These cuts are illustrating two facts about government accounting:
1.) Government's definition a cut is not the same as a normal business person's definition of a cut.
2.) When government agencies are required to make cuts, they will do it in the most painful and public way possible - rather than making the cuts in areas that are not mission critical.
Cutting Money That Wasn't Being Spent
Many people know that the government uses its own system of accounting called "fund accounting" - which is different than what most businesses use which is called "accrual accounting".
The reason government uses "fund accounting" is because it is easier to manipulate and play shell games with.
Holding 20 full-time positions vacant will save the DOT about $3.5 million, and the agency will reduce the budget for temporary employees by $1.4 million, Levi said.
In other words, there are and have been 20 full-time positions that NDDOT has not filled - and they will save $3.5 million by continuing to not fill those positions.
Beyond that, the Forum article also grazes over another under the radar issue that has been plaguing North Dakota state government for a long time
There has been a practice for many years to hide the true growth of the state government bureaucracy.
Since 2003, the number Full-Time Permanent positions in state government (excluding higher education) have grown from 8,386 in 2003 to 9,391 in the 2015-17 budget - a 12% increase.
But those numbers don't show the whole picture. It has become common practice to hire state employees and call them Temporary Positions, even if they are employed for years on end.
This approach is deceptive on both the front and back end.
On the front end, it hides the true growth of government and the bulking of the bureaucracy - something conservatives and Republicans should oppose.
On the back end, it hides the true impact of cuts on the previously bloated and unsustainable growth - something liberals and Democrats should oppose.
By hiding the true growth of government, and using a staffing technique that leads employees to think that the the word "temporary" is just a label for accounting purposes, it puts the employees themselves in a bad situation when it is time to make cuts.
The DOT has about 85 temporary employees in addition to its 1,050 regular employees, but Levi said he couldn't provide specifics on how many were being laid off, as some of those decisions have yet to be made.
"We had to tell some of them we no longer needed their services," he said, adding they were "difficult conversations."
Joey Roberson-Kitzman said he was told last Thursday by his manager in the DOT's Environmental and Transportation Services Division that his temporary position would be eliminated March 4 — the same day he was scheduled to close on the purchase of his first home.
"I was just in shock," he said. "You don't expect to pretty much lose a house before you have it because your stable job goes away."
Hired in May 2014 as an administrative officer II, the divorced father of two said he was previously told his 40 hours a week may be reduced but he now knows of at least three other DOT temporary employees losing their jobs to the budget cuts.
The state simply should not have been leading its employees on about how stable their jobs might be. Calling an employee "temporary" but keeping them on staff for nearly two years is simply not an ethical way to do business or treat your employees - government or private sector.
When compared to the laws that govern the private sector, this is like a business that keeps someone who is really an employee listed as an independent contractor for years on end.
It is just another case of the government not playing by the same rules and ethics it requires of the private sector.
No reductions in the number of state employees will be made as a result of budget cuts, but some families across the state will be impacted by cuts to human services programs.
Intentionally Making Cuts Painful
From 2003 to 2015, the state general fund spending has increased from $1.8 billion to $6 billion - an increase of 233% in 12 years.
Knowing that, most people would think that a 4.05% decrease would not be all that painful after a 233% increase.
But that's not how government agency heads think. Instead of minimizing the impact of a relatively small reduction - they like to maximize the pain to the public so that the very people the agency is supposed to help feel it the most.
Letters went out Wednesday to about 500 families who will lose their eligibility for the child-care assistance program on April 1 in a change estimated to save DHS about $5 million, Anderson said.
Lawmakers in 2013 expanded the eligibility from 50 percent to 85 percent of the state’s median income, but that will now be adjusted back to 60 percent, Anderson said. The average monthly cost per child has been $370 since the current biennium began July 1.
This approach to making cuts that the public sees rather than behind the scenes is very much like the tactics used in the federal government by Democrats to make Republicans look bad during the government shutdowns.
There will likely need to be another round of cuts prior to the 2017 session.
North Dakota will thrive despite what is happening in government, but the fact is: the biggest problems are in government - despite what some might think.
