Contrary to popular mythology, state government is not populated with lazy, overpaid bums

Ken Boyd

Special to PNA

I didn’t expect much when I started my first job with state government.

All my adult life I had either worked directly for the oil industry or as a consultant or contractor to the oil industry. I worked far “upstream” in frontier exploration and rarely ventured into production let alone pipelines, refineries or, God forbid, marketing.

I had led a perfectly happy and productive existence knowing absolutely nothing about government. But after five years of disastrous oil markets that had torn Alaska (and other oil-dependent states) apart, I was glad for the opportunity.

When I arrived at the Alaska Division of Oil and Gas in early July of 1990 (as its new deputy director) I took a tour of the division offices and met the staff. The division was (and is) a mix of geologists, geophysicists, engineers, economists, accountants, auditors and others all working together trying to keep Alaska’s oil business healthy while at the same time realizing the need to protect the state’s interest.

The division is a bit like a small oil company in that it evaluates state land for oil and gas potential, collects and accounts for royalties (but not taxes) and performs audits on a variety of contracts it has with industry. It also creates the guidelines and sets the terms for the state’s oil and gas leasing program through a document called the best interest finding.

The division creates, expands, contracts and oversees unit activities throughout the state. It serves a regulatory role in providing some permits and also issues plans of exploration and operation. It also provides support to the Governor, the Commissioner, the public and the media.

I didn’t expect much from government because that was what I had been led to believe. The popular mythology was (and for too many still is) that government is populated with lazy, overpaid bums who do nothing more than show up to collect a paycheck.

I quickly found out how wrong this is. Never, in all my years with industry, had I worked with such a thoroughly professional, competent and dedicated group of people.

The division is populated with people with MBA, CPA, Ph.D. and other advanced degrees.

But that isn’t the point; the point is that whatever the degree (or even without a degree) these people work with a dedication to public service that many people either don’t see or refuse to recognize. Rarely, especially today, do I see this level of dedication in the private sector.

State government mythology has some basis in reality, but the reality is not the misconceptions about state workers, rather it is the system they must work within.

From my first day in government to the last never did a day pass without some part of the “system” blocking productivity or creativity.

For those that believe this cumbersome process is needed to “protect” people or to create “fairness” I say hogwash. What is “fair” about not being able to promote people who have shown exceptional skill and productivity simply because the system proclaims their job description doesn’t allow it. State managers are hamstrung by a set of personnel rules that promote mediocrity.

Public service was originally designed so that good people would be hired to do good and responsible work. They were trusted to do this.

No more. The complexity of statutes, regulations and other policy “guidelines” has reduced management to a game of trying to beat the system.

And the employees are not better off for it, at least not the best employees.

I urge anyone with an interest in this issue to read “The Death of Common Sense” by Philip K. Howard. One sentence from that book says volumes about government today: “We have deluded ourselves into thinking that the right decisions will be made if we build enough procedural protection.”

In the early eighties, oil prices were high and the North Slope was pumping around 2 million barrels a day.

Money was plentiful and everyone wanted their piece of the action.

Lots of new programs and benefits (all, no doubt, well meaning) were created. With those programs came the people to administer them.

Government grew.

Production is now about half of what it was at the peak, but thanks to a lot of hard work and cooperation between government and industry we can expect those levels (at a minimum) for the next six years or so.

Despite this good work there will be fewer dollars to go around.

The last five years have seen a series of often hard to quantify budget reductions. Too often these reductions resulted in merely making programs smaller by cutting staff. In budget-speak these programs were made “more efficient”. In the majority of cases these incremental reductions only caused increased frustration for the people administering the program as well as for the public.

“Doing more with less” is another favorite phrase and it’s a worthy goal. But implemented without regard to the real personnel needs of projects simply means that things take longer to get done, are not done as well, or don’t get done at all.

Rather than crippling a lot of programs with incremental reductions, I think there is a real need to eliminate entire projects. This takes a large amount of personal and political courage but it is the only way to ensure that critical programs are properly staffed and funded.

Another real change in state government employment has begun and will continue. Many of those people hired during the boom days are reaching retirement age and will be (and are) leaving public service.

A lot of institutional knowledge and skill is walking out the door. The ones I was closest to are easily finding better paying jobs in the private sector.

Some people will say “hooray” and good riddance. Now we can hire employees at a lower pay scale and with fewer benefits.

We shall see.

At a minimum we must recognize the need and value of training for these new folks. A properly staffed, well trained and fairly paid state government, providing those services that are really needed, benefits everyone.

And I know not everyone believes this. If I hadn’t been there myself I probably wouldn’t believe it either.

Farewell to Coughlin

Patrick was the deputy director for the division during most of my tenure as director. Prior to that he was an assistant attorney general and worked almost exclusively on oil and gas issues for the division.

His 10 years of experience will be sorely missed. He, along with me and others from the division and department, was on the front line for the many contentious issues (Northstar, royalty reduction, the merger to name a very few) over the last few years.

He is going to a better place, or so he thinks. He is going to Juneau. He is going to work for the legislature.

Well, even if it’s not a better place I know one thing for sure-it’s a place that pays a lot better than where he was.

Good luck.