Letter to the Editor

State auditor responds to brand inspector editorial

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Dear Editor,

This is to follow up on my conversation today regarding your recent editorial on the Nebraska Brand Committee.  A recent audit of the agency found that 43 out of 45 "full time" brand inspectors worked less than a full time work schedule in violation of state law.

 As journalists, you have an obligation to report the truth.

You write:

 The audit finding is "a result of eastern bureaucratic bean counters who wouldn't know the difference betweeen a heifer and a horsefly…"

The truth:

The report was prepared by a highly experienced auditor who lives in Sidney, Nebraska who is very familiar with the duties of the Nebraska Brand Committee.

You write:

"we're sure most of them (brand inspectors) fulfill those duties admirably -- putting in far more than 40 hours during peak seasons."

The truth:

Yes, some inspectors did work more than 40 hours per week during the peak season.  But even when you count all those overtime hours, the agency's "full-time" inspectors still came up over 10,000 hours short of full time work effort.  One inspector had the equivalent of 17 weeks of NO WORK and he earned full retirement, health care, vacation leave and other state employee benefits during that time.

You Write:

"Lost somewhere in the argument is the fact that the Nebraska Brand Committee is a self-supporting cash fund agency, paying inspectors from fees collected for brand recordings, brand inspections, and registered feedlots and dairies."

The truth:

The agency is funded by fees passed on to the consumers of beef products.  This fact was not "lost" but was reported up-front in my press release on the subject.  Cash funded agencies of government should operate efficiently and in accordance with state law.

You write:

…the Legislature, if that's what it takes, should change the law so brand inspectors can get back to work."

The truth:

Brand inspectors never stopped.  What's needed now is a restructuring of the agency so that it's personnel resources match the work load.   Seasonal fluctuations in work load are not unique to this agency and there are management techniques that can be readily used to address the problem.

Conclusions:

Your editorial is a weak defense of continued inefficiency in state government.  My exposure of it is passed off as an attempt to further my political ambitions.   If you would prefer not to know of instances when my office uncovers waste, fraud, and abuse, please let me know.  In the interim, I hope you will be mindful of your obligation to your readers to report the truth.

Finally, you should be aware that the Nebraska Brand Committee wrote to the Legislature on September 24, 2007 to inform them that the agency will now, "follow the State Auditor's recommendation in requiring all full-time brand inspectors to work forty hours each week or 2,080 hours annually." 

Sincerely,

Mike Foley

State Auditor

Comments
View 2 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Gee -- we have a saying out here in the sticks. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. It sounds like Nebraska State Auditor Mike Foley can't take some legitimate media criticism without throwing a little hissy fit. Maybe he should rethink his choice of political career.

    -- Posted by cowgurl1 on Wed, Oct 10, 2007, at 4:31 PM
  • Actually, we taxpayers regularly claim we want elected officials who recognize government waste and take steps to correct it. Shouldn't appreciate one who actually takes steps to reduce waste and increase inefficiency? Which way do we want it folks?

    -- Posted by dleonard130 on Sun, Oct 14, 2007, at 2:04 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: