A number of interesting things have happened over the past week or so..
Saturday- at a meeting it was announced at a meeting that the Forest Service would be moving its headquarters to Salt Lake City if Congress approves. Tim at the Hotshot Wakeup has a story about this, including comments from the Department and other sources.
I think it’s a bad idea, and at the same time, I don’t think all the positions in DC need to be there. Having tried to recruit people to DC, both in R&D and in NEPA, to GS-14 and 15 positions.. well, it wasn’t easy and I didn’t often get the cream of the crop. In fact, I wasn’t necessarily the cream of the crop either, as I was in DC for dual-career reasons.
Just let’s suppose for a minute, that a foundation existed that was interested in good government in general, and not making partisan political points.
They might fund a school of public administration (or more than one) to ask questions like:
The BLM Experience
What happened to the BLM’s HQ in Grand Junction? What were the goals? Were they successful at meeting them? Did the next Admin ever bring career people back to DC? Which ones? What was their rationale for bringing them back?
The Forest Service Minerals Experience
FS Minerals moved their WO staff to Denver. As I recall the Director had two offices, one in DC and one in our RO, perhaps this changed. Did this “work”? How did the employees feel about it? How did those using their skills feel about it? I know as a client (in the same building) it worked for me, in fact there was a coal expert in Salt Lake who was very knowledgeable and helpful. In fact, we cared more about their expertise and helpfulness than where they were.
Do Certain Positions Lend Themselves to Being in DC? What Kind of Criteria Would We Use?
Of course! Legislative Affairs, for one, and high ranking officials (Directors and above?). My own experience was that I often met with CEQ in person (as AD of NEPA) but others not so much. We met with OGC quite a bit working on a planning rule, and occasionally we’d meet with NRE (when forests flew into town to present their plans).
Moving People Vs. Hiring the Next Person at the New Place
If policies were reasonable, we would analyze these situations and likely determine that many positions did not need to be in DC. Letting the current employees work in DC and hiring new positions in the new place would be the least disruptive to employees and their families. This is very rational, but would require consistency in policies over time, which is hard to do when the issue becomes a partisan football.
***************
How do we end up with irrational policies, and alternating throwing out babies with the bathwater as each color of Admin replaces the next? Probably because each Admin can count on only four years to do what they do.. reward their friends and punish their enemies.
I attribute to a lack of interest in government effectiveness from rich people who fund foundations and charities. I don’t expect reporters to do this kind of work. We have schools of public administration and they are likely to do whatever they are funded to do.
There is no center of reasonableness, but there could be.
****************
Frankly, I always found it difficult to reconcile the view of some D’s that moving any positions from DC would be bad, even though their Admin’s work from home policies meant that the Yates Building (and some ROs) had very few people actually in them. So that’s another seemingly incongruent position that reasonable people might be curious about.
And I think moving all of headquarters willy-nilly to SLC is a bad idea. So here we are.. there is a pathway to reasonable change, but will the underlying analysis be there to take it? Or will we be swept up in another round of partisan sniping and unnecessary drama to the detriment of employees and after all the main objective of all, I would think, getting the work done.
What a situation! Cannot get “the best” to DC and likely in the past it was crime, housing costs, and a daily assault by the DC located lobby and NGOs.
And the grift complex of NGOs and being parked next to the Congress what feeds them just cannot happen because, hard to feed your livestock so far from the “hay barn” of the House Appropriations Committee.
I spent 9 years of my career in DC and retired from the National Office. My DC assignment equaled the work assignments I spent with FIA and the Dixie NF. I thoroughly enjoyed my time in DC and held fascinating jobs. I lived in DC during an idyllic era when the most significant risk I faced was exposure to the Metro. The Forest Service was the only agency building on the Mall. It was an incredible thrill to visit the “clock tower,” the scene of so many agency peccadillos!
My 5th-floor cubicle had great views for a GS-14. Better yet, though, were the views from the 4th-floor Chief’s office, where meetings came to a standstill when Marine One was landing on the South lawn!
I organized a field trip to the George Washington National Forest for the Legislative Affairs Staff on August 23rd, 2011, which took 20 folks from the fifth floor, which was hard hit by the 5.8 magnitude temblor.
I have always encouraged talent to apply and spend time in DC. There is nothing like DC for yourself and your career. Yates is next door to the Holocaust Museum of North America and serves as a dire warning to the inhumanity of humans! The South Building is the best of prison architecture. The South Building Cafeteria invokes a CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation), while the best cafeteria on Independence Avenue is the Department of Energy.
Yes, the Yates is limited in workspace, and there are too many positions that could be based in other states. For example, the Central National Organization (CNO) for Minerals and Geology had a brace of employees in Rosslyn to interact with residual Deputies and Directors, so much for moving policy people to the field.
Old Ebbitt Grill (OEG) cannot be experienced in Utah, where sugar and salt are considered spices. My retirement party in 2017 was held at OEG.
Kelly’s Irish Times is a Capitol Hill Dive Bar where, behind the bar, there’s a glut of police and fire agency patches and one Forest Service uniform patch, courtesy of me.
The loss of Forest Service employees in DC will be devastating to the legislature and the Nation.
And remember, DC is a company town; most people are not from DC, and most agency people come to do good and not to stay to do well. I return every April for the “Secret Meeting.”
“the view of some D’s that moving any positions from DC would be bad” Really, any positions? That sounds a little extreme to believe.
In today’s world, why isn’t the duty station negotiable with the hiring official? Who decided it isn’t? If the best person for the job doesn’t want to live in DC, shouldn’t it be up to the employer, given their assessment of how things will operate, to be able to allow a different duty station instead of having to pick the next best employee?
I am afraid that we are heading towards tit-for-tat employee purges based on loyalty oaths (though I doubt the Ds would be as vindictive as what we’ve seen with Trump), which will hamstring the government’s ability to do just about anything (is this a goal in Project 2025?).