HB 588 - add politically appointed positions for state agencies

[Hunting Wife]

Hadn’t heard about this until today. This would be across the board for agencies, but according to the fiscal note, would mean up to 10% of FWP’s staff (65 positions) would become political appointees. Don’t like the sounds of that.

Bill could make hundreds of state workers political appointees

House Bill 588 would expand the number of political appointment jobs in state government. Opponents worry about politicizing bureaucracy.

www.google.com

https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2021/FNPDF//HB0588_1.pdf

 

[Europe]

If I read this correctly the new administration would only be able to fill a position as it became open, They could not fire someone just to fill a position. Do a lot of people, at the level being discussed, quit when a new administration is voted in ? Does Montana have a law in place the disallows the hiring of relatives ?

The 2nd paragraph is of course true, but sometimes the changes we think or thought we were going to get by voting for someone is not always what we get when they get in office. But, control of "their" agenda is important to them. i.e. The current discussion and debate in Wash D.C. regarding the Supreme Court.

We ( our family ) have considered purchasing land in Montana, so this is of interest to us, thanks for the post.

 

[Hunting Wife]

In general, hiring laws with regards to government positions do provide anti-nepotism provisions and are structured to provide fair opportunities to qualified applicants. I’m not aware of if/how these apply to appointees.

No, most of these positions currently work for whatever administration is in charge. No different than my job or that of hundreds of thousands of public servants. Marching orders change all the time...we’re used to it.

My perspective is admittedly narrowed to my area of experience, wildlife, though this bill reaches far beyond that. The Governor already appoints the members of the FWP Commission, and the Director. That alone provides a lot of control in the direction the agency takes. I completely disagree with making 60-65 more positions politically appointed. Just as I think wildlife management through legislation is completely inappropriate, I see this bill as effectively an extension of that, to give politicians complete control of management.

Given what we’ve just witnessed in this Legislative session in Montana, I think this would be a disaster for wildlife in Montana.

 

[Europe]

Thank you

 

[Sytes]

Seems enough politically induced force is present to impel the pendulum from one side to the other.

Partisanship, in general, needs to be reigned in. Further taxing our state agencies with the ebb and flow of micro managed party interests is inducing an almost, bi-polar type hindrance.