Bureau of Land Management headquarters to return to D.C., reversing Trump decision
Source: Washington Post
Interior Secretary Deb Haaland delivers remarks during the opening ceremony of “In America: Remember,” a public art installation commemorating all the Americans who have died due to covid-19, on Sept. 17 near the Washington Monument in D.C. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
The Interior Department will summon the far-flung headquarters of the Bureau of Land Management back to Washington from the mountains of western Colorado, reversing a move by the Trump administration that caused upheaval within the agency and led to nearly 90 percent of the former headquarters staff to retire, quit or leave for other jobs.Interior Secretary Deb Haaland broke the news to BLM staffers on a phone call Friday afternoon, before the announcement was made public in a statement shortly afterward.
Haaland said the agency will create a new “Western headquarters” in Grand Junction, Colo. During the staff call, Haaland said her “primary concern has always been for your well being and to restore the effectiveness of the BLM’s operations.” “I know the past few years have been difficult for many of you. The relocation of the BLM headquarters scattered employees and programs across the West, driven others out of the agency, and put enormous stress on those who remained,” Haaland said, according to the call heard by The Washington Post.
Haaland and other BLM leaders have been surveying employees about the headquarters move to Grand Junction, which was completed last year at the end of the Trump administration. The move led to widespread stress and frustration among headquarters staff in Washington, who were given a deadline of last summer to move to rural Colorado or other Western cities, or lose their jobs, despite the pandemic. Of the 328 positions that were slated to move out of Washington, 287 employees either retired or quit for other jobs, Haaland noted during a visit to Grand Junction in July.
Just three people ultimately ended up relocating to Grand Junction, she told reporters at the time, and the headquarters ended up with more than 80 vacancies.The Trump administration justified the move, saying the vast majority of the public lands managed by the BLM is in the Western United States and the move would put leadership closer to that land. But current and former employees have said they believe the intention was to weaken the agency that does environmental assessments and regulates fossil fuel and other energy interests.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/09/17/bureau-land-management-headquarters-return-dc-reversing-trump-decision/
= new reply since forum marked as read
when my dad worked at the VA (then called the Veteran's Administration) as a computer programmer, the agency had drawn up plans to consolidate his function in Austin, TX. I remember my parents discussing it and getting ready to do the process of "house-hunting" while me and my sisters were looking up (in the trusty "Word Book Encyclopedia" ) where Austin was.
Eventually neither the consolidation nor the move happened, but I always chuckle that I was thisclose to being a Texan.
I know during various times during my federal career before retiring, there have been consolidations and reorganizations and just all sorts of disruptions. The agency would then have employees take training in "Embracing change". And then a new administration would come in and some of that "embraced change" was shelved and... Next! Wash. Rinse. Repeat. 
because I remember when this similar type of thing happened oh so long ago, promoted by a different "Senator from West Virginia" ...
By Eric Schmitt
Feb. 24, 1992
The Central Intelligence Agency's proposal to build an office complex in West Virginia resulted directly from the influence a powerful West Virginia Senator has on winning financing for the compound, an internal agency investigation has concluded. An examination of agency relocation plans by the agency's inspector general found that C.I.A. officials chose a site in West Virginia over less expensive locations in Virginia because Senator Robert C. Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat who heads the Senate Appropriations Committee, could help the agency receive money for the project.
The inquiry, which was reported in The Washington Post today, found no evidence that Senator Byrd or agency officials violated any laws or Federal ethics rules. But the report criticized agency officials for failing to keep members of Congress informed of the decision process, and for "an attitude that was markedly inconsistent with what would be expected of a group working on a billion-dollar project," said an official familiar with the study, quoting from it.
When Senator Byrd stepped down as majority leader three years ago to head the powerful Appropriations Committee, he said he was doing so to funnel a billion dollars worth of Federal projects and agencies into his impoverished state. The Appropriations Committee is one of the biggest sources of project financing, or political "pork," in Congress, and Mr. Byrd has tapped it without hesitation to help his friends back home and in the Senate, strengthening both himself and his state. "I hope to become West Virginia's billion-dollar industry," the Senator told a crowd in Clarksburg, W.Va., in June 1990. "I expect in my term to bring at least a billion dollars to West Virginia."
Consolidation Plan
The immediate issue is the C.I.A.'s plans to move 6,000 workers now housed in 21 leased offices in the Washington area to two new proposed compounds, one in Jefferson County, W.Va., and the other in Prince William County, Va. The agency's headquarters would remain in Langley, Va., just outside Washington.
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/24/us/cia-seeks-west-virginia-move-because-that-s-where-money-is.html
Incentives, incentives.
is the "earmark" benefit to such relocations.
In the case of the BLM move, one of the ones promoting it, who was the (D) Governor of Colorado at the time, is now a (D) Senator for the state. And he, along with the (D) Senator Michael Bennet (now the senior Senator of CO), still want something there -
https://www.bennet.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/1/bennet-hickenlooper-reiterate-support-for-a-fully-fledged-blm-headquarters-in-grand-junction-urge-biden-administration-to-work-with-colorado-delegation
January 23, 2021
Denver — Colorado U.S. Senators Michael Bennet (D) and John Hickenlooper (D) reiterated their longstanding, consistent support for a fully functioning Bureau of Land Management (BLM) headquarters in Grand Junction, Colorado.
Despite committing to move the BLM headquarters to Grand Junction, the Department of the Interior assigned 41 senior staff positions to Grand Junction, many of which they rushed to fill at the end of 2020. After the scaled-down move was announced, the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel editorial board wrote, “We're stuck between feeling grateful that Grand Junction will be known as the BLM's Western Headquarters and frustrated that such a distinction has been hollowed out to its barest impact.”
