Each week, Capitol Corner highlights someone involved with the legislative process. This week, James Dawson spoke with Rakesh Mohan, director of the Office of Performance Evaluation, about the latest attempt to reconfigure the office under partisan control.
This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity. To receive more interviews like this one during the legislative session, please subscribe to our Legislative Round-up newsletter.
James Dawson:
So, Rakesh, I have to ask you, earlier today – we're speaking on Thursday – the House voted to approve a bill that would essentially restructure your office and get rid of JLOC (the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee, which currently directs the Office of Performance Evaluation). Do you have any comment on that?
Rakesh Mohan:
Yes, I do. I'm very disappointed with the vote and I quite don't understand even the reasons for the bill. And the facts were not presented in the debate. Well, maybe I shouldn't be saying that. There's a lot of confusion about the bill, about JLOC and OPE and how the bill changes pretty much everything.
Dawson:
I was going to say that, at least [House Majority Leader Megan Blanksma’s] characterization of the bill, while it covered parts of it, did not encompass the entire effects the bill would have.
Mohan:
And she repeatedly said that it is only about JLOC, it's not about OPE, and OPE will get to do everything the same way. That's not in the bill.
Dawson:
For those who don't know what OPE is, what would your explanation be to, let's say, a middle schooler? How would you describe it to them?
Mohan:
The one sentence explanation would be The Office of Performance Evaluation is an independent oversight agency. It is an independent oversight agency that looks at the state agencies, policies and programs and any other entity that receives state funds. We look at the use of those state funds and if any other agency has to follow certain rules and regulations and laws, we look at those things to see whether they are operating, using the funds and complying with the laws in an efficient and effective manner and doing what they are supposed to be doing.
Dawson:
And how are you directed to analyze those programs and agencies?
Mohan:
So, even though we are an independent agency of the legislature, we work for the entire legislature, but our authority comes from the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee. The Joint Legislative Oversight Committee is the only legislative entity in Idaho that is equally bipartisan.
And it is this committee that receives the request from any legislators, any legislator can submit a request, or if a private citizen wants to submit a request, they have to go through a legislator to submit a request. And then all those requests are considered at a public meeting.
At that meeting, requesters come and give a brief presentation to tell why they are requesting and what is the importance of this request? How they plan to use the information, how it will make a difference for the people of Idaho. And then after that, the committee decides which three to five new projects we’ll work on.
Then, the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee steps back, and then we decide the scope of this study. We share the draft with the requester and share the draft with the committee members to ask for their input. But their input is only input. We don't have to take it. We have the ultimate authority to say what the final scope would be.
And there was a big discussion about that. There was some confusion in 2007 and there was a discussion. There were certain members of JLOC who wanted to have control over approving the scope and I argued against that. After a long discussion the committee decided in my favor that it should be the OPE’s responsibility to decide ultimately what should be the scope of the study.
That's an important thing because the scope can tend to skew the study. That's the best time to insert any kind of politics there. Members have no role in us conducting the evaluation.
Dawson:
You mentioned something interesting there in 2007 where lawmakers were considering the different ways that JLOC could interact with OPE. Have there been any other attempts, aside from a couple of years ago when Rep. Wendy Horman tried to bring OPE under the control of [the Joint Finance and Appropriation Committee]?
Mohan:
Yes. In 2014, [Sen. Dean Mortimer (R-Idaho Falls)] was interested and he said this thing in-person to me in private meetings about his idea to make some changes in the process of JLOC. I said, “I don't think so. This isn’t going to work and it's not a good thing.” But I said, “I work for you guys, the committee, so you get to decide it, so I'll put it on the agenda.”
Senator Mortimer, and he was the co-chair of JLOC at that time, his argument was that if JLOC members get the draft report earlier and they can review the draft and make changes and suggestions for improvement to the report, then it will be more useful to policy makers.
My argument was that … the public, knowing that it has been reviewed by JLOC and they had the opportunity to suggest certain things, then the report will lose its credibility – at least [there] would be a perception that it's not an independent report. [Mortimer] said, “No, no, no, you don't have to take those suggestions.” I said, I understand that but the public would not see that.
The issue never came for a vote within the committee and it was debated down by another Republican, Maxine Bell (R-Jerome).
Dawson:
What do you think would be lost with this restructuring as it's envisioned in the bill that's now going to the Senate?
Mohan:
Our product would not have the same credibility as it enjoys now and it has enjoyed for all these years. It will be totally lost. That's one negative thing about this proposed change.
The current statute explains that we can look at cities and counties, local governments, we can look at if they are following the state laws and that that will be gone. So, many reports like we have done on the impact of state mandates on county governments and state general fund dollars to public health districts. Those things will not be there.
Volunteer providers of emergency medical services, the state’s response to Alzheimer's disease. Again, those reports will not be done.
Dawson:
This bill would also only require a simple majority to appoint the OPE director, compared to 75% from JLOC. I have to ask, are you concerned about your job? You just celebrated 20 years [as director].
Mohan:
I'm not concerned about my job, but I'm concerned about the jobs of my staff.
I'm not concerned about my job because I've done it for 20 years and if they don't want me, then that's OK in the sense that I can retire. But my staff cannot retire, and I have the best staff anyone can hope for or dream for. They make me look good every day.
Dawson:
Yeah. I end these interviews asking everybody, what's your favorite part of the Capitol as a building, the Capitol as something that we just have a concept of in our mind or the legislature in general?
Mohan:
None of that.
Dawson:
Okay. What is it, then?
Mohan:
Even with the introduction of this bill, in spite of that, every day I am grateful for having this opportunity, having this privilege, to serve the people of Idaho. Our work makes a difference.
Look at the examples of the work of Alzheimer's disease, residential care, Southwest Idaho Treatment Center, child protection, public education, all of that. Those developments that took place about teacher pay and career ladder for teachers? That came out of our report in 2013.
It is being able to serve the people of Idaho. They have placed their confidence and trust in me that, until this bill, nobody has questioned my independence, objectivity. And so knowing that is the biggest thing I enjoy. And it gives me goosebumps every day. I think about it because just knowing that people in the entire state, they trust me, that has a big responsibility on my shoulders.
Follow James Dawson on Twitter @RadioDawson for more local news.
Copyright 2023 Boise State Public Radio
