It's not often that the Interior Department calls, and so when caller ID indicated it was someone in the department calling, I answered the phone. The funny thing about that call, though, was it was going on six years late in coming.
The caller worked in the Office of Inspector General's Freedom of Information Office. Back in November 2009, you see, the Traveler had filed a Freedom of Information Act request into how the National Park Service handled an investigation into alleged embezzlement from the Hubbell Trading Post National Historic Site.
Ten days after we submitted that request, a letter arrived announcing that the request had been received and assigned a case number.
Ten MONTHS later we received another letter, this one apologizing for the long delay in meeting that request. Did we, it went on, still want to pursue the matter?
Yes, we dutifully replied. And then the years of silence ensued.
This despite President Barack Obama's Inauguaral-day pledge that his administration would be the most transparent in history, and that the FOIA process in particular was vitally important.
"The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails," the president wrote in a proclamation endorsing FOIA. "The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by the disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative of abstract fears. Nondisclosure should never be based on an effort to protect the personal interests of Government officials at the expense of those they are supposed to serve."
Well, the years of silence were finally broken the other week when that caller from the Office of Inspector General asked whether we were still interested pursuing the request for the Hubbell investigation. "No," I replied, "but I do wonder why it took six years to hear from you?"
The answer, she said, was a staffing shortage that created a tremendous backlog of FOIA requests to handle.
Now, it's worth noting that most of the information we were seeking was long ago secured pursuant to a FOIA lawsuit filed by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, who thankfully shared it with us. It should be noted, too, that PEER only sued after its FOIA request for the information was ignored. It seems like it's become almost de-facto that normal FOIA requests are ignored, a strategy that leaves the average citizen with little hope of seeing the requested documents, unless they have the wherewithal to sue.
Even more details - most extremely troubling in nature - were subsequently provided in Paul Berkowitz's 2011 book, The Case of the Indian Trader. (As a relevant side-note, Indian Trader Billy Malone's lawsuit is still making its way through the courts, and scheduled for oral arguments in the 9th Circuit on March 14 of this year.)
Nevertheless, this long-overdue response to our FOIA request into the Hubbell Trading Post scandal brought to mind a long list of other requests the Traveler has made for information from the National Park Service -- both in the form of documents as well as basic requests for interviews with the Obama administration's Park Service director, Jon Jarvis.
While most of our requests have been met, we're still hoping for an interview with Director Jarvis. Among the questions we'd like to ask:
* What, if anything, did he do to help Rob Danno in his whistleblower case at Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park that derailed his Park Service career for nearly 10 years? Why is the superintendent that Danno's case revolved around still a superintendent?
* Does Director Jarvis support the proposed management plan for the Yosemite Valley that critics have said doesn't get to the core of the valley's human problem?
* Did he read Sen. Tom Coburn's report, Parked! How Congress' Misplaced Priorities Are Trashing Our National Treasures and what is his opinion of it?
* As secretary of the National Park Foundation, did Director Jarvis support that group's licensing of its name to a company that sells after-market off-road equipment for pickup trucks and SUVs, and to another that makes air fresheners? More specifically, does he believe trucks designed for off-road travel promote environmental consciousness in the parks, and do chemically created wafts of park scents entice visitors to the parks?
* What does Director Jarvis think of congressional efforts to permit logging in areas of Yosemite National Park that were burned last year by the Rim Fire?
* What, if anything, can the director do to help the plight of seasonal rangers, as outlined in a recent Traveler column by PJ Ryan?
These are just an easily grabbed handful of topics that we'd like to discuss with the director. Unfortunately, we're presented with a directorship that is all but silent, publicly at least, on a range of issues that go to the heart of how the National Park System is managed.
Traveler has had a standing request in to the director's office for an interview, and been rebuffed time and again for reasons we can't pinpoint. Director Jarvis's most recent predecessors, Mary Bomar and Fran Mainella, weren't as hard to pin down.
True, politics of the day, and legal impediments, can require a measure of restraint from the Park Service director. But as manager of the world's greatest National Park System, with oversight of a neaerly $3 billion annual budget, and with a workforce of roughly 20,000, his stance/thoughts on a range of topics that are of interest to both the general public and the National Park Service staff deserves transparency and response.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Based on my experiences with retired NPS folks on this board, I wouldn't hold my breath that any of them would stand up for the right thing for Danno. They are not denizens of that culture. many ARE that culture. All it takes is a few dozen good men to do nothing to allow evil to perpetuate. Again, I know there are some good folks in the NPS. I'm still like Diogenes awaiting an honest manager, retired or not.
SmokiesBackpacker,
Please tread carefully, and don't use a broadbrush approach. There are many fine individuals among the ranks of NPS retirees, many who have long supported the Traveler and helped when they could. Many would indeed stand up for Danno, and I know some who are greatly concerned with the current state of the NPS.
Kurt, you don't have to ask Jarvis for his opinion of Sen. Colburn's report. His opinion was published under the letterhead of the Coalition of NPS Retires. I wouldn't be surprised if their reaction wasn't researched and drafted by people on the taxpayer dime in DOI headquarters. You can't produce that kind of reaction on the same day a major report like that is released without plenty of foreknowledge of what it would say.
There was at least, to be sure, some cooperation between those in government and those in the CNPSR to produce their reaction to the Colburn report --government acting as an interest group on its on behalf --pretty unseemly.
