|
What
is wrong with this picture? Too many “environmental” employees, spending too much
taxpayers’ dollars By Sue Forde,
Managing Editor I’ve been hearing plenty lately about how
our vital services will have to be cut due to the shortfall in the
budget in Olympia. As
a result, I went looking around the Washington State site, to see
if I could find out just how many employees the state has, how
much they are paid, and if there are positions that could be cut
back. A recent article by Tom McCabe of the BIAW
(Building Industry Association of Washington) pointed out that
Governor Locke has hired over 8,000 new employees, paid on average
$50,000 per year in salary and benefits; and that his proposed
budget calls for hiring 3,116 new workers over the next two years. (That’s 5 new people per day, every day of the year
including holidays!) He
suggested that Locke STOP HIRING, which would save the state some
$150-300 MILLION. I checked out one section of state government
– “Natural Resources and Recreation” -
to get a sense of how our tax dollars are being spent.
I was amazed to learn that the Department of Ecology has
1,521 employees; the Dept. of Fish & Wildlife has 1,717
employees; and the Dept. of Natural Resources has 1,563 employees.
Combined, these three environmental departments account for more
than 4,800 employees – larger than the total population
contained in the City of Sequim!
The salaries are pretty amazing, too.
Many are paid upward of $50,000 a year. Compare these figures to the meager numbers
in State Parks and Recreation (616) and the Dept. of Agriculture
(596). In Clallam County, another layer of
environmental oversight exists in the Dept. of Community
Development (DCD), where the 43 full time employees are budgeted
to receive $159,537 per month (close to $2 million per year)!
On average, that $3,710 per employee per month!
(In a county where the average household income is $2,865
per month - often the
combined income of two people.) Is it any wonder that initiatives to cut
spending are flying all over the place?
These monies are spent largely to write and enforce
legislation which restricts our freedoms and the right to use
property as we see fit! (Most
people would agree, I think, that the landowner is the most
responsible person to take care of his own property, not some
government employee who has no interest in the land.) Personally, I would add to the suggestion to cut hiring, and further suggest the reduction of the size of the departments of government, especially the ones, like Dept. of Ecology, that seem to disregard the intent of the legislatures, and step-by-step, further force private property to become “public” property.
|