Last November we had an election. Elections change government, which, after all, is why we have them.
During different parts of our history, cronyism and corruption often meant that someone's relative got a job, or lost a job, based on results of an election. Fortunately, after the 2004 voting we largely escaped this eroding political practice of the past.
Still, the changes elections bring are not always easy. New leaders, such as Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. or Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon, need to make the changes they decide are necessary - especially in the personnel area - quickly, decisively and for the right reason, that is, to implement new policies. Old dogs can learn new tricks, but old appointed public officials tend to revert back to old policies they helped create.
For example, during my four-year tenure in the federal government during the Clinton administration, I supervised a senior executive who was in charge of one of the most important areas of the Bureau of Land Management but who simply could not make a final decision. After several attempts at getting him to resolve important policy questions, I decided to move him.
Firing him was not, and most often is not, an option in the civil service at the state or federal level. It took six months, and the expenditure of a large amount of political capital and emotional energy, to find that man a new place outside the agency.
One other strategy related to political change in our free society is the "leak" and "spin." In Washington I came to expect when I was making a change that was meeting resistance within the BLM, that I would read my name in an unflattering context in the newspaper.
This "spin" resulted from a timely leak to the press by the person I was trying to move or fire who thought the secret salvo would save their job. It had the opposite effect on me, as a decision maker, but, unfortunately, it did divert the public's attention from thinking about the policy change I, and others, were trying to make. Public policy should be about real economic and political decisions, not personalities.
Political leadership in appointed political positions requires building a team. This team building is impossible if someone on the team is attempting to resurrect the "good old days."
If one evaluates Ball's firing as simple arithmetic, that is the Legislature complained about his past performance and the new administration fired him to get political favor, such evaluation does not take into account the verities of government.
At the beginning of an administration, individuals who are resisting the changes sought by the new leader and are sowing the seeds of discontent should be relieved of their position.
Senior appointed positions in the executive branch, even in quasi-independent agencies like the Utah Committee of Consumer Services, are not permanent or tenured positions. Ball thought otherwise. Therefore, from my perspective, his departure was required.
By way of disclosure, Leslie Reberg, Mr. Ball's replacement, is a friend of mine and the wife of my 1994 campaign manager, Mike Reberg, when I ran against Sen. Orrin Hatch. Some will suspect that this entire column was written to smooth the way for Leslie, but it had no such genesis. In my usual Don Quixote way, I believe the public should be informed about the "real story" behind the change occurring in the Utah Committee of Consumer Services.
I wish Ball good luck in whatever his new endeavor turns out to be. In the meantime, we need to allow the changes emerging from our recent election to happen.
We need to be watchful of new policies and less concerned about which personalities hold positions. Our judgment, to be exercised at the next election, should be on the new public policies and their results.
---
Pat Shea, a Democrat, served on the transition teams for Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. and Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon.
