Posted on: Friday, April 30, 2004

EDITORIAL
Business fund should not go to general costs

In the chess game that involves vetoes by Republican Gov. Linda Lingle and the Democrats who control the state Legislature, there is one move that is not worth the effort.

That's the move that would have the Legislature dip into some $32 million collected by the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs to finance its operations. The money, held in something called the Compliance Resolution Fund, is generated by various fees and assessments levied by the department.

The move to make the department self-supporting, in other words, almost totally reliant on fees charged its customers, began during the previous Cayetano administration.

It is a sensible example of fee-for-service administration. And in theory, it makes bureaucrats more sensitive to the needs of their "customers" since their livelihood depends on fees paid.

Now, in theory it can be argued that the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs does not work for the business community; it works for the public whose interests it is supposed to protect.

But businesses themselves depend on evenhanded administration of the rules and regulations. So it is reasonable to expect that the fees business pays translates into quality service.

Because there is a surplus in the resolution fund, the Legislature sought to draw that money back into the general fund. Future operations would be paid out of the general fund just as any other state service.

It's clear the $32 million that would be generated would help balance the budget. But it would also disrupt an unusually successful example of getting government to pay for itself.

If there is a surplus over and above what it takes to run the department, the money should be returned to those who paid it rather than plowing it back into the general fund.

This is one veto by Gov. Lingle that should be sustained.