In a letter to President Joe Biden, the senators touted the benefits of a fully-fledged headquarters on the Western Slope and urged the Biden Administration to work with the bipartisan members of the Colorado Congressional Delegation on the BLM headquarters move.
“We continue to support a full BLM headquarters in Grand Junction. We believe that such an effort must be more than symbolic and must include the staff and resources to improve management and protect our public land,” wrote the senators. “A full headquarters in Colorado would not only grow the Western Colorado economy, but also send an important signal that rural America is an appropriate place for such a prestigious institution.”
Bennet has supported moving the BLM national headquarters out West for years, commenting on the idea in August 2017. In March 2018, Bennet encouraged then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to visit Grand Junction and select it as the new headquarters location. In July 2019, Bennet applauded the proposal to move BLM headquarters to Grand Junction as an investment in the community while noting that more work must be done to ensure a true national headquarters was established in Grand Junction.
As Governor, Hickenlooper advocated for the BLM to move its headquarters to Grand Junction and touted the economic benefits for the state.
The text of the letter is available HERE and below.
Dear Mr. President:
We write to express our continued support for a fully functioning Bureau of Land Management (BLM) headquarters in Grand Junction, Colorado.
Early on in the Trump Administration, the Department of the Interior (DOI) indicated that it would move the BLM Headquarters to a western state. This announcement led states and cities across the West to believe that hundreds of employees would move to a single city, improving BLM’s customer service and public land management.
Throughout the Trump Administration’s search for a new headquarters location, we expressed support for and encouraged a move to Colorado for many reasons. The BLM’s multiple-use mission aligns closely with the values of Coloradans who use our public land – whether for hiking, grazing, hunting, mountain biking, or resource development. We felt that a headquarters in Grand Junction would provide BLM leadership the opportunity to live, work, and recreate on the Western Slope. It simply makes sense that the public servants who manage our public lands should live among the natural resources they oversee. When combined with sufficient resources, experienced leadership, and proper priorities, such a move could improve agency decision making.
In July 2019, then-Secretary Bernhardt announced that the BLM headquarters would move to Grand Junction, Colorado and just over a year later the DOI signed an order formalizing this move. Despite these important and symbolic steps, the Trump Administration did not follow through on their commitment to Grand Junction. The BLM assigned only 41 senior staff positions to relocate to Grand Junction, positions that they had to rush to fill at the end of 2020. While this is a reasonable start and is appreciated by the Western Slope, the job is far from finished. When the DOI announced the scaled down move, the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel commented, “A day after feeling like this was a game-changer for Grand Junction, the letdown is palpable. We're stuck between feeling grateful that Grand Junction will be known as the BLM's Western Headquarters and frustrated that such a distinction has been hollowed out to its barest impact.” We share these sentiments. Now more than ever the BLM must work at its highest capacity as climate change drives more catastrophic wildfires and severe drought across the West.
We continue to support a full BLM headquarters in Grand Junction. We believe that such an effort must be more than symbolic and must include the staff and resources to improve management and protect our public land. A full headquarters in Colorado would not only grow the Western Colorado economy, but also send an important signal that rural America is an appropriate place for such a prestigious institution. Therefore, we encourage you to work with the bipartisan members of the Colorado delegation and other congressional leaders to find a path forward for the BLM headquarters in Grand Junction, Colorado.
Sincerely,
Don't know what to say.
I think that the way they define "earmarks" or "pork" can also be considered "redistributing taxpayer money back to the taxpayers". Of course part of that problem is that some are more crafty than others getting those funds to their local communities, where you may have one state loaded up with "job-creating projects", while others barely get anything. So the process really needs some major overhauls.
You almost always point out great contexts of history and detailed information. And in this case, structural issues that frustrate change because of old norms.
I love BLM. I appreciate that it's already had offices in every western state I've visited (since I have a card that lets me go on BLM land). Moving back to Washington won't be zero sum, given the existence of BLM offices out west.
I don't know what to say, either, except that oversight needs overhauling so that Democrats aren't on this treadmill of repair every blasted time they run two branches. Like committee oversight rules that work on behalf of the whole country, and won't allow for earmarks that would or could override or undermine agency regulations that work on behalf of the whole country.
"Pork" was originally a pejorative for good reason. Agencies' serve the nation's long term interests, first, at odds with Congress persons' short term serving of their states. That congressional norm might have to end, so that, like this presidency, Congress must see itself as governing for humans' property interests, not corporations' constitutional interests. Schumer must get bolder about oversight.
was a "master" at calling out the "earmarks". In every budget debate (and I watched a pile to see what would happen with funding for my own agency at the time), he would often show up and literally wave his list of earmarks that "others" were requesting, and would read them into the Congressional record. He literally became a fixture at every budget debate.
For example, when he was a member of the House -
and when he was in the Senate -
And as a sidenote, I have been fortunate to visit CO twice and it certainly is a beautiful state. It still boggled my mind flying into Colorado Springs, after literally flying almost 2,000 miles over "flat" farmland and then seeing the sudden appearance of the Rockies rising up out of the ground like a wall, with the city nestled alongside them. Coming into Denver was even more dramatic because the city's skyscrapers looked like "weeds" popping up out of the flat ground.
And earmarks don't have to be old jurassic "pork" skating by without review. They can be shifted through oversight committees as points of monitoring to assure that agencies spend where the money's needed.
I've been back and forth to CO, visiting, touring, rafting, hiking; it kinda went with an old summer custody arrangement for my daughter back in the day, first in the Colorado Springs & Cripple Creek environs, then in Denver, Boulder and environs. Yeah, it's beautiful there and I'm glad it's getting bluer.
