed conservation issues.

(Idle thought: How much worse would this cut have been if the senior rate had remained $1?)

The other program the guv axed was the $1.8 million appropriation that helps to pay property taxes on lands purchased by the state's sportsmen. The Legislature has traditionally paid half the taxes on those properties from the General Fund because more than half the use of those properties is by non-hunters and non-fishermen. Fact is, some of the state's game areas have become so encroached by development, they are of almost no use to hunters because of safety zones forbidding the discharge of firearms. These areas are valuable recreational/green spaces for all state residents and should be supported as such.

Add in a cool half-million dollar cut that had been earmarked for the law enforcement division (sportsmen pay 60 percent of the division's budget). It follows that game and fish programs will either endure further cuts or sportsmen will see less service from DNR Law.

What makes these cuts so difficult to digest is the simple fact that the Legislature has already begun tapping a previously untouchable trust fund to help pay for this administration's mismanagement of the sportsmen's budget.

So far, $12 million has been transferred from the Game and Fish Trust Fund to the operating budget. At a modest five percent interest, that money would have generated $600,000 every year FOREVER for the state's programs instead of a one-time fix that isn't even necessary.

How did this happen? Is it because the current DNR leadership went on a spending spree -- often on questionable programs -- then was too embarrassed to make up for it by collecting the fees that the Legislature already approved?

This administration has already done permanent damage to conservation in Michigan and is poised to do even more. It's time for someone in state government to step up and say what those in the conservation community know: This just isn't right.

The conservation community deserves a fair share of the blame for this situation, simply because it hasn't demanded attention to these issues. This administration has repeatedly shown it cares nothing for conservation -- and no one has called it on that position.

Now, as we head into an election year, we're still waiting for a candidate who will make conservation a top priority. The recent Senate task force findings, which in some ways repudiate this administration, indicate the pols think these issues are important.

But conservation will never be appropriately funded unless the people demand it. That's the downside of democracy: We tend to get the kind of government we deserve.

Contact Bob Gwizdz at (517) 487-8888 or e-mail him at bgwizdz@boothnewspapers.com.

[Eastern Yooper]

One final kiss from John Engler and his administration........

[boehr]

Yea, I seen the article but there is not to much I, any other employee or any department head can do if the governor says you are only going to get so much of what you need, cut your costs. Believe me it has had an effect on operations all the way down to field people. But if the money is not there.........

[Hamilton Reef]

Been there and done that. In 1995, we were offered early out at USFW and there was a rush to the door. It was not that there was less concern for the resources, but that we were not allowed to do our best job for the resources. The working conditions were getting so bad and there was deliberate sabotage from the administration to undermine the quality of the USFW. We were specifically ordered 'Not' to hire the best qualified as all positions would be filled and promoted as political appointees. When it got worst because the best leaving and replaced by the politicals and anti-hunting/fishing minorities, then more left because the remaining staff did not have the qualified help to safely conduct the river treatments. The sea lamprey population has increased since 1995.

My friends in the DEQ also faced the same problems of political hiring and promotions with the additional problem of staff reductions. This is a double whammy. In the DEQ the Engler corrupted staff were promoted to ignore the DEQ enforcement of certain laws and to promote the polluter's permits that contributed to Engler's Republican party. Michigan dropped from the most respected state for natural resources protection to the lowest, tied with polluter Bush in Texas.

The Fisheries Division in the DNR is already at half staff and cannot keep up with the routine duties not counting the additional work ordered under the consent agreement with the Indians. The fisheries staff deserves a heck of a lot of credit for the work they are getting done inspite of Engler. Sadly we loss one good qualified biologist to an auto accident. At the same time fisheries can't get rid of one worthless 'unqualified' biologist due to civil service protection and the the sob won't retire either. RO'N has sabotaged several west Michiagn fishery projects and research projects, and he is well known and hated by the area sportsclubs and sport shops. He even passed over a highly qualified DNR retiree of 33-years experience for a Muskegon River position to hire an unemployed stationery supply salesman. The salesman was an expert conartist and the only person that would suckup to RO'N.

