ANALYSIS : DFG Plan: Bailout or Shell Game?

People who think Pete Bontadelli set off false alarms when he said his California Department of Fish and Game was going bankrupt have it all wrong, the director says.

At best, as Bontadelli walked around Sacramento with his pockets turned out, it seemed that he was merely trying to arouse legislative support to offset $12.6 million in budget cuts mandated by the legislative analyst, which, Bontadelli implied, would have required mass layoffs and destroyed management of game and non-game species alike.

The latter concern even drew some anxious anti- hunting interests to his side.

Then, suddenly, Bontadelli came up with a rescue package that would solve all the problems--most of which, critics charge, were of his own making. What kind of shell game was he playing, anyway?

No shell game, he says, just some politicking that he hopes will resolve the DFG’s cash-flow problems once and for all.

Part of it is a $9.787-million package recently approved by the governor that includes a $5.3-million measure--AB 2126 sponsored by Assemblyman Gerald Felando (R-San Pedro)--for new commercial fishing revenues. That would leave the DFG only $3.6 million short of the $140 million it would like to spend in this new fiscal year.

Bontadelli hoped to complete the DFG bailout by borrowing the $3.6 million from the state’s Off Highway Vehicle, or “green sticker,” registration fund.

Bob Ham, a legislative representative for the California Off Road Vehicle Assn. (CORVA), said: “Our people aren’t happy about it.”

Each OHV in the state is supposed to buy a $20 green sticker every two years, in lieu of a street-legal registration. Only about one-third of perhaps a million do, but the money is supposed to be spent to enhance OHV activity.

The other part of Bontadelli’s plan is AB 3158 by Assemblyman Jim Costa (D-Fresno) that would loosen up financial restrictions by amending Section 711 (c) of the Fish and Game Code and moving the Fish and Game Preservation Fund for hunting and sportfishing into the state’s General Fund.

Section 711 (c) evolved from the Gualco Act of 1978 conceived by CalTrout, a sportsmen’s lobby. It states, with good intentions: “The costs of hunting and sportfishing programs shall be provided solely out of hunting and sportfishing revenues . . . (and) these revenues shall not be used to support (other programs).”

Assemblywoman Doris Allen (R-Cypress), a dedicated Bontadelli adversary, accused the DFG of violating Section 711 (c) for years. Bontadelli admitted it.

“At no time since that provision was enacted has that section been fully complied with,” he said.

He claimed that the problem is one of ambiguity, as pointed out by the legislative analyst, when sport programs cross over into environmental programs--a growing problem in recent years.

For example, this year, Environmental License Plate funds were used for salmon and steelhead restoration, “which is technically illegal under 711,” Bontadelli said. “(But) it is perfectly legal pursuant to the use of ELP funds and has therefore been authorized.”

Also, Prop. 99, the tobacco tax measure of 1989, allows funds to be spent for waterfowl, wildlife and fishery programs.

“To the degree those benefit a game or commercial species, they are in violation--not of Prop. 99, but of 711,” Bontadelli said.

“Therefore, what we are recommending in (AB 3158) is that the word solely be stricken (from 711); and that, two, the legislature be authorized to spend any other funds that they choose to for those programs.”

Bontadelli also wants the Fish and Game Preservation Fund to become part of the General Fund, “largely from an accounting standpoint. Right now, we have all expenditures made first out of the Preservation Fund and, to the degree we have reimbursements, we are reimbursed. If we go the reverse, all expenditures would be made out of the General Fund, and it basically reverses the burden of proof to further protect the hunting and fishing dollars.”

It still sounds like a shell game to Bontadelli’s critics--especially Allen. Even with Felando’s $5.3-million commercial fishing bill, she said, the commercials still wouldn’t be paying their fair share of DFG enhancement programs as compared to revenues derived from the sale of sportfishing and hunting licenses.

Furthermore, she accused Bontadelli of withholding his funding plan while crying poverty at the budget cuts.

“Bontadelli was using misinformation about the situation with the budget to create a frenzy to push through this so-called ‘rescue package,’ ” said Sam Roth, an aide to Allen. “They were working on that the whole time. They never told anybody about Part B (recovery play).”

Bontadelli said: “At that point, we did not have authors for the bills. It took some time to negotiate and put through the administrative process. (Also), I didn’t even have a signed budget to address until July 31. I couldn’t have submitted an alternative.”

Finally, Bontadelli has been accused of creating his own budget crisis through overspending. His pet $1.5-million Wildlands Program, which generated only about $150,000 in revenue, is often thrown back at him.

“We did not overspend our authorized level of appropriation,” Bontadelli said. “Our income failed to meet projections by $10 million.”

Part of those projections were license sales that continued to drop.

Dick May, president of CalTrout, likes Bontadelli’s plans, with reservations.

“The legislatures and the governors ever since the 1970s have engaged in a cooperative (effort) to break the law,” May said, referring to the misuse of Section 711 (c).

But May believes that the revenues will be placed in “a special account that has ironclad protection against raids from welfare, schools, mental health and all the other programs,” and until he hears otherwise, he’s not going to worry.

Everyone seems to agree that supporting fish and wildlife is no longer solely the responsibility of hunters and fishermen.

“It’s been a festering sore,” May said. “These governors and legislatures over the years have had an unspoken conspiracy to prevent the General Fund from taking on its fair share of the responsibility.”

Bontadelli said: “The Legislature has the clear authority to use other funds, such as ELP, Prop. 99 or even the General Fund, to pay for programs that impact the state’s entire population. The department has been consistent in our statement that the hunting and fishing public has been carrying for years the entire burden of conservation. Many of the activities we now perform are for all the citizens of California, not solely for the benefit of the sport hunting and fishing public.”

How important is Bontadelli’s package?

“If our entire funding package goes as proposed, for the first time ever, the department would be in full compliance with 711,” Bontadelli said. “We would be able to restore the hunting program, the marine area, the environmental service areas and restore part of the inland fisheries cuts.

“If nothing is restored and the cuts are allowed to stand precisely as they are now, there will be adverse impacts on hunting and commercial and sport marine fisheries.

“I have never stated there was a need for layoffs. But we would not necessarily have everybody working in the areas they have worked in in the past.”

As for his critics, Bontadelli said: “It is largely a bookkeeping issue, and I apologize that it has been misconstrued by some individuals.”