Kurt,
As you will see, the bottom of my post says, "I know there are some good folks in the NPS". That is not a broad brush. But regarding honest NPS managers, I stand firm in my personal experience that I am still waiting to run across one. And that is from my personal dealings both in the Smokies and on this forum. Many retired NPS folks here are first to attack and attempt to discredit anyone that disagrees with the NPS. And that is the cultural problem that Jarvis has cultivated and apparently perpetuates. The rank and file NPS folks are some good people. That is not of whom we are speaking here.
Could there possibly be some trickle down going on:)? Am just pointing out the culture that the top managers of our parks live in. A crazy place and getting crazier...
http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2014/02/18/our-decadent-elites/
We have a saying in Wyoming: Shoot, Shovel & Shut Up. The National Park Service has adopted this policy.
Gee. Smokiesbackpacker, I'm sorry we don't live up to your expectations. I suggest you go back and read my review of Danno's book and then ask yourself if I did the right thing.
Rick
Director Jarvis has failed in his leadership responsibilities and this fact is reflected in the consistently plummeting results of the annual employee survey of the Best Places to Work in the Federal Government. This year, the NPS dropped again to 200th out of 300 tested agencies. More to the point, the NPS "leadership" was rated by its own employees 250th out of 300. Director Jarvis tellingly blamed these failures on the impacts of "sequestration," the government shutdown and overall poor budgets. However, every rated federal agency in the survey experienced these same conditions and 200 of them still rated higher than the NPS, despite the many structural advantages of the NPS. Of course, the NPS has many advantages, like: managing our national treasures and places where people come to form lasting memories, a dedicated and educated work force, which is mission driven and so much more. Yet, the NPS work force is extremely unhappy with its leadership, that is, Jarvis and his management selections. Of course, he has never addressed these leadership failures in the survey, pivoting to the overall poor ranking. Good leaders never run from the "bad news," the embrace it and use it as fuel to make the organization better.
Just take a quick look at a short listing of failures under Jarvis:
1) Stalled / Impeded media FOIA requests for years, regarding the Mt. Rainer concessionaire who bought his Asst. Superintendent, David Uberuaga's personal home for a grossly inflated price, then tried to cover it up. Park whistle blowers disclosed the conflict of interest and malfeasance.
2) Promoted David Uberuaga to the Superintendent of Grand Canyon, managing a park with massive concession issues.
3) Derailed Grand Canyon plan to eliminate plastic water bottles from the park, when he received complaints from Coca Cola. Director Jarvis denied this and cited safety concerns, but PEER exposed his false statements through documents received through a FOIA request. Director Jarvis had to reverse his decision and alone the park to exclude water bottles.
4) Director Jarvis did nothing when it was discovered through an OIG investigation that Gettysburg Superintendent, John Latschar had used his government computer to view, download and store massive amounts of porn on his government computer. A whistle blower disclosed this fact to the Washington Post, embarrassing Director Jarvis and exposing the workings of the "Superintendents Club." Director Jarvis then had to reassign Latschar to another park service unit, maintaining another example of a clear Superintendent double standard, and only took the action after the case was disclosed to the public.
5) Initiated and maintained an unethical case against Indian Trader, Billy Malone, even after it was confirmed through both NPS and DOIOIG investigation that the NPS conducted a bad faith investigation. The NPS is still fighting Mr. Malone and has still not made this right.
6) Maintained the unethical case against the Chief of the United States Park Police, Teresa Chambers until MSPB ordered the NPS to reinstate her and pay her over two million dollars of back pay, citing reprisal for her whistle blowing. Even after the MSPB order, the NPS fought against Chief Chambers reinstatement.
7) Maintained the unethical case against Chief Ranger Rob Danno, who blew the whistle on Superintendent, Kevin Brandt and past Director, Mainella for authorizing the unlawful tree cutting along the C&O Canal by billionaire owner of the Washington Redskins, Dan Snyder. The NPS settled due to the involvement of the Office of Special Counsel and PEER. Of course, Superintendent, Brandt is still the Superintendent, another double standard.
8) Maintained the unethical case against Superintendent, Mary Miller at Sitka National Historic park, until MSPB ordered the NPS to reinstate her as Superintendent and pay her back pay, due to the discrimination she suffered by the NPS.
9) Maintained the unethical position of stating the NPS was exercising its "discretionary authority" not to repair a known hazard at Lassen Volcanic NP, after a 9 year old boy, Tommy Botell was killed when a retaining wall failed. A federal judge ruled against the NPS and its park employees, after our own Special Agent testified against the park. The judge specifically stated that Superintendent Darlene Koontz destroyed evidence, obstructed the investigation and lied under oath. Of course, Koontz is still the Superintendent.
So, you ask about "transparency" and the leadership of Director Jarvis? This is just a short public listing of issues and failures. Is there any wonder why there is a lack of confidence is the director's leadership? We know that we often get very poor leaders when political appointees are moved in (Mainella, etc.) However, Director Jarvis knows us and our problems. He is a career employee and knows how badly the NPS needs reform, real management systems and ethical and inspired leadership. We need his leadership to conduct serious reforms, not just hang around for the centennial party. Clearly, we are disappointed. He has let us down, choosing to fulfill his long-time ambition of becoming director, then failing to know what to do with the privilege of its authority.