OPM: Other People’s Money?

October 16, 2008

The upcoming steel-cage smackdown to balance Connecticut’s budget -- a battle that has the potential to last far beyond the 2009 legislative session -- means ample overtime opportunities for employees of the Office of Policy and Management (OPM). The governor’s budget bureaucrats, led by former Norwalk pol Robert L. Genuario, will surely clash with leaders of the general assembly as the state attempts to claw its way out of multi-year deficits.

But OPM itself is symptomatic of the problem that has done so much to create Connecticut’s fiscal misery: mission creep. As legislative researchers observed in 1994, “the governor and the legislature have increasingly assigned to OPM responsibilities typically handled by the other line departments in the executive branch, that is, those that implement policy and programs.”

In 1977, the year it was created through a reorganization of state government, OPM spent $2.4 million -- the equivalent of about $7.8 million today. In the last three decades, the office’s budget has outpaced inflation a wee bit. It currently spends about $250 million. The bulk of that sum goes to local governments. Its Intergovernmental Policy Division “provides policy recommendations on intergovernmental issues, municipal finance, and property tax assessment and collection” and “administers property tax relief and formula grant programs.”

Still, a disturbingly high portion of OPM expenditures is devoted to tasks that involve neither number-crunching state government nor mailing reimbursement checks to cities and towns. For example, it parcels out subsidies to politically favored projects. Disbursements in the last 12 months include:

• $55,773 for Manchester’s teen center to hire a coordinator, create new programs, and do “community outreach”

• $50,000 to assist New Britain in planning “incentive housing zones”

• $25,000 for a new police cruiser in Middletown

• $25,000 to help pay installation costs for an emergency generator for Clinton

• $25,000 for horse-drawn carriage rides in Old Wethersfield

• $10,000 for a playscape expansion at a government school in Plymouth

• $10,000 for a Milford program that promotes “group dynamics and team-building” between police and teens

Some of these projects appear to have merit. But it’s difficult to understand why an office whose mission is to “provide information and analysis that the Governor needs in formulating public policy goals for the State and assist State agencies and municipalities in implementing policy decisions on behalf of the people of Connecticut” is funding them.

Beyond its role as an old-school porker, OPM dabbles in social engineering. Governor Rell’s “Office of Responsible Growth” is housed within OPM. Its job is to “revitalize cities, preserve the unique charm of our state and build livable, economically strong communities while protecting our natural resources for the enjoyment of future generations.” OPM also sends nearly $8 million to the Capital City Economic Development Authority, which has failed, in spectacular fashion, to revive “New England’s Rising Star.”

Other OPM superfluities include the “Office of the Business Advocate” -- run by ex-solon Rob Simmons, who has no business experience -- and the “Office of Ombudsman for Property Rights,” created after the state won U.S. Supreme Court approval for its “redevelopment” land grabs.

Instead of concocting ways to expand its empire, OPM should press the governor and lawmakers to return it to its mission of budgetary planning and analysis. A redesigned OPM would immediately conduct a review of what state expenditures support inherently governmental activities, and what programs and assets need one-way tickets to the private sector.

Next up would be the crafting of a comprehensive approach to get the best return for taxpayers for core public-sector priorities. That doesn’t necessarily mean mass layoffs. But it does require opening as many government functions as possible to bidding -- a process that allows for-profits, not-for-profits, and state employees to compete.

As a 2007 analysis by the Reason Foundation and San Diego Institute for Policy Research noted, public-sector contracting “has a successful and proven track record of lowering … costs while simultaneously improving the quality of … services.” Based on the findings of other entities, including the Center for Naval Analysis, General Accounting Office, Office of Management and Budget, and RAND Corporation, researchers conservatively concluded that San Diego could save as much as 25 percent of its $2.7 billion budget through bidding. (A quarter of Connecticut’s budget would top $4.5 billion.)

Genuario, a visionless technocrat, is not the best candidate to reorient OPM into a lean, focused, competitive-contracting machine. But given Wall Street’s implosion and Connecticut’s sickly economy, he doesn’t have a choice. Time to get to work, Bob.

D. Dowd Muska is a writer, commentator and lecturer. His website is www.dowdmuska.com.

# # # # #