If their is another exodus from the DEQ and DNR, I cannot fault the employees leaving. After 12 years of the worst environmental SOB governor in Michigan's history, those employees deserve some peace in their remaining years. They tried their best for as long as they could. Boehr, I thought one radio program stated that the COs were exempt from taking the early out.

[boehr]

CO's are not exempt but would not benefit from it. CO's, at least all with more than about three years on, fall under a different retirement and would actually end up with less than their regular retirement if they took it. The retirement for CO's is between the state police who have a 25 year retirement at a flat 60%, or there abouts and other state employees who are at 30 years at age 55 at something like a 1.5% multiplier. CO's are at 25 years and ends up being a little less than 60% with age factored in. The longer you stay beyond 25 years the retirement actually decreases, minimal, but less just the same. Actually we have a number of CO's that have been eligable for a while but have choosen to stay. In fact, if I choose to buy my military time I could go now too but I still like working to much and I'm not ready to be a coach potato yet, except during hunting season in the fall that is:). I would go stir crazy.

[goose hunter]

As a state employee for 25 years now, I only wish I was able to take this early out. That is all I hear the others talking about since it was announced. We have had several early retirements in the past and felt only I little change due to them. But I feel this one will have a huge effect on the services we recieve thoughout the state system. The reports I have heard say that only 1 of 4 positions will ever be replaced. WOW. We are short now in many departments. It makes me wonder what is becoming our wonderful state. Engler sure has left his mark on the state. Thank heaven for term limits. Lets hope the next Gov. does a better job of caring for the state and its resources. I will be the first one in line when my early retirement offer comes. I will keep doing my job the best I know how until that time comes.

[BEAGLEMAN]

If you want to see a perfect example of "Buyout Programs" and the end result take a look at Ford Motor Co. I am in the Design Engineering area and cannot believe how bad things have become. We have lost some people we just could not afford to lose.
There was and still is some"dead wood" that needs to be weeded out but the loss of experienced,good
engineers and designers has really hurt our company in the last 5 years.

[Al, L]

Boehr, Just because you retire you don't have to become a couch potoe (call me dan). Now that I'm retired I wonder how I found time to do any thing around the house and go afield and work too. I'm training 2 pups, spoiling a grand child and training her also. I'm fishing more hunting more even taking care of my 87 year old Dad who gets tired of the same old geezers b/s ing with him. You only end up on the couch if you want to. :p Keep doing what ya love to do if your doing it. Thanks Al

[boehr]

Just a figure of speech Al, I'll be playing in the woods until I die, might not always be hunting but I will be in the woods.:)

[Al, L]

Isn't any other place other than the water, with people and animals who love doing the things you do and being with you.
Take care
Al

[boehr]

