Q and A with DNR commissioner

[JohnWester]

Merriam still optimistic about dedicated funding
The state DNR chief says the Legislature will eventually opt to set aside a consistent source of money to protect the state's natural resource, if voters speak up.

Dennis Anderson, Star Tribune
DNR Commissioner Gene Merriam, 61, on the legislative session, dedicated funding, his future, and state conservation:

Q: Was the legislative session good or bad for the DNR?

A: The session didn't deal with our overall budget. But our operating budget got a little bit of money for exotic species control, for our piece of the Clean Water Legacy bill, and some money for bovine tuberculosis. Of course dedicated funding was a disappointment in that it didn't pass. The good news is that in our capital budget we received $14 million for wildlife management areas and $7.5 million for large-scale forest conservation easements.

Q: Were you betting during the session that dedicated funding would pass or fail?

A: I was a handicapping it 40/60 -- 60 being the percentage that it wouldn't pass, 40 that it would.

Q: Is the Legislature capable of passing dedicated funding?

A: Yes. The Legislature is a very reactive institution, and legislators react to what they perceive constituents want. If they hear from enough people, it will happen. They have certainly heard from a lot of people on dedicated funding, but they apparently haven't heard from a critical mass yet.

Q: What did you think about the arts tagging along on the dedicated funding bills?

A: The polling data I've seen, and my experience, tells me that the more focused a constitutional amendment proposal is, the better its chance of passage. I don't believe the arts brought added value to the bills.

Q: Three and a half years into the commissioner's job, what's your take on it?

A: It's a great job most of the time. And really almost all of the time.

Q: What are the downsides?

A: It's a sizable institution, and the structure of government presents a number of challenges and headaches. Everything from dealing with the Legislature to the budgeting process is cumbersome. Unlike in the private sector, where you can make a decision and move on, decisions here are much more prolonged. Also you're operating in a very public arena and there are a lot of different opinions.

Q: How could the DNR be improved?

A: It's difficult to think of encompassing statements that would address that. Much of what I get involved in every day has to do with trying to make our systems work better and more effectively.

Q: Most people can't understand the DNR's budget or money flow in and out. Your an accountant. Do you?

A: Yes. But I had an advantage. In the Legislature I was chair of the Senate Finance Committee and Chair of the Environment and Natural Resources Committee.

Q: Do you want to be commissioner for another four years, assuming the governor is re-elected?

A: The election is almost five months out. A lot of things can happen between now and then. It's a great job, and I look forward to each and every day, and I'm grateful for having the experience for 3? years. I truly haven't had any discussions about, or much consideration beyond, 2006.

Q: Your management style is not that of a cheerleader.

A: I would agree it's not my style to be the cheerleader type. I think I'm fairly outspoken about a number of things and try to point people in the right direction when it comes to public policy. I try to make appropriate remarks when I can.

Q: Would the commissioner's office benefit by a more outspoken leader?

A: It's probably true that at different times you need different types of leadership styles in different positions.

Q: What has the DNR accomplished under your leadership?

A: Three significant accomplishments come to mind.

One, the certification of our state forests by two independent auditors that we are managing our forests in a sustainable fashion and in a way that allows for multiple use.

Secondly, our acquisition of wildlife management areas, and funding for them, as I discussed earlier. We think it's critical for future generations. We made this a priority and it's a significant hallmark. We've received more funding in the past few years for wildlife management areas than in the previous 25 years.

We also have more conservation officers now than we've had in several decades, notwithstanding that we had a decrease in total appropriations in the previous biennium, and only a small increase in the current one.

Also, we've made concerted efforts to cut expenses. We've reduced our fleet and are more efficiently using the vehicles we have. We also cut back attorney fees, and are spending only a third of what the agency did before.

Q: But what about conservation?

A: I'm proud that we put together a conservation agenda and have updated it each year. We assign to each goal a measurable outcome we're trying to achieve. A typical conservation agenda would include everything from stocking walleyes to miles of stream protected to abandoned wells sealed to cords of wood cut.

Dennis Anderson ? danderson@startribune.com

?2006 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.