OUTDOOR NEWS
Retirement option could strap DNR

By Bill Parker
Editor
Lansing — Up to 450 Michigan Department of Natural Resources employees are eligible for early retirement under legislation recently signed by Gov. John Engler. The legislation calls for those retiring to be replaced at a ratio of one new employee for every four that retire. That part of the legislation has both sportsmen and DNR administrators concerned.
Under the program, state employees whose age and years of service equal 80 by Nov. 1 can take an early retirement. Employees can also buy up to five years of service to reach the sum of 80. Employees who accept the “early out” option must notify their supervisors between April 1-30, and must choose a retirement date between July 1 and Nov. 1, 2002
“It will be the end of the month before we get a good idea of exactly how many (DNR employees) will retire,” DNR Press Secretary Brad Wurfel said. “By then, we’ll have a better idea of who is leaving and how we are going to adjust to those losses.”
Nearly 9,000 state employees are eligible for the early retirement offer, which Engler signed last week in an effort to help balance the state budget. The legislation is designed to help reduce the state’s projected general fund deficit of $970 million for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.
Of the DNR’s approximate $250 million annual budget, over 80 percent of revenue comes from restricted funds including license sales and excise taxes. State general fund contributions to the DNR are minimal.Conservationists point to that fact when calling for a better replacement ratio of retiring DNR employees.
Rich Bowman, executive director of the Michigan Chapter of Trout Unlimited, says that because the DNR gets very little help from the state’s general fund, it should be exempt from the restricted hiring clause.
“Even though the state has revenue problems with the general fund, we don’t have revenue problems with the conservation divisions,” Bowman said. “The bottom line is that the money is there to hire the folks to do the work. Let’s hire them and let them do their work. That’s why we buy hunting and fishing licenses. TU’s position is that we should be looking at 100-percent replacement.”
The Natural Resources Commission is seeking a compromise with the Governor’s Office on the replacement issue.
“We’re just recovering from the last early out,” said NRC Chairman Keith Charters, referring to a similar early retirement program Engler offered in 1996. “The Commission is meeting with the governor and trying to get a better replacement than one-for-four. I’m optimistic. The last time we got a one-for-two replacement and we were the only agency that got a better replacement.”
The DNR lost close to 150 employees through the 1996 early retirement program, according to Guy Gordon, chief of staff for the DNR.
“We downsized 10 percent since the last time there was an early out,” Gordon said. “Our best guess is that somewhere in the neighborhood of 250 people will leave the department this time.”
While DNR personnel losses appear imminent, Charters says the department can survive if two goals are achieved.
“The last time we had an early out it seems like wildlife (division) and fisheries (division) got hit pretty hard,” Charters said. “We need two things: Number one, we need better replacement than one-for-four — that would be devastating. Number two, when we find out who’s leaving we need to immediately begin hiring. The Civil Service hiring system is very time-consuming and we can’t delay in getting started.”
Before the new legislation was signed, a state employee could retire at age 55 with at least 30 years of service or, at age 60 with at least 10 years of service.

[jimbos43]

You know Boehr, if we had to vote on a tax increase to keep the current DNR staffing levels most of us would vote yes, if we knew the money would go directly to the DNR. But you and I know that just won't happen. I wouldn't want any increase to help bail out Flint or Highland Park.
For a conservitive as I am, I just can't stand Engler, never have never will, and so long you useless P.O.S.

[NEMichsportsman]

I dont want to get into too much of a political discussion about liking Engler vs. not.....

I disagree with the way issues have been handled in regards to what might concern sportsmen...but I have been awful pleased with the way the welfare moochers have been weeded out, I am sick of taking care of everybody from cradle to grave, there have some other successes as well...Jimbo if you are displeased with John, I can only imagine how we will feel if any one of those in that pack of Dems gets in......


Boehr-

Aside from the retirement issue what is the impact of Director Kools "office mondays" on enforcement. Tell me that that stupidity does not impact the CO's?!?!


jp

[boehr]

The Monday thing has no impact what so ever on CO's, they are exempt with the exception of Lt's., and above. Actually part of me believes the Monday thing is good for the public because people do call the office with questions and sometimes they can never get anybody, now they can when they call on Mondays so it does have it's good points.

[jimbos43]

Yeah Northeast, It's weird,never liked him from the beginning.
His whining about how much money the state is losing due to internet sales is weak.
His ignoring the cities until their insolvent, is weak but i'm not sure what he could of done.
The siphoning of the millage money that was supposed to improve the state parks, to dozens of other non outdoor projects is disgusting.
Now leaving the state, with the last I read was a billion dollar shortfall showed fiscal irresponsibility. Did he think the good times would never end?
The gas tax increase, but not increasing the diesel tax, etc,etc

[NEMichsportsman]

One can only hope that our next Governor will have a strong agenda relating to our Outdoors. Posthumus sounded pretty convincing when I saw him at a function a few weeks ago...

Boehr -
I am glad that the "Mondays" policy wont affect the COs in the field...Sounds like there will be some big problems with being able to replace DNR employees.

jp

[back40]

I hear alot of whining.

However, the governer did not make the rules.

Why is it, that the most experienced, educated, and valuable employees are asked to take the buy-out?

[boehr]

Those employees are not being asked to take the buy out, it's their own decision. When an employee can increase his retirement benefits by an amount that makes it worth taking the buy out it would be foolish for that employee not to look out for their own future. What rules in regards to the retirement, are you talking about that the governor doesn't make?